Doug..

>I have no trouble with that whatsoever John.

Good..

>
Did it ever cross your mind that perhaps Craig simply didn't have the time John? Or must everything be cast by you in your mind in moral tones? You presume knowledge of Craig's motives that he, in his mind, had a less-than-honorable attitude towards someone else. This is your error.
>


Doug, why do YOU read morality into everything. Why do the majority of issues you bring up always boil down to a moral tone?

Fact - A complex question was asked
Fact - A one-sentence answer was given.

This leaves the person asking the question hanging in the wind. A better response would be something like

"There is not sufficient time to answer this question in this lecture. Also, it is beyond the scope of the presentation. Post a message on the UT and I will be happy to address it there so all can benefit"

This would have tabled the issue.

Get off your moral kick Doug. You are reading way more into the issue than what exists. I made no conclusions or assertions to Craig's motives.

As far as giving shots, take your best one Doug. As far as I am concerned, I have brought up a legit issue here. Yes, I remember Winchell. He tore into me once. Then again, I did'nt cry and whine about it either - but that is another story. Fabian Pascal, yes, I remember him. Unlike Jeff who was techncially and factually on the ball, Fabian could not debate, argue, or support his points worth a damn.

You tore into Winchell? Somehow I don't remember that. At least, I don't see where you could have made an impact, especially if you dealt on moral/emotional terms. Morality, religion, and politics are two things best left at the door Doug.

No question that on many levels, Jeff and I are very similar.

Take your best shot Doug. Whatever shot you do take, be sure to make it good..

Best,

< JVP >