If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Those who do not spank have a message or two for you
On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank. Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are trying to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your recent post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling and geography contests. Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said anything against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy, stupid dog! :-) You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers. Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to parenting is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some, that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives. LOL! And some homescholers do spank. When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate Embry right? The ball is in your court. :-) Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my spanked status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have. Weasel words. :-) While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me wonder just how different your fantasy world is. About the same as the "dream land." :-) Doan http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Kane |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Those who do not spank have a message or two for you
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote:
On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank. Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are trying to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your recent post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling and geography contests. Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said anything against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy, stupid dog! :-) Okay, puppy: From: Doan Newsgroups: misc.kids Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800 " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan" Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model." Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them know. That is the often the case in the more successful children.. ..they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed learning...and they work their tutors hard. YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r r.... Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy? You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers. Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to parenting is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some, that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives. LOL! And some homescholers do spank. Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means "all" to you when you want it to. That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it? Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and have in others. When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate Embry right? The ball is in your court. :-) Not hardly pilgrim. It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago. Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry study I do? The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the "speed limit sign" You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is unidentifiable as a constant. It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I am. If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some fashion while spanking. I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to answer The Question. You won't be alone. And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else. So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges met. I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study I have. You refuse to give page references. That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation. You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked. There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My "spanked" status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be though. If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly willing for you to prove it. If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question you cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study. I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice, since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have the study, and the conditions I will respond under. Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's were you left it. Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my spanked status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have. Weasel words. :-) You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I didn't offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to debate Embry? Which is the weasel statement? In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game, it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please you, as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play under are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play. These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck your neck out with your claims. No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so. And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my Embry study, so feel free. Or dance. Makes me no nevermind. You might start by identifying the document by title, give page references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply your debating opponent a copy first of course. You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I wouldn't do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or misunderstanding. Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove you have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt. A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a chart, nothing else. I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely in one of your many spins you saw it there. While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me wonder just how different your fantasy world is. About the same as the "dream land." :-) Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds. I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that the users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood extremes. I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking, despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you. Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't be a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them. And I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I care about society and my child. I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms. Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of the other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you lied about it. I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused. But not until, Droaner. Not until. You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter how feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as is possible, which ain't much. Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a good boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it. I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming is clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong. Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend that homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did and that others do. http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at? Misleading is lying and trying to pretend I said something Ididn't...welllllll. tsk Doan Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM. Kane http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Kane |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Those who do not spank have a message or two for you
Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again. I said WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS. It is in favor of a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids. If you ask Dorothy, you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over public education. Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. YOU ARE JUST STUPID! Doan On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote: On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank. Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are trying to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your recent post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling and geography contests. Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said anything against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy, stupid dog! :-) Okay, puppy: From: Doan Newsgroups: misc.kids Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800 " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan" Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model." Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them know. That is the often the case in the more successful children.. .they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed learning...and they work their tutors hard. YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r r.... Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy? You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers. Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to parenting is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some, that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives. LOL! And some homescholers do spank. Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means "all" to you when you want it to. That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it? Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and have in others. When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate Embry right? The ball is in your court. :-) Not hardly pilgrim. It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago. Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry study I do? The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the "speed limit sign" You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is unidentifiable as a constant. It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I am. If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some fashion while spanking. I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to answer The Question. You won't be alone. And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else. So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges met. I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study I have. You refuse to give page references. That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation. You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked. There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My "spanked" status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be though. If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly willing for you to prove it. If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question you cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study. I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice, since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have the study, and the conditions I will respond under. Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's were you left it. Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my spanked status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have. Weasel words. :-) You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I didn't offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to debate Embry? Which is the weasel statement? In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game, it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please you, as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play under are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play. These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck your neck out with your claims. No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so. And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my Embry study, so feel free. Or dance. Makes me no nevermind. You might start by identifying the document by title, give page references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply your debating opponent a copy first of course. You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I wouldn't do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or misunderstanding. Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove you have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt. A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a chart, nothing else. I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely in one of your many spins you saw it there. While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me wonder just how different your fantasy world is. About the same as the "dream land." :-) Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds. I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that the users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood extremes. I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking, despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you. Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't be a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them. And I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I care about society and my child. I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms. Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of the other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you lied about it. I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused. But not until, Droaner. Not until. You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter how feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as is possible, which ain't much. Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a good boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it. I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming is clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong. Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend that homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did and that others do. http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at? Misleading is lying and trying to pretend I said something Ididn't...welllllll. tsk Doan Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM. Kane http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Kane |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Those who do not spank have a message or two for you
On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:05:23 -0800, Doan wrote:
.........his usual babbling lines of nonsense, denial, dodging, weasel words, and childish acting out attention getting. Let's start with the beginning. Your claim about unschoolers. http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1 Perhaps this will help clarify for you how you have once again stuck your foot in it up to your little child nose: http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1 Your first sentence suggests unschoolers have a single argument about what they do......the very essense of "un" schooling says you are full of it, as in, from the page above: "What is unschooling? Have you ever described 'red' to a person who is color blind? Sometimes, trying to define unschooling is like trying to define red. Ask 30 unschoolers to define the word and you'll get thirty shades of red. They'll all be red, but they'll all be different. Generally, unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated, not with 'doing school.' The focus is upon the choices made by each individual learner, and those choices can vary according to learning style and personality type. There is no one way to unschool. Click here for more definitions." Reading the whole page and it's referrences will show you as being clearly a stupid little boy that knows nothing but makes a lot of attention getting diversionary noise. Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again. Funny, I thought you once or twice claimed that you only gave back what the other person was giving to you. I do not see any ad homs from me in the message you responded to. Are you slipping? I just did give you tit for tat though. Shall we escalate again? YOU always DO. I said WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS. That's nice. That's not what I braced you about. I didn't discuss that. We can later if you wish, and anyway: The subject was your little attack on unschooling, as in: " " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan"" And just an aside related to this quote contents: homeschoolings and unschoolers do not have a single viewpoint on spanking, and they of all people, know and defend the "what worked for one may not be working for another" concept...if you understood and knew anything about homeschooling, generically, you wouldn't make such a stupid claim against unschoolers as having "an" argument. So, now we have you claiming you did not say anything against homeschooling. But THAT shot at unschoolers was SOMETHING against SOME homeschooling. You were making the claim that WE are one track "our way or no way presenters" in the spanking argument. Male bovine excrement, little boy. Or are you down to hair splitting again that something isn't everything so disqualifies your statement as a criticism? Your usual flight of fancy logic? (which amounts to nothing but weasely dodging) It is in favor of a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids. Yep. The question here isn't that. In fact you just used the classic logical fallacy, The Straw Man argument. No one here is suggesting parents don't have freedom to choose. The question is what tools are available to the parent for deciding, rather than guessing. That is the basis for aps, as far as I can gather, and from the FAQ that you keep trying to rewrite to hide the facts....that there is a lack of tools and a lot of guessing. I have never defended forcing parents to not spank, though you twits ARE tempting me to side with Chris and LaVonne. Your illogic and stupidy are very very persuasive. You pretend that tools and resources for decision making are available in instances where they are clearly NOT. Tradition and guesses in the hard sciences would have you and I sending smoke signals and grunting at each other from the hilltops for this little debate. A parent must guess, for instance, on the line where a child might be harmed from CP. And so far you have not admitted that or proven me wrong...you have not drawn and shown us The Line I refer to in The Question....you just pretend you have by sophistry and dodges. If you ask Dorothy, Well, I didn't. And I don't care to. It's you that I'm talking to. you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over public education. You may well do so. But there is no proof of that. And it doesn't fit with your own statements concerning education. You were pushing the idea that children benefit from doing things they don't like, as though homeschoolers or unschoolers actually do a "no pain" teaching program. Children that are unschooled choose, for themselves...willingly and eagerly...very difficult and time consuming tasks. They are highly self challenging and that is a given of Unschooling. Everyone that does it runs into it. Even the few children that don't appear to be doing that often turn out to be internal processers .. and work very hard. You are an ignorant little arrogant twit, boy. You know nothing about homeschooling or the children that learn in this way. They tend to be the most brilliant and creative. And NOT every child can be or should be unschooled...in families that do unschool one of the givens is that children will choose to be formally tutored as part of THEIR choice. In fact many do what I mentioned earlier, as they finally outpace their parents they go to other teachers..formal settings...but IT IS BY CHOICE. Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. Oh, I did that when you brought the subject up...trust me on that. YOU ARE JUST STUPID! "Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the dumbest dumb of all?" R R R R R You just did it again. I nailed you just yesterday on one of your infamous shouting dares. And here you are doing it again, child. Before we go any further I think you should provide the referrances to your defense of homeschooling, and your "prefer homeschooling please. When you've done, see if you can refute what I turned up on this typical dare of yours....the shouting, "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU" that has sunk you so often recently. Do you think it intelligent or smart to keep doing the same thing over and over again when it's not working? Or are you just having fun with us? Each time you use this particular ad hom, "STUPID," lately I've had little trouble in refuting you. Don't you think it's time YOU looked in the mirror? You aren't a champion of homeschooling. Or if you are not proven as yet by your insistence that it's in usenet. Nice to hear you say you are though. The unspanking unschoolers thank you, I'm sure. After an exhaustive search with google on usenet, I found this single instance where you defended parents refusal to have their children take standardized tests....and it was an anti CPS tirade, not a defense of homeschooling, or more specifically THE SUBJECT OF YOUR DERISION IN A RECENT POST...."unschooling." (Whatever made you think unschoolers have a single viewpoint? How stupid can you be?) It's just barely related to homeschooling. And is about testing. http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...usc.edu&rnum=1 or http://tinyurl.com/3ev39 Do you see there were you said you have a preferance for homeschooling? Possibly you steered me wrong asking me to search on "homeschooling" and you. In fact of both permutations of the word, "homeschool" and "homeschooling" I got nothing from you defending homeschooling or unschooling and only four hits two of which were repetative of the above. duplicates. http://tinyurl.com/2styx Now here is your challenge to me, word for word: Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. Then I tried "unschooling" which WAS the point of what I said you were being critical of, in open search on the web and usenet: On a Web wide search on "doan" and unschooling I got a few hits....none were you. Other "Doan"s and a Doan's Pills....R R R R. And usenet for the same search: http://tinyurl.com/3fvxb which simply is the two posts we just exchanged. Then I tried your archives and "home school", and got 26 heats, a lot of them repeaters, and most just hits because someone crossposted to a "homeschool" ng, and not one, nothing, with a defense by you of unschooling or homeschooling. See..... http://tinyurl.com/2asos So, Droany, are you stupid or are you a liar, or a stupid liar? Or are you, as is very plain to us all, a stupid little boy trying to play with the adults and doing silly little boy stunts such as making faces and monkey noises for bit of attention? You have made no defense of homeschooling outside that one CPS attack, and that does not go to our discussion on non-spanking homeschooling parents. I think I've figure out the answer to my question...you are a stupid liar and you are slipping. So many years of it has dulled our brain. When you constantly and consistently lie, Droany, you don't have to think or be creative any more and it shows. The errors accumulate over time. Your brain is accluter with your own lies and trying but failing to keep them sorted. There is a normal reaction to this....one sees it in Nearly Normal Neal's posts over time, and of course, yours. It's a way to not commit yourself, nor be responsible for what you claim and propose. You, Droany, and all compulsive liars, tend to endlessly repeat the same lame one liner shots, and when you try to fill in the gaps you fall on your asses as you just did again in this post. You used to appear better at this game of yours. Your writhings were newer to you and to us back then. Now, it's old, and worn out, and you have nothing to replace them with, except running off to another newsgroup and doing your same ol' same ol' tricks and noises on someone new. Didn't help much, did it? Didn't give you any new tricks, and certainly no new skills. Speaking of mirrors, as you so often do........... Doan Wednesday, 8:00 am, February 25th. I'll be there. Will you be? Kane On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote: On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank. Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are trying to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your recent post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling and geography contests. Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said anything against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy, stupid dog! :-) Okay, puppy: From: Doan Newsgroups: misc.kids Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800 " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan" Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model." Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them know. That is the often the case in the more successful children.. .they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed learning...and they work their tutors hard. YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r r.... Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy? You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers. Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to parenting is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some, that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives. LOL! And some homescholers do spank. Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means "all" to you when you want it to. That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it? Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and have in others. When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate Embry right? The ball is in your court. :-) Not hardly pilgrim. It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago. Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry study I do? The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the "speed limit sign" You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is unidentifiable as a constant. It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I am. If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some fashion while spanking. I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to answer The Question. You won't be alone. And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else. So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges met. I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study I have. You refuse to give page references. That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation. You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked. There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My "spanked" status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be though. If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly willing for you to prove it. If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question you cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study. I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice, since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have the study, and the conditions I will respond under. Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's were you left it. Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my spanked status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have. Weasel words. :-) You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I didn't offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to debate Embry? Which is the weasel statement? In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game, it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please you, as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play under are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play. These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck your neck out with your claims. No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so. And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my Embry study, so feel free. Or dance. Makes me no nevermind. You might start by identifying the document by title, give page references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply your debating opponent a copy first of course. You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I wouldn't do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or misunderstanding. Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove you have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt. A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a chart, nothing else. I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely in one of your many spins you saw it there. While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me wonder just how different your fantasy world is. About the same as the "dream land." :-) Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds. I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that the users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood extremes. I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking, despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you. Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't be a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them. And I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I care about society and my child. I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms. Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of the other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you lied about it. I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused. But not until, Droaner. Not until. You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter how feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as is possible, which ain't much. Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a good boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it. I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming is clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong. Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend that homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did and that others do. http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at? Misleading is lying and trying to pretend I said something Ididn't...welllllll. tsk Doan Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM. Kane http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Kane |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Those who do not spank have a message or two for you
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Those who do not spank have a message or two for you
All of this just to prove that you are stupid as a dog again? Can't find the Straus studies, can't find the Embry study, now can't even do a decent google search! Here is my old post: Date: 2000-11-01 01:35:43 PST "Last year, the kids who got perfect scores on the SAT are homeschooled. Comparing public schools to homeschools is like comparing public toilets to private home toilets. If you care about your kids, homeschool if you can or vote for VOUCHERS!" Doan On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:05:23 -0800, Doan wrote: ........his usual babbling lines of nonsense, denial, dodging, weasel words, and childish acting out attention getting. Let's start with the beginning. Your claim about unschoolers. http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1 Perhaps this will help clarify for you how you have once again stuck your foot in it up to your little child nose: http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1 Your first sentence suggests unschoolers have a single argument about what they do......the very essense of "un" schooling says you are full of it, as in, from the page above: "What is unschooling? Have you ever described 'red' to a person who is color blind? Sometimes, trying to define unschooling is like trying to define red. Ask 30 unschoolers to define the word and you'll get thirty shades of red. They'll all be red, but they'll all be different. Generally, unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated, not with 'doing school.' The focus is upon the choices made by each individual learner, and those choices can vary according to learning style and personality type. There is no one way to unschool. Click here for more definitions." Reading the whole page and it's referrences will show you as being clearly a stupid little boy that knows nothing but makes a lot of attention getting diversionary noise. Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again. Funny, I thought you once or twice claimed that you only gave back what the other person was giving to you. I do not see any ad homs from me in the message you responded to. Are you slipping? I just did give you tit for tat though. Shall we escalate again? YOU always DO. I said WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS. That's nice. That's not what I braced you about. I didn't discuss that. We can later if you wish, and anyway: The subject was your little attack on unschooling, as in: " " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan"" And just an aside related to this quote contents: homeschoolings and unschoolers do not have a single viewpoint on spanking, and they of all people, know and defend the "what worked for one may not be working for another" concept...if you understood and knew anything about homeschooling, generically, you wouldn't make such a stupid claim against unschoolers as having "an" argument. So, now we have you claiming you did not say anything against homeschooling. But THAT shot at unschoolers was SOMETHING against SOME homeschooling. You were making the claim that WE are one track "our way or no way presenters" in the spanking argument. Male bovine excrement, little boy. Or are you down to hair splitting again that something isn't everything so disqualifies your statement as a criticism? Your usual flight of fancy logic? (which amounts to nothing but weasely dodging) It is in favor of a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids. Yep. The question here isn't that. In fact you just used the classic logical fallacy, The Straw Man argument. No one here is suggesting parents don't have freedom to choose. The question is what tools are available to the parent for deciding, rather than guessing. That is the basis for aps, as far as I can gather, and from the FAQ that you keep trying to rewrite to hide the facts....that there is a lack of tools and a lot of guessing. I have never defended forcing parents to not spank, though you twits ARE tempting me to side with Chris and LaVonne. Your illogic and stupidy are very very persuasive. You pretend that tools and resources for decision making are available in instances where they are clearly NOT. Tradition and guesses in the hard sciences would have you and I sending smoke signals and grunting at each other from the hilltops for this little debate. A parent must guess, for instance, on the line where a child might be harmed from CP. And so far you have not admitted that or proven me wrong...you have not drawn and shown us The Line I refer to in The Question....you just pretend you have by sophistry and dodges. If you ask Dorothy, Well, I didn't. And I don't care to. It's you that I'm talking to. you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over public education. You may well do so. But there is no proof of that. And it doesn't fit with your own statements concerning education. You were pushing the idea that children benefit from doing things they don't like, as though homeschoolers or unschoolers actually do a "no pain" teaching program. Children that are unschooled choose, for themselves...willingly and eagerly...very difficult and time consuming tasks. They are highly self challenging and that is a given of Unschooling. Everyone that does it runs into it. Even the few children that don't appear to be doing that often turn out to be internal processers .. and work very hard. You are an ignorant little arrogant twit, boy. You know nothing about homeschooling or the children that learn in this way. They tend to be the most brilliant and creative. And NOT every child can be or should be unschooled...in families that do unschool one of the givens is that children will choose to be formally tutored as part of THEIR choice. In fact many do what I mentioned earlier, as they finally outpace their parents they go to other teachers..formal settings...but IT IS BY CHOICE. Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. Oh, I did that when you brought the subject up...trust me on that. YOU ARE JUST STUPID! "Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the dumbest dumb of all?" R R R R R You just did it again. I nailed you just yesterday on one of your infamous shouting dares. And here you are doing it again, child. Before we go any further I think you should provide the referrances to your defense of homeschooling, and your "prefer homeschooling please. When you've done, see if you can refute what I turned up on this typical dare of yours....the shouting, "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU" that has sunk you so often recently. Do you think it intelligent or smart to keep doing the same thing over and over again when it's not working? Or are you just having fun with us? Each time you use this particular ad hom, "STUPID," lately I've had little trouble in refuting you. Don't you think it's time YOU looked in the mirror? You aren't a champion of homeschooling. Or if you are not proven as yet by your insistence that it's in usenet. Nice to hear you say you are though. The unspanking unschoolers thank you, I'm sure. After an exhaustive search with google on usenet, I found this single instance where you defended parents refusal to have their children take standardized tests....and it was an anti CPS tirade, not a defense of homeschooling, or more specifically THE SUBJECT OF YOUR DERISION IN A RECENT POST...."unschooling." (Whatever made you think unschoolers have a single viewpoint? How stupid can you be?) It's just barely related to homeschooling. And is about testing. http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...usc.edu&rnum=1 or http://tinyurl.com/3ev39 Do you see there were you said you have a preferance for homeschooling? Possibly you steered me wrong asking me to search on "homeschooling" and you. In fact of both permutations of the word, "homeschool" and "homeschooling" I got nothing from you defending homeschooling or unschooling and only four hits two of which were repetative of the above. duplicates. http://tinyurl.com/2styx Now here is your challenge to me, word for word: Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. Then I tried "unschooling" which WAS the point of what I said you were being critical of, in open search on the web and usenet: On a Web wide search on "doan" and unschooling I got a few hits....none were you. Other "Doan"s and a Doan's Pills....R R R R. And usenet for the same search: http://tinyurl.com/3fvxb which simply is the two posts we just exchanged. Then I tried your archives and "home school", and got 26 heats, a lot of them repeaters, and most just hits because someone crossposted to a "homeschool" ng, and not one, nothing, with a defense by you of unschooling or homeschooling. See..... http://tinyurl.com/2asos So, Droany, are you stupid or are you a liar, or a stupid liar? Or are you, as is very plain to us all, a stupid little boy trying to play with the adults and doing silly little boy stunts such as making faces and monkey noises for bit of attention? You have made no defense of homeschooling outside that one CPS attack, and that does not go to our discussion on non-spanking homeschooling parents. I think I've figure out the answer to my question...you are a stupid liar and you are slipping. So many years of it has dulled our brain. When you constantly and consistently lie, Droany, you don't have to think or be creative any more and it shows. The errors accumulate over time. Your brain is accluter with your own lies and trying but failing to keep them sorted. There is a normal reaction to this....one sees it in Nearly Normal Neal's posts over time, and of course, yours. It's a way to not commit yourself, nor be responsible for what you claim and propose. You, Droany, and all compulsive liars, tend to endlessly repeat the same lame one liner shots, and when you try to fill in the gaps you fall on your asses as you just did again in this post. You used to appear better at this game of yours. Your writhings were newer to you and to us back then. Now, it's old, and worn out, and you have nothing to replace them with, except running off to another newsgroup and doing your same ol' same ol' tricks and noises on someone new. Didn't help much, did it? Didn't give you any new tricks, and certainly no new skills. Speaking of mirrors, as you so often do........... Doan Wednesday, 8:00 am, February 25th. I'll be there. Will you be? Kane On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote: On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank. Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are trying to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your recent post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling and geography contests. Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said anything against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy, stupid dog! :-) Okay, puppy: From: Doan Newsgroups: misc.kids Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800 " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan" Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model." Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them know. That is the often the case in the more successful children.. .they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed learning...and they work their tutors hard. YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r r.... Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy? You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers. Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to parenting is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some, that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives. LOL! And some homescholers do spank. Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means "all" to you when you want it to. That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it? Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and have in others. When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate Embry right? The ball is in your court. :-) Not hardly pilgrim. It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago. Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry study I do? The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the "speed limit sign" You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is unidentifiable as a constant. It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I am. If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some fashion while spanking. I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to answer The Question. You won't be alone. And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else. So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges met. I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study I have. You refuse to give page references. That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation. You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked. There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My "spanked" status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be though. If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly willing for you to prove it. If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question you cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study. I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice, since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have the study, and the conditions I will respond under. Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's were you left it. Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my spanked status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have. Weasel words. :-) You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I didn't offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to debate Embry? Which is the weasel statement? In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game, it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please you, as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play under are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play. These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck your neck out with your claims. No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so. And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my Embry study, so feel free. Or dance. Makes me no nevermind. You might start by identifying the document by title, give page references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply your debating opponent a copy first of course. You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I wouldn't do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or misunderstanding. Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove you have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt. A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a chart, nothing else. I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely in one of your many spins you saw it there. While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me wonder just how different your fantasy world is. About the same as the "dream land." :-) Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds. I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that the users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood extremes. I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking, despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you. Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't be a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them. And I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I care about society and my child. I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms. Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of the other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you lied about it. I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused. But not until, Droaner. Not until. You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter how feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as is possible, which ain't much. Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a good boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it. I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming is clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong. Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend that homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did and that others do. http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at? Misleading is lying and trying to pretend I said something Ididn't...welllllll. tsk Doan Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM. Kane http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Kane |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Those who do not spank have a message or two for you
On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:59:09 -0800, Doan wrote:
He is just a little dog that the anti-spanking zealotS thought they could stick on me and I'll go away. "stick on" you? R R R R The frantic anxious bravado of a defeated child. You are blocking your own way to victory here, and making a monumental fool of yourself with your all too obvious bluffs. You could sweep all this away in an instant, one post, and be fully ready to debate the Embry study I have, but you'll just play, just a little boy in school yard doing monkey tricks for attention. . They are wrong and now they have a run away, Whose run away? You don't know where they are or what they are doing. out of control dog they wish they didn't own. :-) Do I appear "out of control" to you? That could be the stupidest thing you've said in your entire posting history. There is only one way you can take control of you away from stupid little boy, and that is to grow up and go through the only door I left open for you. I baited, you bit, you are solidly hooked, and being reeled in...Wednesday isn't that far away. Liars and foolish "players" in debate are suckers for the easiest of debating methods. I set you up for this about a year ago. I'm a very patient man. And what I did was lay down an archive of forced responses to me. You really need to pull up your last 12 months of posts. And by a month or two ago you were ready. You were SURE you had out debated everyone...when all you had done was disgust them with your schoolboy cheating...and not even very clever cheating. Once you believed you had me, I HAD YOU at the bait. Remember your response to The Question? A Jr High school first year debate student wouldn't have bitten on that. Clever little Doan...the clever are the ones that always go down to themselves. The opponent needs only patience. You have long archive, with ample proof of you childishness. All I did was draw it out into the open more clearly.....well, force YOU to spew it out more outrageously. And you did. And you are stuck with my responses to your challenges and of course, next Wednesday. All are going to see you with your pants around your ankles. You have only Fern and Greg as your supporters. Now THAT's got to be painful.... R R R R I haven't even had to hide my tactics...I warned you openly long ago. Your arrogance and hubris has defeated you, not me. YOU are your very own worst enemy. See yah on Wednesday.....because after that time I don't have any obligation to debate you or even notice you any further. You are done, Doan, by your Dim. I will erase you from my list and I know that no one else will post to you ever again, except newbies that haven't found you out yet. and they will, trust me on that. Get honest or get lonesome. If everyone cuts you off it's pretty obvious that no one has "run away" and your protestestations will be met with archives or our most recent exchange, and your backing out, assuming you stay stupid and do. Three simple criteria and we are on, and your little kid butt is saved. Don't do them by Feb 25th and watch what happens. We'll debate Embry and Your input will be ignored. Do you really think you can play with grownups? Doan Gung Ho Fat Choi. Kane On 19 Feb 2004, Fern5827 wrote: Doan, he drones on. Whereas you are succinct, reasoned, and have a coherent philosophy to back up your beliefs, Kane's agenda is to be hostile. He is the true Dronanator. Ironic, isn't he? Doan relates: From: Doan Date: 2/19/2004 2:05 AM Eastern Standard Time Message-id: Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again. I said WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS. It is in favor of a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids. If you ask Dorothy, you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over public education. Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. YOU ARE JUST STUPID! Doan On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote: On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank. Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are trying to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your recent post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling and geography contests. Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said anything against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy, stupid dog! :-) Okay, puppy: From: Doan Newsgroups: misc.kids Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800 " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan" Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model." Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them know. That is the often the case in the more successful children.. .they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed learning...and they work their tutors hard. YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r r.... Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy? You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers. Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to parenting is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some, that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives. LOL! And some homescholers do spank. Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means "all" to you when you want it to. That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it? Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and have in others. When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate Embry right? The ball is in your court. :-) Not hardly pilgrim. It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago. Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry study I do? The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the "speed limit sign" You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is unidentifiable as a constant. It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I am. If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some fashion while spanking. I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to answer The Question. You won't be alone. And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else. So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges met. I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study I have. You refuse to give page references. That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation. snip) |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Those who do not spank have a message or two for you
Doan wrote in message ...
All of this just to prove that you are stupid as a dog again? Can't find the Straus studies, can't find the Embry study, now can't even do a decent google search! Here is my old post: On what grounds do you claim I can't find either study? I can reach across my desk for them. I simply don't debate lying children. When you quit lying I will happily engage you. Date: 2000-11-01 01:35:43 PST "Last year, the kids who got perfect scores on the SAT are homeschooled. Comparing public schools to homeschools is like comparing public toilets to private home toilets. If you care about your kids, homeschool if you can or vote for VOUCHERS!" Doan Gosh Droany, you are right, and I'm so embarrassed that my search didn't have the words in it that you had in this so could findit, but then I used them and google just didn't kick it up... Oh, and you seem to have forgotten something. The subject was UNSCHOOLING Droaner. As usual a sly little weasel wiggle on our part to LOOK like you are debating to the point made, but of course, nothing of the kind. You said that UNschoolers had an argument you challenged. I responded to that by pointing out you were being unfairly critical. I was not saying you didn't like or believe in HOMESCHOOLING....YOU threw that in. I made no general statement of any kind, but a specific on direct to YOUR statement. You seem to go off on these strang twisting byways so often. I'm starting to worry for you. Especially in light of the growing tension you are feeling concerning next Wednesday and that I know you haven't got the Embry study I have. You gave it away when you quoted what doesn't exist in this study. I'll be delivering a copy to someone around the time you'll be providing me with the criteria for debate, so that on the off chance you meet the other two simple criteria I can have the study sent to you....if you admit you don't have it. Droan, the only thing that can ever defeat me is honesty, and you haven't any. When you reform yourself you'll be able to mop up the floor with me. A bright lad like you. But not quite bright enough to see how powerful factual debate can be. See yah on Wednesday, or not. After Wednesday ... without the criteria....not, for ever. And I may not be the only one. Do you like to play alone? "Go" huh? One of my favorites. I played in Taipei and Kioushung, for money, with waterfront stevadors and warehousemen. You wouldn't last five minutes. "Go" or our other games. I have two words for you. Think about them and their relationship to each other. Tactics Strategy And I don't even leave word order out of my tactical maneuvers, let alone my strategy. Not even a mispelling is accidental. Or a grammar "error." And certainly not a "failure" to google correctly. I wonder if you though I really didn't that post. And others the search turned up. I don't think so, and you were so very careful, unlike me, to post the URL to the message. Could you have not wanted me to go there for some reason, and see the thread? You been had, child. In fifty years you'll figure it all out. A bit here, a bit there. It's zen. And yes, I am. Kane On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:05:23 -0800, Doan wrote: ........his usual babbling lines of nonsense, denial, dodging, weasel words, and childish acting out attention getting. Let's start with the beginning. Your claim about unschoolers. http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1 Perhaps this will help clarify for you how you have once again stuck your foot in it up to your little child nose: http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1 Your first sentence suggests unschoolers have a single argument about what they do......the very essense of "un" schooling says you are full of it, as in, from the page above: "What is unschooling? Have you ever described 'red' to a person who is color blind? Sometimes, trying to define unschooling is like trying to define red. Ask 30 unschoolers to define the word and you'll get thirty shades of red. They'll all be red, but they'll all be different. Generally, unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated, not with 'doing school.' The focus is upon the choices made by each individual learner, and those choices can vary according to learning style and personality type. There is no one way to unschool. Click here for more definitions." Reading the whole page and it's referrences will show you as being clearly a stupid little boy that knows nothing but makes a lot of attention getting diversionary noise. Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again. Funny, I thought you once or twice claimed that you only gave back what the other person was giving to you. I do not see any ad homs from me in the message you responded to. Are you slipping? I just did give you tit for tat though. Shall we escalate again? YOU always DO. I said WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS. That's nice. That's not what I braced you about. I didn't discuss that. We can later if you wish, and anyway: The subject was your little attack on unschooling, as in: " " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan"" And just an aside related to this quote contents: homeschoolings and unschoolers do not have a single viewpoint on spanking, and they of all people, know and defend the "what worked for one may not be working for another" concept...if you understood and knew anything about homeschooling, generically, you wouldn't make such a stupid claim against unschoolers as having "an" argument. So, now we have you claiming you did not say anything against homeschooling. But THAT shot at unschoolers was SOMETHING against SOME homeschooling. You were making the claim that WE are one track "our way or no way presenters" in the spanking argument. Male bovine excrement, little boy. Or are you down to hair splitting again that something isn't everything so disqualifies your statement as a criticism? Your usual flight of fancy logic? (which amounts to nothing but weasely dodging) It is in favor of a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids. Yep. The question here isn't that. In fact you just used the classic logical fallacy, The Straw Man argument. No one here is suggesting parents don't have freedom to choose. The question is what tools are available to the parent for deciding, rather than guessing. That is the basis for aps, as far as I can gather, and from the FAQ that you keep trying to rewrite to hide the facts....that there is a lack of tools and a lot of guessing. I have never defended forcing parents to not spank, though you twits ARE tempting me to side with Chris and LaVonne. Your illogic and stupidy are very very persuasive. You pretend that tools and resources for decision making are available in instances where they are clearly NOT. Tradition and guesses in the hard sciences would have you and I sending smoke signals and grunting at each other from the hilltops for this little debate. A parent must guess, for instance, on the line where a child might be harmed from CP. And so far you have not admitted that or proven me wrong...you have not drawn and shown us The Line I refer to in The Question....you just pretend you have by sophistry and dodges. If you ask Dorothy, Well, I didn't. And I don't care to. It's you that I'm talking to. you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over public education. You may well do so. But there is no proof of that. And it doesn't fit with your own statements concerning education. You were pushing the idea that children benefit from doing things they don't like, as though homeschoolers or unschoolers actually do a "no pain" teaching program. Children that are unschooled choose, for themselves...willingly and eagerly...very difficult and time consuming tasks. They are highly self challenging and that is a given of Unschooling. Everyone that does it runs into it. Even the few children that don't appear to be doing that often turn out to be internal processers .. and work very hard. You are an ignorant little arrogant twit, boy. You know nothing about homeschooling or the children that learn in this way. They tend to be the most brilliant and creative. And NOT every child can be or should be unschooled...in families that do unschool one of the givens is that children will choose to be formally tutored as part of THEIR choice. In fact many do what I mentioned earlier, as they finally outpace their parents they go to other teachers..formal settings...but IT IS BY CHOICE. Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. Oh, I did that when you brought the subject up...trust me on that. YOU ARE JUST STUPID! "Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the dumbest dumb of all?" R R R R R You just did it again. I nailed you just yesterday on one of your infamous shouting dares. And here you are doing it again, child. Before we go any further I think you should provide the referrances to your defense of homeschooling, and your "prefer homeschooling please. When you've done, see if you can refute what I turned up on this typical dare of yours....the shouting, "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU" that has sunk you so often recently. Do you think it intelligent or smart to keep doing the same thing over and over again when it's not working? Or are you just having fun with us? Each time you use this particular ad hom, "STUPID," lately I've had little trouble in refuting you. Don't you think it's time YOU looked in the mirror? You aren't a champion of homeschooling. Or if you are not proven as yet by your insistence that it's in usenet. Nice to hear you say you are though. The unspanking unschoolers thank you, I'm sure. After an exhaustive search with google on usenet, I found this single instance where you defended parents refusal to have their children take standardized tests....and it was an anti CPS tirade, not a defense of homeschooling, or more specifically THE SUBJECT OF YOUR DERISION IN A RECENT POST...."unschooling." (Whatever made you think unschoolers have a single viewpoint? How stupid can you be?) It's just barely related to homeschooling. And is about testing. http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...usc.edu&rnum=1 or http://tinyurl.com/3ev39 Do you see there were you said you have a preferance for homeschooling? Possibly you steered me wrong asking me to search on "homeschooling" and you. In fact of both permutations of the word, "homeschool" and "homeschooling" I got nothing from you defending homeschooling or unschooling and only four hits two of which were repetative of the above. duplicates. http://tinyurl.com/2styx Now here is your challenge to me, word for word: Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. Then I tried "unschooling" which WAS the point of what I said you were being critical of, in open search on the web and usenet: On a Web wide search on "doan" and unschooling I got a few hits....none were you. Other "Doan"s and a Doan's Pills....R R R R. And usenet for the same search: http://tinyurl.com/3fvxb which simply is the two posts we just exchanged. Then I tried your archives and "home school", and got 26 heats, a lot of them repeaters, and most just hits because someone crossposted to a "homeschool" ng, and not one, nothing, with a defense by you of unschooling or homeschooling. See..... http://tinyurl.com/2asos So, Droany, are you stupid or are you a liar, or a stupid liar? Or are you, as is very plain to us all, a stupid little boy trying to play with the adults and doing silly little boy stunts such as making faces and monkey noises for bit of attention? You have made no defense of homeschooling outside that one CPS attack, and that does not go to our discussion on non-spanking homeschooling parents. I think I've figure out the answer to my question...you are a stupid liar and you are slipping. So many years of it has dulled our brain. When you constantly and consistently lie, Droany, you don't have to think or be creative any more and it shows. The errors accumulate over time. Your brain is accluter with your own lies and trying but failing to keep them sorted. There is a normal reaction to this....one sees it in Nearly Normal Neal's posts over time, and of course, yours. It's a way to not commit yourself, nor be responsible for what you claim and propose. You, Droany, and all compulsive liars, tend to endlessly repeat the same lame one liner shots, and when you try to fill in the gaps you fall on your asses as you just did again in this post. You used to appear better at this game of yours. Your writhings were newer to you and to us back then. Now, it's old, and worn out, and you have nothing to replace them with, except running off to another newsgroup and doing your same ol' same ol' tricks and noises on someone new. Didn't help much, did it? Didn't give you any new tricks, and certainly no new skills. Speaking of mirrors, as you so often do........... Doan Wednesday, 8:00 am, February 25th. I'll be there. Will you be? Kane On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote: On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank. Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are trying to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your recent post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling and geography contests. Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said anything against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy, stupid dog! :-) Okay, puppy: From: Doan Newsgroups: misc.kids Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800 " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan" Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model." Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them know. That is the often the case in the more successful children.. .they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed learning...and they work their tutors hard. YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r r.... Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy? You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers. Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to parenting is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some, that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives. LOL! And some homescholers do spank. Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means "all" to you when you want it to. That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it? Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and have in others. When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate Embry right? The ball is in your court. :-) Not hardly pilgrim. It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago. Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry study I do? The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the "speed limit sign" You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is unidentifiable as a constant. It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I am. If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some fashion while spanking. I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to answer The Question. You won't be alone. And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else. So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges met. I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study I have. You refuse to give page references. That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation. You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked. There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My "spanked" status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be though. If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly willing for you to prove it. If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question you cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study. I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice, since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have the study, and the conditions I will respond under. Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's were you left it. Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my spanked status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have. Weasel words. :-) You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I didn't offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to debate Embry? Which is the weasel statement? In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game, it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please you, as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play under are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play. These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck your neck out with your claims. No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so. And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my Embry study, so feel free. Or dance. Makes me no nevermind. You might start by identifying the document by title, give page references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply your debating opponent a copy first of course. You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I wouldn't do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or misunderstanding. Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove you have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt. A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a chart, nothing else. I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely in one of your many spins you saw it there. While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me wonder just how different your fantasy world is. About the same as the "dream land." :-) Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds. I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that the users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood extremes. I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking, despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you. Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't be a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them. And I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I care about society and my child. I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms. Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of the other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you lied about it. I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused. But not until, Droaner. Not until. You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter how feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as is possible, which ain't much. Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a good boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it. I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming is clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong. Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend that homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did and that others do. http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at? Misleading is lying and trying to pretend I said something Ididn't...welllllll. tsk Doan Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM. Kane http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Kane |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Kane9 Kunt is showing his stupidity again. Those who do not spankhave a message or two for you
Kane is showing his stupidity again. On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: Doan wrote in message ... All of this just to prove that you are stupid as a dog again? Can't find the Straus studies, can't find the Embry study, now can't even do a decent google search! Here is my old post: On what grounds do you claim I can't find either study? I can reach across my desk for them. I simply don't debate lying children. When you quit lying I will happily engage you. Weasel words. :-) Doan Date: 2000-11-01 01:35:43 PST "Last year, the kids who got perfect scores on the SAT are homeschooled. Comparing public schools to homeschools is like comparing public toilets to private home toilets. If you care about your kids, homeschool if you can or vote for VOUCHERS!" Doan Gosh Droany, you are right, and I'm so embarrassed that my search didn't have the words in it that you had in this so could findit, but then I used them and google just didn't kick it up... Oh, and you seem to have forgotten something. The subject was UNSCHOOLING Droaner. As usual a sly little weasel wiggle on our part to LOOK like you are debating to the point made, but of course, nothing of the kind. You said that UNschoolers had an argument you challenged. I responded to that by pointing out you were being unfairly critical. I was not saying you didn't like or believe in HOMESCHOOLING....YOU threw that in. I made no general statement of any kind, but a specific on direct to YOUR statement. You seem to go off on these strang twisting byways so often. I'm starting to worry for you. Especially in light of the growing tension you are feeling concerning next Wednesday and that I know you haven't got the Embry study I have. You gave it away when you quoted what doesn't exist in this study. I'll be delivering a copy to someone around the time you'll be providing me with the criteria for debate, so that on the off chance you meet the other two simple criteria I can have the study sent to you....if you admit you don't have it. Droan, the only thing that can ever defeat me is honesty, and you haven't any. When you reform yourself you'll be able to mop up the floor with me. A bright lad like you. But not quite bright enough to see how powerful factual debate can be. See yah on Wednesday, or not. After Wednesday ... without the criteria....not, for ever. And I may not be the only one. Do you like to play alone? "Go" huh? One of my favorites. I played in Taipei and Kioushung, for money, with waterfront stevadors and warehousemen. You wouldn't last five minutes. "Go" or our other games. I have two words for you. Think about them and their relationship to each other. Tactics Strategy And I don't even leave word order out of my tactical maneuvers, let alone my strategy. Not even a mispelling is accidental. Or a grammar "error." And certainly not a "failure" to google correctly. I wonder if you though I really didn't that post. And others the search turned up. I don't think so, and you were so very careful, unlike me, to post the URL to the message. Could you have not wanted me to go there for some reason, and see the thread? You been had, child. In fifty years you'll figure it all out. A bit here, a bit there. It's zen. And yes, I am. Kane On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:05:23 -0800, Doan wrote: ........his usual babbling lines of nonsense, denial, dodging, weasel words, and childish acting out attention getting. Let's start with the beginning. Your claim about unschoolers. http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1 Perhaps this will help clarify for you how you have once again stuck your foot in it up to your little child nose: http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1 Your first sentence suggests unschoolers have a single argument about what they do......the very essense of "un" schooling says you are full of it, as in, from the page above: "What is unschooling? Have you ever described 'red' to a person who is color blind? Sometimes, trying to define unschooling is like trying to define red. Ask 30 unschoolers to define the word and you'll get thirty shades of red. They'll all be red, but they'll all be different. Generally, unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated, not with 'doing school.' The focus is upon the choices made by each individual learner, and those choices can vary according to learning style and personality type. There is no one way to unschool. Click here for more definitions." Reading the whole page and it's referrences will show you as being clearly a stupid little boy that knows nothing but makes a lot of attention getting diversionary noise. Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again. Funny, I thought you once or twice claimed that you only gave back what the other person was giving to you. I do not see any ad homs from me in the message you responded to. Are you slipping? I just did give you tit for tat though. Shall we escalate again? YOU always DO. I said WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS. That's nice. That's not what I braced you about. I didn't discuss that. We can later if you wish, and anyway: The subject was your little attack on unschooling, as in: " " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan"" And just an aside related to this quote contents: homeschoolings and unschoolers do not have a single viewpoint on spanking, and they of all people, know and defend the "what worked for one may not be working for another" concept...if you understood and knew anything about homeschooling, generically, you wouldn't make such a stupid claim against unschoolers as having "an" argument. So, now we have you claiming you did not say anything against homeschooling. But THAT shot at unschoolers was SOMETHING against SOME homeschooling. You were making the claim that WE are one track "our way or no way presenters" in the spanking argument. Male bovine excrement, little boy. Or are you down to hair splitting again that something isn't everything so disqualifies your statement as a criticism? Your usual flight of fancy logic? (which amounts to nothing but weasely dodging) It is in favor of a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids. Yep. The question here isn't that. In fact you just used the classic logical fallacy, The Straw Man argument. No one here is suggesting parents don't have freedom to choose. The question is what tools are available to the parent for deciding, rather than guessing. That is the basis for aps, as far as I can gather, and from the FAQ that you keep trying to rewrite to hide the facts....that there is a lack of tools and a lot of guessing. I have never defended forcing parents to not spank, though you twits ARE tempting me to side with Chris and LaVonne. Your illogic and stupidy are very very persuasive. You pretend that tools and resources for decision making are available in instances where they are clearly NOT. Tradition and guesses in the hard sciences would have you and I sending smoke signals and grunting at each other from the hilltops for this little debate. A parent must guess, for instance, on the line where a child might be harmed from CP. And so far you have not admitted that or proven me wrong...you have not drawn and shown us The Line I refer to in The Question....you just pretend you have by sophistry and dodges. If you ask Dorothy, Well, I didn't. And I don't care to. It's you that I'm talking to. you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over public education. You may well do so. But there is no proof of that. And it doesn't fit with your own statements concerning education. You were pushing the idea that children benefit from doing things they don't like, as though homeschoolers or unschoolers actually do a "no pain" teaching program. Children that are unschooled choose, for themselves...willingly and eagerly...very difficult and time consuming tasks. They are highly self challenging and that is a given of Unschooling. Everyone that does it runs into it. Even the few children that don't appear to be doing that often turn out to be internal processers .. and work very hard. You are an ignorant little arrogant twit, boy. You know nothing about homeschooling or the children that learn in this way. They tend to be the most brilliant and creative. And NOT every child can be or should be unschooled...in families that do unschool one of the givens is that children will choose to be formally tutored as part of THEIR choice. In fact many do what I mentioned earlier, as they finally outpace their parents they go to other teachers..formal settings...but IT IS BY CHOICE. Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. Oh, I did that when you brought the subject up...trust me on that. YOU ARE JUST STUPID! "Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the dumbest dumb of all?" R R R R R You just did it again. I nailed you just yesterday on one of your infamous shouting dares. And here you are doing it again, child. Before we go any further I think you should provide the referrances to your defense of homeschooling, and your "prefer homeschooling please. When you've done, see if you can refute what I turned up on this typical dare of yours....the shouting, "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU" that has sunk you so often recently. Do you think it intelligent or smart to keep doing the same thing over and over again when it's not working? Or are you just having fun with us? Each time you use this particular ad hom, "STUPID," lately I've had little trouble in refuting you. Don't you think it's time YOU looked in the mirror? You aren't a champion of homeschooling. Or if you are not proven as yet by your insistence that it's in usenet. Nice to hear you say you are though. The unspanking unschoolers thank you, I'm sure. After an exhaustive search with google on usenet, I found this single instance where you defended parents refusal to have their children take standardized tests....and it was an anti CPS tirade, not a defense of homeschooling, or more specifically THE SUBJECT OF YOUR DERISION IN A RECENT POST...."unschooling." (Whatever made you think unschoolers have a single viewpoint? How stupid can you be?) It's just barely related to homeschooling. And is about testing. http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...usc.edu&rnum=1 or http://tinyurl.com/3ev39 Do you see there were you said you have a preferance for homeschooling? Possibly you steered me wrong asking me to search on "homeschooling" and you. In fact of both permutations of the word, "homeschool" and "homeschooling" I got nothing from you defending homeschooling or unschooling and only four hits two of which were repetative of the above. duplicates. http://tinyurl.com/2styx Now here is your challenge to me, word for word: Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. Then I tried "unschooling" which WAS the point of what I said you were being critical of, in open search on the web and usenet: On a Web wide search on "doan" and unschooling I got a few hits....none were you. Other "Doan"s and a Doan's Pills....R R R R. And usenet for the same search: http://tinyurl.com/3fvxb which simply is the two posts we just exchanged. Then I tried your archives and "home school", and got 26 heats, a lot of them repeaters, and most just hits because someone crossposted to a "homeschool" ng, and not one, nothing, with a defense by you of unschooling or homeschooling. See..... http://tinyurl.com/2asos So, Droany, are you stupid or are you a liar, or a stupid liar? Or are you, as is very plain to us all, a stupid little boy trying to play with the adults and doing silly little boy stunts such as making faces and monkey noises for bit of attention? You have made no defense of homeschooling outside that one CPS attack, and that does not go to our discussion on non-spanking homeschooling parents. I think I've figure out the answer to my question...you are a stupid liar and you are slipping. So many years of it has dulled our brain. When you constantly and consistently lie, Droany, you don't have to think or be creative any more and it shows. The errors accumulate over time. Your brain is accluter with your own lies and trying but failing to keep them sorted. There is a normal reaction to this....one sees it in Nearly Normal Neal's posts over time, and of course, yours. It's a way to not commit yourself, nor be responsible for what you claim and propose. You, Droany, and all compulsive liars, tend to endlessly repeat the same lame one liner shots, and when you try to fill in the gaps you fall on your asses as you just did again in this post. You used to appear better at this game of yours. Your writhings were newer to you and to us back then. Now, it's old, and worn out, and you have nothing to replace them with, except running off to another newsgroup and doing your same ol' same ol' tricks and noises on someone new. Didn't help much, did it? Didn't give you any new tricks, and certainly no new skills. Speaking of mirrors, as you so often do........... Doan Wednesday, 8:00 am, February 25th. I'll be there. Will you be? Kane On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote: On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank. Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are trying to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your recent post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling and geography contests. Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said anything against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy, stupid dog! :-) Okay, puppy: From: Doan Newsgroups: misc.kids Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800 " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan" Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model." Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them know. That is the often the case in the more successful children.. .they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed learning...and they work their tutors hard. YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r r.... Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy? You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers. Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to parenting is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some, that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives. LOL! And some homescholers do spank. Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means "all" to you when you want it to. That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it? Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and have in others. When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate Embry right? The ball is in your court. :-) Not hardly pilgrim. It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago. Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry study I do? The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the "speed limit sign" You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is unidentifiable as a constant. It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I am. If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some fashion while spanking. I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to answer The Question. You won't be alone. And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else. So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges met. I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study I have. You refuse to give page references. That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation. You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked. There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My "spanked" status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be though. If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly willing for you to prove it. If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question you cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study. I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice, since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have the study, and the conditions I will respond under. Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's were you left it. Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my spanked status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have. Weasel words. :-) You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I didn't offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to debate Embry? Which is the weasel statement? In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game, it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please you, as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play under are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play. These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck your neck out with your claims. No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so. And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my Embry study, so feel free. Or dance. Makes me no nevermind. You might start by identifying the document by title, give page references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply your debating opponent a copy first of course. You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I wouldn't do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or misunderstanding. Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove you have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt. A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a chart, nothing else. I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely in one of your many spins you saw it there. While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me wonder just how different your fantasy world is. About the same as the "dream land." :-) Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds. I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that the users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood extremes. I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking, despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you. Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't be a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them. And I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I care about society and my child. I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms. Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of the other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you lied about it. I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused. But not until, Droaner. Not until. You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter how feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as is possible, which ain't much. Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a good boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it. I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming is clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong. Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend that homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did and that others do. http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at? Misleading is lying and trying to pretend I said something Ididn't...welllllll. tsk Doan Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM. Kane http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Kane |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Kane9 Kunt is showing his stupidity again. Those who do not spank have a message or two for you
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:55:02 -0800, Doan wrote:
Kane is showing his stupidity again. Droaner is showing his dishonesty again. This post is a dodge...HE is NOT answering the challenge....the thread had turned to a shot he took at "UNschoolers." I called him on it. He immediately tried claiming is was wrong because he supports "HOMEschoolers" ignoring of course that UNschoolers are a subset. He provided ONE, one example of him "supporting" homeschooling, that was in fact just a slam at public schooling. Used "toilets" for an analogy...cute. NO support for unschoolers, the target of his recent gibe. Kn other words, the weasel is alive and well... and ALL of this nonsense of his is to cover up a yet bigger dodge...his inability to give a cogent answer to The Question. If you are bored I don't blame you. Nothing new here. Different dance, same music. Tedium by Bach, Johann Droananator. On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: Doan wrote in message ... All of this just to prove that you are stupid as a dog again? Can't find the Straus studies, can't find the Embry study, now can't even do a decent google search! Here is my old post: On what grounds do you claim I can't find either study? I can reach across my desk for them. I simply don't debate lying children. When you quit lying I will happily engage you. Weasel words. :-) That's not an answer...as usual. NOT answering is just one more form of weasel. So, prove you aren't lying...just post me the page numbers of the information you wish to submit for proof. And prove I can't find either study. And that I do wish to debate a lying child. I dont NEED to weasel, child. This is YOUR show, not mine. You keep demanding proof from me but producing nothing that is provable...just quotes. Embry is widely published. You could be taking that info from anywhere and I already pointed out that what you offered is NOT in the study I have. To help you clarify I asked for the page number of the behavior in time out chart you offered. Nothing. No response except insistence I prove I have it. I don't, fo course. It isn't the the Embry study I have. From you? No page number so far. Any reason, beyond fraud? YOU challenged ME to provide proof I had the study so we could debate. That is a challenge FROM YOU, and hence when I respond it's up to you to disprove my offering and the best way is to of course provide proof YOU have what YOU claim. I'm just sitting here telling you I'll happily join you in debate if you prove you have it, and you clear up two other matters. Nothing too hard for you here is there? You won't perform on the challenges YOU make, yet YOU claim I'm weaseling...hmmm...interesting. Doan....... ............The silly child exposing himself and thinking the attention is meaningful, beyond the laughter and head shaking from the adults. Kane Date: 2000-11-01 01:35:43 PST "Last year, the kids who got perfect scores on the SAT are homeschooled. Comparing public schools to homeschools is like comparing public toilets to private home toilets. If you care about your kids, homeschool if you can or vote for VOUCHERS!" Doan Gosh Droany, you are right, and I'm so embarrassed that my search didn't have the words in it that you had in this so could findit, but then I used them and google just didn't kick it up... Oh, and you seem to have forgotten something. The subject was UNSCHOOLING Droaner. As usual a sly little weasel wiggle on our part to LOOK like you are debating to the point made, but of course, nothing of the kind. You said that UNschoolers had an argument you challenged. I responded to that by pointing out you were being unfairly critical. I was not saying you didn't like or believe in HOMESCHOOLING....YOU threw that in. I made no general statement of any kind, but a specific on direct to YOUR statement. You seem to go off on these strang twisting byways so often. I'm starting to worry for you. Especially in light of the growing tension you are feeling concerning next Wednesday and that I know you haven't got the Embry study I have. You gave it away when you quoted what doesn't exist in this study. I'll be delivering a copy to someone around the time you'll be providing me with the criteria for debate, so that on the off chance you meet the other two simple criteria I can have the study sent to you....if you admit you don't have it. Droan, the only thing that can ever defeat me is honesty, and you haven't any. When you reform yourself you'll be able to mop up the floor with me. A bright lad like you. But not quite bright enough to see how powerful factual debate can be. See yah on Wednesday, or not. After Wednesday ... without the criteria....not, for ever. And I may not be the only one. Do you like to play alone? "Go" huh? One of my favorites. I played in Taipei and Kioushung, for money, with waterfront stevadors and warehousemen. You wouldn't last five minutes. "Go" or our other games. I have two words for you. Think about them and their relationship to each other. Tactics Strategy And I don't even leave word order out of my tactical maneuvers, let alone my strategy. Not even a mispelling is accidental. Or a grammar "error." And certainly not a "failure" to google correctly. I wonder if you though I really didn't that post. And others the search turned up. I don't think so, and you were so very careful, unlike me, to post the URL to the message. Could you have not wanted me to go there for some reason, and see the thread? You been had, child. In fifty years you'll figure it all out. A bit here, a bit there. It's zen. And yes, I am. Kane On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:05:23 -0800, Doan wrote: ........his usual babbling lines of nonsense, denial, dodging, weasel words, and childish acting out attention getting. Let's start with the beginning. Your claim about unschoolers. http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1 Perhaps this will help clarify for you how you have once again stuck your foot in it up to your little child nose: http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1 Your first sentence suggests unschoolers have a single argument about what they do......the very essense of "un" schooling says you are full of it, as in, from the page above: "What is unschooling? Have you ever described 'red' to a person who is color blind? Sometimes, trying to define unschooling is like trying to define red. Ask 30 unschoolers to define the word and you'll get thirty shades of red. They'll all be red, but they'll all be different. Generally, unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated, not with 'doing school.' The focus is upon the choices made by each individual learner, and those choices can vary according to learning style and personality type. There is no one way to unschool. Click here for more definitions." Reading the whole page and it's referrences will show you as being clearly a stupid little boy that knows nothing but makes a lot of attention getting diversionary noise. Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again. Funny, I thought you once or twice claimed that you only gave back what the other person was giving to you. I do not see any ad homs from me in the message you responded to. Are you slipping? I just did give you tit for tat though. Shall we escalate again? YOU always DO. I said WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS. That's nice. That's not what I braced you about. I didn't discuss that. We can later if you wish, and anyway: The subject was your little attack on unschooling, as in: " " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan"" And just an aside related to this quote contents: homeschoolings and unschoolers do not have a single viewpoint on spanking, and they of all people, know and defend the "what worked for one may not be working for another" concept...if you understood and knew anything about homeschooling, generically, you wouldn't make such a stupid claim against unschoolers as having "an" argument. So, now we have you claiming you did not say anything against homeschooling. But THAT shot at unschoolers was SOMETHING against SOME homeschooling. You were making the claim that WE are one track "our way or no way presenters" in the spanking argument. Male bovine excrement, little boy. Or are you down to hair splitting again that something isn't everything so disqualifies your statement as a criticism? Your usual flight of fancy logic? (which amounts to nothing but weasely dodging) It is in favor of a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids. Yep. The question here isn't that. In fact you just used the classic logical fallacy, The Straw Man argument. No one here is suggesting parents don't have freedom to choose. The question is what tools are available to the parent for deciding, rather than guessing. That is the basis for aps, as far as I can gather, and from the FAQ that you keep trying to rewrite to hide the facts....that there is a lack of tools and a lot of guessing. I have never defended forcing parents to not spank, though you twits ARE tempting me to side with Chris and LaVonne. Your illogic and stupidy are very very persuasive. You pretend that tools and resources for decision making are available in instances where they are clearly NOT. Tradition and guesses in the hard sciences would have you and I sending smoke signals and grunting at each other from the hilltops for this little debate. A parent must guess, for instance, on the line where a child might be harmed from CP. And so far you have not admitted that or proven me wrong...you have not drawn and shown us The Line I refer to in The Question....you just pretend you have by sophistry and dodges. If you ask Dorothy, Well, I didn't. And I don't care to. It's you that I'm talking to. you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over public education. You may well do so. But there is no proof of that. And it doesn't fit with your own statements concerning education. You were pushing the idea that children benefit from doing things they don't like, as though homeschoolers or unschoolers actually do a "no pain" teaching program. Children that are unschooled choose, for themselves...willingly and eagerly...very difficult and time consuming tasks. They are highly self challenging and that is a given of Unschooling. Everyone that does it runs into it. Even the few children that don't appear to be doing that often turn out to be internal processers .. and work very hard. You are an ignorant little arrogant twit, boy. You know nothing about homeschooling or the children that learn in this way. They tend to be the most brilliant and creative. And NOT every child can be or should be unschooled...in families that do unschool one of the givens is that children will choose to be formally tutored as part of THEIR choice. In fact many do what I mentioned earlier, as they finally outpace their parents they go to other teachers..formal settings...but IT IS BY CHOICE. Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. Oh, I did that when you brought the subject up...trust me on that. YOU ARE JUST STUPID! "Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the dumbest dumb of all?" R R R R R You just did it again. I nailed you just yesterday on one of your infamous shouting dares. And here you are doing it again, child. Before we go any further I think you should provide the referrances to your defense of homeschooling, and your "prefer homeschooling please. When you've done, see if you can refute what I turned up on this typical dare of yours....the shouting, "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU" that has sunk you so often recently. Do you think it intelligent or smart to keep doing the same thing over and over again when it's not working? Or are you just having fun with us? Each time you use this particular ad hom, "STUPID," lately I've had little trouble in refuting you. Don't you think it's time YOU looked in the mirror? You aren't a champion of homeschooling. Or if you are not proven as yet by your insistence that it's in usenet. Nice to hear you say you are though. The unspanking unschoolers thank you, I'm sure. After an exhaustive search with google on usenet, I found this single instance where you defended parents refusal to have their children take standardized tests....and it was an anti CPS tirade, not a defense of homeschooling, or more specifically THE SUBJECT OF YOUR DERISION IN A RECENT POST...."unschooling." (Whatever made you think unschoolers have a single viewpoint? How stupid can you be?) It's just barely related to homeschooling. And is about testing. http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...usc.edu&rnum=1 or http://tinyurl.com/3ev39 Do you see there were you said you have a preferance for homeschooling? Possibly you steered me wrong asking me to search on "homeschooling" and you. In fact of both permutations of the word, "homeschool" and "homeschooling" I got nothing from you defending homeschooling or unschooling and only four hits two of which were repetative of the above. duplicates. http://tinyurl.com/2styx Now here is your challenge to me, word for word: Do a google search on me on the subject of unschooling. Then I tried "unschooling" which WAS the point of what I said you were being critical of, in open search on the web and usenet: On a Web wide search on "doan" and unschooling I got a few hits....none were you. Other "Doan"s and a Doan's Pills....R R R R. And usenet for the same search: http://tinyurl.com/3fvxb which simply is the two posts we just exchanged. Then I tried your archives and "home school", and got 26 heats, a lot of them repeaters, and most just hits because someone crossposted to a "homeschool" ng, and not one, nothing, with a defense by you of unschooling or homeschooling. See..... http://tinyurl.com/2asos So, Droany, are you stupid or are you a liar, or a stupid liar? Or are you, as is very plain to us all, a stupid little boy trying to play with the adults and doing silly little boy stunts such as making faces and monkey noises for bit of attention? You have made no defense of homeschooling outside that one CPS attack, and that does not go to our discussion on non-spanking homeschooling parents. I think I've figure out the answer to my question...you are a stupid liar and you are slipping. So many years of it has dulled our brain. When you constantly and consistently lie, Droany, you don't have to think or be creative any more and it shows. The errors accumulate over time. Your brain is accluter with your own lies and trying but failing to keep them sorted. There is a normal reaction to this....one sees it in Nearly Normal Neal's posts over time, and of course, yours. It's a way to not commit yourself, nor be responsible for what you claim and propose. You, Droany, and all compulsive liars, tend to endlessly repeat the same lame one liner shots, and when you try to fill in the gaps you fall on your asses as you just did again in this post. You used to appear better at this game of yours. Your writhings were newer to you and to us back then. Now, it's old, and worn out, and you have nothing to replace them with, except running off to another newsgroup and doing your same ol' same ol' tricks and noises on someone new. Didn't help much, did it? Didn't give you any new tricks, and certainly no new skills. Speaking of mirrors, as you so often do........... Doan Wednesday, 8:00 am, February 25th. I'll be there. Will you be? Kane On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote: On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote: From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank. Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are trying to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your recent post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling and geography contests. Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said anything against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy, stupid dog! :-) Okay, puppy: From: Doan Newsgroups: misc.kids Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800 " I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called "unschooling". The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may not be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life! Doan" Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model." Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them know. That is the often the case in the more successful children.. .they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed learning...and they work their tutors hard. YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r r.... Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy? You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers. Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to parenting is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some, that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives. LOL! And some homescholers do spank. Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means "all" to you when you want it to. That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it? Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and have in others. When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate Embry right? The ball is in your court. :-) Not hardly pilgrim. It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago. Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry study I do? The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the "speed limit sign" You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is unidentifiable as a constant. It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I am. If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some fashion while spanking. I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to answer The Question. You won't be alone. And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else. So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges met. I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study I have. You refuse to give page references. That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation. You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked. There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My "spanked" status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be though. If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly willing for you to prove it. If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question you cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study. I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice, since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have the study, and the conditions I will respond under. Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's were you left it. Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my spanked status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have. Weasel words. :-) You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I didn't offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to debate Embry? Which is the weasel statement? In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game, it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please you, as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play under are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play. These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck your neck out with your claims. No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so. And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my Embry study, so feel free. Or dance. Makes me no nevermind. You might start by identifying the document by title, give page references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply your debating opponent a copy first of course. You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I wouldn't do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or misunderstanding. Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove you have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt. A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a chart, nothing else. I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely in one of your many spins you saw it there. While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me wonder just how different your fantasy world is. About the same as the "dream land." :-) Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds. I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that the users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood extremes. I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking, despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you. Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't be a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them. And I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I care about society and my child. I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms. Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of the other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you lied about it. I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused. But not until, Droaner. Not until. You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter how feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as is possible, which ain't much. Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a good boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it. I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming is clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong. Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend that homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did and that others do. http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at? Misleading is lying and trying to pretend I said something Ididn't...welllllll. tsk Doan Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM. Kane http://sandradodd.com/s/proof Kane |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Darn! The message I dreaded came today. | chiam margalit | General | 0 | February 5th 04 04:43 AM |
| | Kids should work... | Kane | General | 13 | December 10th 03 02:30 AM |
| And again he barks........ Kane barks ...... again! was Kids should work... | Kane | General | 9 | December 9th 03 06:08 AM |
Kids should work. | LaVonne Carlson | General | 22 | December 7th 03 04:27 AM |
And again he strikes........ Doan strikes ...... again! was Kids should work... | Kane | General | 2 | December 6th 03 03:28 AM |