There are times when no matter what the situation happens to be or whom is being addressed, after a while it’s only reasonable to recognize the futility of pursuing an argument in which the other person won’t honestly participate.
I’m referring to Mick Nugents latest post about the smear campaign against him by none other than The Usual Suspects.
I’m not going to go through every post Mick has written, nor am I going to dissect the responses from those that have nothing to offer but continuing misrepresentations, strawmen, and out right defamations of Mick and others that happen to comment on his blog posts (If I counted correctly, 15 posts.). I would like to say however, that Mick has learned that facts mean nothing to some.
For many of us, none of these tactics are new. Attempting to start a dialogue has been met with derision, threats, misrepresentation, and of course, defamation. Asking for retractions of blatantly false statements is met with more of the same. It’s the same as beating your head against a brick wall. Nothing is accomplished except a bruise on the forehead.
I’m not advocating that Mick should discontinue his posts as his audience seems to be fairly large and I’m certain there are a lot of people that have been either unaware or unconcerned with the controversy of the past few years.
For me, it’s been especially entertaining to read these posts then watch the verbal gymnastics that have to be accomplished in response. Of course, none of the responses have ever directly addressed any of the points presented by Mick, just more misrepresentation and smears.
None of these people are truly skeptics because they are people that can never be wrong and their ideology cannot be challenged.
All of this is reminiscent of debating with theists, isn’t it?