Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-03-2016, 09:53 AM (This post was last modified: 09-03-2016 10:01 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(09-03-2016 09:17 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  
(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
Disability? Now where did your read that? The word was Disorder. There is that bias I was talking about again. Get's in the way of communication & understanding doesn't it?
There is a difference as far as I can tell, but apparently you can't see it.
Maybe this article may help:
http://www.autismkey.com/autism-a-disabi...-disorder/

Disorder:  An abnormal physical or mental condition.
The key word here is abnormal. It does not always carry a negative connotation, but it's human nature to treat anything you would deem "not normal" as negative and in some cases a threat.
I can list for you a number of individuals that is popularly believed to have suffered from disorders which have made them some of the most positively influential human beings on the planet.
You would probably be surprised to see the names that made the list.
It's a bit of a double edged sword too, but it all depends on what purpose they use their "abnormality" to affect society.

Don't worry though, I'm only interested in gaining knowledge as far as abnormalities are concerned. Won't be changing the world anytime soon.

P.S. I gave away a clue that the disorder is a form of Autism in this post, but as you said, you're not really that interested in trying to find out, so I won't push you for the answer anymore my friend.
The "testing reality thing" is what started this whole disorder topic, but does it really matter why it was started if you suddenly found interest in a subtopic that both parties are willing to discuss? Or is there some hidden rule of conversation that I seem to be breaking?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 09:59 AM (This post was last modified: 09-03-2016 10:04 AM by Peebothuhul.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(09-03-2016 09:53 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Disability? Now where did your read that? The word was Disorder. There is that bias I was talking about again. Get's in the way of communication & understanding doesn't it?
There is a difference as far as I can tell, but apparently you can't see it.
Maybe this article may help:
http://www.autismkey.com/autism-a-disabi...-disorder/

Disorder:  An abnormal physical or mental condition.
The key word here is abnormal. It does not always carry a negative connotation, but it's human nature to treat anything you would deem "not normal" as negative and in some cases a threat.
I can list for you a number of individuals that is popularly believed to have suffered from disorders which have made them some of the most positively influential human beings on the planet.
You would probably be surprised to see the names that made the list.
It's a bit of a double edged sword too, but it all depends on what purpose they use their "abnormality" to affect society.

Don't worry though, I'm only interested in gaining knowledge as far as abnormalities are concerned. Won't be changing the world anytime soon.

Yes Fine, fine. Tom-a-toe, to-mate-o,

You're happy with 'Disorder' fine, great. Thumbsup

As to what your disorder is? Unless you're providing a link through to that which you've got?

Then I am still wishing you all the best with dealing/living with it.

Hoping the treatments etc are going swell. Hug

(09-03-2016 09:53 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  P.S. I gave away a clue that the disorder is a form of Autism in this post, but as you said, you're not really that interested in trying to find out, so I won't push you for the answer anymore my friend.

See? This is what I am talking about.

Other than actually being something like a weird stalker... there is NO WAY I can infer what your disability disorder is simply over the internet.

With out you adding more information then what you are asking of me to do is impossible.

Are we at an understanding?

Anything I might do is simply making wild guesses and you posting back 'Warmer/Colder' type responses. That is a waste of time.

While you might be enjoying the back and forth, it's not fun for others.

So, simply coming out with all the information you want to present in the first place is the better way to hold a forum conversation.

Hope that helps with the understanding between at least us. Yes

Again, all the best for your treatment of your disorder. Hug
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 10:10 AM (This post was last modified: 09-03-2016 12:25 PM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(09-03-2016 09:59 AM)Peebothuhul Wrote:  
(09-03-2016 09:53 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Disability? Now where did your read that? The word was Disorder. There is that bias I was talking about again. Get's in the way of communication & understanding doesn't it?
There is a difference as far as I can tell, but apparently you can't see it.
Maybe this article may help:
http://www.autismkey.com/autism-a-disabi...-disorder/

Disorder:  An abnormal physical or mental condition.
The key word here is abnormal. It does not always carry a negative connotation, but it's human nature to treat anything you would deem "not normal" as negative and in some cases a threat.
I can list for you a number of individuals that is popularly believed to have suffered from disorders which have made them some of the most positively influential human beings on the planet.
You would probably be surprised to see the names that made the list.
It's a bit of a double edged sword too, but it all depends on what purpose they use their "abnormality" to affect society.

Don't worry though, I'm only interested in gaining knowledge as far as abnormalities are concerned. Won't be changing the world anytime soon.

Yes Fine, fine. Tom-a-toe, to-mate-o,

You're happy with 'Disorder' fine, great. Thumbsup

As to what your disorder is? Unless you're providing a link through to that which you've got?

Then I am still wishing you all the best with dealing/living with it.

Hoping the treatments etc are going swell. Hug
I understand you now. You're basically saying "in the event that it proves to be some negative abnormality of the mind, you wish me a healthy recovery". Am I right?
Indeed I would wish the same on myself were it true that it is some form of negative abnormality. You still haven't gotten the point I have made (I think) or at he very least failed to address it.
As stated before, it is not the abnormality that is negative or positive within itself, but how you use it. It's a matter of perspective in the end. Do you understand the meaning of what I just said or should we just leave it as a temporary communication barrier until further notice?

Another assumption I think you are making is that I already know the answer and I'm deriving some sort of twisted pleasure from making everyone guess.
I don't see it that way, but rather (being the skeptic that I am), rather than take the diagnosis I have been given by those "would be authorities" in the field as the only possible answer I chose to keep the question open in the hopes that if they were wrong the better truth may one day be recognized.
It's not a confirmation that I'm searching for, it's an objection.

It's not about curing or treating it, it's about controlling it. An example of which is the way I make a conscious effort to control my temper when replying to some of the most repugnant responses here. I will admit these forums provide quite a challenge for communication compared to the many others I have visited. I don't see myself leaving anytime soon Wink

P.S. I think we may both agree there is quite a lot one can discern about an individual based solely on their writing patterns. What do you think?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 09:11 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
I have limited time and far more interesting things to do so I'm going to keep my individual answers brief (ish). There will be a consistent theme of me asking you what the fuck you are talking about, and I'll also start most of my responses with what you did wrong in parentheses.
(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  The posts in question start with "do not reply". Does this mean nothing to you?
It means that you asked the person not to reply. It does not give you protection from the fact you stole, modified, and inserted your own words into someones work. Which is plagiarism. By definition.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Are you that ignorant of the facts that you fail to recognize this?
(Stupid/dishonest) Not only to a recognize it but I've actually responded to it MULTIPLE times. The fact that you have entirely ignored my objections does not mean they don't exist.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.
Not until three days after your plagiarism had been pointed out and also irrelevant to the question of if taking someones work, modifying it, and inserting your own is plagiarism. Which it is. Again by definition.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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?
The claim that they were not official or for public viewing, despite posting them publicly .....twice, was not made until post #16 3 days after you were already caught inserting your words into another persons work to make it say something it didn't. You know...plagiarism.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.
(Lie)Naturally I deny that as it's demonstrably untrue. As pointed out above your first statement that they were not official responses comes in post #16 3 days after the first demonstration by me of your plagiarism. So the question is what the fuck are you talking about? Your second post does not mention this at all, nor your 3rd nor your 4th.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  What baffles me is even after seeing me request the posts be removed you still post that it was a form of Plagerism.
Asking the mods to delete the evidence of your plagiarism 3 days after the fact and after it's already been entered into the record is not argument that it's NOT plagiarism.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Is it because you were proven wrong on so many points in the "What am I?" thread ....
(Lie/Delusional) Again I'm left to ask what the fuck are you talking about considering the you never once respond to a SINGLE post I make in that thread. My involvement in the "What am I?" thread begins here on post #32 continued on post #81 and concluded at post #148.
You know how many of those you responded to? Zero. You do not respond to a single point or post I made in that thread. So I would really like to know what the actual fuck you are talking about when you don't even respond to A SINGLE point but are claiming now that you proved me wrong on multiple points.
Not only did you ignore my points, you also ignored the same points when they were made by other people.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.
(Delusional) And now you are attempting to tell the future.
[Image: 103875-chris-tucker-facepalm-gif-Frid-GSTI.gif]
I also don't consider actively lying to be polite by hey, you do you.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  whilst not yielding to your disdainful use of baseless character defamation to invalidate a claim.
(Stupid) Character defamation has some requirements. Two of which are that they negatively affect the persons reputation and have been made to someone other then the person defamed.
1.) Your rep was almost universally negative long before any claims.
2.) All of my criticisms and insults have been made entirely to you personally and not to other people.
You are as incompetent at law as you are at science and philosophy.


(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  What did you expect a driveby?
No that's why in the "What am I?" I was perfectly polite, patient, and informative. You chose to ignore all my points in that thread, even when made by other people,....and continued to ignore them in the next thread...even though you kept quoting them in your replies. You actively engaged in dishonest debate and it was at that point I stopped being polite and patient. Which has been the case with EVERY SINGLE dishonest person here.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  I am here to stay, so get over it already.
There is nothing for me to "get over". You are more than welcome to stay and contribute to the forum. I've never asked you to leave Capt. Persecution Complex, frankly I couldn't care less if you stay or go. I care if you stop or don't stop being intentionally dishonest which you have been since just about day one.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.
(Stupid/Lie) You don't know what defamation is or what constitutes it. More importantly though I've never used an insult in lieu of an argument. I'll call you a lying scumbag...and then I will almost always explain WHY I think that. Not the same thing.


(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.
1.) You mistake annoyance and frustration with a compulsive liar (that would be you), with anger. Just because I don't tolerate you doesn't mean I'm angry with you.
2.) You just tried to pretend like you know what my future is. I'm not sure you know what self aggrandizement means. Add it to your collection.
3.)HA! Narrow minded. I've had my mind changed on multiple subjects since joining this forum. Some of the older members have watched it happen, most notedly on the subject of capital punishment. The fact I don't accept your delusional nonsense doesn't make me narrow minded.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Atleast I have a disorder, what's your excuse?
What's the name of it again? Oh right you are playing games with it. Fuck off.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Btw, stereotyping is so last year.
(Hypocrisy) Tells me I fit a stereotype, then tries to condemn my use of stereotypes.Laugh out loadHobo

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Here is your rebuttal to your pitiful attempts at character defamation:
[Image: You+keep+using+that+word....jpg]


(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  1. Typos & pre-edited posts don't count as evidence in a plagiarism case
(Lie) 1.) There are no typos during the copy+paste process FacepalmFacepalm. To go from the original authors conclusions to go from "at Warp 37 ( 0.99999...37 times) the journey across the universe takes only 0.2 SECONDS!" to "at Warp 37 ( 0.99999...37 times) the universe's age is only 0.2 SECONDS!" requires you to deliberately modify the existing work.
Expecting anyone to believe that a change, in a copy+pasted section of text, that just so happens to change someones work from not agreeing with you at all to completely agreeing with you in the exact spot that would have to happen for it to be true is a typo is just......straining credibility to say the least.
2.) That said however you are technically right in that it is NOT evidence in a plagiarism case......because there is no such thing as a plagiarism case.


(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.
(Massive Lie) This is the single best example of you making shit up. Not only is plagiarism NOT a crime, plagiarism is not even MENTIONED in any current statute, either criminal or civil. Plagiarism is not even a legal matter.
So either you are lying or who ever you talked to lied to you. Either way how about you provide citation for your claim. I've provided multiple sources now and NONE of them claim what you claim. In fact I can't find anyone that does.
[Image: wikipedian_protester.png]


(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  7. 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.
While I appreciate you telling me what I know (fuck you) I actually had no idea what you were talking about. Your inability to communicate ideas is not MY fault or problem.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.
(delusional/dishonest) Again the fact you ignore the substance of my posts does not mean it's not there, so eat a dick.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.
(Delusional/hypocritical) Pseudoscience, pseudo-philosophy, pseudo-legalese, and now pseudo-psychology! Anything else you would like to pretend you have an idea what you are talking about or can we leave it at 4 fake knowledge bases?

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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?
(Stupid) Yes because "Assholeitice" (a made up word) was an actual attempt at naming a real disorder. Fuck me you are just so dumb.Facepalm


(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.
Could be 100% and it wouldn't matter. I insult you because your narcissistic and as the "what am I?" thread shows that if I am polite, patient, and informative you ignore my points and criticisms. I have to wrap them in swear words like it's a fuck you burrito just to get you in the bloody ball park of responding to my points. You still don't, you just ignore them but it's something at least.

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  It's only logical we would assume you are trolling.
(delusional)Who is this "we" you crazy motherfucker?

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Or is it just mere coincidence?
Ya it's a real mystery if the universe why I treat a dishonest lying fraud poorly.Facepalm

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  12. I take pride in the fact that some users respect the politeness of my replies enough to rep it.
(Delusional) Of the 3 TOTAL people have given you a positive rep one called you an asshole, the other said your "behavior/attitude... is problematic" and exactly ZERO say anything about your "politeness". What the fuck are you talking about?

(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  A characteristic which I'm sure you will never achieve based on your trollish approaches to discussions.
(Stupid/delusional) Do I even have to explain why this is stupid? Why don't you actually go read my rep comments and see how wrong you are you nut case.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 09:16 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(09-03-2016 09:03 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  but alas the proverbial "can't teach on old dog new tricks" has once again raised it's ugly head.
(Hypocrisy) You are still using "agnostic" entirely wrong after months of correcting, by multiple people in multiple threads so maybe shut the fuck up about old dogs and their tricks.

Oh by the way still waiting to here what the difference between a dog and a dog dog is.

(09-03-2016 09:03 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  How is someone ever to have a constructive conversation with you is truly a challenge.
(Dishonest) Considering my first several attempts at conversing with you were polite and informative and continued to be so until you started being intentionally dishonest it's actually quite easy. I even gave you the benefit of the doubt SEVERAL times. How trollish!
Stop being a lying bag of dicks, and the problem ends.

It is held that valour is the chiefest virtue and most dignifies the haver.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 09:37 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? Even Bucky who was the initiator of the claim no longer supports or defends the claim that I have plaigarized anything.

"Plagiarized", not plaigerized or any of the other ways you spell it.

Don't mistake my silence for non support. I see you lie with great facility, and now even make up things about my (supposed) "non-support". You're just too boring and ignorant to bother with. You did post something with no reference, then claimed it was "preliminary notes" when you were caught. If they really were, they could have been saved as "drafts", or not posted AT ALL until they were ready, in any number of other ways. You're just a liar, and not worth dealing with. You don't post things on the internet for private purposes. Then you made up this shit about "going through your trash". YOU posted it. You are too dishonest to own what you did. It's not going to court. All that crap is irrelevant rationalization, and an attempt at deflection.

Quote:Such an act would be considered libel or at the very least slander from the legal perspective.
Prove me wrong:
1. Rebut the "scrap paper" reference to the posts in question
2. Show where the plagiarized sentences were deliberately posted for the purpose of public display.

It would not. YOU put them on the most public venue there is, delusional one. A jury would laugh you out the court door.

So now he's a troll too. Seems anyone who calls out your bullshit is one of those. Facepalm

My brother is autistic, and long ago I admitted to a degree of Asperger's. Neither one makes us liars, or makes us claim things we then have to say "Oh never mind, I didn't mean it". So you're not a theist. No one cares. You're still a presuppositionalist, and have some other sort of "confabulation" thing.

You showed up with all this garbage about physics, and were proven TOTALLY full of crap, and understand almost nothing about it's basic concepts. Your own signature refutes something you say, and are too delusional to admit it.

You're on ignore, and should have been from your 1st OP.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Bucky Ball's post
09-03-2016, 10:30 PM (This post was last modified: 09-03-2016 10:47 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.

I just have one last question. Is there any relationship between "plagerism" and "plagiarism" ?

Oh. It was a "typo", repeated over and over and over. Never mind.
I heard there was thing new thing coming out. Called a "spell checker".
Not sure if a spelling checker, or if you use it when you're "having a *spell*"
Consider
Maybe you could get one with dual use ?
Ta ta.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 10:48 PM
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(09-03-2016 10:30 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(08-03-2016 04:36 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  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.

I just have one last question. Is there any relationship between "plagerism" and "plagiarism" ?

Oh. It was a "typo", repeated over and over and over. Never mind.
I heard there was thing new thing coming out. Called a "spell checker".
Not sure if a spelling checker, or if you use it when you're "having a *spell*
Consider
Both words used inconsistently and interchangeably during this thread.
Reason: the autocorrect feature on my IPad & my Nokia Smart phone have these words added as 2 different spelling in it's dictionary and I couldn't be bothered to personally spell check the auto corrects before pressing the enter button.
If you take pride in being the TTA spelling police then good for you.
I wish you all the best with that Thumbsup
Very commendable cause, maybe some good will come of it one day, but for now it's just a null distraction to me.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 11:02 PM (This post was last modified: 10-03-2016 12:54 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(09-03-2016 09:37 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(07-03-2016 11:10 PM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  Oh my all this talk about plagiarism and yet no supporting evidence? Even Bucky who was the initiator of the claim no longer supports or defends the claim that I have plaigarized anything.

"Plagiarized", not plaigerized or any of the other ways you spell it.

Don't mistake my silence for non support. I see you lie with great facility, and now even make up things about my (supposed) "non-support". You're just too boring and ignorant to bother with. You did post something with no reference, then claimed it was "preliminary notes" when you were caught. If they really were, they could have been saved as "drafts", or not posted AT ALL until they were ready, in any number of other ways. You're just a liar, and not worth dealing with. You don't post things on the internet for private purposes. Then you made up this shit about "going through your trash". YOU posted it. You are too dishonest to own what you did. It's not going to court. All that crap is irrelevant rationalization, and an attempt at deflection.

Quote:Such an act would be considered libel or at the very least slander from the legal perspective.
Prove me wrong:
1. Rebut the "scrap paper" reference to the posts in question
2. Show where the plagiarized sentences were deliberately posted for the purpose of public display.

It would not. YOU put them on the most public venue there is, delusional one. A jury would laugh you out the court door.

So now he's a troll too. Seems anyone who calls out your bullshit is one of those. Facepalm

My brother is autistic, and long ago I admitted to a degree of Asperger's. Neither one makes us liars, or makes us claim things we then have to say "Oh never mind, I didn't mean it". So you're not a theist. No one cares. You're still a presuppositionalist, and have some other sort of "confabulation" thing.

You showed up with all this garbage about physics, and were proven TOTALLY full of crap, and understand almost nothing about it's basic concepts. Your own signature refutes something you say, and are too delusional to admit it.

You're on ignore, and should have been from your 1st OP.
A snap shot of the edit process of an unofficial post that was edited numerous times and then made uneditable minutes after the last edit is your best evidence for "plagiarism"?
You're grasping at straws. Are you running out of spelling errors to sustain your self gratification?
In law there is such a thing as intent, premeditation & motive which is missing from your poorly put together accusation of plagiarism.
Your best method of winning this argument is blindly repeating it an unlimited number of times in the hopes that someone would be foolish enough to believe it. Show a little dignity for yourself for a change, you have been here long enough.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-03-2016, 11:34 PM (This post was last modified: 10-03-2016 01:24 AM by Agnostic Shane.)
RE: Commentary on Paleophyte and Agnostic Shane
(09-03-2016 09:16 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(09-03-2016 09:03 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  but alas the proverbial "can't teach on old dog new tricks" has once again raised it's ugly head.
(Hypocrisy) You are still using "agnostic" entirely wrong after months of correcting, by multiple people in multiple threads so maybe shut the fuck up about old dogs and their tricks.

Oh by the way still waiting to here what the difference between a dog and a dog dog is.

(09-03-2016 09:03 AM)Agnostic Shane Wrote:  How is someone ever to have a constructive conversation with you is truly a challenge.
(Dishonest) Considering my first several attempts at conversing with you were polite and informative and continued to be so until you started being intentionally dishonest it's actually quite easy. I even gave you the benefit of the doubt SEVERAL times. How trollish!
Stop being a lying bag of dicks, and the problem ends.
As I have just told Bucky:
A snap shot of the edit process of an unofficial post that was edited over numerous times and then made uneditable minutes after the last edit is your best evidence for "plagiarism"? What ever happened to the direct approach to finding flaws.
For you to derive a Plagerism (can't seem to fix this auto correct) claim you have to totally ignore/refute the following:
1. Purpose of saying "do not reply"
2. Purpose of numerous editing within minutes of each one for posts 1 & 2
3. Purpose of there not being a single plagerised citation in the official reply (3rd post) & all references hyperlinked
4. Purpose of using the draft function after it was shown to me (ask mods) after the 2nd post
5. Purpose of requesting the uneditable posts be deleted
6. Purpose of publicly condemning the first 2 posts in a manner that proves I was totally opposed to the way it was written
7. Purpose of editing/developing my argument in plain sight of my opponent. It sped up the reply process (don't believe me? Ask Paleophyte)
If you think these points do not sufficiently detract from your Plagerism (...) claim then I am forced to wonder which of us is delusional. Stop grasping at straws. Your case is lacking substance.
Your whole case rests on the following:
"It ended up on a public forum therefore it's an intentional form of Plagerism" & "I don't care if you can prove it wasn't intentional" because "you deserve to be called a plagerist regardless of any intent to commit Plagerism" (<-- look Bucky a cookie)

Moving on to the "Dog Dog":
Why would I answer the question about a dog dog? It has no relevance to anything I said. If you are going to use metaphors at least use them in relative context. You are deliberately making a mockery of the English language for less than genuine motives.
What's the difference between a Gnostic, an Agnostic Gnostic and a Gnostic Agnostic? I didn't initiate those labels.
& when you answer that,
What's the difference between a person that uses these labels in reference to an Agnostic Agnostic.
Just because you can't juggle more than one concept simultaneously in your own mind doesn't mean it's illogical.
"Agnostic Agnostic with regards to objectively reality" is the context you need to repeat and not just the word "Agnostic Agnostic"
Try to keep up:
"I don't know if I don't know" because in a world of seemingly endless possibilities and a seemingly unknown objective reality, not fully knowing everything is the only consistent thing we come to rationalize.
There are two types of knowing:
1. Primal Instinctive Knowledge passed down through evolution, genomes & epigenomes
2. Cognitive Rationalization which is conducted in a seperate part of the brain.
The former being the more widely used when it comes to the belief system and the decision making process.
See here for further evidence:
http://boingboing.net/2009/09/08/how-we-...ind-b.html
http://www.scientificamerican.com/articl...en-making/

Agnostic Agnostic: I am not sure if I can Cognitively Rationalize my Primal Knowledge.
Hope I didn't give you an aneurism there. Drinking Beverage

Which part of the brain do you think we use to answer these questions in most cases?
What happens to you after you die?
What started everything?
Why am I here?
What should I do next?
Is this the right thing to do?

We are plagued with uncertainty whilst fighting to get out of it. I have embraced my uncertainty. I have come to the realization that finding good answers is not my motivation for life but rather finding good questions.

Let me break it down for you:
If knowing (Gnostic) & not knowing (Agnostic) belongs on opposing ends of the spectrum which one do you think we would be closer to as far as objective reality is concerned?
My honest answer is "I don't know"
Therefore I am both "Agnostic about being Agnostic" & simultaneously "Agnostic about being Gnostic"
If your honest answer is you "know" (which I highly doubt) then you would consider yourself "Gnostic about being Agnostic" & simultaneously "Gnostic about being Gnostic"
I can't say which is the better world view, but that doesn't rescind my right to state what I believe in now does it?
If you are opposed to the beliefs of others even when they have given you their rationalization then good for you.
Failure to explain why you are opposed to their beliefs leads one to believe that you are an oppressive individual. Hence my consistent reference to your troll like behaviour.
Coupled with your liberal use of profanity and continuous defamatory remarks which you have continuously been unable to validate only adds more popularity to the belief that you are Trolling these forums.
You lack the mental capacity to prove your points absent the use of character assassination. You seem to think this is something to be proud of & it entertains me to see that your next reply is still going to follow this very same trend.
Prove me wrong.
Can't wait to see how you're going to respond to this. I'm beginning to read you like a book.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: