Sceptimatics theory

  • 1903 Replies
  • 382916 Views
?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1830 on: November 01, 2013, 07:58:03 AM »
Just about all of it.

Using telescopes and math.

Telescopes to see a outer space you believe doesn't exist and math you believe is completely made up, of course.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1831 on: November 01, 2013, 07:59:22 AM »
Just about all of it.

Using telescopes and math.

Telescopes to see a outer space you believe doesn't exist and math you believe is completely made up, of course.
I'm sure you can do better than that.
I said provable.
What are you proving about looking through a telescope?

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1832 on: November 01, 2013, 08:02:58 AM »
Quote
I'm sure you can do better than that.
I said provable.

You realize provable to you isn't equal to being provable to a sane, rational person, yes?

Much of science and math is provable. You refuse to accept it.............but it doesn't change the facts.

Quote
What are you proving about looking through a telescope?

That the universe outside of Earth exist.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1833 on: November 01, 2013, 08:07:47 AM »
Quote
I'm sure you can do better than that.
I said provable.

You realize provable to you isn't equal to being provable to a sane, rational person, yes?

Much of science and math is provable. You refuse to accept it.............but it doesn't change the facts.

Quote
What are you proving about looking through a telescope?

That the universe outside of Earth exist.
A telescope does not prove a universe exists. It proves that you can MAGNIFY things at distance, that's it. Nothing more.

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1834 on: November 01, 2013, 08:14:30 AM »
Quote
A telescope does not prove a universe exists. It proves that you can MAGNIFY things at distance, that's it. Nothing more.

And what are those things that are at a distance being magnified?

Stars.......comets.........meteors.......astroids........planets.........more stars.............space debris and dust........and so on and so forth.

Put all them things together and guess what you get? A galaxy. Put together a whole bunch of galaxies and you end up with a universe.

And looking through a telescope can show you these things.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1835 on: November 01, 2013, 08:19:55 AM »
Quote
A telescope does not prove a universe exists. It proves that you can MAGNIFY things at distance, that's it. Nothing more.

And what are those things that are at a distance being magnified?

Stars.......comets.........meteors.......astroids........planets.........more stars.............space debris and dust........and so on and so forth.

Put all them things together and guess what you get? A galaxy. Put together a whole bunch of galaxies and you end up with a universe.

And looking through a telescope can show you these things.
You have no clue what those things are. You just believe they are what they are. because you were TOLD they are what they are and that's it.

You can't or won't get your head around this stuff. I mean, DUST in a supposed vacuum. Come on man.
I mean, there's no way you can be looking at reflected and refracted light, is there?

Or is there?
The truth is, you simply do not know, but because you have been schooled, you now believe they are what you are told they are and that's it, yet it cannot be physically verified to be what you think it is and that's my point.

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1836 on: November 01, 2013, 08:32:51 AM »
Quote
You have no clue what those things are. You just believe they are what they are. because you were TOLD they are what they are and that's it.

I was told a car is a car when I was little. I was told a mountain was a mountain and the ocean was the ocean.

Should I deny everything?

Quote
You can't or won't get your head around this stuff.

There is nothing to get my head around. The stuff you spew is nonsense. It's not rational or even well thought out.

Quote
I mean, DUST in a supposed vacuum. Come on man.

Please explain how there can't be dust in a vacuum.

Quote
I mean, there's no way you can be looking at reflected and refracted light, is there?

Seems highly unlikely considering you can see objects move and change over time.

Quote
Or is there?
The truth is, you simply do not know, but because you have been schooled, you now believe they are what you are told they are and that's it, yet it cannot be physically verified to be what you think it is and that's my point.

You have no point.........other than to just deny things actually exist. Sticking your head in the sand does not make the world go away.

Looking in a telescope and using math equations is physical verification.

I know there is a universe. I know the earth is an oblate spheroid. I know there are other planets in the universe and stars that light it. I know.

You continue being delusional.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1837 on: November 01, 2013, 08:34:52 AM »
Once again, Scepti hit the nail on the head!  Only idiots would spend so much time questioning a hypothesis that they disagree with.  You people have GOT to have an agenda. 

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1838 on: November 01, 2013, 09:11:52 AM »
Quote
You have no clue what those things are. You just believe they are what they are. because you were TOLD they are what they are and that's it.

I was told a car is a car when I was little. I was told a mountain was a mountain and the ocean was the ocean.

Should I deny everything?
Nobody is asking you to deny anything, just question it. Oh and you can physically touch a car and a mountain, so it's pointless bringing stuff like this into an argument. In fact I have to wonder why anyone would.
Quote
You can't or won't get your head around this stuff.
There is nothing to get my head around. The stuff you spew is nonsense. It's not rational or even well thought out.
No, it's not nonsense, it's just nonsense to you and others that cannot or will not accept any other theory but the one you had battered into your heads.

Quote
I mean, DUST in a supposed vacuum. Come on man.
Please explain how there can't be dust in a vacuum.
This should be blatantly obvious.

Quote
I mean, there's no way you can be looking at reflected and refracted light, is there?
Seems highly unlikely considering you can see objects move and change over time.
Are you saying that reflections have to be still?

Quote
The truth is, you simply do not know, but because you have been schooled, you now believe they are what you are told they are and that's it, yet it cannot be physically verified to be what you think it is and that's my point.
You have no point.........other than to just deny things actually exist. Sticking your head in the sand does not make the world go away.
If I was sticking my head in the sand I would not be questioning anything. Who's actually sticking their heads in the sand? Not me!

Looking in a telescope and using math equations is physical verification.
Forget about your text books and start from scratch and you now only have a telescope and a pen and paper as your friends. Tell me how you go about calculating what you see through your telescope.

I know there is a universe. I know the earth is an oblate spheroid. I know there are other planets in the universe and stars that light it. I know.
You know what you've been told to know and that's it.

You continue being delusional.
I'll continue to question, always.

Basically you are a mimic for the establishment.

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1839 on: November 01, 2013, 09:51:59 AM »
Quote
Nobody is asking you to deny anything, just question it. Oh and you can physically touch a car and a mountain, so it's pointless bringing stuff like this into an argument. In fact I have to wonder why anyone would.

The entire basis of science is questioning everything. Man looked to the sky and found the stars and the other planets because he questioned his own existence and why he was here.

Science continues to question everything which is why research continues and why every day new ground is broken in physics.

And by questioning.........I mean doing actual research. Not bringing up ridiculous "theories" on a message board you couldn't possibly begin to back up with anything credible.

You claim to question things..........but you lack any actual understanding of what you are trying to question. You're an ignorant fool, in a nutshell.

Quote
No, it's not nonsense, it's just nonsense to you and others that cannot or will not accept any other theory but the one you had battered into your heads.

It is nonsense. It's the very definition of nonsense in that IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

I can't accept a theory that is backed by something credible or logical. Nothing you say has credibility or logic.

Quote
This should be blatantly obvious.

The only thing blatantly obvious is your ignorance.

Quote
If I was sticking my head in the sand I would not be questioning anything. Who's actually sticking their heads in the sand? Not me!

To question something is to do research and experiments and find out if it is true or false.

That isn't what you're doing.

You're simply saying everyone else is wrong, you refuse to experiment, and insert your own "reality" instead. By the very definition of the term...........you are sticking your head in the sand and pretending the outside world no longer exist.

Quote
Are you saying that reflections have to be still?

Certainly not. I'm saying continued observation, and logical thought, will prove they aren't reflections. I'd explain logical thought to you but you wouldn't get it.

Quote
Forget about your text books and start from scratch and you now only have a telescope and a pen and paper as your friends. Tell me how you go about calculating what you see through your telescope.

If I didn't have textbooks, knowledge of math, or had been taught what I have been taught..............I'd simply be like our early ancestors. Looking to the sky with an open mind and observing that I see. Over time I'd form an opinion and pass it down for people younger than I to continue on.

Many of our early ancestors, certainly my early ancestors for sure being as I am Egyptian by blood, knew the Earth was round. They didn't have the calculations we have now..........there was no "NASA conspiracy" then. But they looked to the sky and figured things out.

Quote
You know what you've been told to know and that's it.

No different than being told 2+2 is 4 and accepting it. Because 2+2 does in fact equal 4 and the Earth is infact an oblate spheroid.

Quote
I'll continue to question, always.

No........you're continue to deny and reject without basis.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1840 on: November 01, 2013, 09:54:52 AM »
Quote
Nobody is asking you to deny anything, just question it. Oh and you can physically touch a car and a mountain, so it's pointless bringing stuff like this into an argument. In fact I have to wonder why anyone would.

The entire basis of science is questioning everything. Man looked to the sky and found the stars and the other planets because he questioned his own existence and why he was here.

Science continues to question everything which is why research continues and why every day new ground is broken in physics.

And by questioning.........I mean doing actual research. Not bringing up ridiculous "theories" on a message board you couldn't possibly begin to back up with anything credible.

You claim to question things..........but you lack any actual understanding of what you are trying to question. You're an ignorant fool, in a nutshell.

Quote
No, it's not nonsense, it's just nonsense to you and others that cannot or will not accept any other theory but the one you had battered into your heads.

It is nonsense. It's the very definition of nonsense in that IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

I can't accept a theory that is backed by something credible or logical. Nothing you say has credibility or logic.

Quote
This should be blatantly obvious.

The only thing blatantly obvious is your ignorance.

Quote
If I was sticking my head in the sand I would not be questioning anything. Who's actually sticking their heads in the sand? Not me!

To question something is to do research and experiments and find out if it is true or false.

That isn't what you're doing.

You're simply saying everyone else is wrong, you refuse to experiment, and insert your own "reality" instead. By the very definition of the term...........you are sticking your head in the sand and pretending the outside world no longer exist.

Quote
Are you saying that reflections have to be still?

Certainly not. I'm saying continued observation, and logical thought, will prove they aren't reflections. I'd explain logical thought to you but you wouldn't get it.

Quote
Forget about your text books and start from scratch and you now only have a telescope and a pen and paper as your friends. Tell me how you go about calculating what you see through your telescope.

If I didn't have textbooks, knowledge of math, or had been taught what I have been taught..............I'd simply be like our early ancestors. Looking to the sky with an open mind and observing that I see. Over time I'd form an opinion and pass it down for people younger than I to continue on.

Many of our early ancestors, certainly my early ancestors for sure being as I am Egyptian by blood, knew the Earth was round. They didn't have the calculations we have now..........there was no "NASA conspiracy" then. But they looked to the sky and figured things out.

Quote
You know what you've been told to know and that's it.

No different than being told 2+2 is 4 and accepting it. Because 2+2 does in fact equal 4 and the Earth is infact an oblate spheroid.

Quote
I'll continue to question, always.

No........you're continue to deny and reject without basis.
Rip up your space text books and start again. If you want an open mind, this is what you need to do. If you want to stay brainwashed, then carry on with what you are doing.

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1841 on: November 01, 2013, 09:57:16 AM »
Quote
Rip up your space text books and start again. If you want an open mind, this is what you need to do. If you want to stay brainwashed, then carry on with what you are doing.

Having an open mind is what drew me to science in the first place. Continuing to have an open mind is what makes science my favorite subject.

Because science questions everything, including itself. Non stop.

You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1842 on: November 01, 2013, 09:59:31 AM »
Quote
Rip up your space text books and start again. If you want an open mind, this is what you need to do. If you want to stay brainwashed, then carry on with what you are doing.

Having an open mind is what drew me to science in the first place. Continuing to have an open mind is what makes science my favorite subject.

Because science questions everything, including itself. Non stop.
And yet you are steadfastly refusing to question the earth you live on and what you are told space is.

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1843 on: November 01, 2013, 10:03:18 AM »
No reason to question it.

I've seen pictures and video of it from space.

And I'm not a completely mad lunatic that things outer space doesn't actually exist and NASA is just some ridiculously thought up conspiracy that was designed to steal money.


I question a lot of things in life. Politics and the inner workings behind government chief among them. Motives of organizations like the CIA or Mossad and others. Wars and terror acts designed at grabbing for money and oil.

I see no reason to question the shape of the Earth. For one, I've seen evidence of it. Evidence has existed for quite some time. All the science that goes into it adds up together and makes great sense. Plus..........did I mention I've seen it?
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1844 on: November 01, 2013, 10:10:58 AM »
Ugh, why do you respond to Um, Scepti?  His non-stop personal attacks and lack of substantial content is so annoying to read.  Go post on another thread Um, just go away.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1845 on: November 01, 2013, 10:11:07 AM »
No reason to question it.

I've seen pictures and video of it from space.

And I'm not a completely mad lunatic that things outer space doesn't actually exist and NASA is just some ridiculously thought up conspiracy that was designed to steal money.


I question a lot of things in life. Politics and the inner workings behind government chief among them. Motives of organizations like the CIA or Mossad and others. Wars and terror acts designed at grabbing for money and oil.

I see no reason to question the shape of the Earth. For one, I've seen evidence of it. Evidence has existed for quite some time. All the science that goes into it adds up together and makes great sense. Plus..........did I mention I've seen it?
Seen what? I'm intrigued. Tell me what you have physically seen.

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1846 on: November 01, 2013, 10:13:49 AM »
Quote
Ugh, why do you respond to Um, Scepti?  His non-stop personal attacks and lack of substantial content is so annoying to read.  Go post on another thread Um, just go away.

How bout no?
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1847 on: November 01, 2013, 10:14:30 AM »
Ugh, why do you respond to Um, Scepti?  His non-stop personal attacks and lack of substantial content is so annoying to read.  Go post on another thread Um, just go away.
Yes, I realise he gets frustrated and irate and he feels that the only way to get his point across is to try and ridicule and intimidate and FAILS. lol
Ten a penny these kids. Ten a penny.

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1848 on: November 01, 2013, 10:15:10 AM »
Quote
Seen what? I'm intrigued. Tell me what you have physically seen.

The Earth from space via pictures and video.

Pictures and video I see no reason to question and logic dictates the likelihood they could be fake are likely less than .00000001%.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1849 on: November 01, 2013, 10:17:55 AM »
Quote
Seen what? I'm intrigued. Tell me what you have physically seen.

The Earth from space via pictures and video.

Pictures and video I see no reason to question and logic dictates the likelihood they could be fake are likely less than .00000001%.
Well that's one hell of a calculation based on absolutely nothing. You mentioned to me that you had seen it. Have you now decided that it's just videos and pictures, because I was under the impression that you were about to turn into an Astronaut but thought better of it.

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1850 on: November 01, 2013, 10:18:26 AM »
Quote
Yes, I realise he gets frustrated and irate and he feels that the only way to get his point across is to try and ridicule and intimidate and FAILS. lol
Ten a penny these kids. Ten a penny.

For one, when have I ever tried to intimidate?

I ridicule, successfully I might add, because you and your boyfriend earthisaspaceship quite frankly deserve it. Your ignorance shows no end and I find it distasteful that you try to argue science despite having no knowledge in the field. I'm am certainly no scientist and I've seen a big handful of posters on this board that have more knowledge than I do but at the very least I can argue on a lot of the subjects because I have at least studied them.

The best you seem to be able to do is present a vague wikipedia driven type of knowledge that wouldn't hold up in a third grade debate. And earthisaspaceship might be one of the dumbest guys I've ever seen on a message board.
« Last Edit: November 01, 2013, 10:21:45 AM by Umurweird »
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1851 on: November 01, 2013, 10:21:13 AM »

Quote
Well that's one hell of a calculation based on absolutely nothing.

Pictures and video are physical evidence.

Quote
You mentioned to me that you had seen it.


Yes. Via pictures and video. Perhaps you missed where I said that? Or just purposely ignored it so you could argue against it in futility?

Quote
Have you now decided that it's just videos and pictures,

I never said it was anything to the contrary.

Quote
because I was under the impression that you were about to turn into an Astronaut but thought better of it.

Nice argument. Sadly you fall flat on your face. Must hurt.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1852 on: November 01, 2013, 10:22:11 AM »
Quote
Yes, I realise he gets frustrated and irate and he feels that the only way to get his point across is to try and ridicule and intimidate and FAILS. lol
Ten a penny these kids. Ten a penny.

For one, when have I ever tried to intimidate?

I ridicule, successfully I might add, because you are your boyfriend earthisaspaceship quite frankly deserve it. Your ignorance shows no end and I find it distasteful that you try to argue science despite having no knowledge in the field. I'm am certainly no scientist and I've seen a big handful of posters on this board that have more knowledge than I do but at the very least I can argue on a lot of the subjects because I have at least studied them.

The best you seem to be able to do is present a vague wikipedia driven type of knowledge that wouldn't hold up in a third grade debate. And earthisaspaceship might be one of the dumbest guys I've ever seen on a message board.
Is this where you want to end up? If this is how you plan on going on, you might as well take a back seat, because tit for tat will get you nowhere and doesn't add to anything, so let's not get into it.
You can pm me or put something in the angry rant section if you're feeling really irate and flustered, if you feel the need to get it all off your little chest.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1853 on: November 01, 2013, 10:23:54 AM »

Quote
Well that's one hell of a calculation based on absolutely nothing.

Pictures and video are physical evidence.

Quote
You mentioned to me that you had seen it.


Yes. Via pictures and video. Perhaps you missed where I said that? Or just purposely ignored it so you could argue against it in futility?

Quote
Have you now decided that it's just videos and pictures,

I never said it was anything to the contrary.

Quote
because I was under the impression that you were about to turn into an Astronaut but thought better of it.

Nice argument. Sadly you fall flat on your face. Must hurt.
I've see Armageddon and deep impact. Good films for entertainment. Are they real?

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1854 on: November 01, 2013, 10:25:45 AM »
Quote
Is this where you want to end up?  If this is how you plan on going on, you might as well take a back seat, because tit for tat will get you nowhere and doesn't add to anything, so let's not get into it.
 


The fact that you ignored a whole post of mine at the top of this page and tried to change the subject proves my point exactly. So I'd safely say tit for tat and I have the upper hand.

You're free to run away with your tail between your legs anytime but my guess is you're far too ignorant, and certainly too dense, to do so.

Quote
You can pm me or put something in the angry rant section if you're feeling really irate and flustered, if you feel the need to get it all off your little chest.

I'd much rather sit here and argue science and logical thought with you. I realize it's mainly one sided due to the fact you are unable to process logical thought and have next to no understanding of science but I'm more than willing to debate you.

I see no need to PM. I'm have no problem putting all the words I need to say right out in the open.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1855 on: November 01, 2013, 10:25:58 AM »
Quote
Yes, I realise he gets frustrated and irate and he feels that the only way to get his point across is to try and ridicule and intimidate and FAILS. lol
Ten a penny these kids. Ten a penny.

For one, when have I ever tried to intimidate?

I ridicule, successfully I might add, because you and your boyfriend earthisaspaceship quite frankly deserve it. Your ignorance shows no end and I find it distasteful that you try to argue science despite having no knowledge in the field. I'm am certainly no scientist and I've seen a big handful of posters on this board that have more knowledge than I do but at the very least I can argue on a lot of the subjects because I have at least studied them.

The best you seem to be able to do is present a vague wikipedia driven type of knowledge that wouldn't hold up in a third grade debate. And earthisaspaceship might be one of the dumbest guys I've ever seen on a message board.
HAHAHA, funny....see more personal attacks.  Lowlife tactics.  You, like many REs here are the ignorant ones.  Unobservant.  I am a woman.  My profile and my avatar stated this before I recently changed it.

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1856 on: November 01, 2013, 10:27:50 AM »
Quote
I've see Armageddon and deep impact. Good films for entertainment. Are they real?

No, they are movies.

I've seen videos of Earth and pictures of Earth taken from satelliite and spacecraft.

Just as I've seen video of war.........such as videos of World War 2. But that doesn't make Saving Private Ryan real, does it?


Terrible argument. Lacking any logical thought whatsoever.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1857 on: November 01, 2013, 10:28:26 AM »
Quote
Is this where you want to end up?  If this is how you plan on going on, you might as well take a back seat, because tit for tat will get you nowhere and doesn't add to anything, so let's not get into it.
 


The fact that you ignored a whole post of mine at the top of this page and tried to change the subject proves my point exactly. So I'd safely say tit for tat and I have the upper hand.

You're free to run away with your tail between your legs anytime but my guess is you're far too ignorant, and certainly too dense, to do so.

Quote
You can pm me or put something in the angry rant section if you're feeling really irate and flustered, if you feel the need to get it all off your little chest.

I'd much rather sit here and argue science and logical thought with you. I realize it's mainly one sided due to the fact you are unable to process logical thought and have next to no understanding of science but I'm more than willing to debate you.

I see no need to PM. I'm have no problem putting all the words I need to say right out in the open.
Well next time you feel like crying like a little kid, please use the rant or pm.
Anyway, enough of that:
So, what where we talking about, again?

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1858 on: November 01, 2013, 10:28:37 AM »
The fact that a movie about space can be made in no way is evidence that photographs and videos from space must be fake.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa

?

Umurweird

  • 796
  • +0/-0
Re: Sceptimatics theory
« Reply #1859 on: November 01, 2013, 10:30:30 AM »
Quote
Well next time you feel like crying like a little kid, please use the rant or pm.

Please point out where I was crying.

All my words will always be put out in the open. I don't do PMs. I haven't ranted on anything here. I am debating you word for word. Please show where I have done otherwise.

Quote
So, what where we talking about, again?

Scroll up and read again.
You did not ask me for logic.  You asked for my opinion. - Jroa