[ChuckElias]

Originally posted by JRutledge
I did not listen to triple dog dares when I was a shortee, I do not listen to them while I am in my 30s.

Just to be clear, and I hope everyone already realizes this, the "triple-dog dare" was meant in fun. My posts have been very serious in tone and I wanted to put just a little levity into them. The triple-dog dare comes from "A Christmas Story" where the kids dare their friend to put his tongue on the flagpole.

I did not say Tony said it or even JR said it or Mick. So for me to claim something specifically, I would have to point someone out.

You do realize that this is obviously and outrageously false, don't you? Engage brain before typing, please. To make a specific claim, the claim must be made about a particular person? Uh, no. Here's an example. "The car in the driveway at 10 Main Street is red." That's a specific claim. It's verifiable (or falsifiable). It makes no mention of any specific person. Here's another one. A woman goes to the police and says, "Someone has been stalking me." She has no idea who's been following her. She's pointed out no particular person. On your view, the police should tell her to get lost until she can make a real claim.

I do think there are people that feel that way. They bring that to light by the way they have disagreed with or mocked the "presence vs. rules" discussion

I don't mean to get too personal, Jeff, but they're not mocking the discussion; they're mocking you b/c you continue to claim that they believe that ONLY the rules test matters. They don't believe that, and since you won't listen when they tell you that, you make yourself the target of the discussion.

Originally posted by ChuckElias
In any intellectual or scientific dialogue, a person who asserts that something is true is expected by his audience to present evidence or support for his assertions.

In most intellectual or scientific dialogues that I have been a party to, do not give specific, undeniable evidence to back up a point.[/quote][/b]
So what? I never asked you to give "undeniable" evidence. All I asked for was for you to produce one single solitary sentence from any post in which somebody seriously propounded the view that you have tried to ascribe to them.

Most of the time it is opinion and analysis. That is what I did, that is what I stand by.

I might disagree that this is true of scientific discussions. But even if you are right, and you may be, that's not what you did. In order to do analysis, you have to have something that you are analyzing. Some data, some observations, some text, something. You've provided none of that. You've made a false statement that has no basis in fact, whatsoever. And you haven't even bothered to try to give any rationale for that statement.

Because you do not believe that anyone feels that way, I do. It is called an opinion and I stand by it.

Ah, we're back to this old chestnut, are we? Well, Jeff, you and I have had this discussion before. You did not state an opinion. You stated a matter of fact. You said:

we have people on this board that think your test score is the determiner of what officiating is all about.

That's not an opinion. You are making a claim of FACT. It's either true or false. And in fact, it's false. Your statement is no different from saying that 2 + 2 = 5. You can say "it's my opinion" all day, but that doesn't mean that two and two really are five. You can say

we have people on this board that think your test score is the determiner of what officiating is all about.

all day but it doesn't make it true. It doesn't even make it "true for you". It's objectively false.

And when we are talking about opinions and different views on the facts, I can hardly be a liar when we do not agree on what the facts are.

As I said, this is not a matter of opinions. This is a matter of what the facts are. Now, perhaps we really do not agree on what the facts are. All I've been asking you to do -- all along -- is to show me the FACTS that back up your claim. Help me out, and share with me the same facts that you have. Because if I'm wrong, I want to know that, I really do.

So please, I'll ask again, please show me one post, one sentence -- anything -- that supports your view and I will shut up about this topic forever.

And finally, Jeff, I have never called you a liar. I have never said that you have intentionally tried to mislead anybody. I think you're wrong. I think you are perpetuating a falsehood. But if you're an honorable person, you will either prove your claim or stop making it.

Chuck