Saturday, March 6, 2010

Obsessions for Clay

Flickr Photo by waI.ti
I am getting a strange sense of deja-vu as I write this, but, if you disagree with someone's opinion, how does a rational person go about handling it? Do you sit down and calmly discuss the difference of opinion? Perhaps if you still don't agree you engage in some ever-so friendly name calling. As the last resort, I think most rational people will just come the realization that agreement simply isn't possible and move on - not everyone is going to agree.

Or, if your name happens to be Clay, you spend your time finding new and entertaining ways of attempting to carry on a discussion with someone who no longer cares to talk to you. Isn't there a word for this type of behavior?

Yes, this gentlemen is at it again, this time with the interesting argument that this object of his obsession has "refused to acknowledge when people prove superior factual points" and therefore must be accepting monies from sources unknown to continue to hold onto his ideas. So, as the reasoning goes, the obsessor feels that it them becomes his business how the obsessee supports themselves.

I frequently find myself wondering who is paying people to disagree with me. It happens so often that the person making these payments must be pretty well off to still have any money left. But, with any luck, I'll be able to bankrupt them soon.

Clay, give it a rest already, will you? You need to find a new hobby because this one is just getting embarrassing.

P.S. The number you will want to call is 1-800-NO-STALK, they will be able to help you with your "problem"


  1. It is really no use trying to reason with Clay. Anyone would do this is quite profoundly disturbed and it saddens me. It also shows how little credibility the ND movement has in general and the autism hub and Dave Seidel and Kimb Wombles in particular who laugh at his cheap shots at me. They are nothing but hypocrites. I can't imagine the ire that would be directed at an equivalent autism hub that had a pro chelation thimerosal causes autism stance that linked to john best's blog when he would be abusive to ari ne'eman or Amanda Baggs.

    I believe that what Clay is doing is a violation of blogger's terms of services as it really constitutes hate speech on the basis of my disability but I doubt it is enforceable or they would do anything about it.

  2. actually not only am i waiting for superior factual points from clay but any factual points whatsoever. He does the old neurodiversity schtick of "don't confuse me with the facts". He never offers any facts to refute my factual argments but only stoops to insulting me and my family.

  3. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  4. @ Jonathan, who said:
    "actually not only am i waiting for superior factual points from clay but any factual points whatsoever."

    But you always delete my comments, no matter how nice I am! Ol' Rex beat you in an argument recently, but I suppose that escaped your notice.

    @ MJ - Jonboy isn't going to like it that you've put up another pic of him. ;-)

  5. Clay,

    Haven't we been over this? No name calling here.

  6. @ MJ - I guess you think that calling Dave and Kim "hypocrites" is a statement of fact?

    A real fact is that neither of them has laughed, or said anything about it. Phil enjoyed it though.

    It would be very easy for Mitchell to get me to stop. Just answer the question.

  7. Clay,

    If you call someone a hypocrite, you are saying that -

    "you mean that they pretend to have qualities, beliefs, or feelings that they do not really have."

    and while that term is being used in a pejorative way, it is more an opinion about how the other person's actions reflect their stated opinions.

    The word that you used is implying that your obsessee is "extremely stupid or has behaved in a stupid way" and is almost always used as an insult.

    I hope you can understand the difference.

    As for "just answering the question", I don't think you have any right to expect an answer. Your question is invasive, personal, and completely irrelevant.

    You seem to be an intelligent guy, so I don't know why you just don't get the hint and stop asking.

  8. @ MJ - It's incorrect for him to call Dave or Kim hypocrites, because they haven't actually said anything about it. I'm sure that they understand the difference between "bigotry against a group", and "criticism of an individual" for his behavior.

    I actually forget what word I might have used. Was it "schlub"? I only recall that in that comment, I said that I had only said nice things about his mother.

    I suppose it's invisible to you when he gets personal in his criticism of others.

    He hasn't bothered to issue a denial, and since somebody has to be paying for his upkeep, I think it's fair to assume he can't.

  9. Clay,

    I think the hypocrite comment was a general statement that these people do not stand by their beliefs when confronted with your actions. It is Jonathan's opinion and he is certainly entitled to have it. And as it is an opinion I don't know how it could be considered "incorrect".

    The word was not schlub.

    I do see what other people say, including Jonathan. I don't agree with everything he says but I don't think that his actions or words are so bad as to deserve any special mention.

    Whereas you, on the other hand, have said some things that were completely out of line and continue to skirt the line with your current comments. And, as I explained to you last time, you will get no more free passes from me. The world of autism has more than enough nonsense in it already without your contributions.

  10. @ MJ - You obviously have no experience dealing with autistics who have a sense of humor. I know Jonboy doesn't. Has he complained yet about that picture of him you put up here? ;-)

    PS. It's easy to come up with modified lyrics to a song. Just google up the lyrics, and then change a few words. Whyn't you guys try it, and see how clever you can be?

  11. MJ-I am not going to bother insulting Clay back or making up songs about him. I have fallen into neurodiversity's flame-bait traps before and I will attempt not to do so in the future.

    Clay is not annoyed by your posts in fact he is enjoying the attention you are giving him as he has no real life friends by his own admission (small wonder why).

    He would not be bothered if i hurl insults at him.

    What is going to bother him much more is that I am going to continue exposing the problems that his idols Ari Ne'eman and Michelle have and their hypocrisy and inconsistencies in all of their activities.

    Particularly salient is Clay's trying to claim that I am on the payroll of some sort of pro-cure organization, when in fact it is his idol, Dawson, who accepts funding from autism speaks an organization she despises with no qualms whatsoever, then has the gall to write about ethics as far as autistics are concerned.

    My continued exposures a andcriticisms of those people will continue to Mr. Adams chagrin and I will have the satisfaction of knowing that this will annoy him much more than your posts about him and whatever insults I could hurl back at him or songs I could make up about him.

  12. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

  13. I am beginning to think that you are right, Jonathan. Most people will get the point when you call out their actions, but Clay just doesn't seem to get it.

    Oh well, it was worth a try.

  14. [Submitted with all respect]

    "Clay, give it a rest already, will you? You need to find a new hobby because this one is just getting embarrassing."

    Embarrassing for Mitchell, maybe, but now that I've found something else that I'm really good at, I plan to keep practicing. ;-)

    "Anyone would do this is quite profoundly disturbed and it saddens me."

    I really don't see how you can lay that on me, Jon, sadness is your normal modus operandi.

    "Actually not only am I waiting for superior factual points from Clay but any factual points whatsoever."

    Here ya go:
    "A person can only be termed as one of two things – neurotypical or neurodiverse. And if you get right down to it, anyone who’s neurotypical is also neurodiverse, because typicality is just another way of being, although more numerous. “Diversity” includes every-freakin’-body, of whatever description. So when you say, “We don’t need no stinkin’ Neurodiversity”, you might as well be saying, “We don’t need no stinkin’ gravity.” It’s there, you can’t deny it or do anything about it."

    When you can refute that, let me know.