Will This Be The Next Obama Scandal?

Snopes is about as non-partisan as you can get. And I assume you're embarrassed about Conservapedia?

I'm embarrassed that it exists. I wouldn't embarrass myself by citing it the way Oreo proudly cites rational-wiki as if it has any validity at all.

Most of what Snopes addresses aren't particularly partisan. My point is that they are no more qualified to debunk on any given item than any other human on the planet with an internet connection and Google.

Point being that Oreo only reads people that already agree with him.

Snopes and fact-check.org both make diligent efforts to be non-partisan. Their personal biases leak through at times in the language used in debunking or fack-checking.

Liberals that are found wanting are said to have "misspoken" or to have been "factually incorrect" Non-liberals are "damned liars." In not-so-many words.
 
So you don't believe in quantum mechanics then? Or relativity?

How do either of those concept, properly explained "fail at a glance on their own merits?"

I realize it is popular to assert that only good little liberals are all "sciency and stuff."
 
How do either of those concept, properly explained "fail at a glance on their own merits?"

I realize it is popular to assert that only good little liberals are all "sciency and stuff."

LMAO. Quantum electro dynamics is about as counter intuitive as it's possible to get. You can't explain it properly in words, you need mathematics. Mathematics that 99% of the population and 99.9% of Americans are incapable of understanding.
 
LMAO. Quantum electro dynamics is about as counter intuitive as it's possible to get. You can't explain it properly in words, you need mathematics. Mathematics that 99% of the population and 99.9% of Americans are incapable of understanding.

Oh the English are ever so much better? ~Oreo Mode~ Cite?!??

I happen to not be in the 99.9% of the population. I am pretty sure Oreo is.

Was there a point you were trying to make?

People that do not speak Spanish do not get involved in arguments in Spanish.

So Mr. Expert on Quantum Physics, riddle me this: If God is all-powerful, how come he can't create a rock too big for him to lift?

Also, when did you quit beating your wife?

What passes for rhetorical argument on this site is sad.
 
I happen to not be in the 99.9% of the population. I am pretty sure Oreo is.

Was there a point you were trying to make?

Yes. The point is that your "If your argument fails on its own merits at a glance, goggling twelve more "cites" is meaningless" is total bullshit.
So Mr. Expert on Quantum Physics, riddle me this: If God is all-powerful, how come he can't create a rock too big for him to lift?

.
Because the two are mutually exclusive in a deterministic universe. I thought everyone knew that.
 
KO sticks with Salon, Huffington and his liberal version of Wiki.

He and the others like him are why I wrote:

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1094387

They're at a real loss to explain why their economy failed, but they know they are right and do not want to hear from "conservatives" because they know everything and that means that any other viewpoint cannot possibly be valid.
 
KO sticks with Salon, Huffington and his liberal version of Wiki.

He and the others like him are why I wrote:

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=1094387

They're at a real loss to explain why their economy failed, but they know they are right and do not want to hear from "conservatives" because they know everything and that means that any other viewpoint cannot possibly be valid.

Which is why most of them are on ignore. Life is too short to spend any significant amount of time bantering with the willfully ignorant.

Ishmael
 
Which is why most of them are on ignore. Life is too short to spend any significant amount of time bantering with the willfully ignorant.

Ishmael

Like people that say AIDS isn't caused by HIV but by "the homosexual lifestyle" you mean?
 
Which is why most of them are on ignore. Life is too short to spend any significant amount of time bantering with the willfully ignorant.

Ishmael

:cool:

You know, life is unpredictable. I took a three-day weekend to get the garden winterized.

So, of course the fall monsoon has set in for at least the next three days.

So, I'm pulling a Byron.

image.php
 
:cool:

You know, life is unpredictable. I took a three-day weekend to get the garden winterized.

So, of course the fall monsoon has set in for at least the next three days.

So, I'm pulling a Byron.

image.php

Yup, weather has me in and out as well.

Ishmael
 
This afternoon, I've been playing a drinking game with the DOW and our 401K plans...

:(

Is Germany going to be a domino? Will China manage to replace the dollar with RMB now that their economy, on paper, has surpassed ours? Will I be glad about my much maligned purchases of precious metals? Will the Fed introduce a negative interest rate? ... I think I need a drink. I'll bet someone invents a drinking machine to replace me.
 
This afternoon, I've been playing a drinking game with the DOW and our 401K plans...

:(

Is Germany going to be a domino? Will China manage to replace the dollar with RMB now that their economy, on paper, has surpassed ours? Will I be glad about my much maligned purchases of precious metals? Will the Fed introduce a negative interest rate? ... I think I need a drink. I'll bet someone invents a drinking machine to replace me.

Robo-drunk, you can be the designated driver.

Ishmael
 
Yes. The point is that your "If your argument fails on its own merits at a glance, goggling twelve more "cites" is meaningless" is total bullshit.

Because the two are mutually exclusive in a deterministic universe. I thought everyone knew that.

Your rhetoric is retarded.

Lets assume to use your example that in some alternative universe I deign to discuss quantum Theory with Oreo. He has a difference of opinion on something that as you claim cannot be explained in English. How would him coming up with 12 cites improve that discussion that wouldn't ever happen?

Argumentum absurdo-bizzarro doesn't in the least refute what I said. If you YOURSELF cannot make a cogent argument BY YOURSELF on the topic you are debating, dragging out "cites" doesn't improve the experience AT ALL.

Why people continue to count what they just now "googled" as part and parcel of their working knowledge of a given subject baffles me. I have said it before, pretend Google just died. If you cannot make your argument without resorting to Google you don't know enough about the subject to even be discussing it let alone asserting authority on it.

I have a friend that is a working professor of American History. A best selling author on the subject. He happens to now live in one of the towns I grew up in. On Facebook the dilettantes of the very same stripe you see here will endlessly debate him on the very area that he has a PHD as well as years of independent research on. He has read the original source documents and written books on them. But no, some nimrod lawyer whose kid shares a school with his kids knows so much more based on what the lawyer's idiot sociology professor said in class 20 years ago. He takes on all comers and easily "refudiates" them, they throw up a few "cites" and leave in a huff, victorious.
 
Last edited:
And there you are, frittering away your time in the garden when you could be moving the fence. :D

Ishmael

And they say good fences make good neighbors...

:)

The neighbor's third wife is from South America. Maybe I should claim the fence is racist and should be done away with altogether.
 
And they say good fences make good neighbors...

:)

The neighbor's third wife is from South America. Maybe I should claim the fence is racist and should be done away with altogether.

That move would make you a hit with the 'open borders' crowd. :)

Ishmael
 
Back
Top