Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
07-03-2016, 11:32 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(07-03-2016 08:12 PM)Rik Wrote:  
(07-03-2016 06:50 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Not really, it's one of those disorders that that does more good than harm (for society), so I'm happy to bear it.
Only the anger part can be a bit tricky, but as you can probably tell by now I don't let it get the better of me.

Now be a good sport and take a go at it.

Paranoid schizophrenia.
Not really, but I'll bite, which of the characteristics listed would fall under paranoid schitzophrenia?
Can you put a little more effort this time? Just asking.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2016, 08:20 AM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(07-03-2016 06:50 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Not really, it's one of those disorders that that does more good than harm (for society), so I'm happy to bear it.
Only the anger part can be a bit tricky, but as you can probably tell by now I don't let it get the better of me.

Hug

(07-03-2016 06:50 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Now be a good sport and take a go at it.

Um... why should I throw a dart at a blank wall and hope to hit the correct spot when...

You can just explain what it is that ails you? Consider

Still wishing you all the best. Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2016, 10:25 AM (This post was last modified: 08-03-2016 10:33 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(08-03-2016 08:20 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  
(07-03-2016 06:50 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Not really, it's one of those disorders that that does more good than harm (for society), so I'm happy to bear it.
Only the anger part can be a bit tricky, but as you can probably tell by now I don't let it get the better of me.

Hug

(07-03-2016 06:50 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Now be a good sport and take a go at it.

Um... why should I throw a dart at a blank wall and hope to hit the correct spot when...

You can just explain what it is that ails you? Consider

Still wishing you all the best. Thumbsup
1. I don't consider it an ailment.
2. I already explained what it is, based on the symptoms.
3. I'm not asking because I don't already have a good answer.

Just curious what others might think it is called. It's ok if you don't want to guess what it is, but I'm not quite ready to state what I have been told that it is either. It would defeat the purpose of me asking.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2016, 04:18 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Oh my all this talk about plagiarism and yet no supporting evidence?
I have provided it before but I will happily do so again.
Here is where I point out that you not only stole someones work without credit but that you also dishonestly and knowingly delete sections and change them to support your bullshit when it does not.

Here's the thing: had you just copy pasted it, while as a writer I hate that shit, it would just be an uncredited source. However you said "Here is how I prove that we do not know that the Universe is 13.799 Billion years old." and then proceeded to post the work and thinking of someone else. You also deleted part of that persons writing and inserted your own meaning you were not just offering the view of someone else, without naming them, but actively stealing another persons work and hiding your own conclusions and thoughts in it to give it an bit of legitimacy it doesn't deserve.
That, motherfucker, is textbook plagiarism. In fact if you, or those reading, would like to click on that link and read the section "All of the Following are considered plagiarism:" you can clearly see that:
  • copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
  • changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
  • copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not
are all examples of plagiarism and all things you did. So yes you are a thieving plagiarizing asshole.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Even Bucky who was the initiator of the claim no longer supports or defends the claim that I have plaigarized anything.
Actually I was the first person to notice you were stealing other peoples work. Also so what?

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It was pointed out that posts 1 & 2 of the debate were not to be used for public review or as a source of information. The reason given was that it was simply a scrap paper of sorts that was being edited & due to a time limit the ability to edit was revoked.
First off I'm not interested in your revisionist bullshit, you made no claim that they were "notes or scraps of paper" in the posts themselves and not until 3 DAYS after people noticed and started pointing out you had stolen great big sections of them without offering sources. Secondly you claim they are not your views, but as we just say you deliberately and maliciously edited them to include YOUR conclusions, and not the authors, in them so that claim is a blatant lie. Thirdly and most importantly plagiarism doesn't magically stop being plagiarism because you don't want them to be used as sources of information. You posted stolen, unsourced, and deliberately edited content written by someone else on a public forum.
Do you have your own word for when someone takes other peoples work, replaces sections of it with his own writings and then does not give credit to the original author until after he has been caught? Cause down here on earth we call it plagiarism bitch.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  To call such a post plagiarism is no different than going through my trash to find a scrap paper with notes I made and publicize it as a form of Plagerism. It will not stand up in court as it's intended purpose was not that of public display.
Then you knowledge of courts is as bad as your knowledge of science. A public forum is not your trashcan just cause you declare it to be so. You took someones work, edited it to say things it didn't and then provided no source till after you had been caught. I didn't publicize it fuckwit YOU DID.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  For you to have completely bypassed the initiating sentence of "please do not reply" and still expound a claim of plagiarism only heightens my belief of what a slanderous fraud/troll you are.
"Please do not reply" doesn't exempt you from the rules governing plagiarism shithead. Also I'll point out that what you said, while typing, was "replay in progress". Combined with the fact you said "Here is how I prove that we do not know that the Universe is 13.799 Billion years old." before copy-pasting another persons work means you are just full of shit, "scrap paper" or not.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Such an act would be considered libel or at the very least slander from the legal perspective.
Please at the very least keep your ignorance confined to science. Don't make yourself look like an idiot in multiple fields at once.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  1. Rebut the "scrap paper" reference to the posts in question
Well you make absolutely no claim to it being "scrap paper" until 3 days after you have already been caught stealing, simply asking your debate partner to wait until you were done your reply, so there is that. However it's also irrelevant because plagiarism doesn't stop being plagiarism because you say it's not for public display...while displaying it publicly.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Show where the plagiarized sentences were deliberately posted for the purpose of public display.
This is a public forum so.......literally anywhere you post it on the forum. This goes double for when when you take someones content and then add your own words to it and don't give a source for the original. Do you think a judge is going to look at that on a PUBLIC forum and so no that doesn't count as public? how fuckin' stupid are you?

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  WhiskeyDebates I believe failure to rebut this claim of plaigarism you have made will show the very repugnant approach you use to win an argument on these forums and as such your comments do not deserve a reply from posters with an ounce of moral fiber in them.
So let me get this right...if I am unable to rebut my own claims it proves I'm a villain? It seems the answer to my earlier question was: very fucking stupid. Why would I want to or need to rebut my own claim? Fuckin' 'ell.....honestly. I've substantiated it well enough though, so I don't see a reason to rebut my own demonstrated claim. Idiot.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Lastly, you got the disorder wrong & it wasn't even a good attempt.
That might be because I wasn't attempting to as I don't care what kinda disorder you think/claim you have. I care that your first example is bullshit given that you have displayed no respect for the scientific process or methodology and that the other (black and white thinking) is completely and utterly incompatible with a "desire to push science to extremes".


(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  No suprise there, considering every sentence in your feeble attempt to name the disorder was plagued by defamatory remarks biased towards character assassination rather than truly pointing out a psychologically coined disorder.
Bullshit for two reasons:
  • Some sentences had mockery (which you earned btw) but several had legitimate criticisms of your claims. Not surprised you ignored those!
  • For me to engage in character assassination would require me to believe you had character in need of assassination. I do not think that. At all. I think you drowned that particular motherfucker your own damn self, when you started stealing other peoples shit and passing it off as your own, or when you continue to use words wrong when you KNOW the usage is wrong.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Made me laugh (just a little) when you called me a Christian. In your "trollish" world I suppose that's one of the most derogatory remarks you can come up with. I mean seriously? A Christian? How do I even begin to take offense there?
I don't consider it to be derogatory, just unfortunate. You offered up a description of yourself that had a great deal in common with people of faith: black and white thinking, delusional self aggrandizement, naivete, poor anger control, and a persecution complex. Assholeitice was actually the insult, the christian thing was my way of reiterating that I think you're a lying piece of shit when you claim you are agnostic and not just another deadhead godwanker.
Oh fyi, pointing out your bullshit is not "trolling".

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Keep it coming though, as it looks like my ability to take baseless ridicule with a smile is starting to win favor amongst forumers
Based on what? Your -8 rep or your massively negative likes-to-posts ratio? At least you are consistently delusional.Laugh out load

Oh ya cause I forgot: what's the difference between a dog and a dog dog? I noticed you COMPLETELY failed to address my entire point. Shocking!

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2016, 04:36 PM (This post was last modified: 08-03-2016 10:54 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(08-03-2016 04:18 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Oh my all this talk about plagiarism and yet no supporting evidence?
I have provided it before but I will happily do so again.
Here is where I point out that you not only stole someones work without credit but that you also dishonestly and knowingly delete sections and change them to support your bullshit when it does not.

Here's the thing: had you just copy pasted it, while as a writer I hate that shit, it would just be an uncredited source. However you said "Here is how I prove that we do not know that the Universe is 13.799 Billion years old." and then proceeded to post the work and thinking of someone else. You also deleted part of that persons writing and inserted your own meaning you were not just offering the view of someone else, without naming them, but actively stealing another persons work and hiding your own conclusions and thoughts in it to give it an bit of legitimacy it doesn't deserve.
That, motherfucker, is textbook plagiarism. In fact if you, or those reading, would like to click on that link and read the section "All of the Following are considered plagiarism:" you can clearly see that:
  • copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
  • changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
  • copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not
are all examples of plagiarism and all things you did. So yes you are a thieving plagiarizing asshole.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Even Bucky who was the initiator of the claim no longer supports or defends the claim that I have plaigarized anything.
Actually I was the first person to notice you were stealing other peoples work. Also so what?

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It was pointed out that posts 1 & 2 of the debate were not to be used for public review or as a source of information. The reason given was that it was simply a scrap paper of sorts that was being edited & due to a time limit the ability to edit was revoked.
First off I'm not interested in your revisionist bullshit, you made no claim that they were "notes or scraps of paper" in the posts themselves and not until 3 DAYS after people noticed and started pointing out you had stolen great big sections of them without offering sources. Secondly you claim they are not your views, but as we just say you deliberately and maliciously edited them to include YOUR conclusions, and not the authors, in them so that claim is a blatant lie. Thirdly and most importantly plagiarism doesn't magically stop being plagiarism because you don't want them to be used as sources of information. You posted stolen, unsourced, and deliberately edited content written by someone else on a public forum.
Do you have your own word for when someone takes other peoples work, replaces sections of it with his own writings and then does not give credit to the original author until after he has been caught? Cause down here on earth we call it plagiarism bitch.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  To call such a post plagiarism is no different than going through my trash to find a scrap paper with notes I made and publicize it as a form of Plagerism. It will not stand up in court as it's intended purpose was not that of public display.
Then you knowledge of courts is as bad as your knowledge of science. A public forum is not your trashcan just cause you declare it to be so. You took someones work, edited it to say things it didn't and then provided no source till after you had been caught. I didn't publicize it fuckwit YOU DID.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  For you to have completely bypassed the initiating sentence of "please do not reply" and still expound a claim of plagiarism only heightens my belief of what a slanderous fraud/troll you are.
"Please do not reply" doesn't exempt you from the rules governing plagiarism shithead. Also I'll point out that what you said, while typing, was "replay in progress". Combined with the fact you said "Here is how I prove that we do not know that the Universe is 13.799 Billion years old." before copy-pasting another persons work means you are just full of shit, "scrap paper" or not.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Such an act would be considered libel or at the very least slander from the legal perspective.
Please at the very least keep your ignorance confined to science. Don't make yourself look like an idiot in multiple fields at once.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  1. Rebut the "scrap paper" reference to the posts in question
Well you make absolutely no claim to it being "scrap paper" until 3 days after you have already been caught stealing, simply asking your debate partner to wait until you were done your reply, so there is that. However it's also irrelevant because plagiarism doesn't stop being plagiarism because you say it's not for public display...while displaying it publicly.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Show where the plagiarized sentences were deliberately posted for the purpose of public display.
This is a public forum so.......literally anywhere you post it on the forum. This goes double for when when you take someones content and then add your own words to it and don't give a source for the original. Do you think a judge is going to look at that on a PUBLIC forum and so no that doesn't count as public? how fuckin' stupid are you?

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  WhiskeyDebates I believe failure to rebut this claim of plaigarism you have made will show the very repugnant approach you use to win an argument on these forums and as such your comments do not deserve a reply from posters with an ounce of moral fiber in them.
So let me get this right...if I am unable to rebut my own claims it proves I'm a villain? It seems the answer to my earlier question was: very fucking stupid. Why would I want to or need to rebut my own claim? Fuckin' 'ell.....honestly. I've substantiated it well enough though, so I don't see a reason to rebut my own demonstrated claim. Idiot.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Lastly, you got the disorder wrong & it wasn't even a good attempt.
That might be because I wasn't attempting to as I don't care what kinda disorder you think/claim you have. I care that your first example is bullshit given that you have displayed no respect for the scientific process or methodology and that the other (black and white thinking) is completely and utterly incompatible with a "desire to push science to extremes".


(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  No suprise there, considering every sentence in your feeble attempt to name the disorder was plagued by defamatory remarks biased towards character assassination rather than truly pointing out a psychologically coined disorder.
Bullshit for two reasons:
  • Some sentences had mockery (which you earned btw) but several had legitimate criticisms of your claims. Not surprised you ignored those!
  • For me to engage in character assassination would require me to believe you had character in need of assassination. I do not think that. At all. I think you drowned that particular motherfucker your own damn self, when you started stealing other peoples shit and passing it off as your own, or when you continue to use words wrong when you KNOW the usage is wrong.

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Made me laugh (just a little) when you called me a Christian. In your "trollish" world I suppose that's one of the most derogatory remarks you can come up with. I mean seriously? A Christian? How do I even begin to take offense there?
I don't consider it to be derogatory, just unfortunate. You offered up a description of yourself that had a great deal in common with people of faith: black and white thinking, delusional self aggrandizement, naivete, poor anger control, and a persecution complex. Assholeitice was actually the insult, the christian thing was my way of reiterating that I think you're a lying piece of shit when you claim you are agnostic and not just another deadhead godwanker.
Oh fyi, pointing out your bullshit is not "trolling".

(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Keep it coming though, as it looks like my ability to take baseless ridicule with a smile is starting to win favor amongst forumers
Based on what? Your -8 rep or your massively negative likes-to-posts ratio? At least you are consistently delusional.Laugh out load

Oh ya cause I forgot: what's the difference between a dog and a dog dog? I noticed you COMPLETELY failed to address my entire point. Shocking!
The debate starts at post 3 and the previous post are uneditable. Paleophyte recognizes this.
The posts in question start with "do not reply". Does this mean nothing to you? Are you that ignorant of the facts that you fail to recognize this?
The mods were publicly asked to remove the posts and it was explicitly stated by myself they are full of inaccruracies, typos and not to be used as part of the debate. The moderators can prove the post were being edited almost every hour (equivalent of a scrap post) until the ability to edit was timed out, it was also indicated in the 2nd post what happened & then Paleophyte showed me the draft function, which mods can check for themselves started being used right after Paleophyte's advice.
Do you deny what I have just said? How do you contend with these points without coming to the realization that the post in question is not part of my argument nor meant for public viewing.
Do you deny that the first 2 posts were not my official reply or meant for public viewing considering all that I have just pointed out?
Do you deny that I stated the posts were not my official response before any claims of Plagerism were made by yourself? Check the date of the 2nd post & compare them to the date you first claimed it was a form of Plagerism. What baffles me is even after seeing me request the posts be removed you still post that it was a form of Plagerism. Can it be any more blatant that this is just another attempt at trolling from a dishonest poster? Is it because you were proven wrong on so many points in the "What am I?" thread you have decided to plague my posts with dishonest defamatory remarks in the hopes that one might stick? Good luck with that.
If there was any attempt at plaigarism why were all the points you just raised removed from the first official reply I have made in the post with parts 1, 2 & 3?

I have the suspicion your next response is going to deliberately bypass these points once more even though they are the most pertinent defense to such claims of plaigarism in said thread.
No one else here is going to side with you on the plagiarism accusation because it is based on a baseless assumption wrapped in a personal bias against someone you have continuously failed to find character flaws in, yet blindly repeat it as though it were your personal anthem.
WhiskeyDebates it will soon come to pass your motives are far from genuine and you serve no purpose on these forums but to troll those that would politely find flaws in your logic.
I shall continue to stand up to your outrageous attempts at cyber bullying, whilst not yielding to your disdainful use of baseless character defamation to invalidate a claim.
Keep them coming, it adds passion to my posts and further cements my presence on these forums.
What did you expect a driveby?
I am here to stay, so get over it already.

P.S. You don't deserve a response from me to all your posts until you learn to stop using character defamation as your basis of debating. You should change your name from WhickeyDebates to WhiskeyDefames as it more suits your posting style.
Basedd on how you describe a Christian I think you would more fit the title. Angry, self aggrandizing, narrow minded seem to fit you like a skin. Atleast I have a disorder, what's your excuse?
Btw, stereotyping is so last year.
Here is your rebuttal to your pitiful attempts at character defamation:
1. Typos & pre-edited posts don't count as evidence in a plagiarism case
2. None of the plagerism evidence you have provided can be applied to any of the posts I have made from the first official reply onwards.
3. It is common knowledge among legal peers (yes I asked) that any statement/writing that's not a personal & official public statement/writing from a person cannot be deemed a form of Plagerism.
4. You have no evidence to prove the "plagerised" section you have pointed out is a personal & official statement from said poster & all the evidence points to the contrary.
5. What you claim to be Plagerism is nothing more than the formulation a reply whilst studying the works of others & not claiming it to be works of my own.
6. The first official post that was made has hyperlinked (for reference purposes) the very same section you claimed to be Plagerism. Since when do people that Plagerise do this?
7. Again I repeat failure to rebut this further proves your malicious motives. We both know the context it was meant in the first time I said it, so why harp on a missing verb? It would seem you are running out of ways to attack my character. You are grasping at straws & beginning to look angry and helpless at this point.
8. I would like to discuss your liberal use of profanity when attempting a reply to my posts in which your points are lacking substance. Not that I have issues with the use of profanity but surely there are times when it serves absolutely no purpose in your replies. I believe you too may suffer from a disorder, but in your case it may eventually prove more harmful than good. You really should get that checked out.
Hug I hope you may someday overcome your ailment Thumbsup
9. All credit given to Peebothul for point 8, so please don't initiate another Plagerism claim. Smile
10. If you're not attempting to name the disorder and you don't care to do so why did you still try to name the disorder? I can recommend you a good therapist. Hug
11. Continuous failure to follow through with your outlandish accusations of bullshit only further gives credibility to my claim of you being nothing more than a troll. I mean the amount of times your posts have had negative remarks about my character as opposed to the amount of times they didn't is bordering on the 90 percentile range. It's only logical we would assume you are trolling. Or is it just mere coincidence?
12. I take pride in the fact that some users respect the politeness of my replies enough to rep it. A characteristic which I'm sure you will never achieve based on your trollish approaches to discussions. Maybe this is a new technique to further enhance your rep points that may be worth giving it a try.
13. Your most inspiring words to me thus far on these forums was the time when I proved a claim you made was 100% inaccurate and asked for an apology to which you replied "I see your sorry & raise you a "go f..k yourself". I mean that one is truly innovative even for a troll.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
08-03-2016, 11:47 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
Goddamn what a gish gallop lol I'll admit I'm impressed that you managed to read, internalize, respond with that idiotic wall of text, AND talk to a legal professional (or two or three, who knows!) all in the space of less than 18 minutes! (Assuming you saw it the second it went up). All while addressing damn near none of my actual criticisms!

It's almost like you don't bother to read people's responses at all. Weird.

So many mistakes and outright lies in your post it's gonna take me no small amount of time to catalog them all just so I can respond. Not tonight though.

When valour preys on reason, it eats the sword it fights with.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 08:36 AM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(08-03-2016 10:25 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  1. I don't consider it an ailment.

Thumbsup Good for you!

I do hope you're receiving good and proper care and treatment? After all.. lots of poeple don't consider being an 'Alcoholic' or a 'Chain smoker' an ailment either. Consider

(08-03-2016 10:25 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  2. I already explained what it is, based on the symptoms.
3. I'm not asking because I don't already have a good answer.

Just curious what others might think it is called. It's ok if you don't want to guess what it is, but I'm not quite ready to state what I have been told that it is either. It would defeat the purpose of me asking.

Thumbsup

That's fine dear/mate. However, having been on a similar roller-coaster before with previous long since faded forum members, I am completely disinclined to hop back on the 'Guess my size while I prevaricate some more about the dimensions' line of chat discussion.

That you're feeling unwell is sad. I can but empathize with you and hope that things get better/clear up.

Anything beyond that? No

Also.. might I ask what is your purpose in asking? Consider
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 08:51 AM (This post was last modified: 09-03-2016 09:08 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(09-03-2016 08:36 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  
(08-03-2016 10:25 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  1. I don't consider it an ailment.

Thumbsup Good for you!

I do hope you're receiving good and proper care and treatment? After all.. lots of poeple don't consider being an 'Alcoholic' or a 'Chain smoker' an ailment either. Consider

(08-03-2016 10:25 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  2. I already explained what it is, based on the symptoms.
3. I'm not asking because I don't already have a good answer.

Just curious what others might think it is called. It's ok if you don't want to guess what it is, but I'm not quite ready to state what I have been told that it is either. It would defeat the purpose of me asking.

Thumbsup

That's fine dear/mate. However, having been on a similar roller-coaster before with previous long since faded forum members, I am completely disinclined to hop back on the 'Guess my size while I prevaricate some more about the dimensions' line of chat discussion.

That you're feeling unwell is sad. I can but empathize with you and hope that things get better/clear up.

Anything beyond that? No

Also.. might I ask what is your purpose in asking? Consider
What ever made you think I'm feeling unwell? Surely it wasn't by my own direct admittance now was it. Is it safe to say you arrived at such a conclusion by some use of deductive logic which you have yet to show me?
Also it would seem your past experience with "long since faded forum members" have biased your powers of deduction & whilst commendable, is not always going to lead you to the correct deduction. Would you not agree?

My purpose in asking has to do with my method of finding the most logical truth behind any claim. As you may have noticed & I have said before in this thread, I never fully close the question, regardless of how strong the evidence is to support a claim. Even then I may still never have the answer but at least be closer to understanding than I am to ignorance. Would you not agree?
My world view is that "there is always room for doubt". Asking questions is one of the main approaches to finding answers is it not?
I once wrote an article that shows what motivates every human being is curiosity. Without it we would have no reason to live & yet our instincts would probably not let us die all the same. Very interesting topic though.

As I said before I have no issues with your lack of desire to participate in my quest for knowledge so don't feel troubled by it my friend. Our conversation has drifted a tad bit into the boring side, however, is there anything more interesting you would like to discuss?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 09:03 AM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(08-03-2016 11:47 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  Goddamn what a gish gallop lol I'll admit I'm impressed that you managed to read, internalize, respond with that idiotic wall of text, AND talk to a legal professional (or two or three, who knows!) all in the space of less than 18 minutes! (Assuming you saw it the second it went up). All while addressing damn near none of my actual criticisms!

It's almost like you don't bother to read people's responses at all. Weird.

So many mistakes and outright lies in your post it's gonna take me no small amount of time to catalog them all just so I can respond. Not tonight though.
Was hoping you would take the bait and stay away from such trollish words as "idiotic", but alas the proverbial "can't teach on old dog new tricks" has once again raised it's ugly head.
How is someone ever to have a constructive conversation with you is truly a challenge. One which one day I hope to overcome.
Best wishes and good luck with the Trolling. Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 09:17 AM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(09-03-2016 08:51 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  What ever made you think I'm feeling unwell?

Consider Dafaq mate? You're the one claiming a disability. You've posted so? Is my vernacular language not coming across straight?

(09-03-2016 08:51 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Surely it wasn't by my own direct admittance now was it. Is it safe to say you arrived at such a conclusion by some use of deductive logic which you have yet to show me?

Um... other than your own posts.. what else have I to go on? Consider


(09-03-2016 08:51 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Also it would seem your past experience with "long since faded forum members" have biased your powers of deduction & whilst commendable, is not always going to lead you to the correct deduction. Would you not agree?

You've missed the point, mate. having been in such similar posting tete-a-tetes before I've not found them productive at all and seem to simply be vehicles for the instigator to ramble/waffle on about all sorts of weird things... all the while said instigator can get as flakey as they like.

(09-03-2016 08:51 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  My purpose in asking has to do with my method of finding truth behind any claim. As you may have noticed & I have said before in this thread, I never fully close the question, regardless of how strong the evidence is to support a claim.

Okay, you see this above bit? It makes no fekkin' sense.

You start by making the claim of inability. You then ask others to some how judge your inability. And then[ whether others engage or not you say the others aren't trying hard enough at proving/confirming something that you've made the claim for.

Only you can verify the things your starting your posts about.

You want to add more information, fine.

You don't? Fine.

But what you're doing above? It's... *Waves hands in the air* 'Vacuous'. 'Pointless'. It might also be seen, by some, as simply baiting.


(09-03-2016 08:51 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  My world view is that "there is always room for doubt". Asking questions is one of the main approaches to finding answers is it not?p.

You seem to have mixed up the thread topics.

We weren't really discussing your disability. The whole 'testing reality' thing? You're having that conversation with some one else. Not m'self. Yes


(09-03-2016 08:51 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I once wrote an article that shows what motivates every human being is curiosity. Without it we would have no reason to live & yet our instincts would probably not let us die all the same. Very interesting topic though.

As I said before I have no issues with your lack of desire to participate in my quest for knowledge so don't feel troubled by it my friend. Our conversation has drifted a tad bit into the boring side, however, is there anything more interesting you would like to discuss?

Again, that's a conversation you're having with some one else. I was and am talking about your self proclaimed disability.

Again, you don't want to go any further on it/with it? Fine.

I'll not push. You're free to come out with it in your own time. Yes Thumbsup
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: