Doug Henwood wrote:
>
> I don't know if it's a flame exactly, but it's a bit too ad hominem.
>
No it isn't. It's a personal attack (of the form X & Y are jerks because they believe Z) rather than an ad hominem (of the form Z is false because X & Y support it). An Ad Hominem attack is an attempt to refute an argument by undermining the _ethos_ (Aristotelian sense) of those upholding that argument. Since personal attacks are mere static and can be ignored, while ad hominem arguments are serious attempts to disrupt discussion, the distinction is worth keeping.
Carrol