Freethought & Rationalism Archive

River · 03-14-2003, 11:13 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Mageth
And what screen name would that be?

(If you're referring to me, I ain't Magus, and predate his presence here by a couple of years and a few thousand posts).

It's bad form to post the same thread on multiple fora.

Mageth you have manifested yourself in the form of Magus55

Mageth · 03-14-2003, 11:17 AM

Mageth you have manifested yourself in the form of Magus55

You're either deliberately being silly, trying to get a rise out of me, or are exhibiting the reasoning abilities of a rock.

If it's the first, it's working; if it's the second, you're also fulfilling the first; and if it's the third, what does that say about the arguments in your other posts?

Bumble Bee Tuna · 03-14-2003, 05:04 PM

Can you prove that you don't worship my keyboard?
Can you prove that there isn't a pink unicorn living on the surface of Pluto, covered in miniature green leprechauns all singing the "Oompah Loompah Song" and playing miniature harmonicas, while simultaneously performing a perfect rendition of "Riverdance"?

WTF is the point of the "Can you prove this absurd negative?" question?

-B

River · 03-15-2003, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bumble Bee Tuna
Can you prove that you don't worship my keyboard?
Can you prove that there isn't a pink unicorn living on the surface of Pluto, covered in miniature green leprechauns all singing the "Oompah Loompah Song" and playing miniature harmonicas, while simultaneously performing a perfect rendition of "Riverdance"?

WTF is the point of the "Can you prove this absurd negative?" question?

-B

I dont' argue for the sake of arguing. That is what peasants do.

Bumble Bee Tuna · 03-15-2003, 12:51 PM

Actually I think arguing for the sake of arguing is something that peasants would not have time for- it is more the realm of wealthy academics. Regardless, it appears you're correct, you do not argue for the sake of arguing. You just don't argue at all.

Come back when you have a point.

-B

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-14-2003, 11:17 AM	#12
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	Mageth you have manifested yourself in the form of Magus55 You're either deliberately being silly, trying to get a rise out of me, or are exhibiting the reasoning abilities of a rock. If it's the first, it's working; if it's the second, you're also fulfilling the first; and if it's the third, what does that say about the arguments in your other posts?

03-14-2003, 05:04 PM	#13
Bumble Bee Tuna Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Middletown, CT Posts: 7,333	Can you prove that you don't worship my keyboard? Can you prove that there isn't a pink unicorn living on the surface of Pluto, covered in miniature green leprechauns all singing the "Oompah Loompah Song" and playing miniature harmonicas, while simultaneously performing a perfect rendition of "Riverdance"? WTF is the point of the "Can you prove this absurd negative?" question? -B

03-15-2003, 12:51 PM	#15
Bumble Bee Tuna Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Middletown, CT Posts: 7,333	Actually I think arguing for the sake of arguing is something that peasants would not have time for- it is more the realm of wealthy academics. Regardless, it appears you're correct, you do not argue for the sake of arguing. You just don't argue at all. Come back when you have a point. -B

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.