Reply With Quote
Bingo.
(shrugs)
Define "troll".
Rob is a vacuous troll, unable or unwilling to even modestly defend the stupidity he spews. Seems pretty much like what most would accept as a troll.
I am happy to answer any question posed to me with intellectual honesty, and when asked, I gladly provide sources, links and reasoned arguments, which would tend to be the an hesis of what most would hold in their minds as "troll".
I do tend to smack talk, and even occasionally lose my temper. Mea culpa.
Your chest-thumping, e-peen measuring though, would seem to be a lot closer:
The only way I could look foolish is to continue taking you seriously for much longer, given that you don't seem to be able to do much more than above.In Internet slang, a troll (/ˈtroʊl/, /ˈtrɒl/) is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,[1] by posting inflammatory,[2] extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a forum, chat room, or blog), either accidentally[3][4] or with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response[5] or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion.[6]
Bingo.
2nd time:
Give me what you found to be the most effective "scientific argument", or , give me a link to a "scientific study".
More BS. I just now googled, "Is there any scientific proof that God exists?" and got over ten pages worth, pro and con.
So either you are lazy or incompetent. You tell me.
I'm not doing your work for you, especially since you prefer to, what did you call it instead of trolling, smack talk?
Very little difference in trolling IMHO because the result you are after is the same.
Do you deny this? Or are your baseless accusations just part of your natural character flaws?
Whenever you are willing to be, or at least act like, a mature respectable sensible intelligent adult in your discussions, you will find me a willing participant.
But if you choose to troll, smack talk, spam, whatever, it's all the same thing, then all you deserve is bashing IMHO.
What you definitely do not deserve is respect whatsoever.
just because a page uses the term scientific argument in no way means there is one present on that page.
So you are basically saying that out of ten pages worth there is not one single article?
That is highly dubious at best.
Read it again.
I did, and right before I replied to your post.
And I never said there actually WAS proof, only that there were scientific studies of it, ten pages worth that discuss this very topic.
What more do you want, egg in your beer?
Do you know how search engines work?
Why don't you just cut to the chase and say what you have to say instead of beating around the bush?
If you have some legitimate arguments then I will sincerely check them out.
I have been wrong before, and I'm never too proud to admit it when I am.
However if you plan to troll or whatever you call it, then you can forget getting much cooperation and discussion from me.
translation: do the research for me so I can dismiss it anyway or call you atroll
Idiocy abounds.translation: do the research for me so I can dismiss it anyway or call you a
link one that you've actually read. Or just state the le and author of the article if you don't know how to copy and paste a link.I did, and right before I replied to your post.
And I never said there actually WAS proof, only that there were scientific studies of it, ten pages worth that discuss this very topic.
What more do you want, egg in your beer?
I guess you can't read. Not my fault, you should have studied while in school.
I told everyone how and where. This isn't rocket science.
Do it.
You said you found an article so post it. If you can't, then nobody believes you have one.I guess you can't read. Not my fault, you should have studied while in school.
I told everyone how and where. This isn't rocket science.
Do it.
it's not rocket science.
If it isn't equivalent to rocket science for you then you would have read that I said there were ten pages worth of articles, pro and con.
Pick one, any one, unless you can't read.
pros and cons? So it could be 9 con and 1 pro?If it isn't equivalent to rocket science for you then you would have read that I said there were ten pages worth of articles, pro and con.
Pick one, any one, unless you can't read.
I'm not going to guess which one you read. Either you have an article or you're talking right out of your ass.
Pick any one your little mind desires, makes no difference to me.
But try to read it, or get your children to read it to you.
I can't wait for the next episode. What can Neal possibly do for an encore short of just ing all over the faces of the creationists? He has dominated them so throughly, what else can he possibly do? Can the FCC even allow such full submission sodomization on over the air waves national tv?
God did it.
Link #3:
"There is no scientific evidence indicating that God exists."
http://godisimaginary.com/i11.htm
Good for you!
so we're done here.Good for you!
Good.
We were "done" a long time ago, you just weren't paying attention.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions