There is nothing I need to add to that. Perfect example of liberal elitism. You dont even accept the possibility that your position is not right, heh heh.


And, naturally, only the people who agree with you have real smarts. Uh huh....



Dictionary.com is your friend:

Are you saying this does not describe you?


I didnt used to think so. But you are now claiming that morals should not determine our actions (IOW, they are invalid). So apparently I know at least one.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

Nah, missed the point there.....

You gotta UNDERSTAND my position first, before you can evaluate it.

Glitch, is DELIBERATELY preventing himself, from trying to UNDERSTAND.

THAT, is the result of "orthodoxy".

It would be, what I call, the "ostrich" mentality.




No, I expect you to investigate the model before you start talking nonsense about it.

I can tell, if you've checked it out.

I can tell by the words you use, to "report".

If you're gonna be an idiot and spout nonsense into my face, I'm gonna call you on it EVERY TIME.

But if your words make sense, then I'll consider them to be "intelligent", right?

Well, yes - but it only has "colloquial" meanings, which are often "imprecise".


Not sure. Largely irrelevant though.


I claimed nothing of the sort. See, you're "not understanding the model".

You see, in that little diagram I drew for you (don't remember where exactly it was now, but it's in one of these posts somewhere), I showed you EXACTLY how this works, so like, the statement you just made there, would DIRECTLY CONTRADICT what I showed you in that picture, correct?

So, like, try to UNDERSTAND the model, first. 'Kay? And I mean, I'll EXPLAIN it to you, if you have any questions or anything I'll do my best to help.

But I mean - really, check it out. It explains a lot of stuff that the "orthodox" model doesn't.

So if I dont tell you what you want to hear, it must mean I dont understand it. Uh huh.


Do whatever makes you feel better. Either you are not being clear or you are simply unhappy with my response.


Flattery is irrelevant. I dont really care whether or not you think I am smart. I am not here to make friends or impress people.


You are asking me what a word means...why not just ask the dictionary and skip the middle man?



Not in this context.


Maybe you just aren't explaining it very well. Perhaps you should put more effort into your explanation and less effort into attempting to sound clever and funny.

Not an insult, just constructive criticism.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

Dude, I even drew you a picture. What do you want from me?

I can't do math on this stupid keyboard, and you probably wouldn't read it anyway, so.....

I even tried pointing you to "background material" so you could get some "core concepts" in some important areas.....

But I mean, all I'm hearing out of you is, "I'm right so therefore there's no need for further study".

And I mean - okay, you know, I can't clobber you over the head with it. But I mean, you're obviously reaching erroneous and contradictory conclusions from whatever model you're using "now", so....

I'm not gonna sit here and argue with you, but I will be able to tell if you're actually taking this seriously or not, and if not, you know... your loss, right?

All that means is, you're gonna know the same thing tomorrow as you did today (ie you won't have learned anything).

A clear explanation without all the cutesy veiled insults, clever quips, and other irrelevant minutia. That is what I want from you.


Convince me that it is worth my time. You have a history of making up your own definitions on here, so I am understandably skeptical.


If you really believe that, why are you wasting your time responding to me at all?


Apparently you are. You keep saying that, and then you keep responding anyway. Your actions are not consistent with your words.


Not a huge loss apparently.


That is incorrect. The fact that I will not have learned anything from YOU does not necessarily mean I have not learned anything.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

Yeah, that's pretty typical.

That's where the moralist goes when he's backed into a corner.

He puts the blinders on, and deliberately keeps himself in ignorance.

"Convnice me it's worth my time"....

Nah, dude, I can't help you, with an attitude like that......

I'll be sure to remind you of that the next time some loopy white supreamist posts a link to his "evidence" and you refuse to read all of it. Hypocrite.

__________________
My Political Blog (Last post Feb 14) - My MySpace Page

So, hm.... now you're projecting "behavior", as well as morality.

[quote=nonsqtr;411239]Yeah, that's pretty typical.

He puts the blinders on, and deliberately keeps himself in ignorance.[quote]

When a self-proclaimed man of God moralist screws up it's not the same as a sinner who hasn't found Jesus who screws up - there is a double standard.

Of course, they keep on sending Creflo Dollar all their cash.....

It doesn't, the FEDs are just using it as the excuse to gain access to everyone's telecom records. They know they can't justify it through normal "Probable Cause" and get a Legal Warrant so they ask the Companies to hand over their call records En Mass and they run the Data Wholesale. You know something is wrong when your told that your being searched for your own protection. There's something coming down the pike and they'll need the ability to run our records, so now they got them in advance. This Law will apply in other areas, and we won't know about it because there is now a legal precedent and therefore, there will be no public debate.