Rupert wrote:
> On Aug 1, 3:58 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>> Rupert wrote:
>>> On Aug 1, 11:06 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>> On Jul 31, 3:29 pm, Rupert > wrote:
>>>>> On Aug 1, 8:03 am, Rupert > wrote:
>>>>>> On Aug 1, 7:56 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>> On Jul 31, 2:52 pm, Rupert > wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Aug 1, 1:09 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 31, 4:34 pm, Rupert > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 31, 3:40 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 31, 12:29 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 30, 2:38 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 30, 1:52 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 29, 1:56 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 29, 1:10 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 29, 12:58 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Rupert wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 28, 3:22 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Guppy the Corpse Pumper wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 27, 2:08 pm, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 27, 12:52 pm, shrubkiller > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Jul 27, 1:42 am, Rudy Canoza > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> rupie, you lisping fruit: you assert that (non-human)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals are due equal moral consideration (compared
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with humans). You haven't established that. Get busy,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you lisping utilitarian fruit.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why would anyone have to prove something which is SELF EVIDENT?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It is not self-evident. In fact, it is more likely self-evidently
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> false.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> More proof that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The proposition of equal moral considerability of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> animals (with humans) is self evidently false.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, surely if I can be criticized for making an assertion without
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> meeting by burden of proof, then this assertion of yours here can
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> equally be criticized on that basis.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm just following your lead.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I see. Well, that blabber of mine to which I directed you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I mean, you did ask me to defend my position in your opening post. So
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I direct you towards a considered attempt at a defence
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Post the content here, skirt-boy. I'm not interested
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in signing up for your fruit-display Yahoo group.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't think you have to sign up to the Yahoo group to download the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> file. Dutch did it and I don't think he signed up. It's too long to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> put in a newsgroup message. Maybe I'll put it on my webpage.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, anyway, by your own admission you dismissed my talk as "babble"
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> without having read a single word of it.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know that you assume that which you are required to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> prove.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, yes. You know a lot, Rudy.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Right - I do. I do know that you still assume in your
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> little sermon that animals are entitled to equal moral
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consideration, when that premise is the very thing you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are tasked to show. You haven't shown it, and we all
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> know you can't.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You asked me for an argument. I gave you one.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You didn't. You merely repeated the assertion you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't seem to support.
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Okay, this is your response to my talk?
>>>>>>>>>>>> What talk? The unsupported blabber about animals being
>>>>>>>>>>>> due equal consideration?- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>> I directed you to a document in the Files section of my Yahoo group.
>>>>>>>>>>> Have you actually managed to download it yet? Or are you unable to
>>>>>>>>>>> download it without joining my Yahoo group and do you want me to put
>>>>>>>>>>> it up on my webpage?- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>>>>>> I've put it on my webpage for you. How could I refuse, when you asked
>>>>>>>>>> so nicely?
>>>>>>>>>> http://rupertmccallum.com/animal%20rights%20talk.doc
>>>>>>>>> What laughable bullshit!
>>>>>>>>> Here I want to discuss a short argument for this
>>>>>>>>> conclusion which would probably be accepted as
>>>>>>>>> sound, with perhaps some qualifications, by almost
>>>>>>>>> all philosophers who hold the view that using
>>>>>>>>> animals in scientific research is wrong.
>>>>>>>>> In other words, people who have *ALREADY* reached the
>>>>>>>>> very conclusion you're attempting to prove! HA HA HA
>>>>>>>>> HA HA! You ****ing DILETTANTE fruit! "Philosopher" my
>>>>>>>>> ass...
>>>>>>>> Is that your response, then?
>>>>>>> Yes, you circular ****wit. You explicitly acknowledge that you are
>>>>>>> assuming the very thing you are tasked with proving. What a ****ing
>>>>>>> chump.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>>> Jolly good. Let me just say that I cannot believe what a joke you are.
>>>>>> The idea that any respectable university ever gave you a Ph.D. is
>>>>>> quite absurd. I will publish your response on my webpage along with my
>>>>>> reply.- Hide quoted text -
>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>>>> It's up there. Your move.
>>>>> http://rupertmccallum.com/debate.html
>>>> Take the name off your page, fruit.- Hide quoted text -
>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>> Let me get this straight,
>> Take it down, rupie. I know how to get that page
>> ****ed up but good if you don't. Take it down. No one
>> authorized you to put anyone's name on your page. Take
>> it down.
>
> God help me, what a coward.

Take it down, rupie. You are not authorized to post
personal references and photos on your site.