Anyone not interested in spelling quibbles, please skip.
Log, as this could easily devolve into bantering, I will try and keep this light and polite.
Bill this is highly presumptuous if not arrogant. Please do not pursue the holder of the shining truth vs evil skeptics schtick. Erroneous data and statements are discussed ase are poor reasonings trying to bring veracity to the PGF. Nothing you have written is intimidating in anyway and I certainly feel no obligation to join a bigfoot enthusiast's forum to discuss it.
You're obviously new to internet forums and the kind of social interaction they entail. You found the BFF, started posting your musings and immediately got accolades and attention from the kids 'round the fire there. They encouraged you, you encouraged them. You present your musings in an apparent scientific package which excites the footers. They strive and long for legitimacy so of course they react this way. Meanwhile, while your every word becomes doted on by your new fan club, people who conduct critical inquiry into the PGF take note of the bigfoot enthusiast's flavour(flavor) of the month and note the 'wisdom' in some of these musings. Again, being new to the concept of internet forums, having your musings criticized is taken personally and now your spend much time here addressings (addressing) those criticisms.
What you don't seem willing to recognize is that some of those criticisms are valid.
Kitakaze
I've taken the liberty of correcting your spelling.
Thank you for catching my typo of 'addressing'. I try not to make them but I was in a rush to finish the post and get out the door. Apparently you took my earlier corrections as my being facetious. I did try to make clear that was not my intention. Now please keep in mind I said "I have taken the liberty of correcting
some of your spelling, just to help."
'Some' meaning that I intentionally left alone things like 'thier' which was an obvious typo and even 'proported' (purported) as I only meant to correct what I felt were significant mistakes that obscured the meaning of the word. I trust you had the same intention with the spelling mistakes I've highlighted in my above post that you've left uncorrected. I realize that being in the habit of quibbling over spelling in general can be very annoying.
For example, I would be more interested in questioning your understanding of the word 'modality' or the coherence of your writing in general than pointing out your misspelling of the word 'disdain' in the rest of your post below. I tell you what, I won't make a habit of correcting your or anyone else's spelling (it's not my style, anyway). But I would be most appreciative if you could explain why you consider the changing of
flavour to
flavor to be a correction.
Do you see some error when I write things like
rumour,
favour,
colour,
behaviour,
rancour,
demeanour, etc.?
That said I find it strange that you of all people would comment on the apparent arrogance of Bill Munns when your level of arrogance is perhaps unequaled here. But then there is a tendency to turn a blind eye to one’s own, shall we say, less than flattering shortcomings. You speak time and time again of enlightened thought and thinking and yet you feel the need to berate the membership of another internet community. In this case to use your terminology “kids around the fire”. I come to this place because it challenges me. It challenges me to read with steady measure the things you post while my skin is crawling with distain. I suggest you actually try operating in that enlightened modality that you so often claim to adhere to. The first step of attaining that modality may be to show this internet community that you are well and truly comfortable with your knowledge and viewpoint. And by that I mean comfortable is not having to reduce the opposing viewpoints which whether or not they agree with yours are nevertheless your intellectual equal. And without hesitation I can say that none of those “kids around the fire” are as vile as you.
Log, I could well see how you would think me arrogant and vile. You say silly things, have trouble writing coherently, making and carry through sensical discussions, and believe in bigfoot. I point it out, you get flustered. I get it.
Steady.
Two final things:
1) Yeah, I'll make a reference to the BFF saying "kids 'round the fire." Besides the point that I think many may actually be kids, the behaviour (hey, a 'u'!) there often has that atmosphere to it. I might call Loose Change 'truther' members 'deluded idiots'. Would you mind?
2) I'm guessing there's not much point in pursuing if you consider Chico being at the PGF film site important.
