@8 The Honorable Mr. Neva: "Perhaps you could cite an example of your claim, Jacek, but your views on this subject are well known, and you take the side of the AWG evidently."

I'd be happy to! Just let me grab my fallacy-popping pin... okay, ready!

1. "Tateru, you've cut and pasted Saijani Kuhn's press release" -- Bzzt! No, she didn't. Maybe if you had actually read Tateru's post, you'd realize it's quite different from Saijaini's announcement.

2. "(he's the head of AWG)" -- Bzzt! No, he isn't. He is _an active participant_ in AWG, but he's not the head. Would you like me to explain the difference?

3. "There are several misrepresentations here" -- Bzzt! None of the points you "refute" were brought by Tateru's post, you're just arguing against the wall. Although, to be fair, I think you simply forgot what you were numbering things for, since after point #1 you just started to ramble about your views on the topic, instead of listing the alleged "misrepresentations". That's undestandable: you have so much to say, and so little time to check facts or even attempt to maintain a coherent thought.

4. "1. "They've been debating this since 2005". " -- Bzzt! That's not what she said. She said it has been a "hot topic" since 2005, i.e. it has inspired heated debate when brought up. Cleverly deceptive misquotation, though!

Oh dear, I've only gotten 3 sentences into your adorable rambling, and I've already come across 4 examples where you misquoted, distorted, or flat out lied about something. Need I go on?

Alright, if you insist. Here's one more, from your latest comment:

5. "your views on this subject are well known, and you take the side of the AWG evidently." -- Bzzt! Wrong again, old chum. My views on this subject are _not_ well known, for the simple reason that I have not expressed them publicly. And, for what it's worth, I take neither "side". Once sentence, two falsities! A noble attempt, but not quite up to your usual standards. I would have given you bonus points for the attempted ad hominem attack -- if only you hadn't missed so badly.

Here's a tarnished gold star for your efforts, though. Keep up the good work, tiger! We're all counting on you to erode our intellectual debates with your fallacious, venomous sludge. :-)

XOXO,
Jacek

P.S. Thanks for the spar, even if it was a bit one-sided. See you around, hot shot! Mwah! ;-*