No, they're useless because human memories are so easy to manipulate. If you make a comment about something unusual (but nonexistent) about a suspect in a fake crime, you can bet your ass most of the witnesses will "remember" it. They may not even believe you when you bring the fake criminal into the room. Doesn't matter if they were panicked or not. Not to mention that you can mis-attribute aspects of some memories to others.
If panicked is not the right word, there are plenty others. Suffice to say, your mind altered what you've seen to exaggerate it or stretch the truth of the situation, or, say, that was an illusion. We all know you want to kill yourself. Stop bringing it into threads.
Seeing is believing means you judge everything by what you see, bringing thought in as a secondary judgment, in other words "Judging books by their cover", in other words "I am not twisting your words. You yourself are twisting your own words"
No, none of us won the argument, you yourself just killed yours.
.
Yes, "seeing is believing" and "my eyes don't lie to me" are two COMPLETELY different things.
Not an insult as much as failing to respond to a point made and instead telling another to delude himself with victory.
Science is very fool proof. It only falls short in areas humans don't yet have the technology to test. Also, the humans conducting scientific experiments are certainly almost the polar opposite of fool-proof.
Stop and think about what a "thought" is. Just a surge of electricity along conductive materials. Electricity comes with a magnetic field. While it is several many, many, [HIGHLIGHT]many[/code], hundred kinds of unlikely, it could theoretically be possible for those patterns of electromagnetic currents to be imprinted on something (or for them to leave some sort of electromagnetic mark), and for those patterns of electromagnetic currents to be noticed by someone passing by. If ghosts are real, that's what it is.
Like existence.
Ouija, not wuigi.
Like existence.
Yeah. Greek myths, flat earths, and (my belief) psychics are all falsified acts of science.
It's a brain.
A spirit is a hypothetical entity and should not be assumed as already existing unless with valid reason to do so.
.
Your mistake Ouija then.
He dropped the bait. You bit it damn well hard. He's sprinkling in his vulgarities into his posts because you take it so well. He's not an immature child getting a cheap rush from saying fuck. He's an immature child getting a cheap rush from seeing you overreact.
Fuck
By definition, science is foolproof. Maybe our understanding of it isn't, but science itself is.
That was directed at everybody in this thread, and prompted by the text in the quote. It wasn't me telling you off for being an idiot or something, I'm sorry you took it that way. Also, your thought patterns are who you are, effectively the core of your being. Is it really that much of a stretch to believe that ghosts are imprints of human thought-patterns? It's a semi-plausible manner for it to scientifically occur.
Because you insist on being so touchy about it. I'm distracting any focus you may have had on what's being discussed with one word (actually several, but the one I've been using is [HIGHLIGHT]fuck[/code]), and you shouldn't be letting me. You're almost spending as much time being irate about me cursing as you are being irate about the rest of my post.
Science is foolproof, what we learn from it/do with it isn't. Is that any better?
I'm assuming you haven't seen many of my posts in which I don't curse, but when I curse, it's about strong emphasis. As long as that gets across, I couldn't really care less how it affects your opinion of me.
My understanding of science is that it is by definition fool-proof, although you may not because of how you view science.
I'm assuming that have different ideas about what "science" is. To me, science is the established facts that explain how our universe works, what we do with those facts (properly) to improve our knowledge of those facts and others, and the processes used to establish theories as either true or false. Viewed like that, it's foolproof, but what we do with it and (think) learn from it isn't. I'm sorry for not realizing we probably view science differently sooner.
If you don't care, drop it. Please.
You think it isn't. Lifestyles are really what determines that, we obviously lead rather different ones. I also invite you to notice that I wasn't the first one to throw in a useless curse in this thread.
I honestly have no idea how to reply to what SuPa- said, because for the most part it's probably true. I'd like to say I don't troll/flame unless people make big openings for it, but I'm pretty sure I don't spam very much outside of _.
Kudos to you, SuPa- for interrupting our debate with completely off topic spam, being a hypocrite, making unsupported facts, confusing detailed debate for forcing opinions on others, and posting a site that wasn't funny the first time you posted it, and still isn't funny the third time you post it. Indeed, you utterly fail.
As I said before, just about everyone's a hypocrite. So... calling someone else a hypocrite as an insult (which you were probably doing... once again, flaming) is pretty null
There's a difference that you obviously can't see. You don't force feed information in a debate, you give them the information and if there is no valid rebuttal, you win. Whether they've learned something or not from it is none of your concern because you have established a precedent. Not only that, but you've displayed it in such a derogatory manner, it's really hard to see you as anything near civil.
Do you know what the purpose of a debate, and a trial, is for that matter? It's to inform others, the jury if you're in a trial, of the facts, and strip away things you know aren't true. You obviously don't understand the art of debating, seeing as you believe it's just "ROFL I GIV MY THOT N DEN NO THINK NEMORE". Debates give us a chance to think about another person's displayed facts and reconsider what you think.
I never denied trolling in this thread, because I've been lately losing patience with those, and therefore feel the need to display things in a sadistic, or sarcastic, manner. Notice how I haven't been going on a tyrade against debating users, however.
As for "unsupported facts" part of my statement is completely supported. Teh_Ephy agreed with me. Please read up on the thread before causing more interruptions in this "detailed debate"[/quote
That's not what I mean about supported, and you obviously don't know that. What I mean about supported is giving examples of such excessive spam, flaming, and trolling, that calls for us deserving to get banned any more than you. Furthermore, Ephy is not my mother, nor is he my clone or my pimp. I think I can think some things without his consent.
Okay then. Go get yourself banned, seeing as you have been debating OUR deservance of getting banned, and is therefore trying to force your view on me, and, as you said, you've trolled, flamed, and spammed before as well.BTW, complaining in a thread about another person spamming IS spamming
It was obviously an attempt at looking creative, which failed because it has been posted on this site for the fuckteenth time, not to mention it was as uncivilized as the activity you find bannable.
Yup. Hit n run posting is definitely the new fad of nettiquette.
ZOMG ELENAI FORS VEW ON UTHRS! BAN!
I've calmed down a bit. Sock it to me, baby.
Horrible? That was the best damn steak I've had in my life. But the phrase in the end of my post has been a result of purposeful grammatical error, which almost all parties have partaken in, as you obviously see. Oh, and I directed no anger at you. I love you.
<3
You were debating, of which supa defines as forcing views on others, which he defines as bannable.
Love you too, but my point was made in the previous statement.
You've been saying that for a long time. How about enforcing it?
) After all I am arrogant.
Perspectives are thoroughly opinionated, and therefore moot.
I could have made a joke there, but it isn't exactly family friendly.
You're only his "ally" because he's against us. In fact, what he condones is against you too."Stop kissing his ass."
--I am not kissing his ass, He is an internet friend and an ally, And I never kiss up (sept to mods and Ralle
Bear.
Oooh, smite me oh mighty smiter of smiteness. <3=sideways heart.
Ok.
uhh, you support supa and then laugh at his theory? wow. you keep saying this discussion is over, then you come crawling back for more. indeed, you are laughable.
Perspectives are nothing but opinions, and therefore there is no correct perspective.
Oooh, I'm immature. That hurts so much coming from a person that himself said no matter what valid proof someone offers, you will remain concrete on the subject of stem cell research.
Yes, but you were thoroughly agreeing with his statements, most of which has logic that can apply to you deserving to be banned.
Smite me hmmmz.
SuPa's theory was what I offered, and then you laughed at me for reiterating it. You therefore are laughing at his theory.
I don't see the "polit" part of it, and yes, you are crawling back for more. You continuously say this conversation is over, then come back every time I say something. If you shoot the horse, you don't beat it afterwards.
Ok, I take that back. You're shooting the horse, then beating it, then shooting it again, and you're probably going to beat it some more after I make this reply.
And so are you.
It wasn't correct, it was efficient in the eyes of the people, in other words, widely accepted.
Murder? I think you must be in the wrong server. Try Mok'Nathal.
He defined debating as "forcing your opinion on people", and you are therefore banworthy.
Redirect to upper statement.
You lose.Elenai said:
I give a statement, it's an insult. You give a statement, it's polite. I see.
Yeah.
*cough*
Reroute to the other thread.
You haven't given any valid reason as to why you are different from us debating, of which supa defines as forcing your opinion on others.
I'll reply to this in the statement below.
Hold on.. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA *gasp for breath* HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Now is this the REAL last time, or is there going to be a sequel, like the rest of the "last times".
You are a dickhead. That wasn't an insult, I was telling the truth about yourself.
You say that after supa's little tyrade?
But you put such nice situations for it.
Rofl that's ironic. Usually people who refuse to step down do just that.
Sorta odd how you say it's over... over and over again.
You too <3
