What do RE and FE agree on?

  • 55 Replies
  • 1155 Views
*

Jura-Glenlivet II

  • 1543
  • Will I still be perfect tomorrow?
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #30 on: March 13, 2019, 03:36:10 AM »
You see! A FE'r and a RE'r arguing (wrongly) against a RE'r about Lasagne ingredients, but all fundamentally agreeing about Lasagne, are there any Lasagne haters here?
Because if not, John should rename this place  Everyone Venerates Italian lasagne,  it would bring a whole new section of people to argue with, just make it a rule backed by insta-ban that the first rule of Lasagne club is we don’t talk about lasagne, confusion would reign.

Quote
“I joined a forum about Lasagne the other day and they have proof that Qantas is murdering it’s passengers”


Quote
“I argued that crushed walnuts and cottage cheese have no place in a Lasagne and got perma-banned!”

Quote
“Why do Italian food fanatics have such a problem with gravity and Elon Musk”
« Last Edit: March 13, 2019, 03:48:54 AM by Jura-Glenlivet II »
Eagles may soar high, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #31 on: March 13, 2019, 09:13:39 AM »
We both agree that as much truth as one can be had can be discerned through experience.

Many more truths can be had than simply those which can be experienced. For example, we can't experience radio waves, building the pyramids of Egypt, geometry, or what another person is feeling. Nonetheless, these truths are evident.
I disagree; the only way we know anything - whether its about radio or history or geometry is through sense experience. That and mysticism.

Really? Do you claim to possess some unique extraordinary sense of radio waves which is not shared by any other human beings?

That's easy enough to test with a simple experiment where I have a radio transmitter and you have no receiver at all except just your own senses. I will transmit at random intervals and you will indicate when I am transmitting or not.

Please forgive me for being skeptical but I am dubious of you (or anyone's) ability to pass this test.

"The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 15202
  • Quantum Ab Hoc
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #32 on: March 13, 2019, 09:15:42 AM »
We both agree that as much truth as one can be had can be discerned through experience.

Many more truths can be had than simply those which can be experienced. For example, we can't experience radio waves, building the pyramids of Egypt, geometry, or what another person is feeling. Nonetheless, these truths are evident.
I disagree; the only way we know anything - whether its about radio or history or geometry is through sense experience. That and mysticism.

Really? Do you claim to possess some unique extraordinary sense of radio waves which is not shared by any other human beings?

That's easy enough to test with a simple experiment where I have a radio transmitter and you have no receiver at all except just your own senses. I will transmit at random intervals and you will indicate when I am transmitting or not.

Please forgive me for being skeptical but I am dubious of you (or anyone's) ability to pass this test.


How do you read the results of the radio receiver without use of your eyes, ears, or touch? I imagine you use ESP?
[John Davis is a DANGEROUS TERRORIST who MAKES US LOOK BAD

Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #33 on: March 13, 2019, 10:50:29 AM »
I disagree.
It doesn't look flat in the slightest.
At the small scale there are plenty of variations with hills and mountains and buildings.
Far too much to consider it as flat.

What I would agree with is that at that level you will not see the curvature of Earth.

You clearly have never been to my country.  ;)

*

rabinoz

  • 19933
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #34 on: March 13, 2019, 04:03:38 PM »
I disagree.
It doesn't look flat in the slightest.
At the small scale there are plenty of variations with hills and mountains and buildings.
Far too much to consider it as flat.

What I would agree with is that at that level you will not see the curvature of Earth.

You clearly have never been to my country.  ;)
I thought you had "met" dutchy ;D?
Look what he writes:
I lived at sea for the first 18 years of my life.
I personally never saw a ship going over a bulge and have never heard anyone claim he/she did who actually lived near the beach...to the contrary.
I heard many testimonies of ships going to the port of IJmuiden far underneath earth's supposed curvature if you do the math.

Where i lived (The Netherlands) the sea traffic was huge going in and out the port of Rotterdam and several smaller ports lined up at the coast.
Sure in school i heard the story about shipmast going over an imaginary bulge, but was never ever remotely capable of seeing this feature myself.
At the beach we had strong fixed tourists binoculars aiming at the horizon after you throwed in a coin.
No...no ships gradually going over the horizon.Only time your vision playes tricks with you is during a raw sea with high waves.
What more telling was that most oil tankers seem to float upon the horizon....a strange sighting indeed,
Since a decade we plant these windmill parcs in open sea in the Netherlands and they are obscured from the general public because those going to the beach prefer an open sea sighting...politics you know....
Two years ago people started to call the local news because the horizon was filled with windmills all of a sudden.
It turned out to be an unique day with unique vision that once so often occurs.

Do we really have to go over that extremely childish perception of ships going over a bulge while nothing of the sorts ever happens for people like me who looked to the horizon thousends of times ?

Do you live near the beach or do you solely rely on the internet for your ''bulge'' proof ?
But "our dutchy" couldn't be convinced of any curvature if you took him to the ISS.

JackBlack and I are convinced that the earth is a Globe but claim that at sea-level there so little curvature on the horizon that it cannot be seen.

Walter Bislan has written a very good Curvature App for the Simulation of Globe-Earth and Flat-Earth.
This allows a comparison of the expected horizon curve (and much more) on both the Globe and a Flat Earth. It's worth a look.

Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #35 on: March 14, 2019, 12:04:56 AM »
I disagree.
It doesn't look flat in the slightest.
At the small scale there are plenty of variations with hills and mountains and buildings.
Far too much to consider it as flat.

What I would agree with is that at that level you will not see the curvature of Earth.

You clearly have never been to my country.  ;)
I thought you had "met" dutchy ;D?
Look what he writes:
I lived at sea for the first 18 years of my life.
I personally never saw a ship going over a bulge and have never heard anyone claim he/she did who actually lived near the beach...to the contrary.
I heard many testimonies of ships going to the port of IJmuiden far underneath earth's supposed curvature if you do the math.

Where i lived (The Netherlands) the sea traffic was huge going in and out the port of Rotterdam and several smaller ports lined up at the coast.
Sure in school i heard the story about shipmast going over an imaginary bulge, but was never ever remotely capable of seeing this feature myself.
At the beach we had strong fixed tourists binoculars aiming at the horizon after you throwed in a coin.
No...no ships gradually going over the horizon.Only time your vision playes tricks with you is during a raw sea with high waves.
What more telling was that most oil tankers seem to float upon the horizon....a strange sighting indeed,
Since a decade we plant these windmill parcs in open sea in the Netherlands and they are obscured from the general public because those going to the beach prefer an open sea sighting...politics you know....
Two years ago people started to call the local news because the horizon was filled with windmills all of a sudden.
It turned out to be an unique day with unique vision that once so often occurs.

Do we really have to go over that extremely childish perception of ships going over a bulge while nothing of the sorts ever happens for people like me who looked to the horizon thousends of times ?

Do you live near the beach or do you solely rely on the internet for your ''bulge'' proof ?
But "our dutchy" couldn't be convinced of any curvature if you took him to the ISS.

JackBlack and I are convinced that the earth is a Globe but claim that at sea-level there so little curvature on the horizon that it cannot be seen.

Walter Bislan has written a very good Curvature App for the Simulation of Globe-Earth and Flat-Earth.
This allows a comparison of the expected horizon curve (and much more) on both the Globe and a Flat Earth. It's worth a look.

I live near the town of IJmuiden (could walk it) and have seen ships disappear bottom first over the horizon. Maybe he could use some new glasses. I have not met him but to be fair I don't think many FErs will be telling anybody IRL that they believe in the FE. So meeting one is quite hard  :)

Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #36 on: March 14, 2019, 08:56:32 AM »
We both agree that as much truth as one can be had can be discerned through experience.

Many more truths can be had than simply those which can be experienced. For example, we can't experience radio waves, building the pyramids of Egypt, geometry, or what another person is feeling. Nonetheless, these truths are evident.
I disagree; the only way we know anything - whether its about radio or history or geometry is through sense experience. That and mysticism.

Really? Do you claim to possess some unique extraordinary sense of radio waves which is not shared by any other human beings?

That's easy enough to test with a simple experiment where I have a radio transmitter and you have no receiver at all except just your own senses. I will transmit at random intervals and you will indicate when I am transmitting or not.

Please forgive me for being skeptical but I am dubious of you (or anyone's) ability to pass this test.


How do you read the results of the radio receiver without use of your eyes, ears, or touch? I imagine you use ESP?

You actually proved my point. There are truths which can't be experienced directly with the senses and can only be demonstrated indirectly by some other means. When you hear sounds coming from your radio you are hearing sounds from your radio. You aren't directly sensing radio waves with your body's radio ESP. You are hearing an analog representation of radio waves after they have been converted to sound with the aid of an external apparatus which does have a sense of radio waves even though you do not.

"The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

*

Jura-Glenlivet II

  • 1543
  • Will I still be perfect tomorrow?
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #37 on: March 14, 2019, 09:51:25 AM »

What the hell has this got to do with Lasagne?
Eagles may soar high, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 15202
  • Quantum Ab Hoc
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #38 on: March 14, 2019, 10:09:10 AM »
We both agree that as much truth as one can be had can be discerned through experience.

Many more truths can be had than simply those which can be experienced. For example, we can't experience radio waves, building the pyramids of Egypt, geometry, or what another person is feeling. Nonetheless, these truths are evident.
I disagree; the only way we know anything - whether its about radio or history or geometry is through sense experience. That and mysticism.

Really? Do you claim to possess some unique extraordinary sense of radio waves which is not shared by any other human beings?

That's easy enough to test with a simple experiment where I have a radio transmitter and you have no receiver at all except just your own senses. I will transmit at random intervals and you will indicate when I am transmitting or not.

Please forgive me for being skeptical but I am dubious of you (or anyone's) ability to pass this test.


How do you read the results of the radio receiver without use of your eyes, ears, or touch? I imagine you use ESP?

You actually proved my point. There are truths which can't be experienced directly with the senses and can only be demonstrated indirectly by some other means. When you hear sounds coming from your radio you are hearing sounds from your radio. You aren't directly sensing radio waves with your body's radio ESP. You are hearing an analog representation of radio waves after they have been converted to sound with the aid of an external apparatus which does have a sense of radio waves even though you do not.
And the only way to have it demonstrated indirectly is through sense experience.
[John Davis is a DANGEROUS TERRORIST who MAKES US LOOK BAD

*

boydster

  • Illegal Alien
  • Planar Moderator
  • 11291
  • May I have 55 words with you?
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #39 on: March 14, 2019, 10:14:21 AM »
We can also all agree that we don't agree on the proper spelling of lasagna.
Let me explain this in a way you can understand. What you just wrote sounds exactly like something that a gay rights Portuguese Samurai would write.

Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #40 on: March 14, 2019, 01:02:54 PM »
Lasagna should not be mentioned in the same thread with peanut butter. What were you thinking?

*

Jura-Glenlivet II

  • 1543
  • Will I still be perfect tomorrow?
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #41 on: March 14, 2019, 01:34:19 PM »
We can also all agree that we don't agree on the proper spelling of lasagne.

FTFY.
Eagles may soar high, but weasels don't get sucked into jet engines.

*

boydster

  • Illegal Alien
  • Planar Moderator
  • 11291
  • May I have 55 words with you?
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #42 on: March 14, 2019, 03:02:05 PM »
We can also all agree that we don't agree on the proper spelling of lasagne.

FTFY.

>:(
Let me explain this in a way you can understand. What you just wrote sounds exactly like something that a gay rights Portuguese Samurai would write.

*

rabinoz

  • 19933
  • Real Earth Believer
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #43 on: March 14, 2019, 07:57:52 PM »

Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #44 on: March 15, 2019, 09:13:57 AM »
We both agree that as much truth as one can be had can be discerned through experience.

Many more truths can be had than simply those which can be experienced. For example, we can't experience radio waves, building the pyramids of Egypt, geometry, or what another person is feeling. Nonetheless, these truths are evident.
I disagree; the only way we know anything - whether its about radio or history or geometry is through sense experience. That and mysticism.

Really? Do you claim to possess some unique extraordinary sense of radio waves which is not shared by any other human beings?

That's easy enough to test with a simple experiment where I have a radio transmitter and you have no receiver at all except just your own senses. I will transmit at random intervals and you will indicate when I am transmitting or not.

Please forgive me for being skeptical but I am dubious of you (or anyone's) ability to pass this test.


How do you read the results of the radio receiver without use of your eyes, ears, or touch? I imagine you use ESP?

You actually proved my point. There are truths which can't be experienced directly with the senses and can only be demonstrated indirectly by some other means. When you hear sounds coming from your radio you are hearing sounds from your radio. You aren't directly sensing radio waves with your body's radio ESP. You are hearing an analog representation of radio waves after they have been converted to sound with the aid of an external apparatus which does have a sense of radio waves even though you do not.
And the only way to have it demonstrated indirectly is through sense experience.

Physical senses are crude, imprecise, and easily deceived.

Wild animals can see, hear, smell, taste, and feel. That's adequate for hunting/gathering, self defense, and mating. A monkey can be trained to ride a bicycle but will never invent one. A human limited to only sense experiences of the world is a merely a feral creature that can be trained to speak but will never create a dictionary.

Physical senses are incapable of determining size, mass, or velocity with any degree of precision. The pyramids of Egypt weren't built by eyeballing some chunks of rock and deciding to heap them in a pile. Instruments, from rulers and scales to spectroscopes and volt meters are required to measure what our senses cannot. And creating such instruments requires recognition of truths which our senses can't perceive.

Professional magicians make a living by creating illusions which deceive easily fooled senses.  Likewise, video deceives the eye into seeing motion where in actuality merely a sequence of still images is presented on the screen.

It's no wonder then that someone who believes in the Flat Earth would insist that all knowledge is limited to only that which can be experienced through crude animal senses. Truths which require precise observations and measurements to determine, and more than a primitive animal's intellect to conceive of, combine perfectly to completely undermine the premises of a Flat Earth based on physical senses and feelings.
"The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #45 on: March 15, 2019, 10:56:10 AM »
It's no wonder then that someone who believes in the Flat Earth would insist that all knowledge is limited to only that which can be experienced through crude animal senses. Truths which require precise observations and measurements to determine, and more than a primitive animal's intellect to conceive of, combine perfectly to completely undermine the premises of a Flat Earth based on physical senses and feelings.

And yet we have so many things that show even our crude animal senses that the earth is curved and that gravity exists.
I personally performed the Cavendish experiment, and it sure looks to me like gravity works between two lead weights.
Then there's mountains dipping in the distance at the rate of 8 inches per mile squared.
And then there's the horizon dipping down, and not rising to eyelevel.
There's the sun that sets on the horizon, and vanishes bottom first like it's sliding behind the edge of the earth.
Even our crude animal senses tell us that the sun is going down below ground level.

They start out by saying "Oh we don't want to let NASA steal our senses. We rely on what our own senses tell us." But then ask them where their senses tell them the sun sets. And they have no answer.


*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 15202
  • Quantum Ab Hoc
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #46 on: March 15, 2019, 12:37:33 PM »
It's no wonder then that someone who believes in the Flat Earth would insist that all knowledge is limited to only that which can be experienced through crude animal senses.
Couldn't agree more.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=define%3A+empiricism

That marks one off the list - we both can't agree on empiricism.  ;D
« Last Edit: March 15, 2019, 12:59:59 PM by John Davis »
[John Davis is a DANGEROUS TERRORIST who MAKES US LOOK BAD

*

Lonegranger

  • 3830
  • Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes Turn and face the strange
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #47 on: March 16, 2019, 01:43:30 AM »
I disagree; the only way we know anything - whether its about radio or history or geometry is through sense experience. That and mysticism.

Well sure, so long as you classify learning from others with your eyes (as in reading) or with your ears (as in listening about something done by someone elsewhere) as being through "sense experience".  But not through mysticism, or from ghosts or dreams or your imagination.
How do you explain the thousands of advances in engineering and technology due to mysticism?

For example, Tesla's invention of the ac motor while hallucinating a burning wheel in the park; Roger Penrose visiting a 'purely mathematical realm' to gain insight on his mathematics; Thomas Crick discovering the structure of DNA on acid.

Totally and utterly False.
The discovery of the structure of the double helix had zero to do with any acid trip! It relied more on stealing data without permission from Rosalind Franklin! It amazes me how little you appear to concern yourself with either facts or the truth.

A quote from Matt Ridley from his book on Crick.

http://www.mattridley.co.uk/books/francis-crick-discoverer-of-the-genetic-code/

I am frequently asked for my opinion on the speculation that Francis Crick was on LSD when he discovered the double helix; or that he was involved with a man named Dick Kemp in the manufacture of LSD. These assertions were reported second hand in an article in the Mail on Sunday by Alun Rees following Crick's death and they have since gained a certain amount of traction on the internet. Both stories are wrong. The true story, which I was told directly by Crick's widow and by the man who (as his widow confirms) first supplied the Cricks with LSD, is much less sensational. Crick was given (not sold) LSD on several occasions from 1967 onwards by Henry Todd, who met the Cricks through his girlfriend. Todd did know Kemp, with whom he was eventually prosecuted, but the Cricks did not. As for the implausible idea that the then impoverished and conventional Crick would have had access to LSD when it was newly invented in the early 1950s, there is simply no evidence for it at all. Those who wish to argue that LSD helped Crick make discoveries should note that all his major breakthroughs in molecular biology were made before 1967.
Zen and the art of turd polishing.

Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #48 on: March 16, 2019, 08:38:56 AM »
It's no wonder then that someone who believes in the Flat Earth would insist that all knowledge is limited to only that which can be experienced through crude animal senses. Truths which require precise observations and measurements to determine, and more than a primitive animal's intellect to conceive of, combine perfectly to completely undermine the premises of a Flat Earth based on physical senses and feelings.

And yet we have so many things that show even our crude animal senses that the earth is curved and that gravity exists.


Well, okay. I was giving their crude animal senses the benefit of a doubt. You can't actually smell or taste the curvature of the Earth.  :)
"The problem with quotes on the Internet is that it is hard to verify their authenticity." — Abraham Lincoln

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 15202
  • Quantum Ab Hoc
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #49 on: March 16, 2019, 05:10:14 PM »
I disagree; the only way we know anything - whether its about radio or history or geometry is through sense experience. That and mysticism.

Well sure, so long as you classify learning from others with your eyes (as in reading) or with your ears (as in listening about something done by someone elsewhere) as being through "sense experience".  But not through mysticism, or from ghosts or dreams or your imagination.
How do you explain the thousands of advances in engineering and technology due to mysticism?

For example, Tesla's invention of the ac motor while hallucinating a burning wheel in the park; Roger Penrose visiting a 'purely mathematical realm' to gain insight on his mathematics; Thomas Crick discovering the structure of DNA on acid.

Totally and utterly False.
The discovery of the structure of the double helix had zero to do with any acid trip! It relied more on stealing data without permission from Rosalind Franklin! It amazes me how little you appear to concern yourself with either facts or the truth.

A quote from Matt Ridley from his book on Crick.

http://www.mattridley.co.uk/books/francis-crick-discoverer-of-the-genetic-code/

I am frequently asked for my opinion on the speculation that Francis Crick was on LSD when he discovered the double helix; or that he was involved with a man named Dick Kemp in the manufacture of LSD. These assertions were reported second hand in an article in the Mail on Sunday by Alun Rees following Crick's death and they have since gained a certain amount of traction on the internet. Both stories are wrong. The true story, which I was told directly by Crick's widow and by the man who (as his widow confirms) first supplied the Cricks with LSD, is much less sensational. Crick was given (not sold) LSD on several occasions from 1967 onwards by Henry Todd, who met the Cricks through his girlfriend. Todd did know Kemp, with whom he was eventually prosecuted, but the Cricks did not. As for the implausible idea that the then impoverished and conventional Crick would have had access to LSD when it was newly invented in the early 1950s, there is simply no evidence for it at all. Those who wish to argue that LSD helped Crick make discoveries should note that all his major breakthroughs in molecular biology were made before 1967.
I'm not sure I'd trust a man, or a timeline, that doesn't recognize when LSD was invented. Though thank you for bringing this to my attention. Go ahead and substitute Kary Mullis then who told the BBC himself he wouldn't have come up with the PCR technique without it.
[John Davis is a DANGEROUS TERRORIST who MAKES US LOOK BAD

*

Lonegranger

  • 3830
  • Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes Turn and face the strange
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #50 on: March 17, 2019, 02:12:23 AM »
I disagree; the only way we know anything - whether its about radio or history or geometry is through sense experience. That and mysticism.

Well sure, so long as you classify learning from others with your eyes (as in reading) or with your ears (as in listening about something done by someone elsewhere) as being through "sense experience".  But not through mysticism, or from ghosts or dreams or your imagination.
How do you explain the thousands of advances in engineering and technology due to mysticism?

For example, Tesla's invention of the ac motor while hallucinating a burning wheel in the park; Roger Penrose visiting a 'purely mathematical realm' to gain insight on his mathematics; Thomas Crick discovering the structure of DNA on acid.

Totally and utterly False.
The discovery of the structure of the double helix had zero to do with any acid trip! It relied more on stealing data without permission from Rosalind Franklin! It amazes me how little you appear to concern yourself with either facts or the truth.

A quote from Matt Ridley from his book on Crick.

http://www.mattridley.co.uk/books/francis-crick-discoverer-of-the-genetic-code/

I am frequently asked for my opinion on the speculation that Francis Crick was on LSD when he discovered the double helix; or that he was involved with a man named Dick Kemp in the manufacture of LSD. These assertions were reported second hand in an article in the Mail on Sunday by Alun Rees following Crick's death and they have since gained a certain amount of traction on the internet. Both stories are wrong. The true story, which I was told directly by Crick's widow and by the man who (as his widow confirms) first supplied the Cricks with LSD, is much less sensational. Crick was given (not sold) LSD on several occasions from 1967 onwards by Henry Todd, who met the Cricks through his girlfriend. Todd did know Kemp, with whom he was eventually prosecuted, but the Cricks did not. As for the implausible idea that the then impoverished and conventional Crick would have had access to LSD when it was newly invented in the early 1950s, there is simply no evidence for it at all. Those who wish to argue that LSD helped Crick make discoveries should note that all his major breakthroughs in molecular biology were made before 1967.
I'm not sure I'd trust a man, or a timeline, that doesn't recognize when LSD was invented. Though thank you for bringing this to my attention. Go ahead and substitute Kary Mullis then who told the BBC himself he wouldn't have come up with the PCR technique without it.

So what you appear to be saying is that because LSD was invented in the 30s in a lab in Switzerland then Crick must have dropped a tab in the 50s! In a lab in the UK! I’m not sure I’d trust a man who jumped to such a conclusion.  What I’d prefer is some evidence.
Once more you made a claim, That Crick was high on LSD  when he discovered the double helix. Other than some nonsense on Reddit, can you provide some authentic source for your claim. A claim I may add that is at odds with the actual truth of the matter.

While Crick may indeed have taken LSD in the 1950s, there was some research going on in universities at that time, to say that the taking of it led to his discovery of DNA is bending the truth somewhat to suit your own agenda. I think it would be better to stick to the facts.

The facts of the matter are that Rosalind Franklin discovered the double helix structure of DNA while conducting her X-ray diffraction experiments......perhaps she was on LSD, the history books don’t say!
Zen and the art of turd polishing.

*

boydster

  • Illegal Alien
  • Planar Moderator
  • 11291
  • May I have 55 words with you?
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #51 on: March 17, 2019, 04:21:58 AM »
I just thought of something else that RE and FE agree on! Lonegranger is just turrible.
Let me explain this in a way you can understand. What you just wrote sounds exactly like something that a gay rights Portuguese Samurai would write.

*

Bullwinkle

  • Flat Earth Curator
  • 15504
  • "Umm, WTF ???"
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #52 on: March 17, 2019, 04:31:28 AM »
oh . . . turrible
RE can never win this argument.
FE can't be disproved.

*

Lonegranger

  • 3830
  • Ch-ch-ch-ch-changes Turn and face the strange
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #53 on: March 17, 2019, 08:16:28 AM »
I just thought of something else that RE and FE agree on! Lonegranger is just turrible.

Just as nature abhors a vacuum, FE supporters appear to do the same where the truth and facts are involved. Your comment while your own opinion adds nothing to the debate and like all of your other beliefs has no supporting facts.
Zen and the art of turd polishing.

*

boydster

  • Illegal Alien
  • Planar Moderator
  • 11291
  • May I have 55 words with you?
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #54 on: March 17, 2019, 09:15:54 AM »
See?! But he does try very hard.
Let me explain this in a way you can understand. What you just wrote sounds exactly like something that a gay rights Portuguese Samurai would write.

*

John Davis

  • Secretary Of The Society
  • Administrator
  • 15202
  • Quantum Ab Hoc
Re: What do RE and FE agree on?
« Reply #55 on: March 17, 2019, 10:28:01 AM »
I just thought of something else that RE and FE agree on! Lonegranger is just turrible.

Just as nature abhors a vacuum, FE supporters appear to do the same where the truth and facts are involved. Your comment while your own opinion adds nothing to the debate and like all of your other beliefs has no supporting facts.
Please stay on topic in the upper forums or you'll be banned.

This is the only warning I'm giving you.
[John Davis is a DANGEROUS TERRORIST who MAKES US LOOK BAD