|
Post by gadreel on Sept 15, 2020 23:07:50 GMT
I see, so if instead of calmly responding to your various claims about religion and science I was ever instead to call you an arrogant and self-aggrandising scientific illiterate who regularly mocks the mentally handicapped, that would be determinedly telling the truth, no matter how unpleasant? No, that wouldn't be difficult to say at all, thanks. Got it. No need to reply to this with points as I would not be capable of recognising them. You can say anything that crosses your far wandering mind. No one cares, and I most certainly don't, obviously, except that I do care enough to mark where you have missed the point. I've tried to explain to you that you are the problem in these misunderstandings. You should know that no one including myself is going to wait for you to recognize logic you rather obviously cannot. "Evasion noted," "Where is your evidence?," and quite many other things you say are quite rude. You fail to understand what an insulting pompous idiot you are. That's what deludes you into believing you're any more polite. I sincerely hope this helps, but that isn't likely, is it? in todays news, world irony meter broken by Arlon calling someone a pompous idiot. Jesus mate, you couldn't write this as a comedy writer and be any funnier
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 15, 2020 23:20:23 GMT
That you remain oblivious of reality is not funny, and your clinging to your delusions in public would be very frightening, except that I am not easily frightened. I do find it very rude though when children order adults what to do. Somewhere along the line you got the notion that all you have to do is "ask" for evidence and that makes you a reasonable person. That's not how it works. There's much more to it. It is necessary to recognize answers when you get them and you never do. Since you never do your right to "ask" for evidence expires. It becomes necessary to order the unruly child to the principal's office, out of the classroom. You and most atheists have the minds of children and have become unruly because of the internet. Thank you in advance for finally realizing you should not run the world and for finding pass times more appropriate to you level of intellectual development. Have you tried Chutes and Ladders? I'm afraid that is exactly how it works, especially when one is confronted by sweeping, unsubstantiated opinions. As for not recognising answers, that would be because non-sequiturs and other evasions don't count. Fresh ad hominems noted. Thank you for proving that the internet is dominated by children. I hope it leads to some sort of better management, for example shutting it off to children, or at least shutting it off to children who are as much a problem as you are. Consider for a moment that you are very mistaken about how wrong my explanations are. You? Mistaken? I know, how could that happen? If so though, what is the solution? You would just keep "asking" ridiculous questions forever. That's why I would call the principal and have you removed if this were real life.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Sept 16, 2020 2:05:35 GMT
I'm afraid that is exactly how it works, especially when one is confronted by sweeping, unsubstantiated opinions. As for not recognising answers, that would be because non-sequiturs and other evasions don't count. Fresh ad hominems noted. Thank you for proving that the internet is dominated by children. I hope it leads to some sort of better management, for example shutting it off to children, or at least shutting it off to children who are as much a problem as you are. Consider for a moment that you are very mistaken about how wrong my explanations are. You? Mistaken? I know, how could that happen? If so though, what is the solution? You would just keep "asking" ridiculous questions forever. That's why I would call the principal and have you removed if this were real life. This just in, Arlon thinks the real world has a principal that will remove you if so called upon, that's an assassin dingleberry and it's called murder.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Sept 16, 2020 2:08:24 GMT
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Sept 16, 2020 17:58:55 GMT
I'm afraid that is exactly how it works, especially when one is confronted by sweeping, unsubstantiated opinions. As for not recognising answers, that would be because non-sequiturs and other evasions don't count. Fresh ad hominems noted. Thank you for proving that the internet is dominated by children. I hope it leads to some sort of better management, for example shutting it off to children, or at least shutting it off to children who are as much a problem as you are. Another ad hominem noted. Since you rarely substantiate any of your sweeping opinions, all one can do is to compare such claims with opposing facts which are substantiated; or the words of those, unlike you, who are specialists in their fields. That's why your various, striking, conclusions on such matters as Darwin's status in science, Einsteinian physics, climate change, types of religious belief etc, all of which inevitably end in you insulting people as 'idiots' or worse, rarely inspire confidence. None of this means you are necessarily wrong of course; just much less likely to be right. For you to dispute with civility and intellectual modesty while all along using evidence and substantiation, and not avoiding difficult questions. I hope that helps. But it won't.
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 17, 2020 6:14:00 GMT
Thank you for proving that the internet is dominated by children. I hope it leads to some sort of better management, for example shutting it off to children, or at least shutting it off to children who are as much a problem as you are. Consider for a moment that you are very mistaken about how wrong my explanations are. You? Mistaken? I know, how could that happen? If so though, what is the solution? You would just keep "asking" ridiculous questions forever. That's why I would call the principal and have you removed if this were real life. This just in, Arlon thinks the real world has a principal that will remove you if so called upon, that's an assassin dingleberry and it's called murder. Someone put attic insulation in your soap?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 17, 2020 6:28:18 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 17, 2020 6:40:53 GMT
Thank you for proving that the internet is dominated by children. I hope it leads to some sort of better management, for example shutting it off to children, or at least shutting it off to children who are as much a problem as you are. Another ad hominem noted. Since you rarely substantiate any of your sweeping opinions, all one can do is to compare such claims with opposing facts which are substantiated; or the words of those, unlike you, who are specialists in their fields. That's why your various, striking, conclusions on such matters as Darwin's status in science, Einsteinian physics, climate change, types of religious belief etc, all of which inevitably end in you insulting people as 'idiots' or worse, rarely inspire confidence. None of this means you are necessarily wrong of course; just much less likely to be right. For you to dispute with civility and intellectual modesty while all along using evidence and substantiation, and not avoiding difficult questions. I hope that helps. But it won't. You left out one, Pluto is round.
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Sept 17, 2020 10:50:16 GMT
Those replies to Arlon10 may be factually true, but their tone is not doing them a favor. They give atheists a bad name. Pity, since proponents of evolution don't need to be rude, as they have reality on their side.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Sept 17, 2020 19:15:34 GMT
Another ad hominem noted. Since you rarely substantiate any of your sweeping opinions, all one can do is to compare such claims with opposing facts which are substantiated; or the words of those, unlike you, who are specialists in their fields. That's why your various, striking, conclusions on such matters as Darwin's status in science, Einsteinian physics, climate change, types of religious belief etc, all of which inevitably end in you insulting people as 'idiots' or worse, rarely inspire confidence. None of this means you are necessarily wrong of course; just much less likely to be right. For you to dispute with civility and intellectual modesty while all along using evidence and substantiation, and not avoiding difficult questions. I hope that helps. But it won't. You left out one, Pluto is round. Since you haven't seen it yourself, and photos can be faked, one imagines the dwarf planet is as suspicious to you as heart transplants are. (The International Astronomical Union (IAU) downgraded the status of Pluto to that of a dwarf planet because it did not meet the three criteria the IAU uses to define a full-sized planet. Essentially Pluto meets all the criteria except one—it has not cleared its neighbouring region of other objects. Only Arlon knows of what, if any issue, there is with this)
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 17, 2020 22:23:56 GMT
Since you haven't seen it yourself, and photos can be faked, one imagines the dwarf planet is as suspicious to you as heart transplants are. (The International Astronomical Union (IAU) downgraded the status of Pluto to that of a dwarf planet because it did not meet the three criteria the IAU uses to define a full-sized planet. Essentially Pluto meets all the criteria except one—it has not cleared its neighbouring region of other objects. Only Arlon knows of what, if any issue, there is with this) There's a point. However notice that I would tend to accept convincing photographic evidence if there were any that Pluto is not round. The problem with faking it, how to collaborate with all the other fakers. One wonders why a supposedly sound and logical person such as yourself couldn't do that math. I noticed the "rule" that in order to be considered a planet the celestial object must clear its path. However Mars has not cleared its path, which is little more than one percent as large as Pluto's path. Also that far out as Pluto's path is, it can be difficult to be certain objects are genuinely in Pluto's path. Remember how everyone was saying Pluto isn't round? Well, those same imbeciles are judging what is in Pluto's path.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Sept 18, 2020 2:16:17 GMT
What is a type of castle that is capable of holding more than your brain?
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Sept 18, 2020 2:19:51 GMT
Those replies to Arlon10 may be factually true, but their tone is not doing them a favor. They give atheists a bad name. Pity, since proponents of evolution don't need to be rude, as they have reality on their side. To be fair though, the type of idiocy Arlon spills out of his face does invite ridicule
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 18, 2020 2:25:05 GMT
Those replies to Arlon10 may be factually true, but their tone is not doing them a favor. They give atheists a bad name. Pity, since proponents of evolution don't need to be rude, as they have reality on their side. To be fair though, the type of idiocy Arlon spills out of his face does invite ridicule I live in the real world, where do live? Is this anonymous discussion board the only place you can win at anything?
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Sept 18, 2020 2:39:38 GMT
To be fair though, the type of idiocy Arlon spills out of his face does invite ridicule I live in the real world, where do live? Is this anonymous discussion board the only place you can win at anything? The real world where you think there is a principal who can expell people?
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Sept 18, 2020 2:46:48 GMT
To be fair though, the type of idiocy Arlon spills out of his face does invite ridicule I live in the real world, where do live? Is this anonymous discussion board the only place you can win at anything? Was the first reply you tried too stupid even for you?
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Sept 18, 2020 19:49:00 GMT
Since you haven't seen it yourself, and photos can be faked, one imagines the dwarf planet is as suspicious to you as heart transplants are. (The International Astronomical Union (IAU) downgraded the status of Pluto to that of a dwarf planet because it did not meet the three criteria the IAU uses to define a full-sized planet. Essentially Pluto meets all the criteria except one—it has not cleared its neighbouring region of other objects. Only Arlon knows of what, if any issue, there is with this) There's a point. However notice that I would tend to accept convincing photographic evidence if there were any that Pluto is not round. The problem with faking it, how to collaborate with all the other fakers. One wonders why a supposedly sound and logical person such as yourself couldn't do that math. This still means you accept that Pluto is round even though you haven't seen it yourself. There is indeed a problem (as with all conspiracies) in assuming that the fakers are co-ordinated enough to sustain things, but that is besides the point. It is illogical to posit the notion that heart transplants don't happen, or are faked, while accepting that Pluto is round, when in neither instance have you seen matters first hand. Try and remain consistent. I guess you must have been elected an expect in planetary science too just recently then, ahead of all those other imbeciles? Congratulations. However as usual you offer no substantiation for your views so on the same basis they can be found suspect. As for why you would want to make a dispute about whether Pluto is a dwarf or regular planet is something only you can say, unless to make the poor point that 'science had it wrong' after it characteristically revises itself in the light of more discovery or need for refinement. However one observes that you must accept its differing classifications to argue the choice between them.
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Sept 18, 2020 19:54:28 GMT
Those replies to Arlon10 may be factually true, but their tone is not doing them a favor. They give atheists a bad name. Pity, since proponents of evolution don't need to be rude, as they have reality on their side. To be fair though, the type of idiocy Arlon spills out of his face does invite ridicule He also, one assumes, appreciates rudeness given how often he falls back on it.
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Sept 18, 2020 20:13:18 GMT
To be fair though, the type of idiocy Arlon spills out of his face does invite ridicule He also, one assumes, appreciates rudeness given how often he falls back on it. Honestly, I can't figure out why any of you - FilmFlaneur, gadreel or Phludowin - even bother with Arlon. FF, you so patiently and properly address his posts, again and again, while he flies off on some tangential quasi-point. I've read quite a few of your exchanges, and he just seems like such a lost cause. Why ever do you bother with him at all?
|
|
|
Post by Arlon10 on Sept 18, 2020 21:39:29 GMT
There's a point. However notice that I would tend to accept convincing photographic evidence if there were any that Pluto is not round. The problem with faking it, how to collaborate with all the other fakers. One wonders why a supposedly sound and logical person such as yourself couldn't do that math. This still means you accept that Pluto is round even though you haven't seen it yourself. There is indeed a problem (as with all conspiracies) in assuming that the fakers are co-ordinated enough to sustain things, but that is besides the point. It is illogical to posit the notion that heart transplants don't happen, or are faked, while accepting that Pluto is round, when in neither instance have you seen matters first hand. Try and remain consistent. I guess you must have been elected an expect in planetary science too just recently then, ahead of all those other imbeciles? Congratulations. However as usual you offer no substantiation for your views so on the same basis they can be found suspect. As for why you would want to make a dispute about whether Pluto is a dwarf or regular planet is something only you can say, unless to make the poor point that 'science had it wrong' after it characteristically revises itself in the light of more discovery or need for refinement. However one observes that you must accept its differing classifications to argue the choice between them. There are clear pictures of a spherical Pluto. There are no clear pictures of a Pluto that is not spherical. There are no clear pictures of a heart transplant. Try the math again, maybe you'll get next time. Although it is true that I do not "substantiate" much, I do not claim much either. You apparently believe in all sorts of things you cannot substantiate. I have substantiated many times that the intelligent designer is not found in nature. That is a small if very significant claim. I cannot prove relativity, heart transplants, that people learned anything significant from Darwin, that Pluto is not spherical, that curly fluorescent light bulbs made any sense, that automatic dishwashers are always necessary and prudent, or that time is a helix of semiprecious stones. Curiously, you cannot substantiate anything whatsoever, never have and likely never will. Should I keep asking you?
|
|