Gentleman, I was not offended by SiP
I have no issue with Sip, no need to apologize. Thanks , though, for the consiliatory gesture.
I was actually responding to Bud Manleys response, where he quotes me:
"There is not question about that.
But it will not do humans or other species any good, if it does not have a habitat anymore", and then he proceeds with:
"Your absolutely correct. We should all embrace the realistic goal of defeating corporate America and its sinister plans to destroy our precious earth by allowing the people to rise up and fight this oppression and by Punishing anyone who disagrees.
To that comeback I stated that I do not see any connection between what I have been quoted for, and his response.
Unless he is jumping to conclusions, or is assuming that those are the logical conclusions to my thought, there was no relation.
However, you are right that I must not take it seriously, and I do not. I do admit that my response was a quick reaction, because it seemed to me that my point had been deliberately distorted, and therefore I consider it hype, as per definition.
I am not even close to losing my sense of humor in general, but patience for that kind of foolishness is an acquired virtue, and not always readily available.
I now recognize that this forum is not interested in actually compare notes, but seems to be largely geared towards making environmentalists look foolish.
Hence, to continue to contribute to this semi-discussion is akin to pissing into the wind. No sweat of my butt, just a bit disappointing.......
I have no issue with Sip, no need to apologize. Thanks , though, for the consiliatory gesture.
I was actually responding to Bud Manleys response, where he quotes me:
"There is not question about that.
But it will not do humans or other species any good, if it does not have a habitat anymore", and then he proceeds with:
"Your absolutely correct. We should all embrace the realistic goal of defeating corporate America and its sinister plans to destroy our precious earth by allowing the people to rise up and fight this oppression and by Punishing anyone who disagrees.
To that comeback I stated that I do not see any connection between what I have been quoted for, and his response.
Unless he is jumping to conclusions, or is assuming that those are the logical conclusions to my thought, there was no relation.
However, you are right that I must not take it seriously, and I do not. I do admit that my response was a quick reaction, because it seemed to me that my point had been deliberately distorted, and therefore I consider it hype, as per definition.
I am not even close to losing my sense of humor in general, but patience for that kind of foolishness is an acquired virtue, and not always readily available.
I now recognize that this forum is not interested in actually compare notes, but seems to be largely geared towards making environmentalists look foolish.
Hence, to continue to contribute to this semi-discussion is akin to pissing into the wind. No sweat of my butt, just a bit disappointing.......
Comment