Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
13-01-2017, 10:21 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(12-01-2017 11:50 PM)morondog Wrote:  
(12-01-2017 04:01 PM)Vosur Wrote:  You're using different words, but the spirit of my question remains the same. Who decides that someone is deluded, willfully ignorant and/or a liar? The people who are doing the mocking?

It seems that you think you should decide? Or maybe we should have a vote? What makes your opinion that someone shouldn't be mocked worth more than mine that they should?

*I* decide how I react to someone, not you, not anyone else.

(13-01-2017 08:30 AM)Vosur Wrote:  
(12-01-2017 11:50 PM)morondog Wrote:  It seems that you think you should decide? Or maybe we should have a vote? What makes your opinion that someone shouldn't be mocked worth more than mine that they should?

*I* decide how I react to someone, not you, not anyone else.
I'm not sure why this response was directed at me considering that I never said even a single one of these things.

I took your question to imply that you propose some other means of determining who deserves ridicule than people's individual judgement.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
13-01-2017, 10:25 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
Here is a means of getting me to be polite that will actually work: "Hey morondog, CW is not such a total shit stain as you believe. Here's evidence why." Instead of which I get "this tosser deserves respect simply for existing". Fuck that.

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 5 users Like morondog's post
13-01-2017, 12:12 PM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I don't know much about Aliza's history,
Go find out than. That's just one example, which is more than enough to put to rest the assertion that people who disagrees with the popular view gets ganged up on at every turn.

(12-01-2017 11:39 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  but KC is a really, really bad example for the point you're trying to make.
Eh fair point, though I have been here since 2013 and I've never really taken a run at him at all I like him. That said if he stopped posting silly ridiculous religious nonsense, but still held that opinion which is not the popular one, and people stopped mocking him I'd say the mockery had a lot to do with the content of his beliefs as he expressed them and not that he holds a different opinion.


(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I would appreciate it if you could formulate an argument as to why these 'demonstrably fucking stupid' ideas should be mocked.
Rediculous positions are by their definition deserving of ridicule. If the definition is not enough, you are more than welcome to read my post history, as there are numerous examples in there.
If in 2017 you consider one of the strongest and well evidenced scientific theories, that of Evolution, to be fake and made up then there is nothing NOTHING anyone on the internet can say to convince you otherwise. I won't waste my time debating someone that willfully ignorant, that'sa position that has a default starting possition of mockery. You don't have to and i'm certainly not gonna critism you for your way of handeling those people.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I mean, I agree that the positions you mentioned have been shown to be false many times, but I don't understand why you think that we should mock the people who espouse them instead of sending them a link to a previous refutation that can serve as the basis for a new debate.
Because I don't feel the need to act as an instructor to every silly twat who walks through the door who can't be bothered to educate himself/herself before they enter the door? Not every person is worth talking to, worth inviting to the debate, or worth having around. If you live in the year 2017 and you think the world is flat, evolution is not real, or some other nonsense then no I don't feel the need to fake civility for civilities sake.
The OP is a very fine example of the fact that not every person deserves a spot at the debate. He has demonstrated a willingness to lie, dishonestly evade criticism, shift goal posts, argue fallaciously and keep doing so after the fallacy has been explained, and use assertions in place of evidence. He won't engage in debating a persons arguments, and he will lie about why. The list goes on.
If you think he does that because people mock him and not because he is a dishonest cunt than that is your opinion and I respect it. If you think that kind of person is deserving of respect that's on you and I'll respect your opinion, I don't think he does and he won't get it no matter how much he or other people whine about it.

If you wanna hold their hand and help educate them fine by me, that's a noble and a fine thing to do. It's possibly a naive thing to do but that's just my opinion.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  You'll probably say that the two aren't mutually exclusive and while that's true, you should ask yourself what value mockery adds to a rebuttal.
I didn't come to an atheist forum to hold hands with the religious or the irrational, so frankly if they get upset when their ridiculous positions and beliefs are subjected to ridicule that is their problem not mine. Don't express ridiculous positions if you don't have the balls to deal with the ridicule.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  It certainly doesn't make it any more true, but it does diminish its persuasiveness significantly.
My first post to the Christian girl was polite, if sterile, and i asked her questions, raised objections, and provided counter arguments to her position. I didn't mock her or belittle her. I'm perfectly willing to be polite and civil and be persuasive....right up until the point you are dishonest, evasive, or out right lie. I do not have tolerance for these actions and I don't consider tolerance of these actions or the people that employ them to be a virtue.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  If your goal is to persuade people to your side, then you're shooting yourself in the foot. If your goal is to verbally beat people over the head and to make them feel like shit, then keep on going because you're doing well at that.
I joined an atheist forum to be around people that were already on my side, if I was interested in the slightest in converting people to my position I'd be on a religious forum doing just that. I'd also have a hard time being friends with Aliza but I don't.
I'll happily take time out of my day to point out the flaws in someones thinking or reasoning, because I think it's a useful and productive thing to do. This is what I did with the Christian girl in my first response to her.
Now if a person respond to people's criticism with dishonesty in any of it's many forms (lying, evasiveness, etc) than ya I'm gonna extend my claws. If you lie, if you act like shit, I will treat you like shit. I consider lying to be extremely rude and disrespectful and at that point you will get a concentrated dose of that disrespect right back.


(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I think the phrase you're looking for is "I couldn't care less."
Yup, you would be right.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  That being said, if you don't care about the reasons why people are being mocked, then why are we even having this discussion?
The fact I don't really waste my time giving a fuck about the motivations of people being slightly rude over the internet has little to nothing to do with the fact you made a silly assertion about the forum that wasn't backed up by reality.


(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I don't think I implied that, but just for the record, I don't believe that that is the only reason why people get mocked. It is, however, a pretty common one.
And I disagree, people don't get mocked because they don't share the popular opinion the get mocked because their alternative to that opinion involves demonstrably ridiculous nonsense. They are mocked for the content of their posts not for who they are for the majority of the time. Almost exclusively in my case at least.
Aliza does not adhere to the popular opinion but she does not get mocked because she doesn't go around spouting religious nonsense. She has even brought her religion into debates with other religious people and been actively praised for doing so because she does it in an honest and educational manner. She doesn't agree with the popular opinion so what is she not getting "ganged up on at every turn"?

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  If you said one, let alone all of these statements in public, I think you would be the one who would find himself the subject of intense ridicule and mockery.
So the fuck what Voser? I'm not afraid of mockery, I don't need a goddamn safe space and I'd tell anyone white knighting into my defense to fuck off as readily as anyone else. I'm a big boy with thick skin who can stand on his own two feet. I'm an asshole, but I'm not a little bitch.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  You have neatly defined that term for yourself so that it automatically excludes any and every religious person and only allows atheists (and even then not all of them) to be critical thinkers.
No mate, it excludes exclusively those who don't apply critical thinking consistently to all their beliefs. Those people that you listed, if they didn't apply critical thinking to all their beliefs than no I don't consider the label of "critical thinker" as suited to them. That doesn't mean they are incapable of critical evaluation, clearly they are, but it takes more than the ability to do so you have to actually do it and do it consistently.

If you want to argue that you are still a critical thinker even if you completely and utterly eject your critical thinking skills when it comes time to evaluate your religious beliefs then I'd say that the label is at that point utterly vapid and worthless.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Chances are that you consider yourself a critical thinker, unlike all of these brilliant minds from history who supposedly only took up critical thinking and skepticism 'as a hobby.'
I try to apply critical thinking across all my beliefs consistently as I consider that to be my responsibility as a person who wants to know as many true things as a possible and remove as many false things from my thinking as I can. That's not to say I am always successful at any given point in time, but I sure as shit don't turn my critical thinking off and try to turn lead into gold or justify the belief in soemthign with no evidence.


(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  You're probably right, but there are enough examples with much less, if any room for interpretation for the point of my post to remain unaffected.
If you can't tell the difference between mockery and asking questions in your own examples I'd say that calls into question your qualifications to complain about the conduct of this forum and it's members.
I'd also argue that finding a half dozen people in a thread being rude with a bunch of people being nice and asking legitimate questions as an example of being "ganged up on at every turn" to be kinda grasping at straws.

If she had made an introduction that didn't contain any of the silly religious nonsense do you think she would have been mocked as such or do you think she got mocked because of the ridiculous content of her post?
Cause here is a thread from the first page where everyone was polite despite the poster not agreeing with the popular opinion. He even spouted a bit of silliness and people were still polite.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Not only did I cite far worse examples than a cat fail meme (e.g. Rahn127's post),
You are trying to convince a guy who told one of our trolls to get anally fisted to death by a gorilla wearing pineapple gloves that calling someone delusional is "far worse" than telling them they are full of shit. Your definition of "far worse" seem to be rather.... loose mate.
Tongue

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I also explicitly asked you if you needed me to post more example to get you to the point where you would be willing to concede that the treatment she received was undeserved.
And I told you that being civil and polite is not a shield from mockery when you say ridiculous things. I'll ask my question again. If her post was civil and polite and the content was about how African-Americans aren't actually people would she deserve to be mocked or would we all be required to bite our tounges and preserve a fabricated civility?

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  It's not really fair for you to say that you don't care and then berate me for posting examples that aren't harsh enough.
Haha no Vosur, I wasn't berating you at all. Some of your examples of mocking were asking questions and legitimate criticism, I'm not belittling you for your inability to tell the difference but I am certainly criticizing you for it.

Translucently thin skin.


(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Why do you think that it was a legitimate question?
Ok, now you have to just be taking the piss mate. In what world is asking a self-professed critical thinker if they have applied critical thinking to their fantastical, baseless, evidenceless story NOT a legitimate question?

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I already pointed out her choice of words in my previous post, namely that she said she "still" thinks she is a critical thinker, i.e. that she thinks she's a critical thinker in spite of her religious beliefs rather than because of them.
I'm not arguing the opposite so.....yaaa.... I'm aware she "still" thinks she is a critical thinker, she's just happens to be wrong.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Jesus Christ, she even said that coming to God requires people to abandon arguments in her third post.
Arguments and evidence. Missed that last part. She said you had to put aside arguments and evidence, which to me is a clear sign you are not a critical thinker as only a person who has abandoned reason would make such a ridiculous claim. A position which I criticized but didn't mock even though I consider that to be a position that should be bloody savaged.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  For you guys to act like she was citing her religious beliefs as an example of her critical thinking skills or that she denied that they didn't have the same rational basis as the STEM field she's studying is so absurd that it beggars belief.
Good thing I didn't fucking do that isn't it Vosur? I've never said she cited her religious beliefs as an example of her critical thinking I said she failed to apply that critical thinking to her religious beliefs and as such her claim she is a critical thinker was fallacious and not factual.

I'm at the point where I think you are inventing strawmen to justify your sense of outrage, because I never said anything fucking like what you are claiming.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  That's not even to mention that even if you consider the question to be legitimate, it certainly didn't seem to have been asked in good faith.
Oh for fuck sake Vosur that's not up to you to decide. It was a legitimate and relevant question that was not accompanied by anything even remotely hostile in intent. I'm sorry he didn't send out a fucking welcome to the forum fruit basket before he had the nerve to ask a question.
If just asking terse but entirely justified questions is enough to get your panties in a twist maybe the internet is not the place for you. I love you dude and I respect your opinions but you are making mountains out of molehills.

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
[+] 5 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
13-01-2017, 02:24 PM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(13-01-2017 08:22 AM)mordant Wrote:  The site I used to frequent was all about enforced civility, and eventually, theists used it as a cudgel to redefine "disagreement" and "inconvenient argument" and such like as "uncivil" or more particularly "rude", "nasty", "disrespectful" and "persecution". Then they used this as a cudgel to shut down dissent.

Was that the JREF forum? It was a lot like that. It had its moments, but even *think* of taking a Clue-By-Four™ to the head of some certifiably barmy believer and you'd be looking at warnings, suspensions or worse. I actually got a warning for using someone's RL name in a post even though the crazy bastard had been using it himself repeatedly in his own posts. Got tired of it all and just walked away.

I'm sorry, but your beliefs are much too silly to take seriously. Got anything else we can discuss?
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
13-01-2017, 04:18 PM (This post was last modified: 13-01-2017 04:26 PM by Celestial_Wonder.)
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(13-01-2017 12:12 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I don't know much about Aliza's history,
Go find out than. That's just one example, which is more than enough to put to rest the assertion that people who disagrees with the popular view gets ganged up on at every turn.

(12-01-2017 11:39 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  but KC is a really, really bad example for the point you're trying to make.
Eh fair point, though I have been here since 2013 and I've never really taken a run at him at all I like him. That said if he stopped posting silly ridiculous religious nonsense, but still held that opinion which is not the popular one, and people stopped mocking him I'd say the mockery had a lot to do with the content of his beliefs as he expressed them and not that he holds a different opinion.


(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I would appreciate it if you could formulate an argument as to why these 'demonstrably fucking stupid' ideas should be mocked.
Rediculous positions are by their definition deserving of ridicule. If the definition is not enough, you are more than welcome to read my post history, as there are numerous examples in there.
If in 2017 you consider one of the strongest and well evidenced scientific theories, that of Evolution, to be fake and made up then there is nothing NOTHING anyone on the internet can say to convince you otherwise. I won't waste my time debating someone that willfully ignorant, that'sa position that has a default starting possition of mockery. You don't have to and i'm certainly not gonna critism you for your way of handeling those people.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I mean, I agree that the positions you mentioned have been shown to be false many times, but I don't understand why you think that we should mock the people who espouse them instead of sending them a link to a previous refutation that can serve as the basis for a new debate.
Because I don't feel the need to act as an instructor to every silly twat who walks through the door who can't be bothered to educate himself/herself before they enter the door? Not every person is worth talking to, worth inviting to the debate, or worth having around. If you live in the year 2017 and you think the world is flat, evolution is not real, or some other nonsense then no I don't feel the need to fake civility for civilities sake.
The OP is a very fine example of the fact that not every person deserves a spot at the debate. He has demonstrated a willingness to lie, dishonestly evade criticism, shift goal posts, argue fallaciously and keep doing so after the fallacy has been explained, and use assertions in place of evidence. He won't engage in debating a persons arguments, and he will lie about why. The list goes on.
If you think he does that because people mock him and not because he is a dishonest cunt than that is your opinion and I respect it. If you think that kind of person is deserving of respect that's on you and I'll respect your opinion, I don't think he does and he won't get it no matter how much he or other people whine about it.

If you wanna hold their hand and help educate them fine by me, that's a noble and a fine thing to do. It's possibly a naive thing to do but that's just my opinion.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  You'll probably say that the two aren't mutually exclusive and while that's true, you should ask yourself what value mockery adds to a rebuttal.
I didn't come to an atheist forum to hold hands with the religious or the irrational, so frankly if they get upset when their ridiculous positions and beliefs are subjected to ridicule that is their problem not mine. Don't express ridiculous positions if you don't have the balls to deal with the ridicule.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  It certainly doesn't make it any more true, but it does diminish its persuasiveness significantly.
My first post to the Christian girl was polite, if sterile, and i asked her questions, raised objections, and provided counter arguments to her position. I didn't mock her or belittle her. I'm perfectly willing to be polite and civil and be persuasive....right up until the point you are dishonest, evasive, or out right lie. I do not have tolerance for these actions and I don't consider tolerance of these actions or the people that employ them to be a virtue.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  If your goal is to persuade people to your side, then you're shooting yourself in the foot. If your goal is to verbally beat people over the head and to make them feel like shit, then keep on going because you're doing well at that.
I joined an atheist forum to be around people that were already on my side, if I was interested in the slightest in converting people to my position I'd be on a religious forum doing just that. I'd also have a hard time being friends with Aliza but I don't.
I'll happily take time out of my day to point out the flaws in someones thinking or reasoning, because I think it's a useful and productive thing to do. This is what I did with the Christian girl in my first response to her.
Now if a person respond to people's criticism with dishonesty in any of it's many forms (lying, evasiveness, etc) than ya I'm gonna extend my claws. If you lie, if you act like shit, I will treat you like shit. I consider lying to be extremely rude and disrespectful and at that point you will get a concentrated dose of that disrespect right back.


(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I think the phrase you're looking for is "I couldn't care less."
Yup, you would be right.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  That being said, if you don't care about the reasons why people are being mocked, then why are we even having this discussion?
The fact I don't really waste my time giving a fuck about the motivations of people being slightly rude over the internet has little to nothing to do with the fact you made a silly assertion about the forum that wasn't backed up by reality.


(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I don't think I implied that, but just for the record, I don't believe that that is the only reason why people get mocked. It is, however, a pretty common one.
And I disagree, people don't get mocked because they don't share the popular opinion the get mocked because their alternative to that opinion involves demonstrably ridiculous nonsense. They are mocked for the content of their posts not for who they are for the majority of the time. Almost exclusively in my case at least.
Aliza does not adhere to the popular opinion but she does not get mocked because she doesn't go around spouting religious nonsense. She has even brought her religion into debates with other religious people and been actively praised for doing so because she does it in an honest and educational manner. She doesn't agree with the popular opinion so what is she not getting "ganged up on at every turn"?

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  If you said one, let alone all of these statements in public, I think you would be the one who would find himself the subject of intense ridicule and mockery.
So the fuck what Voser? I'm not afraid of mockery, I don't need a goddamn safe space and I'd tell anyone white knighting into my defense to fuck off as readily as anyone else. I'm a big boy with thick skin who can stand on his own two feet. I'm an asshole, but I'm not a little bitch.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  You have neatly defined that term for yourself so that it automatically excludes any and every religious person and only allows atheists (and even then not all of them) to be critical thinkers.
No mate, it excludes exclusively those who don't apply critical thinking consistently to all their beliefs. Those people that you listed, if they didn't apply critical thinking to all their beliefs than no I don't consider the label of "critical thinker" as suited to them. That doesn't mean they are incapable of critical evaluation, clearly they are, but it takes more than the ability to do so you have to actually do it and do it consistently.

If you want to argue that you are still a critical thinker even if you completely and utterly eject your critical thinking skills when it comes time to evaluate your religious beliefs then I'd say that the label is at that point utterly vapid and worthless.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Chances are that you consider yourself a critical thinker, unlike all of these brilliant minds from history who supposedly only took up critical thinking and skepticism 'as a hobby.'
I try to apply critical thinking across all my beliefs consistently as I consider that to be my responsibility as a person who wants to know as many true things as a possible and remove as many false things from my thinking as I can. That's not to say I am always successful at any given point in time, but I sure as shit don't turn my critical thinking off and try to turn lead into gold or justify the belief in soemthign with no evidence.


(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  You're probably right, but there are enough examples with much less, if any room for interpretation for the point of my post to remain unaffected.
If you can't tell the difference between mockery and asking questions in your own examples I'd say that calls into question your qualifications to complain about the conduct of this forum and it's members.
I'd also argue that finding a half dozen people in a thread being rude with a bunch of people being nice and asking legitimate questions as an example of being "ganged up on at every turn" to be kinda grasping at straws.

If she had made an introduction that didn't contain any of the silly religious nonsense do you think she would have been mocked as such or do you think she got mocked because of the ridiculous content of her post?
Cause here is a thread from the first page where everyone was polite despite the poster not agreeing with the popular opinion. He even spouted a bit of silliness and people were still polite.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Not only did I cite far worse examples than a cat fail meme (e.g. Rahn127's post),
You are trying to convince a guy who told one of our trolls to get anally fisted to death by a gorilla wearing pineapple gloves that calling someone delusional is "far worse" than telling them they are full of shit. Your definition of "far worse" seem to be rather.... loose mate.
Tongue

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I also explicitly asked you if you needed me to post more example to get you to the point where you would be willing to concede that the treatment she received was undeserved.
And I told you that being civil and polite is not a shield from mockery when you say ridiculous things. I'll ask my question again. If her post was civil and polite and the content was about how African-Americans aren't actually people would she deserve to be mocked or would we all be required to bite our tounges and preserve a fabricated civility?

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  It's not really fair for you to say that you don't care and then berate me for posting examples that aren't harsh enough.
Haha no Vosur, I wasn't berating you at all. Some of your examples of mocking were asking questions and legitimate criticism, I'm not belittling you for your inability to tell the difference but I am certainly criticizing you for it.

Translucently thin skin.


(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Why do you think that it was a legitimate question?
Ok, now you have to just be taking the piss mate. In what world is asking a self-professed critical thinker if they have applied critical thinking to their fantastical, baseless, evidenceless story NOT a legitimate question?

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  I already pointed out her choice of words in my previous post, namely that she said she "still" thinks she is a critical thinker, i.e. that she thinks she's a critical thinker in spite of her religious beliefs rather than because of them.
I'm not arguing the opposite so.....yaaa.... I'm aware she "still" thinks she is a critical thinker, she's just happens to be wrong.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  Jesus Christ, she even said that coming to God requires people to abandon arguments in her third post.
Arguments and evidence. Missed that last part. She said you had to put aside arguments and evidence, which to me is a clear sign you are not a critical thinker as only a person who has abandoned reason would make such a ridiculous claim. A position which I criticized but didn't mock even though I consider that to be a position that should be bloody savaged.

(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  For you guys to act like she was citing her religious beliefs as an example of her critical thinking skills or that she denied that they didn't have the same rational basis as the STEM field she's studying is so absurd that it beggars belief.
Good thing I didn't fucking do that isn't it Vosur? I've never said she cited her religious beliefs as an example of her critical thinking I said she failed to apply that critical thinking to her religious beliefs and as such her claim she is a critical thinker was fallacious and not factual.

I'm at the point where I think you are inventing strawmen to justify your sense of outrage, because I never said anything fucking like what you are claiming.

A little bitch isn't always an asshole, but an asshole is always a little bitch. You talk about others having a lack of balls, and yet here you are... on internet forum... dribbling excrement at every turn you get. Do you compensate in aggression here for the inadequacies you have in life?

(13-01-2017 12:12 PM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(13-01-2017 08:25 AM)Vosur Wrote:  That's not even to mention that even if you consider the question to be legitimate, it certainly didn't seem to have been asked in good faith.
Oh for fuck sake Vosur that's not up to you to decide. It was a legitimate and relevant question that was not accompanied by anything even remotely hostile in intent. I'm sorry he didn't send out a fucking welcome to the forum fruit basket before he had the nerve to ask a question.
If just asking terse but entirely justified questions is enough to get your panties in a twist maybe the internet is not the place for you. I love you dude and I respect your opinions but you are making mountains out of molehills.

You don't get to decide what's relevant whiskey stop avoiding the issue he brought up, that's like 95% of his argument! As for making mountains out of molehills you should certainly know a thing or two about that!

The hypocrisy is strong with you.

For your information I am now attempting to respond in a manner which you might, fight fire with fire as the saying goes? A taste of your own medicine? Reaping what you sow? Your turn at the bottom of the wheel? Kindness obviously has no effect on you. If you wish to respond to me, further responses from me will replicate what a response from you would be like. Perhaps you prey on those you suspect to be weaker than you to give you a sense of strength? I do not know, but this is an option I am willing to try. And I just wanted to give you fair warning before I use it any further on you.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2017, 12:25 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  A little bitch isn't always an asshole, but an asshole is always a little bitch. You talk about others having a lack of balls, and yet here you are... on internet forum... dribbling excrement at every turn you get. Do you compensate in aggression here for the inadequacies you have in life?
This "little bitch" spanked you up and down so what's that make you kiddo? Drinking Beverage

Oh wait is this an example of you holding out your hand for me and expressing your concern for me? Lol fuck off you stupid cunt.

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  You don't get to decide what's relevant whiskey stop avoiding the issue he brought up, that's like 95% of his argument!
I get that you're a fucktard but I literally went point for point and addressed just about every sentence, not just argument, he made. I know you don't know what addressing arguments actually looks like as you have never done it but you're trying to be clever at about 6 times the rate your intelligence can handle.

You're trying too hard kid.

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  As for making mountains out of molehills you should certainly know a thing or two about that!

Got an example or just an assertion? Drinking Beverage

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  The hypocrisy is strong with you.
Your lack of self-awareness is hilarious.

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  For your information I am now attempting to respond in a manner which you might, fight fire with fire as the saying goes? A taste of your own medicine? Reaping what you sow? Your turn at the bottom of the wheel?
You got the part where I'm an asshole, but you're missing the whole part where I actually make arguments, argue other people's arguments, give examples, comparisons, and have a fucking coherent and consistent point.

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  Kindness obviously has no effect on you.
Riiiight, cause you have demonstrated nothing but kindness up until now.Rolleyes

Why do you keep lying about things that take less than 60 seconds to show you are lying? I'm more bothered by your incompetence than your dishonesty.


(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  If you wish to respond to me, further responses from me will replicate what a response from you would be like.
You mean they will have actual content, address my arguments, and have a shred of internal consistency? That would be a neat trick. You can swear all you fucking liek if you actually do any of the other things I regularly do. Drinking Beverage

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  Perhaps you prey on those you suspect to be weaker than you to give you a sense of strength?
I target stupid cuntish people who say and do stupid cuntish things. Be less of a stupid cunt I guess? *shrug*

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  I do not know, but this is an option I am willing to try.
Good for you, try to do the rest of what I do and not just the sad parody of your strawman if you could. kthxbye.


(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  And I just wanted to give you fair warning before I use it any further on you.
Oooooh scary! It's almost like I give a shit.


So lying didn't work, pretending to agree with me didn't work, changing your story back and forth didn't work, and now you saw that your little poor abused martyr that just wants to help me routine wasn't gonna work so you're trying out this line of bullshit on for size? K nothing new for you, got a plan for the next one? Maybe fake a mental illness?
You wanna try acting like an asshole again go for it, I'm not bothered by it at all and it's always fun watching you fail at something new. But if you're still just gonna lie, avoid arguments, and act like a stupid dishonest cunt it's not gonna go any better for you just cause you're being rude.




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
[+] 5 users Like WhiskeyDebates's post
14-01-2017, 01:19 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(14-01-2017 12:25 AM)WhiskeyDebates Wrote:  
(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  A little bitch isn't always an asshole, but an asshole is always a little bitch. You talk about others having a lack of balls, and yet here you are... on internet forum... dribbling excrement at every turn you get. Do you compensate in aggression here for the inadequacies you have in life?
This "little bitch" spanked you up and down so what's that make you kiddo? Drinking Beverage

Oh wait is this an example of you holding out your hand for me and expressing your concern for me? Lol fuck off you stupid cunt.

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  You don't get to decide what's relevant whiskey stop avoiding the issue he brought up, that's like 95% of his argument!
I get that you're a fucktard but I literally went point for point and addressed just about every sentence, not just argument, he made. I know you don't know what addressing arguments actually looks like as you have never done it but you're trying to be clever at about 6 times the rate your intelligence can handle.

You're trying too hard kid.

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  As for making mountains out of molehills you should certainly know a thing or two about that!

Got an example or just an assertion? Drinking Beverage

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  The hypocrisy is strong with you.
Your lack of self-awareness is hilarious.

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  For your information I am now attempting to respond in a manner which you might, fight fire with fire as the saying goes? A taste of your own medicine? Reaping what you sow? Your turn at the bottom of the wheel?
You got the part where I'm an asshole, but you're missing the whole part where I actually make arguments, argue other people's arguments, give examples, comparisons, and have a fucking coherent and consistent point.

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  Kindness obviously has no effect on you.
Riiiight, cause you have demonstrated nothing but kindness up until now.Rolleyes

Why do you keep lying about things that take less than 60 seconds to show you are lying? I'm more bothered by your incompetence than your dishonesty.


(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  If you wish to respond to me, further responses from me will replicate what a response from you would be like.
You mean they will have actual content, address my arguments, and have a shred of internal consistency? That would be a neat trick. You can swear all you fucking liek if you actually do any of the other things I regularly do. Drinking Beverage

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  Perhaps you prey on those you suspect to be weaker than you to give you a sense of strength?
I target stupid cuntish people who say and do stupid cuntish things. Be less of a stupid cunt I guess? *shrug*

(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  I do not know, but this is an option I am willing to try.
Good for you, try to do the rest of what I do and not just the sad parody of your strawman if you could. kthxbye.


(13-01-2017 04:18 PM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  And I just wanted to give you fair warning before I use it any further on you.
Oooooh scary! It's almost like I give a shit.


So lying didn't work, pretending to agree with me didn't work, changing your story back and forth didn't work, and now you saw that your little poor abused martyr that just wants to help me routine wasn't gonna work so you're trying out this line of bullshit on for size? K nothing new for you, got a plan for the next one? Maybe fake a mental illness?
You wanna try acting like an asshole again go for it, I'm not bothered by it at all and it's always fun watching you fail at something new. But if you're still just gonna lie, avoid arguments, and act like a stupid dishonest cunt it's not gonna go any better for you just cause you're being rude.




I knew you wouldn't be able to resist. I've never seen anyone so easily baited.

He who argues with a fool proves there are two.

Chin up old boy, I told you I haven't the time for banter.





Observation complete.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
14-01-2017, 01:50 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
Ban hammer. CW is unworthy of consideration.

NOTE: Member, Tomasia uses this site to slander other individuals. He then later proclaims it a joke, but not in public.
I will call him a liar and a dog here and now.
Banjo.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Banjo's post
14-01-2017, 02:20 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(14-01-2017 01:19 AM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  I knew you wouldn't be able to resist. I've never seen anyone so easily baited.

He who argues with a fool proves there are two.

Chin up old boy, I told you I haven't the time for banter.





Observation complete.

Cue the violin, the sad boy is trying to deflect his own staggering ineptitude with faux purpose.

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like EvolutionKills's post
14-01-2017, 03:23 AM
RE: Questioning The Intangible Versus Questioning the Tangible
(14-01-2017 02:20 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  
(14-01-2017 01:19 AM)Celestial_Wonder Wrote:  I knew you wouldn't be able to resist. I've never seen anyone so easily baited.

He who argues with a fool proves there are two.

Chin up old boy, I told you I haven't the time for banter.





Observation complete.

Cue the violin, the sad boy is trying to deflect his own staggering ineptitude with faux purpose.

Evolution, Whiskey replies to those things which are not worth replying to. He doesn't focus on any single point, preferring something that resembles a broad spectrum of topics when in reality all he is really doing is insulting the parts he doesn't like. How can one have a conversation with someone of such a vulgar predisposition? Its as if everything from him is some sort of white noise that lacks in coherency.

Aside from my attempt at vulgarity. The only thing that even remotely resembles something that could be disputed that I brought up was that Vosur was talking about, what Whiskey called irrelevant. He changed the argument into everything but.

If you observe his lengthy posts you can probably pick up on why I call a lot of his 'input' as white noise. This is not an isolated case Evolution.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: