What Linda Rogers Really thinks!

[neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk]

Linda Rogers is probably a very nice person who really loves animals and cares for her little dogs very well. She breeds Goldendoodles. I'm sure they are very lovely animals. The pictures I have seen make them look really cuddly.

However, she has said some pretty nasty things about me and I'd like to point out the truth in_her_own_words when she thought I would not see them.

Linda Rogers wrote:

> Ed, please send this on my behalf to those lists:
> I have no battle with Neil Jones, and post only in defense to his nasty
> posts and attacks he makes on commercial butterfly farming. People,
> including myself, are bored with trying to reason with someone who will not
> even listen. I seem to come under especially barbed attack by Mr. Jones
> because I co-authored a butterfly breeders manual and because I am chair of
> the political activities committee of the IBBA. 
.
..
..
.
> There is no percentage in
> continued debate with Neil Jones and I have no interest in speaking with him
> further - I know that it would bring no improvement.  

Bored with trying to reason with me? My entire argument is based on reason. That isn't quite it. Previously when we engaged in debate she lost the argument big time. Again it was a matter of logic. She knows she lost it because this is what she wrote. It was on an IBBA releated list when she thought I would not find out. ( I have been reluctant to quote this but the IBBA must know it is leaking like a sieve by now.)

"Dear Farmers, 

After the recent volleys vollies? back and forth with Neil 
on the Leps-list, I will no longer be participating in discussions there.
...
...
I care too much, and know too little (scientifically) to hold my own in a
debate on that list.  (Like a battle of the wits and someone shows up
unarmed!)"

There you have it, she doesn't debate because she can't answer my argument. Just to repeat it, you cannot rely on what the IBBA says because its arguments violate the simple rules of logic and are therefore unscientific.

There is, incidentally, another logical flaw in Linda's argument. She makes an emotional plea that I must be wrong because I have been "nasty". I realise that plain speaking sometimes offends sensitive people but unfortunately that is another one of those old logical fallacies with a Latin name, "Argumentum ad Hominem". (Argument against the man). What I say stands purely on the logic of my argument not on how nasty or nice I am.

I grow tired myself of all this to and fro argument. If you agree with logic you have to agree with me otherwise we'll just have to agree to differ. I don't want to be nasty or provocative but I have had some really nasty and  false things said about me. I'm sure Linda is a really nice lady, she is just ruled by her heart and not by her head.

-- 
Neil Jones- Neil at nwjones.demon.co.uk http://www.nwjones.demon.co.uk/
"At some point I had to stand up and be counted. Who speaks for the
butterflies?" Andrew Lees - The quotation on his memorial at Crymlyn Bog
National Nature Reserve




 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl