@spendius,
Here's one from page 4 of this thread.
Quote:sorry wandel, but I dont think that spendi adds anything to this thread either. When we get PMing back, I have a solution. Till then, Im gonna not participate because any of our objections to his childish churlishness would be read as petulance. I am interested in the subject but not with his mean spiritedness on the boards.
My honest opinion is that he should seek competent help or else get laid for once in his life so he can have something else to obsess about .
It was emotionally derived from barmyman's inability to respond to my posts. He was, and still is, unaware that my entire position is based on scientific observations made on a sample of females which makes the statistical conclusions of most opinion polls look like guesses. And that I prefer to read the literary publications of men who had made equally comprehensive studies of the female sex rather than those of hung up little pipsqueaks like Dawkins and of the transcripts of neurotic courtroom farces like Dover where a flagella organism was pompously compared to a valve in a pump which flew directly in the face of Darwin's remarks about the complexity of small life forms such as barnacles.
barmyman's whole position is based on a rejection of Christian sexual morality which has no other source than personal convenience. The science is irrelevant to him. He hasn't even read Spengler. He daren't. He couldn't if the truth was told. It is way over his fat head.
And when it comes to atheism barmyman steered away from the Marquis de Sade as he might from a flaming pit in which a shell has just exploded. He was even scared of my comments regarding Footballer's Wives which was a popular programme going out on prime-time TV.