Straw Man has zero credibility. He is afraid of food and believes in urban legends.
He is worthless.
Ironically, my good man, your argument against Straw Man -- itself a classic argumentation fallacy, though I don't recall the Latin name -- is a clear-cut case of Argumentum Ad Hominem; i.e., diversionary personal attack, attack against the person, etc., etc. Your own riposte is, frankly, as you said, "worthless."
I think you know that, too, Adam. It's only too easy to divert from what someone says by trying to divert the issue to their character, actions or even character (per the also classic Tu Quoque: "Well, gee, pal, you snort heroin, too, so who are you to say it might soon kill me?").
Address his arguments,
not the man says or even his behavior. As a fellow Star Trek fan, perhaps you'll appreciate this quote: "Perhaps the words are more important than the man."
Aside: while I cannot completely agree with the fellas who have crashed on McDonald's as they have, I DO understand where some of them are coming from. I know my friend Michael Wong, a life-long atheist, engineer, family man and self-avowed "asshole" would have a field day with some of this fast food business. He swore to me that his late DOG wouldn't even eat McMeat even when little Fuzzy Wong's bowl was empty.
Michael has largely retired from the Internet, but he still occasionally posts on this site:
http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/category/blog/
