Pac_Man

You have a point; I should have ignored him. But when someone keeps digging at you and digging at you, it's tough not to put the little weasel in his place.

I believe CTM has called himself a Mensa member, and I've done the same. Given that he was the one who wrecked this thread, I'd like to think your second paragraph was in reference to him.

Not everyone follows your morning routine.

Dude, lighten up. You honestly see nothing ironic about the fact that you're calling me a Nazi at the same time you're trying to teach me German? Well, you may be thinking, if this guy is going to be a Nazi anyway, I'll make him a proper Nazi who speaks proper German! You dragged me--kicking and screaming--into this discussion in the first place. I mean, there I was, minding my own business, making comments about the relatively placid subject of judicial activism--judicial activism for crying out loud--when along you came with your efforts to relate the subject to "marital genocide" and so forth. Evidently you had a need to talk about things that reminded you of Nazism. But if you couldn't get a real Nazi, someone who opposed interracial marrage was--by your standards--close enough. This obsessed need to have an argument with a "Nazi," your knowledge of German . . . hmmmm. I think you see where I'm going with this.

If you want to look inward, go ahead.

There's a difference between hearing about it and taking the time to figure out how to put one on the web. You know, there's a theory that the people who hate gays the most have some latent homosexual tendencies themselves. Maybe the people who have expressed the most hatred towards me on this thread--and are presently trying to give me a lesson in German--have some inner issues they need to deal with.

That's not the way it went. I pointed out the error in your logic--repeatedly, and apparently you repeatedly suffered from some kind of amnesia or something. Your warped thought process didn't just result in calling me a Nazi, but in an "avowed" Nazi. In case you don't know the meaning of your own words, an "avowed" Nazi is someone who has professed him- or herself a Nazi. My response was to tell you to either show me where I'd professed myself a Nazi, or else take it back. I correctly predicted you'd choose to do neither, because waiting for you to do the right thing is like waiting for water to run uphill. Actually, my response was to point out you looked very foolish for calling a Mensa member an idiot. You've shown no particular need to tell the truth, so why not point that out? As for things being "self-evident," I guess they would appear that way to a victim of brainwashing such as yourself.

In that case, I suggest you contact the Encyclopedia Britannica, Time magazine, and the tens of thousands of others who've spelled it "Godel" and let them know how "completely ignorant" they all are. Maybe if you joust with that particular windmill it will keep you out of my hair for a little while.

I can't believe the number of times I keep having to deal with this. Does some selective blindness or mental breakdown inflict you each time your eyes look at my response? For the umpteenth time, you are calling me a Nazi because, in your opinion, something I wrote about race resembled something a Nazi wrote about race. But since Rosenberg began his quote by calling for respect of different races, your logic could be used to "prove" that anyone who called for racial respect was a Nazi. Of course, I expect you to ignore this refutation--just as you have in the past--and go on repeating your name-calling. Typical.

You do know what the word "avowed" means, don't you? Show me anywhere, anywhere, where I've stated that I'm a National Socialist. Or else do the right thing and take it back. . . . waiting for it, waiting for it . . . Hold on here. Waiting for you to do the right thing is like waiting for water to run uphill. Nevermind.

I hate to get into an argument about the correct spelling of Godel's name, but below are a few links to sites which spell it Godel. http://www.nas.edu/history/members/godel.html http://www.exploratorium.edu/complexity/Co...icon/godel.html http://www.time.com/time/time100/scientist...file/godel.html http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detai...051692?v=glance http://libweb.princeton.edu/libraries/fire...bsc/aids/godel/ http://www.english-dictionary.us/meaning/Kurt_Godel.asp http://www.supernaturalminds.com/KurtGodel.html http://www.britannica.com/ebc/article?tocId=9365748 I guess both Time magazine and the Encyclopedia Britannica got it wrong, and you got it right. Google found just 8310 documents with "Kurt Goedel" but 39,300 documents with "Kurt Godel." As someone who thinks as highly of himself as you seem to ought to be aware, most or all academics who studied race in Nazi Germany came to support the Nazis' conclusions. Most people, including myself, agree this had more to do with the pressures and incentives these scientists faced than with any inherent correctness in the theories themselves. If this discussion has shown anything, it is that there is at least as much hatred towards those who dissent from racial orthodoxy today was there was in Nazi Germany. This intolerance and hate can affect people directly--witness the way the authors of The Bell Curve were treated--or indirectly. Funding requests are either granted or denied, professorships are granted or withheld, works are published or left alone. When a very shaky and dubious study was performed to "demonstrate" the races were all the same, the mass media lapped it up; treated the study's authors as heroes, and its conclusions as established fact. Expecting the academic world to be more immune to these pressures now than it was in Nazi Germany is hopelessly naive.

They haven't put you back in the zoo yet?

This is even more of a stretch than trying to cram Mike Williams into a size 2 dress.

I don't care about what "most people" think or don't think. I care about accuracy. It's not accurate to use emotion-laden words like "hate" on reasonable interpretations of scientific data. In other words, they're acting in a spirit of emotionalism rather than scientific inquiry. I refuse to make that my problem. I'll probably drop dead with shock if anyone mentions a single fact in their disagreement with me. I've seen plenty of labels, emotion, hate, intolerance, but not a single fact. An idiot label. How original. You were accusing me of spreading hate? Pot? Kettle? Black?

If you enjoy feeling this warm and fuzzy sense of unity with a bunch of posters who've come to feel you're a complete jerk, go ahead. Far be it from me to take from you your few crumbs of comfort. As for your accusations against me, you've fallen on your face every time you were stupid enough to try to defend them; but that hasn't stopped you from shamelessly repeating them, now has it? You haven't even bothered to defend your own honesty when I called it into question. If you want agreement and harmony, I guess you and I can agree honesty ranks pretty low on your current list of priorities.