info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The complete superiority of the creationist conceptual scheme over all the other philosophical stuff:
129 views
Skip to first unread message
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 23, 2021, 10:41:11 PM7/23/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
1. Because the creationist logic is inherent in ordinary common discourse, it is therefore God given
2. It covers reality in it’s entirety, leaves nothing out
3. It has no logical errors
4. It is practically useful, as creationist logic is used in common discourse by everyone
5. It defines subjectivity and opinion
6. It defines objectivity and fact
7. It directly supports the main mechanism of intelligent design theory, which is choice
8. It is in line with nature, because as the creationist conceptual scheme has 2 fundamental categories, so also the brain has 2 halves.
9. It is the most intellectually honest theory, because it is in line with common discourse. So then there is no duplicity between common discourse sayings, and intellectual sayings.
10. In it’s application in common discourse it presents a continuity and shared understanding, of all people everywhere, throughout history.
11. The creationist conceptual scheme is the lesson that should be learned from the holocaust, where asserting matters of opinion as if they were matters of fact (social darwinism), led to personal and societal catastrophy.
12. It is the most fundamental theory possible, because there is nothing more fundamental than origins, and the creationist conceptual scheme covers origins.
1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / subjective / opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / objective / fact
Where choosing is defined in terms of spontaneity, making one of alternative futures the present. Or, to make a possible future the present, or not the present.
And opinion is defined as a chosen expression based on emotion, which expression identifies a creator, and the attributes of a creator like personal character and emotions.
And fact is defined as a 1 to 1 corresponding model of a creation in the mind, forced by the evidence of it.
2. It covers reality in it’s entirety, leaves nothing out
3. It has no logical errors
4. It is practically useful, as creationist logic is used in common discourse by everyone
5. It defines subjectivity and opinion
6. It defines objectivity and fact
7. It directly supports the main mechanism of intelligent design theory, which is choice
8. It is in line with nature, because as the creationist conceptual scheme has 2 fundamental categories, so also the brain has 2 halves.
9. It is the most intellectually honest theory, because it is in line with common discourse. So then there is no duplicity between common discourse sayings, and intellectual sayings.
10. In it’s application in common discourse it presents a continuity and shared understanding, of all people everywhere, throughout history.
11. The creationist conceptual scheme is the lesson that should be learned from the holocaust, where asserting matters of opinion as if they were matters of fact (social darwinism), led to personal and societal catastrophy.
12. It is the most fundamental theory possible, because there is nothing more fundamental than origins, and the creationist conceptual scheme covers origins.
1. Creator / chooses / spiritual / subjective / opinion
2. Creation / chosen / material / objective / fact
Where choosing is defined in terms of spontaneity, making one of alternative futures the present. Or, to make a possible future the present, or not the present.
And opinion is defined as a chosen expression based on emotion, which expression identifies a creator, and the attributes of a creator like personal character and emotions.
And fact is defined as a 1 to 1 corresponding model of a creation in the mind, forced by the evidence of it.
Mike Duffy
Jul 26, 2021, 8:51:11 AM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 19:39:33 -0700, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote:
> 9. It is the most intellectually honest theory, because it is in line
> with common discourse. So then there is no duplicity between common
> discourse sayings, and intellectual sayings.
The problem, Mr. Top-Poster is that you are the only one who understands
> 9. It is the most intellectually honest theory, because it is in line
> with common discourse. So then there is no duplicity between common
> discourse sayings, and intellectual sayings.
what you are saying. Don't project that onto us. We don't have a clue
what you're on about.
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 26, 2021, 10:46:11 AM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
Obviously you are just a total liar.
An honest person would reply with the understanding of how subjectivity works.
You're just another fucking liar.
Op maandag 26 juli 2021 om 14:51:11 UTC+2 schreef Mike Duffy:
An honest person would reply with the understanding of how subjectivity works.
You're just another fucking liar.
Op maandag 26 juli 2021 om 14:51:11 UTC+2 schreef Mike Duffy:
Harry Krishna
Jul 26, 2021, 12:31:11 PM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Fri, 23 Jul 2021 19:39:33 -0700 (PDT), "mohammad...@gmail.com"
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>1. Because the creationist logic is inherent in ordinary common discourse
As described by you, it is incoherent, so no, it isn't any relation to
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>1. Because the creationist logic is inherent in ordinary common discourse
"ordinary common discourse".
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 26, 2021, 1:36:11 PM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
You're another fake person.
How it works is, you provide a reasoned argument as to what the underlying logic is in a subjective opinion, like to say something is beautiful.
Failing that, I know you are just another fucking liar.
Not dissimilar to some guy who only understands about pussy, and who'se then at a loss what the fuck you are talking about with the underlying logic in a subjective opinion. Where's the pussy?
Op maandag 26 juli 2021 om 18:31:11 UTC+2 schreef Harry Krishna:
How it works is, you provide a reasoned argument as to what the underlying logic is in a subjective opinion, like to say something is beautiful.
Failing that, I know you are just another fucking liar.
Not dissimilar to some guy who only understands about pussy, and who'se then at a loss what the fuck you are talking about with the underlying logic in a subjective opinion. Where's the pussy?
Op maandag 26 juli 2021 om 18:31:11 UTC+2 schreef Harry Krishna:
Harry Krishna
Jul 26, 2021, 1:41:11 PM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 10:34:41 -0700 (PDT), "mohammad...@gmail.com"
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>You're another fake person.
>
>How it works is, you provide a reasoned argument as to what the underlying logic is in a subjective opinion, like to say something is beautiful.
>
>Failing that, I know you are just another fucking liar.
Or that I don't understand what you're asking. What is "the underlying
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>You're another fake person.
>
>How it works is, you provide a reasoned argument as to what the underlying logic is in a subjective opinion, like to say something is beautiful.
>
>Failing that, I know you are just another fucking liar.
logic to a subjective opinion" even supposed to mean?
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 26, 2021, 1:56:11 PM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
The rules by which it works, asshole.
Op maandag 26 juli 2021 om 19:41:11 UTC+2 schreef Harry Krishna:
Op maandag 26 juli 2021 om 19:41:11 UTC+2 schreef Harry Krishna:
Harry Krishna
Jul 26, 2021, 2:36:11 PM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 10:53:49 -0700 (PDT), "mohammad...@gmail.com"
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The rules by which it works, asshole.
I'm not following you. "Underlying logic" and "rules" are not
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The rules by which it works, asshole.
synonyms, and what do you mean by "rules by which it works" in regard
to opinions?
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 26, 2021, 2:41:11 PM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
The rules are that an opinion must be chosen, and that the opinion must express what it is that makes a choice.
Asswipe.
Op maandag 26 juli 2021 om 20:36:11 UTC+2 schreef Harry Krishna:
Asswipe.
Op maandag 26 juli 2021 om 20:36:11 UTC+2 schreef Harry Krishna:
Wolffan
Jul 26, 2021, 5:01:11 PM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On 2021 Jul 26, Mike Duffy wrote
(in article <sdmasu$4qc$1...@dont-email.me>):
He lacks the communication skills to successfully make his point. He lacks
the intelligence to detect and attempt to correct his errors. He lacks the
self-awareness to see when others are giving him good advice.
He is, however, amusing.
(in article <sdmasu$4qc$1...@dont-email.me>):
the intelligence to detect and attempt to correct his errors. He lacks the
self-awareness to see when others are giving him good advice.
He is, however, amusing.
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 26, 2021, 5:41:11 PM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
You're a complet fucking intellectual fraud.
And you are a part of this whole holocausting scheme with the vaccinations.
The fact that a logical theory can be made that 60 percent of vaccinated will die, and that there is some evidence for this theory, proves that the whole vaccination drive is irresponsible. 60 percent of vaccinated test positive for a signal that the bloodclotting mechanism has been activated in their body.
The vaccination drive is bad judgement, and bad judgements is based on a shitty emotional life. And the shitty emotional life is based on total rejection of subjectivity at the intellectual level.
You are killing people, you are a murderer. Because there is no question about it that you should know how subjectivity works. No question about it that you should take proper care of emotions, in order to make good judgements. Yet you don't, you think it is all just a joke this subjectivity, and really objectivity is where it is at, and subjectivity can just be ignored. And then you kill people, murder your own family, maybe yourself, with that totally shit judgement you have.
Op maandag 26 juli 2021 om 23:01:11 UTC+2 schreef Wolffan:
And you are a part of this whole holocausting scheme with the vaccinations.
The fact that a logical theory can be made that 60 percent of vaccinated will die, and that there is some evidence for this theory, proves that the whole vaccination drive is irresponsible. 60 percent of vaccinated test positive for a signal that the bloodclotting mechanism has been activated in their body.
The vaccination drive is bad judgement, and bad judgements is based on a shitty emotional life. And the shitty emotional life is based on total rejection of subjectivity at the intellectual level.
You are killing people, you are a murderer. Because there is no question about it that you should know how subjectivity works. No question about it that you should take proper care of emotions, in order to make good judgements. Yet you don't, you think it is all just a joke this subjectivity, and really objectivity is where it is at, and subjectivity can just be ignored. And then you kill people, murder your own family, maybe yourself, with that totally shit judgement you have.
Op maandag 26 juli 2021 om 23:01:11 UTC+2 schreef Wolffan:
Wolffan
Jul 26, 2021, 10:06:11 PM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On 2021 Jul 26, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote
(in article<03c1a6ec-96aa-4ae9...@googlegroups.com>):
> You're a complet fucking intellectual fraud.
Nah. You just can’t comprehend what you read, that’s all.
(in article<03c1a6ec-96aa-4ae9...@googlegroups.com>):
> You're a complet fucking intellectual fraud.
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 26, 2021, 11:26:11 PM7/26/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
Because by definition, you can never be to blame. Because you always do what is best, by definition. So it must be me that is doing things wrong.
And sure enough Fauci reasons like that. While he lies to everyone. It's all for the best, he can never be blamed for anything, by definition.
Op dinsdag 27 juli 2021 om 04:06:11 UTC+2 schreef Wolffan:
And sure enough Fauci reasons like that. While he lies to everyone. It's all for the best, he can never be blamed for anything, by definition.
Op dinsdag 27 juli 2021 om 04:06:11 UTC+2 schreef Wolffan:
Wolffan
Jul 27, 2021, 8:26:11 AM7/27/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On 2021 Jul 26, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote
(in article<346c937e-2a38-4270...@googlegroups.com>):
> Because by definition, you can never be to blame. Because you always do what
> is best, by definition. So it must be me that is doing things wrong.
skills, and you insist on putting that lack on public display.
But then you wouldn’t be as funny as you are if you wised up, so do keep on
doing it.
Harry Krishna
Jul 27, 2021, 1:46:12 PM7/27/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 11:39:47 -0700 (PDT), "mohammad...@gmail.com"
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The rules are that an opinion must be chosen,
Nonsense. You keep repeating that, but why you think that people
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>The rules are that an opinion must be chosen,
choose their opinions is something known only to you.
> and that the opinion must express what it is that makes a choice.
Harry Krishna
Jul 27, 2021, 1:51:11 PM7/27/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Mon, 26 Jul 2021 20:23:38 -0700 (PDT), "mohammad...@gmail.com"
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Because by definition, you can never be to blame. Because you always do what is best, by definition. So it must be me that is doing things wrong.
If we're talking about communicating in English, yes, you are.
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Because by definition, you can never be to blame. Because you always do what is best, by definition. So it must be me that is doing things wrong.
Literally everyone else has pointed that out to you many times.
Bob Casanova
Jul 27, 2021, 2:56:11 PM7/27/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 13:47:06 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Harry Krishna
<op...@pearpimples.com>:
Even though reality isn't subject to vote or majority rule,
I believe that in this case it is indeed a case of the
classic, "Oh, look! Everyone's out of step but Nando!"
>
--
Bob C.
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
in talk.origins, posted by Harry Krishna
<op...@pearpimples.com>:
I believe that in this case it is indeed a case of the
classic, "Oh, look! Everyone's out of step but Nando!"
>
--
Bob C.
"The most exciting phrase to hear in science,
the one that heralds new discoveries, is not
'Eureka!' but 'That's funny...'"
- Isaac Asimov
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 27, 2021, 4:41:12 PM7/27/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
Fuck you asswipe. You don't understand logic, means you don't understand any language.
You literally have no clue what a personal opinion is. Why you even insist that opinions are generally not chosen.
Not the way it works asswipe, to be forced to say a painting is beautiful, provides an invalid opinion, because the opinion is not chosen.
And I communicate great, the creationist conceptual scheme is great. It is just that you define making a choice in terms of figuring out the best option, which is a logic error. It is conflating the advise to think about what is best, with the logic of making a choice.
We simply totally disagree on everything. And on your side are all the fucking atheists, socialists, materialists, who are obviously all clueless about subjectivity. All those crazy professors, those wacked out libtards with their totally fake emotions.
Just saw libtard Schiff crying about the lack of commitment to peaceful transition of power. Fucking fake emotions. Not spontaneous, but choosing the best things to say to achieve his goals.
And then that capitol police man, saying that about 20 people called him the "n-word". Never happened, obviously a total liar, same as all the evolutionist here are total fucking liars. You all just lie, you don't give a crap about the truth. You give a crap about your feelings of the best.
It's all from that same place of rejecting the subjective human spirit.
While the subjectivity of the religious folk, is totally great. The emotional crediblity is great. The spontaneity is great, the personal judgements are great. All round greatness.
Op dinsdag 27 juli 2021 om 19:51:11 UTC+2 schreef Harry Krishna:
You literally have no clue what a personal opinion is. Why you even insist that opinions are generally not chosen.
Not the way it works asswipe, to be forced to say a painting is beautiful, provides an invalid opinion, because the opinion is not chosen.
And I communicate great, the creationist conceptual scheme is great. It is just that you define making a choice in terms of figuring out the best option, which is a logic error. It is conflating the advise to think about what is best, with the logic of making a choice.
We simply totally disagree on everything. And on your side are all the fucking atheists, socialists, materialists, who are obviously all clueless about subjectivity. All those crazy professors, those wacked out libtards with their totally fake emotions.
Just saw libtard Schiff crying about the lack of commitment to peaceful transition of power. Fucking fake emotions. Not spontaneous, but choosing the best things to say to achieve his goals.
And then that capitol police man, saying that about 20 people called him the "n-word". Never happened, obviously a total liar, same as all the evolutionist here are total fucking liars. You all just lie, you don't give a crap about the truth. You give a crap about your feelings of the best.
It's all from that same place of rejecting the subjective human spirit.
While the subjectivity of the religious folk, is totally great. The emotional crediblity is great. The spontaneity is great, the personal judgements are great. All round greatness.
Op dinsdag 27 juli 2021 om 19:51:11 UTC+2 schreef Harry Krishna:
youngbl...@gmail.com
Jul 27, 2021, 5:31:11 PM7/27/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Monday, July 26, 2021 at 8:26:11 PM UTC-7, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote:
> Because by definition, you can never be to blame. Because you always do what is best, by definition. So it must be me that is doing things wrong.
>
> And sure enough Fauci reasons like that. While he lies to everyone. It's all for the best, he can never be blamed for anything, by definition.
>
You don't have to believe Fauci.
> Because by definition, you can never be to blame. Because you always do what is best, by definition. So it must be me that is doing things wrong.
>
> And sure enough Fauci reasons like that. While he lies to everyone. It's all for the best, he can never be blamed for anything, by definition.
>
But it's not just him, it's every country with
the ability to rest the vaccines.
They all say the same thing because of the massive
amount of testing done prior to releasing the
vaccines.
Or are you one of those idiots who believe that
there is an international conspiracy?
Had my Moderna shots.
The rest of my family has also been vaccinated.
Nobody has gotten sick, nobody has died
The number of people who have had bad reactions
is in line with what was predicted from testing.
The percentage of people who have died after being
vaccinated is about .0009%.
There are no valid reports of anything that had
not been predicted.
There are no gods unless we create them.
> Op dinsdag 27 juli 2021 om 04:06:11 UTC+2 schreef Wolffan:
> > On 2021 Jul 26, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote
> > (in article<03c1a6ec-96aa-4ae9...@googlegroups.com>):
> > > You're a complet fucking intellectual fraud.
> > Nah. You just can’t comprehend what you read, that’s all.
youngbl...@gmail.com
Jul 27, 2021, 5:36:11 PM7/27/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Tuesday, July 27, 2021 at 1:41:12 PM UTC-7, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote:
> Fuck you asswipe. You don't understand logic, means you don't understand any language.
>
> You literally have no clue what a personal opinion is. Why you even insist that opinions are generally not chosen.
>
> Not the way it works asswipe, to be forced to say a painting is beautiful, provides an invalid opinion, because the opinion is not chosen.
>
> And I communicate great, the creationist conceptual scheme is great. It is just that you define making a choice in terms of figuring out the best option, which is a logic error. It is conflating the advise to think about what is best, with the logic of making a choice.
>
> We simply totally disagree on everything. And on your side are all the fucking atheists, socialists, materialists, who are obviously all clueless about subjectivity. All those crazy professors, those wacked out libtards with their totally fake emotions.
>
> Just saw libtard Schiff crying about the lack of commitment to peaceful transition of power. Fucking fake emotions. Not spontaneous, but choosing the best things to say to achieve his goals.
>
> And then that capitol police man, saying that about 20 people called him the "n-word". Never happened, obviously a total liar, same as all the evolutionist here are total fucking liars. You all just lie, you don't give a crap about the truth. You give a crap about your feelings of the best.
>
> It's all from that same place of rejecting the subjective human spirit.
>
> While the subjectivity of the religious folk, is totally great. The emotional crediblity is great. The spontaneity is great, the personal judgements are great. All round greatness.
>
>
It's just that those opinions are meaningless
> Fuck you asswipe. You don't understand logic, means you don't understand any language.
>
> You literally have no clue what a personal opinion is. Why you even insist that opinions are generally not chosen.
>
> Not the way it works asswipe, to be forced to say a painting is beautiful, provides an invalid opinion, because the opinion is not chosen.
>
> And I communicate great, the creationist conceptual scheme is great. It is just that you define making a choice in terms of figuring out the best option, which is a logic error. It is conflating the advise to think about what is best, with the logic of making a choice.
>
> We simply totally disagree on everything. And on your side are all the fucking atheists, socialists, materialists, who are obviously all clueless about subjectivity. All those crazy professors, those wacked out libtards with their totally fake emotions.
>
> Just saw libtard Schiff crying about the lack of commitment to peaceful transition of power. Fucking fake emotions. Not spontaneous, but choosing the best things to say to achieve his goals.
>
> And then that capitol police man, saying that about 20 people called him the "n-word". Never happened, obviously a total liar, same as all the evolutionist here are total fucking liars. You all just lie, you don't give a crap about the truth. You give a crap about your feelings of the best.
>
> It's all from that same place of rejecting the subjective human spirit.
>
> While the subjectivity of the religious folk, is totally great. The emotional crediblity is great. The spontaneity is great, the personal judgements are great. All round greatness.
>
>
without facts to back them up.
There are no gods unless we create them.
>
>
Harry Krishna
Jul 28, 2021, 9:01:12 AM7/28/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 13:40:24 -0700 (PDT), "mohammad...@gmail.com"
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Fuck you asswipe. You don't understand logic, means you don't understand any language.
As with so many other words, you have your own personal definition of
<mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Fuck you asswipe. You don't understand logic, means you don't understand any language.
"logic", and as usual, it's incoherent, so I'd have to admit that I
don't understand what you mean by it.
>You literally have no clue what a personal opinion is. Why you even insist that opinions are generally not chosen.
can't or won't you answer that simple question?
Bob Casanova
Jul 28, 2021, 11:51:12 AM7/28/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Wed, 28 Jul 2021 09:00:21 -0400, the following appeared
Am I alone in concluding that responding to Nando is
equivalent to pushing any button in response to those
annoying robocalls to "Lower Your Credit Card Rate!", "Your
Car's Warranty May Be Expiring" and from various "Legal
Departments" or "The IRS" that you will be arrested if you
don't respond?
equivalent to pushing any button in response to those
annoying robocalls to "Lower Your Credit Card Rate!", "Your
Car's Warranty May Be Expiring" and from various "Legal
Departments" or "The IRS" that you will be arrested if you
don't respond?
Wolffan
Jul 28, 2021, 10:26:12 PM7/28/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On 2021 Jul 28, Bob Casanova wrote
(in article<2mu2ggl54pkhp65o6...@4ax.com>):
> On Wed, 28 Jul 2021 09:00:21 -0400, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Harry Krishna
> <op...@pearpimples.com>:
>
> > On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 13:40:24 -0700 (PDT), "mohammad...@gmail.com"
> > <mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Fuck you asswipe. You don't understand logic, means you don't understand
> > > any language.
> >
> > As with so many other words, you have your own personal definition of
> > "logic", and as usual, it's incoherent, so I'd have to admit that I
> > don't understand what you mean by it.
> >
> > > You literally have no clue what a personal opinion is. Why you even insist
> > > that opinions are generally not chosen.
> >
> > For probably the 20th time or more, why do you think they are? Why
> > can't or won't you answer that simple question?
> Am I alone in concluding that responding to Nando is
> equivalent to pushing any button in response to those
> annoying robocalls to "Lower Your Credit Card Rate!", "Your
> Car's Warranty May Be Expiring" and from various "Legal
> Departments" or "The IRS" that you will be arrested if you
> don't respond?
No, now, now. Be nice. I once kept one of the ‘Microsoft Support’ people
on the phone for nearly an hour. When he finally worked out that I was just
stringing him along, he lost it, and said that he was going to come and shoot
me in the forehead. I replied to the effect that he’d just made a
terroristic threat on a recorded line. He hung up. I haven’t got a
‘Microsoft support’ call since. How sad. I used to have such fun with
them. The car warranty and credit card rate people catch on much faster and
are far less fun to play with. Pity. When I don’t have time to play, I just
leave the phone alone and let them talk to themselves for a while. By the
time I get back they’ll have hung up.
(in article<2mu2ggl54pkhp65o6...@4ax.com>):
> On Wed, 28 Jul 2021 09:00:21 -0400, the following appeared
> in talk.origins, posted by Harry Krishna
> <op...@pearpimples.com>:
>
> > On Tue, 27 Jul 2021 13:40:24 -0700 (PDT), "mohammad...@gmail.com"
> > <mohammad...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Fuck you asswipe. You don't understand logic, means you don't understand
> > > any language.
> >
> > As with so many other words, you have your own personal definition of
> > "logic", and as usual, it's incoherent, so I'd have to admit that I
> > don't understand what you mean by it.
> >
> > > You literally have no clue what a personal opinion is. Why you even insist
> > > that opinions are generally not chosen.
> >
> > For probably the 20th time or more, why do you think they are? Why
> > can't or won't you answer that simple question?
> Am I alone in concluding that responding to Nando is
> equivalent to pushing any button in response to those
> annoying robocalls to "Lower Your Credit Card Rate!", "Your
> Car's Warranty May Be Expiring" and from various "Legal
> Departments" or "The IRS" that you will be arrested if you
> don't respond?
on the phone for nearly an hour. When he finally worked out that I was just
stringing him along, he lost it, and said that he was going to come and shoot
me in the forehead. I replied to the effect that he’d just made a
terroristic threat on a recorded line. He hung up. I haven’t got a
‘Microsoft support’ call since. How sad. I used to have such fun with
them. The car warranty and credit card rate people catch on much faster and
are far less fun to play with. Pity. When I don’t have time to play, I just
leave the phone alone and let them talk to themselves for a while. By the
time I get back they’ll have hung up.
Bob Casanova
Jul 29, 2021, 12:36:12 AM7/29/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Wed, 28 Jul 2021 22:23:32 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by Wolffan <akwo...@zoho.com>:
I've thought of doing something similar. In fact, there are
quite a few sources, dating back to at least the early '90s,
with "scripts" to do exactly that, but my time is too
valuable to me (at 75, I don't have much to waste) to waste
it gratifying my urge to cost these idiots *their* time,
i.e., their money. And I understand that it's been fairly
well established that *any* response will increase the
number of "this one answered" lists on which one appears.
The "do not call" list is, as should be obvious, is useless;
it is,after all, a government program.
in talk.origins, posted by Wolffan <akwo...@zoho.com>:
quite a few sources, dating back to at least the early '90s,
with "scripts" to do exactly that, but my time is too
valuable to me (at 75, I don't have much to waste) to waste
it gratifying my urge to cost these idiots *their* time,
i.e., their money. And I understand that it's been fairly
well established that *any* response will increase the
number of "this one answered" lists on which one appears.
The "do not call" list is, as should be obvious, is useless;
it is,after all, a government program.
jillery
Jul 29, 2021, 1:41:12 AM7/29/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Wed, 28 Jul 2021 22:23:32 -0400, Wolffan <akwo...@zoho.com>
wrote:
Since you mention the above, there are a number of Youtube videos of
people who have made a point of "affirmatively defending" against such
telephone scammers, in part because much of it is related to fraud.
Here's one of my favorites, where the guy returns a "glitter bomb":
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrKW58MS12g>
--
You're entitled to your own opinions.
You're not entitled to your own facts.
wrote:
people who have made a point of "affirmatively defending" against such
telephone scammers, in part because much of it is related to fraud.
Here's one of my favorites, where the guy returns a "glitter bomb":
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VrKW58MS12g>
--
You're entitled to your own opinions.
You're not entitled to your own facts.
Zen Cycle
Jul 29, 2021, 5:41:12 AM7/29/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Tuesday, July 27, 2021 at 4:41:12 PM UTC-4, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> And then that capitol police man, saying that about 20 people called him the "n-word".
> Never happened, obviously a total liar, same as all the evolutionist here are total fucking liars.
>
It's on video, you stupid fuck. In fact, it's on the video that you posted a link to weeks ago. The same video which you claimed showed 'peaceful tourists' that also showed them bashing in windows with fire extinguishers and crushing a police officer in a door.
>
> And then that capitol police man, saying that about 20 people called him the "n-word".
> Never happened, obviously a total liar, same as all the evolutionist here are total fucking liars.
>
> You all just lie, you don't give a crap about the truth.
> You give a crap about your feelings of the best.
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 29, 2021, 7:01:12 AM7/29/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
That's not on video, you goddamned liar. Fucking liar, fucking evolutionist.
Op donderdag 29 juli 2021 om 11:41:12 UTC+2 schreef funkma...@hotmail.com:
Op donderdag 29 juli 2021 om 11:41:12 UTC+2 schreef funkma...@hotmail.com:
Zen Cycle
Jul 29, 2021, 11:31:12 AM7/29/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
Just like there is no video of trump supporters ransacking the capitol, right sparky?
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 29, 2021, 11:56:12 AM7/29/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
You're a fucking liar. Goddamned evolutionists, lying all the time.
Op donderdag 29 juli 2021 om 17:31:12 UTC+2 schreef funkma...@hotmail.com:
Op donderdag 29 juli 2021 om 17:31:12 UTC+2 schreef funkma...@hotmail.com:
Zen Cycle
Jul 29, 2021, 1:31:13 PM7/29/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
You're a fucking liar. Goddamned creationists, lying all the time
Bob Casanova
Jul 29, 2021, 2:06:12 PM7/29/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 01:40:33 -0400, the following appeared
in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
Excellent! And *definitely* worth watching. Thanks!
in talk.origins, posted by jillery <69jp...@gmail.com>:
mohammad...@gmail.com
Jul 29, 2021, 2:21:12 PM7/29/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
Where's the fucking video of 20 or so people at the capitol calling some capitol police man the n-word?
Not there, fucking liar. Goddamned fucking liar.
Op donderdag 29 juli 2021 om 19:31:13 UTC+2 schreef funkma...@hotmail.com:
Not there, fucking liar. Goddamned fucking liar.
Op donderdag 29 juli 2021 om 19:31:13 UTC+2 schreef funkma...@hotmail.com:
Bob Casanova
Jul 29, 2021, 4:41:12 PM7/29/21
to talk-o...@moderators.isc.org
On Thu, 29 Jul 2021 10:26:48 -0700 (PDT), the following
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Zen Cycle
<funkma...@hotmail.com>:
> You're a fucking liar. Goddamned creationists, lying all the time
>
He is, and it's nearly a defining characteristic of him. But
mimicking his idiocy won't help
appeared in talk.origins, posted by Zen Cycle
<funkma...@hotmail.com>:
> You're a fucking liar. Goddamned creationists, lying all the time
>
mimicking his idiocy won't help
>
>On Thursday, July 29, 2021 at 11:56:12 AM UTC-4, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote:
>> You're a fucking liar. Goddamned evolutionists, lying all the time.
>
<CrapSnip>
>On Thursday, July 29, 2021 at 11:56:12 AM UTC-4, mohammad...@gmail.com wrote:
>> You're a fucking liar. Goddamned evolutionists, lying all the time.
>
0 new messages