Interesting rfnajera.
I read your Blog piece, "Twinkies and Sin" which was interesting, had the twinkies in it, just as your remark today did, substantiated the medical background, and was pretty good, perhaps very good on the subject of sin, and how to view it.
It also alluded to a, possibly in the past character trait that you described a professor believing you had. I hate it when people accuse me of that because of course it's not true; I just strongly defend my views and people hold that against me,
To be honest, I did find the recitation of stats relating to deaths and treating those stats as no big deal under a heading of 'Chill Out' to be a rather normal if not sensitive attitude...

Interesting rfnajera.
I read your Blog piece, "Twinkies and Sin" which was interesting, had the twinkies in it, just as your remark today did, substantiated the medical background, and was pretty good, perhaps very good on the subject of sin, and how to view it.
It also alluded to a, possibly in the past character trait that you described a professor believing you had. I hate it when people accuse me of that because of course it's not true; I just strongly defend my views and people hold that against me,
To be honest, I did find the recitation of stats relating to deaths and treating those stats as no big deal under a heading of 'Chill Out' to be a rather normal if not sensitive attitude some people will have, that is until I got to the end and you said you were an epidemiologist followed by the "Relax, I've got your back". That really did floor me.
Hey I just searched out the clip this started on, and I find you blew it in my opinion.
Aside from the pointlessness of your mentioning my spelling error, which I wasn't going to mention, you said:
"Healt Care Professional"? You just tried using a whole bunch of big words to no avail. Perhaps it's your gene pool that should be cleansed?
Can't apologize to an attitude like that. Yes the person did say uncomplimentary things about epidemiologists in general, but your response does not paint a caring image of epidemiologists, rather it supports their view of them.
The difference between the two attacks is that Joseph's critique appears to be in defense of humanity, while your critique is just scorn of 2 people who raised your ire.
That's how I see it anyway.