A logical rebuttal?

OK

"but the judgmental invective such as "telling lies" is not an honest way to handle disagreements."

It is when the disagreement is over whether or not the other person is lying.

"As for adaptability, Dawkins and others have stated with proper scientific evidence, they would change their positions. It has always been the credo of most people who are called atheists."

Dawkins stopped making scientific arguments a couple of books ago I agree with most of what he says about evolution and cosmology. But when he diagnoses half the world as delusional it is he who is misusing scientific terms. If you were as unbiased about him as you claim to be, you would see that too.

" I'm sure that Martin Luther King had the "rudeness" moniker pasted on him. After all, he was considered "an outside agitator"." Interesting, you hypothesis is "proved" by the fact that you made it.

Are you sure that you are interested in and knowledgeable about "logic"? I have a better question. Are you really arrogant enough to consider yourself comparable to Dr. Martin Luther King? Are you really stupid enough to think he was rude, with no evidence just because you are? If you had any shred of decency or integrity you would have proof of such a statement before you made it and start from that point rather than baseless speculation. That is very loaded statement for you to just pull it out of your butt.

Dr. Martin Luther King indeed!

"Polite to me means sticking with the issues and not personalizing them to the degree that you silence information that may be uncomfortable and it certainly means avoiding ad hominem attacks on books that you haven't read. That's both delusional and rude. "

Surely you must realize that the issues under discussion are not Evolution or Cosmology or Science but your lack of manners. Surely one who demands logic from others, knows enough about logic to realize that ad hominem means "to the man" and that Books are not men.

Surely a student of logic would not have his head up his arse so far that he would not know that it is quite permissible to criticize THE TITLE of a book or a quote from a book as independent from the book. Surely one can criticize some things that a man has said without reading every condescending illogical, smug word he has ever written.

Not reading a book because you told me to? Delusional and rude? Who are you, a grade school teacher giving homework?

Get over yourself Strings. Using big words poorly does not make you seem wiser.