I read your posts, and other people's posts. How else would I have been able to point out your repeated poor reasoning skills and ignorance regarding the English language? How else would I have known you were fabricating information contained in those posts to back your position? You on the other hand failed to comprehend or read (I am not sure which) 98% of my first post, and complain about the content. Then failed to read, or simply lied about, the contents of other responses to my post.
If you really want to keep going I'm game, but you've essentially just been calling me illogical, delusional, etc, while I insulted you for being socially retarded
I'm socially retarded because I correctly used an expletive? Seriously, you still never bothered to read anything about written language after me pointing out your ignorance? No, I'm not surprised really because the first paragraph explains exactly where you are wrong in every conceivable way. You never demonstrated how "Wholly fuck" as a statement could possibly be a personal attack, or why a different expletive would not be attack. Obviously you see me as socially retarded, because you refuse to admit that you are factually wrong!
To the other piece of that sentence: Show me a single text book that claims ignoring facts and basing your opinion opposite of facts is not delusional, irrational, and illogical. I have at least 6 college text books on my book shelf and every one of them defines your position almost exactly as I have. You ignore the definitions of words, but if you bothered to look for those definitions you would see they also match my statements. Like this these.
A delusion is a belief held with strong conviction despite superior evidence to the contrary. As a pathology, it is distinct from a belief based on false or incomplete information, confabulation, dogma, illusion, or other effects of perception.
exclamation: a sudden cry or remark, esp. expressing surprise, anger, or pain.
a : a syllable, word, or phrase inserted to fill a vacancy (as in a sentence or a metrical line) without adding to the sense; especially : a word (as it in “make it clear which you prefer”) that occupies the position of the subject or object of a verb in normal English word order and anticipates a subsequent word or phrase that supplies the needed meaningful content
b : an exclamatory word or phrase; especially : one that is obscene or profane
Personal attack: see 'ad hominem'
An ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument. Fallacious Ad hominem reasoning is normally categorized as an informal fallacy, more precisely as a genetic fallacy, a subcategory of fallacies of irrelevance. Ad hominem reasoning is not always fallacious, for example, when it relates to the credibility of statements of fact.
Ad hominem arguments are the converse of appeals to authority, and may be used in response to such appeals.
Ad hominem as it is discussed in this article refers to the logical fallacy argumentum ad hominem, and not to the literal Latin phrase ad hominem.
Now, show me one single fact that backs your opinion that my statements "Wholly fuck!" and "Absolutely wrong!" are personal attacks without changing either statement or combining them. Don't come back without proof, your opinion thus far has been based on dishonesty and ignorance (feigned or otherwise). You won't be able to do so, but I'll look for a fact based reply.