Re: Late night thoughts: Pathetica and Interspersal

[Anthony Docimo <keenir@hotmail.com>]

> Then you have noticed in this thread that David first mis-characterized my 
> position,

did you clarify your position?  or did  you simply stand where you were, not 
caring if anyone mistook your position?

> then spouted a poorly formed opinion as fact ("if they were that 
> vulnerable, they would have been extinct by the Late Jurassic").

 considering you said essentially "anything could bite into a sauropod 
neck", his reply made sense.

> and followed w/ an insult wrapped in a condescension, and a non sequitur 
> ("Are you saying that your hypothesis cannot be tested?").

to be fair, that was the implication you left.

> If you did not notice that, then you missed something. It is probably 
> because interspersal, or "interlinear commentary" as you call it, is the 
> perfect vehicle for such activities,

 when one cannot highlight which line in a paragraph one wishes to reply 
to, and when one is replying to several points in a single paragraph, its 
rather difficult to simply use cut&paste to repeat the paragraph over and 
over to no good use.

> His activity relies on a selectively permissive atmosphere onlist,

being allowed to counter data he percieves as false?

> limited time resources on my part,

 you're on the list often enough to reply frequently to him and others, 
both about this thread, and numerous other threads.  you might wish to 
clarify 'limited time resources'.

> and is adversarial beyond the bounds of logical discourse.

it can't be beyond the bounds...you've always replied.  now, unless you're 
suggesting that you are also beyond the bounds of discourse...


> You will have further noticed that in this thread he makes claims about 
> maximum sauropod size that yield a logical conclusion; that directional 
> selection for size never occurred in the largest land animals ever to have 
> lived. So much for evolution, apparently. He says they were always all the 
> same size anyway, or possibly just appeared at full size and then decreased 
> in size, and that both patterns falsify predation as a factor in sauropod 
> size, which they do not.

no, he said that sauropod size wasn't a result of carnivores biting sauropod 
necks.

if having their necks bitten was such a risk, sauropods wouldn't have grown 
such vulnerable necks -- they would develop armor, or simply have shorter 
necks.


> Or you may not have noticed... perhaps because interlinear commentary can 
> be used as a written form of interruption. Have you attempted debate w/ an 
> interrupter?

yes, and I've also attempted debate WITH

> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
> *         ---REMAINDER OF MESSAGE TRUNCATED---            *
> *     This post contains a forbidden message format       *
> *  (such as an attached file, a v-card, HTML formatting)  *
> *    This Mail List at USC.EDU only accepts PLAIN TEXT    *
> * If your postings display this message your mail program *
> * is not set to send PLAIN TEXT ONLY and needs adjusting  *
> * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

oh, sorry...good thing I didn't have anything there.

>

_________________________________________________________________
PC Magazine?s 2007 editors? choice for best Web mail?award-winning Windows 
Live Hotmail. 
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_mini_pcmag_0507