i would challenge whether it was ever possible to be on lekatt’s side.
He/she/it had an odd little trick: whenever somebody would agree with He/she/it, lekatt would narrow the definitions of his/her/its beliefs to exclude the potential ally. Then ignore the “narrowing” when it became inconvienent later on.
An odd trick of self-sabotage.
Well, yes, but His4ever could get annoyed by tall grass, so…
As the opener of the thread which apprently drove lekatt off (but he’s said the same before, mind) I feel a little regret. I tried to explore his worldiew as rigorously as possible, addressing every citation no matter how kooky.
In the end, I think he became rather uncomfortable and frustrated with me and used Czarcasm’s IMO slightly overly caustic comments as a convenient excuse for martyrdom.
I think we might, just might, have been getting somewhere with the neuroscience-explains-mind like electronics-explains-computers analogy. I don’t think he liked that at all.
You’re a true optimist. When faced with absolute evidence that he’s wrong, lekatt ignores it. Or disappears, as he’s done now.
OK, Price, one thing at a time.
I back it up with research I've done over the past 15 years into VietNam-era military records. First-hand accounts of significant incidents often agree more with one another than with 'official' military records.
Because most of the time the records are kept by ameteurs with no record-keeping training. Combat units used to get company clerks by lining up incoming troops and asking, "Do any of you know how to type?" If you said yes, you were the new company clerk and chief record keeper. Also, when a unit is moving from one location to another records get lost. People go on sick call and are never heard from again, until their assignment to a new unit is made. The old unit is not always notified, though there are procedures in place to do that. Sometimes when the choice is "save the records" or "save your ass" the ass wins.
I snipped the rest of your post because I had no comment on the parts I snipped.
Someone else is free to address the other issues; I only had my 2¢.
I've read only about half of **lekatt**'s stuff. Quite enough to know enough about him to know better. Actually, I'm not defending him, except as an example. I'm defending open discourse. Too often I have seen the effect that ridicule, intolerance, hatred, ignorance and the like has on human discourse, human development, human history and freedom.
Nothing personal.
Reading this thread reinforced why I only visit this board when I’m really, really bored and Pogo is busy. I rather like Lekatt and found other posters behaviour towards him quite dreadful at times. I don’t think anyone deserves to be treated like that. I really don’t.
Take care Lekatt.
Adios Jerkoff.
I didn’t really have any run-ins with lekatt, and could care less if he stays or goes, but i’m pissed off today, so…
Rejoice.
Since my registration here Lekatt is the only person I’ve even thought about pitting. The only reason I didn’t was because by the time I was done reading his dribble I was too mad to even type out a coherent thought. And this is coming from someone who has only read one debate which he has participated in. I felt like ringing his neck eveytime I saw his “Love” sig.
Having dealt with Lekatt before (in the thread that must never be named), I finally decided there was no point. At first, I hated the idea of him getting the last word in, but really, it doesn’t matter. It always amuses me to see him post because he’s so predictable, so in a way I’ll miss him until he comes back. I’m sure he will come back, because he’s like a human car wreck. He always pops up sooner or later, and causes a gaper’s delay when he does.
They had nothing to do with evolution. They were rants so vague as to be meaningless about how scientists are trying to oppress anyone with spiritual beliefs.
It was not helpful.
That’s dead wrong. He consistently cites well-known and well-documented cases. Which is not to say that everything he cites is well-known and -documented.
Lekatt is a decent fellow, but he is not a great debater. But I don’t think he really tries to “debate”–he is more of a sharer. I also personally like most or all of the skeptics on this board, but they can get quite nasty when debating “paranormal topics.” Lekett’s posting style and theirs are like oil and water.
It is tricky when someone is modding and debating at once. Czarcasm does better than most would, and he is overall a very good moderator, but I too have found it a little tricky to participate in debates when he’s playing both roles.
I also doubt that Lekatt is gone for good.
Well, I was stating my general impression, not a detailed analysis, but it wouldn’t be the first time I was wrong about something. By contrast, admitting that possibility is something our boy seemed to have great trouble doing.
Anyway, I had no particular axe to grind with him, hence my reaction being pretty much a shrug, rather than one of the more forceful responses in this thread.
Gotta confess , though, that “Woohoo!” post cracked me up.