Search
Username

Dee M 
Member since Aug 25, 2018


Stats

Friends

  • No friends yet.
Become My Friend Find friends »

Recent Comments

Re: “Skeptical Activism: Removing the Spin

LOL indeed, "Michael."

You apparently never tire of repeating yourself, so I will repsond in kind (from my previous post): Perhaps I would attack your arguments if the Novella debate (which was summarized in the Vice article) did not already prove that engaging in any debate with you is fruitless. Your arguments are not science based and your logic is unsound. I find your obfuscation of science offensive and dangerous.

Your attacks on fact- and science-based skepticism would possibly carry a modicum of weight, if any semblance rational credibility wasn't forfeited by your ridiculous 911 conspiracy theory. If you sincerely apologize for your pathological 911 truther quest and denounce it as the uneducated, attention-grabbing, nonsensical trash that it has been proven to be, I might consider engaging you on another subject.

And now, for something not quite completely different, as an example of your "logic":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

This is my last post on this subject.

Posted by Dee M on 08/29/2018 at 11:44 AM

Re: “Skeptical Activism: Removing the Spin

Once again, Michael, you are the king of projection. Your penchant for employing the playground tactic of "I know you are, but what am I" is exhausting and pathetic.

Obviously, you are desperate for attention when you share a link to an article you wrote - on a website that you manage (and apparently created) - to garner hits. Continuing this tactic by providing 2 more links to your website, as a counterpoint to the well researched Vice article, becomes even more laughable knowing that YOU wrote those 2 linked articles. You continue to defend yourself with your own flawed circular logic...what a surprise.

My reference to the Vice article was to give any readers who may be following this thread, context into your agenda: self promotion built from an easily (and repeatedly) debunked conspiracy theory. The best part of my first post is that it provided a link to an article written by someone who objectively followed a public discourse (providing a link to the debate transcript) and came to the same rational conclusion about your viewpoints as myself.

Perhaps I would attack your arguments if the Novella debate (which was summarized in the Vice article) did not already prove that engaging in any debate with you is fruitless. Your arguments are not science based and your logic is unsound. I find your obfuscation of science offensive and dangerous.

Posted by Dee M on 08/28/2018 at 12:27 PM

Re: “Skeptical Activism: Removing the Spin

Hey Michael:

I do find it curious that you - who apparently lives in Canada - quickly responded to a free small town publication. You did this to provide a link to a review on your website criticising one of Brian's works. Your first paragraph of this review is also a blatant ad hominem attack on Brian...project much, Michael?

Regardless, The fact that you don't live in central Oregon, but felt compelled to weigh in on this article is enough information to trust Brian's comments. Oh, that and this article summarizing your 2014 debate with Dr. Steven Novella (who, BTW, totally CRUSHED you and your absurdly delusional 911 truther vomit) :

https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/539dex/are-911-truthers-still-science-proof

Posted by Dee M on 08/25/2018 at 12:00 PM

Extra Extra!

Make sure you're signed up so we can inbox you the latest.

  • Weekly Newsletter (Thursday) - Your weekly guide to all things Bend!

Login to choose
your subscriptions!

Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.
 

© 2018 LAY IT OUT INC | 704 NW GEORGIA, BEND, OREGON 97703  |   Privacy Policy

Website powered by Foundation