335 Replies. 17 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Older >
 |
| 335. |
Re: Loose ends |
Jul 9, 2012, 09:50 |
Blue |
|
|
The Opera Ghost wrote on Jul 9, 2012, 01:46:
Stating facts is not "misbehaving." But silencing the opposition is what you do when you can't win on the merits, isn't it, Blue?
You seem to have mistaken me for your opposition in this debate.
And anyone who frequents these forums knows how ridiculous it is to suggest you were banned for "stating facts." You'll have to sell that canard to a less informed audience. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen "Blue" Heaslip
Blue's News Publisher, Editor-in-Chief, El Presidente for Life |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 334. |
Re: Op Ed |
Jul 9, 2012, 09:45 |
Sepharo |
|
|
| It warms my cockles that this thread is so memorable to him that he returns to it over two years later. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [I'm not trolling I'm just] tossing stuff like that in there only to get your panties all bunched up. -TrollinThundr |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 333. |
Re: Loose ends |
Jul 9, 2012, 08:28 |
nin |
|
|
But silencing the opposition is what you do when you can't win on the merits, isn't it, Blue?
Oh look, an alt account! How exciting!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RollinThundr Apr 17, 2013, 12:25: Eh really tossing stuff like that in there only to get your panties all bunched up. If you really want to call that trolling sure.
Mr. Tact Apr 17, 2013, 12:33: Pretty sure that's the definition of trolling... |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 332. |
Re: Loose ends |
Jul 9, 2012, 07:32 |
Beamer |
|
|
| Someone is drunk and looking to be banned again. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 331. |
Re: Loose ends |
Jul 9, 2012, 01:46 |
The Opera Ghost |
|
|
Stating facts is not "misbehaving." But silencing the opposition is what you do when you can't win on the merits, isn't it, Blue?
Blue wrote on May 20, 2010, 19:09:
hmm... I wonder what the record is for longest thread here...
680 post when my mom died, followed by 654 from 9/11.
When you use the search box here the popular threads from the last week list is replaced by the most popular threads of all time.
Sorry to spoil your lengthy debate, but your opponent has been banned for misbehaving in a different thread, so you are going to have to carry the load from here if you want the record.  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 330. |
Re: Op Ed |
May 20, 2010, 23:10 |
Wowbagger_TIP |
|
|
True. But at some point I guess you just have to accept that someone's head just doesn't work like a normal person's. If they can't make logical arguments and can't be reasoned with, then they're operating outside the reality that most of us live in. I mostly don't like to let such ramblings go unanswered for fear of someone else being infected by them. That's a terrible burden in the internet age :-/
http://xkcd.com/386/ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 329. |
Re: Op Ed |
May 20, 2010, 19:58 |
Sepharo |
|
|
| We may have just been running in circles but the laps were good exercise. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [I'm not trolling I'm just] tossing stuff like that in there only to get your panties all bunched up. -TrollinThundr |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 328. |
Re: Loose ends |
May 20, 2010, 19:09 |
Blue |
|
|
hmm... I wonder what the record is for longest thread here...
680 post when my mom died, followed by 654 from 9/11.
When you use the search box here the popular threads from the last week list is replaced by the most popular threads of all time.
Sorry to spoil your lengthy debate, but your opponent has been banned for misbehaving in a different thread, so you are going to have to carry the load from here if you want the record. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stephen "Blue" Heaslip
Blue's News Publisher, Editor-in-Chief, El Presidente for Life |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 327. |
Re: Loose ends |
May 20, 2010, 18:33 |
Wowbagger_TIP |
|
|
It's not my own words that matter. It's scientific evidence, which you refuse to address, and you can't possibly dispute the theory without disputing the scientific evidence. As soon as you can address that, let me know.
The rest of your post is just distortions and cherry-picking. The same thing we expect from those of your ilk who have the amazing ability to filter out any information that doesn't conform to their own view of reality. Distorting, redefining, excusing, and dismissing things as needed to preserve your predefined Truth(TM). It's a bizarre world you live in. Utterly impervious to reason.
hmm... I wonder what the record is for longest thread here...
This comment was edited on May 20, 2010, 18:39. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 326. |
Loose ends |
May 20, 2010, 03:34 |
Amillennialist |
|
|
-A fact is a fact. You're clearly confused in believing that observable fact is not "one of the Scientific Method's own definitions."
-Did you ever find an actual, observable fact about vertical speciation that you can state in your own words (links to videos and a website is not an "argument")?
-You have realized that a comment to Sepharo is not a comment to you, haven't you?
-I know you don't like this, but your arguments throughout this thread boil down to: 1) denying religious liberty protects religious liberty; 2) Jefferson opposed any mixture of government and religion, even though he used tax dollars to promote Christianity and worshiped in the House; 3) never being able to demonstrate that Man arose from microbes by way of maggots and monkeys proves that he did; and 4) Qur'anic commands to war against non-Muslims "until all religion is for Allah" means that all religions are equally bad.
We'll always have Paris.
This comment was edited on May 20, 2010, 04:15. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"The Christian religion, when ... brought to the original purity and simplicity of it's benevolent institutor, is a religion of all others most friendly to liberty, science, and the freest expansion of the human mind."
Thomas Jefferson, 1801 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 325. |
Re: Wowbagger: The gift that keeps on giving |
May 18, 2010, 12:04 |
Wowbagger_TIP |
|
|
You admit that your "scientific fact" is impossible to observe, ever. That which cannot be observed cannot be falsified. No, you just have your own personal definition of "fact" that doesn't agree with that which is used in science. You don't get to redefine science, especially when you don't even understand how it's done. I think there's ample evidence that the scientific method works just fine using its own definitions.
Science has built a theory that explains the evidence very well and has predictive capability. You have nothing that comes remotely close to doing either of those things. You lose. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 324. |
Re: Wowbagger: The gift that keeps on giving |
May 18, 2010, 01:35 |
Amillennialist |
|
|
Wowbagger_TIP wrote on May 17, 2010, 09:32:
If you never address the actual science, you can never win an argument about the validity of a scientific theory. It's a simple fact.
You admit that your "scientific fact" is impossible to observe, ever. That which cannot be observed cannot be falsified.
That is not Science. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"The Christian religion, when ... brought to the original purity and simplicity of it's benevolent institutor, is a religion of all others most friendly to liberty, science, and the freest expansion of the human mind."
Thomas Jefferson, 1801 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 323. |
Re: Wowbagger: The gift that keeps on giving |
May 18, 2010, 00:54 |
Amillennialist |
|
|
| Groundhog Day. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"The Christian religion, when ... brought to the original purity and simplicity of it's benevolent institutor, is a religion of all others most friendly to liberty, science, and the freest expansion of the human mind."
Thomas Jefferson, 1801 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 322. |
Re: Wowbagger: The gift that keeps on giving |
May 17, 2010, 09:32 |
Wowbagger_TIP |
|
|
Don't blame me because you won't read and I won't let you get away with lying. Dude, you just overloaded my irony meter. Thanks for that.
Says the person who admits that he has no observable evidence of Man arising from microbes, and that proves he's right! Lying again I see. If you never address the actual science, you can never win an argument about the validity of a scientific theory. It's a simple fact. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 321. |
Re: Wowbagger: The gift that keeps on giving |
May 17, 2010, 00:08 |
Amillennialist |
|
|
And now, in true liar fashion, you proceed to split hairs to try to redefine your actions as something other than what they were.
Don't blame me because you won't read and I won't let you get away with lying.
Either address actual scientific claims or admit that you can't.
Says the person who admits that he has no observable evidence of Man arising from microbes, and that proves he's right! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"The Christian religion, when ... brought to the original purity and simplicity of it's benevolent institutor, is a religion of all others most friendly to liberty, science, and the freest expansion of the human mind."
Thomas Jefferson, 1801 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 320. |
Re: Wowbagger: The gift that keeps on giving |
May 12, 2010, 13:36 |
Wowbagger_TIP |
|
|
As should be clear to even the moderately-literate, that post wasn't addressed to you, Wowbagger.
My "very next post" was directed to you, but its purpose wasn't to debate Darwinism, it was to defend against another absurd personal attack: And now, in true liar fashion, you proceed to split hairs to try to redefine your actions as something other than what they were. Pathetic.
Now, if I had been addressing you, your claim that I "lied" by commenting on Darwin's creation myth again would be an admission that you lack "the courage to discuss this topic honestly," which was the condition I put on further discussion of Darwinism in that post to Sepharo. Quite the contrary, I'm the one willing to discuss the theory. You refuse to address anything but your own ridiculous definitions of it, even though you know those are lies because I've linked to the actual claims. It is most certainly you that is the coward here.
Either address actual scientific claims or admit that you can't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 319. |
Re: Op Ed |
May 12, 2010, 05:45 |
Amillennialist |
|
|
Sepharo wrote:
Stop assigning me positions that I don't adhere to.
I see you employ that same strategy on this topic as you do with evolution.
That's true, but not in the sense you mean.
My "strategy" with both subjects is to adhere to facts. Yours is to regurgitate (without realizing it, I don't doubt) whatever you swallowed whole from atheistic, craven, nescient tyrants (I'm assuming college professors, since one can find such irrational, self-destructive propaganda typically only in institutions of "higher learning").
As for your "positions," I was making a rhetorical point: How can one interpret the following in response to my quoting Islamic texts?
The guy writing a racist, anti-Mustlim hate site for the past 7 years just accused me of having a psychosis.
Muhammad's the one who called for the enslavement or slaughter of all who refuse the "invitation" to Islam, so your calling my pointing that out -- my condemnation of slavery and genocide on any grounds, but especially on religious ones -- "racist," "anti-Mustlim" [sic], "hate," and "psychotic" means that either you agree with Muhammad, or you didn't know what he actually preached and practiced. That's why I noted that only the ignorant and the deceitful can claim what you claimed.
So, which is it? Do you support Muhammad's calls to genocide, rape, and slavery on religious grounds, or is it just that you were unaware of them and all-too-willing to libel me . . . again? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"The Christian religion, when ... brought to the original purity and simplicity of it's benevolent institutor, is a religion of all others most friendly to liberty, science, and the freest expansion of the human mind."
Thomas Jefferson, 1801 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 318. |
Wowbagger: The gift that keeps on giving |
May 12, 2010, 05:18 |
Amillennialist |
|
|
I wrote in a post to Sepharo:
Until you have the courage to discuss this topic honestly, this will be my final word to you on it . . . Sepharo
So, of course, even though I was responding to Sepharo, Wowbagger replies with:
You addressed that topic again in your very next post. So yes, you lied.
As should be clear to even the moderately-literate, that post wasn't addressed to you, Wowbagger.
My "very next post" was directed to you, but its purpose wasn't to debate Darwinism, it was to defend against another absurd personal attack:
You're obviously incapable of understanding the subject matter at hand.
So, no, I didn't "lie." (Speaking of "repeatedly demonstrating reading comprehension issues"!)
Now, if I had been addressing you, your claim that I "lied" by commenting on Darwin's creation myth again would be an admission that you lack "the courage to discuss this topic honestly," which was the condition I put on further discussion of Darwinism in that post to Sepharo.
Well done, Wowbagger! It's good to see that you're consistent!
What a waste of time. You won't be honest, and I won't lie. You were doing so much better when you were arguing that denying religious liberty was protecting religious liberty. At least then you had some actual facts, even if you misinterpreted them. Kind of like Darwinism, but not nearly as obnoxious.
Regardless, I have a right to refute your mendacity. You stop lying, and I'll stop pointing out your lies. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"The Christian religion, when ... brought to the original purity and simplicity of it's benevolent institutor, is a religion of all others most friendly to liberty, science, and the freest expansion of the human mind."
Thomas Jefferson, 1801 |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 317. |
Re: Op Ed |
May 5, 2010, 21:19 |
Sepharo |
|
|
Amillennialist wrote on May 5, 2010, 02:52:
Still defending Muhammad's genocide, pedophilia, rape, and slavery with nescience, Sepharo?
I'm neither defending nor advocating anything.
In my opinion, anyone who claims to believe in any supernatural/mystical contrivance is either ignorant, delusional, or a deluder.
You mentioned your blog. I mentioned that you were a french fry short of a happy meal. And you went on to prove it outside of your blog.
Stop assigning me positions that I don't adhere to.
I see you employ that same strategy on this topic as you do with evolution.
Leave that poor scarecrow alone. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| [I'm not trolling I'm just] tossing stuff like that in there only to get your panties all bunched up. -TrollinThundr |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
| 316. |
Re: Op Ed |
May 5, 2010, 09:30 |
Wowbagger_TIP |
|
|
"this topic."
So, either you can't read, or you won't read, or you can't tell the truth, or you won't tell the truth, or some combination thereof. You addressed that topic again in your very next post. So yes, you lied. Please rectify that and retire to your cave.
In the event that this thread is closed or deleted, it should be pointed out that when presented with Qur'anic mandates for genocide, pedophilia, rape, and slavery, Wowbagger attacked . . . Christianity! And when confronted with the same evidence from Islam's own texts, Sepharo attacked . . . me! Lol! I think it should be pointed out that Amillenialist has serious reading comprehension issues, as he's repeatedly demonstrated.
This comment was edited on May 5, 2010, 09:43. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
335 Replies. 17 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 ] Older >
|
|
Twitter 
