Wednesday, January 26, 2005

Paul, Paul, Paul

My apologies to anyone who hasn't been following this discussion on global warming, but this is just in reply to Paul, who seems to think that I'm an idiot. He locked comments down on the post, so I can only reply via trackback.

I don't remember exactly what I was reading into your post, but I was aware you said that it had to do with ozone depletion factor. If I remember what I was attempting to communicate (not very effectively, apparently), was that the two (ozone depletion factor and global warming factor) 'environmental factors' used in classifying refrigerants such as CFC's, HFC's, and HCFC's, are seperate and not related to each other.

I guess I failed to make the point clear, I wasn't attempting to argue against you, just clarify a point. I happen to agree with you (on all subjects except MAC worshiping, but let's not go there - its like arguing with this one guy I know, wasn't quite a friend, he was the greenest, most liberal person around, and you never should bring up politics or religion around him, he'll talk you an earful whether you like it or not) in this argument, so why the disparaging remarks?

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Dude, it wasn't just you.

If you read the note I put up when I closed the thread it was a build up.

Try if you can to see if from my shoes. Your "correcting" me by telling me something I already said was a big straw. -- Not in that it was not big a deal like you told me my mother wore combat boots -- just that it was quite maddening at that period in time. (Don't know if I explained that)

Here's the deal. One of my absolute pet peeves -and I'm not alone in this one- is when people reply without reading. Or at least without slowing down long enough understand what I said and give any thought to the reply.

Yesterday it seemed like every person who commented didn't give a shit what I had actually written, they just wanted to whine.

I had like 5 people all mischaracterizing what I said. (Purposely or innocently doesn't matter) That will just wear you (me) out.

Now-- speaking about replying to things I did not say, you asked, "so why the disparaging remarks?"

I didn't go back and look but as I recall I did not disparage you. I might have shown exasperation but no disparagement was intended and (I think and hope) a fair reading of it would not show as hostility toward you, just exasperation.

If I went overboard and snapped at you then I apologize.

see ya


P.S. I went back and looked, dude read it again*, exasperation yes, disparagement -- well, none that I see.

*Why do I spend half my time online telling people to read things again?