a.) prevent this from becoming a naplesx vs. jinmac showdown thread (may be too late for that)
b.) to somehow wrangle this thread back to something in the blast radius of its intent (sorry, sdw, i'll do what i can...)
and
c.) introduce a little bit of levity to brighten the mood 'round here...
the xmas holidays have come and gone, and nothing happened. do you want to know why? do you really want the honest truth? it wasn't because the terrorists saw "terror alert: high" on fox news. it wasn't that joe public was on the lookout...
it was because they knew that trying to hijack a plane full of people who just had to spend the holidays with their in-laws would have to be the dumbest idea on earth. the collective lot of them would hogtie the son-of-a-bitch and rape him with every chia pet or clapper they recieved under the tree and had to smile and say "aw, how sweet!"
they won't do it on new years, either... no one wants to f*ck with a drunk new york crowd.
game. set. match.
The reason that is so funny is because it rings very true.
Seriously, who here would stand up to a potential hijacker and procede to pummel him with every ounce of your being?
At one time, not too long ago I figured this was a great place to exchange ideas and learn from one another. I may be wrong about that. You and jimmac seem to think it is all about you and proving something to someone.
Debate can be a powerful tool in the human learning process. If you want it to be and if you don't think you know everything.
i like to learn, That is my agenda here. I think I know, but, what is yours?
I totally agree. However, problems start when folks come in with uninformed theories. There are some things I know jack shit about. Like speaking cantonese. I don't know anything about it. But if I go start arguing with a native cantonese speaker, telling them they aren't doing it right, that would be insane.
When your knowledge on a topic is clearly very limited, why make big conclusions and then proceed to tell other people that they are wrong, people who have actually spend a lot more time learning about that topic. In any situation of this kind it is extremely likely that your belief is wrong and that you could learn a lot if you just bothered to listen and learn.
Unfortunately, for some reason people think that when discussing foreign relations, or politics in general, that background knowledge is unimportant. I don't understand it. For instance, one thing I'm really interested in is intelligence collection and analysis. It's really odd to me when I see folks on here spit out their uninformed opinions when I know how increadibly detailed and complex it is.
9.11 (and everything surrounding it) is another PERFECT example. There is SO MUCH DETAIL it's rediculous. The more you learn the more confusing it becomes. But for some unknown reason people feel compelled to construct beliefs about it that fit into their predetermined systm of beliefs. It's odd.
As far as Iraqi WMD, there is a Mountain of info on the weapons program and there always was. The reasons people actually believed he had these big programs had nothing to do with the facts. It had to do with a belief unsupported by the facts. THAT IS CALLED IMAGINATION. Sure, it's needed sometimes, but if you live your life according to imagined scenarios unsupported by fact then we call you a crazy person and put you in a home. Plain and simple.
If your agenda is to learn, I can tell you where to start. But coming on here telling others how it is when you don't even know the basics, much less the background, is the quickest path to ignorance.
Note that I started a thread in GD about the xbox, asking for the opinions of others. I didn't know about it so I asked. Try it some time. It's not that hard.
I think I went over all this with you before but I will recap.
I agree about complications when it comes to almost any matter. I would disagree with you that a relatively uninformed person can draw conclusions on all sorts of complicated things from anecdotal evidence.
For example:
A wee child can come to an understanding of the english language ( or just about any) long before they can break it down to it's simplest form, the letter. Long before they know all of the rules, they can communicate quite well.
You have stated many times that I or no-one has the ability to even form an opinion unless we have read as much as you have. At least that is what I am taking away from your comments.
From the sounds of it, you are well read. Likely more than a lot of us. So if we follow your own argument, it would seem you are slumming! I will ask again of you, why would you hang out in a forum of apple geeks if you really want to discuss foreign affairs or world economics or intelligence gathering theory? Surely there must be a "Know it all" world affairs forum somewhere. Oh wait...never-mind.
If you really feel the way you say you do, PLEASE, post a required reading list in order that we talk to you on an even standpoint. It seems to me that you dismiss anything or anyone that is not there. Now, I am sure you realize the chances of any one person reading the all the same things you have, is miniscule. Right?
You viewpoint is vary narrow and goes against what is commonly known, "opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one." Ask any backwoods redneck, they'll tell you the same.
at the risk of continuing this thread in the wrong direction, my opinion has always been that...
in order to make a truly informed, well-researched opinion, you have to devote a significant amount of your waking hours to it. by doing so, you lose perspective on what it's like to be an "average joe" who has a life to lead, yet is asked on a regular basis to make decisions about voting and expressing opinions.
needless to say, it's a catch-22 that i don't see an easy way out of, ever.
You have stated many times that I or no-one has the ability to even form an opinion unless we have read as much as you have. At least that is what I am taking away from your comments.
And apparently you aren't understanding them. On this particular topic I have devoted time to learning and you have not. What is the problem? Are you insecure about it? For lovers of learning, different people have different things they spend their time learning. You don't see me one here arguing about economics, do you? And the amazing thing is that I actually study that a lot (I studied finance for a couple years at Northwestern in the 90s) and invest, but I don't think I know enough to tell other people where they should focus their money.
Quote:
From the sounds of it, you are well read.
Maybe, or maybe I just like learning about certain things.
Quote:
I will ask again of you, why would you hang out in a forum of apple geeks if you really want to discuss foreign affairs or world economics or intelligence gathering theory?
Rok answered the question. I don't personally know people that buy into the craziness of the Bush admin. Maybe there just aren't as many suckers in chicago. I don't know what it is. But I meet a whole lot of people and almost never find anyone that buys into it. By coming on here I can see why folks believe the rediculous things they do.
Plus, I love all of my apple gear and software. For years I've made music on my apple computers and in the past couple of years have done video work as well. I use Logic, FCP, the adobe cs suite, some macromedia apps and a whole range of smaller apps. My work requires me to know and use a whole range of languages from perl to c++ to php and I like using the mac more than anything else. Why are you here?
Quote:
If you really feel the way you say you do, PLEASE, post a required reading list in order that we talk to you on an even standpoint.
I've already posted short ones a couple of times.
Quote:
You viewpoint is vary narrow and goes against what is commonly known
commonly believed, since you can't 'know' things that aren't true.
And how can you possibly know my viewpoint when you can't even spell Halliburton? You have no idea whether it's narrow or not since you don't know what it's based on since you simply haven't bothered to look.
Post, for me a list of articles, books, blogs, papers or whatever you think I need to read. I want to debate you, and so that I do not have to hear or reply to your weak argument about research or lack thereof, please do so, for me. I WILL read your required list and I will use your own reading and my own research to punch so many holes in your thinking it will look like a sieve.
Sounds like a challenge? It is.
Bring it.
Oh I would like all of AI to witness it also, that is why I challenge you this.
Post, for me a list of articles, books, blogs, papers or whatever you think I need to read.
Yeah. You are going to condense years of schooling, work and research in four days and come back to 'challenge' me. Grow the hell up. Next time I talk to my buddy who teaches history of science I'll say the same thing to him. "Give me a reading list and I'll come back in a few weeks and 'punch so many holes in your thinking it will look like a sieve.'"
Your post is one of the stupidest ever put on AO. Congrats.
Quote:
I will use your own reading and my own research to punch so many holes in your thinking it will look like a sieve.
So this is basically all it is to you? You feel weak and only think about these topics in terms of who 'wins' an argument.
And here's a hint: in the upper right corner of the page you are reading right now, there is a search function. Use it. Of course, I shouldn't have to tell you where to look for this info. For example, there's no question about where to start when researching 9/11. If you don't know, then you are in no position to talk about it. It's like trying to be an authority on breast cancer without ever taking a biology class.
Quote:
you putting everyone down like we all know nothing about nothing.
Good job at not understanding anything I just wrote. You need me to translate it into baby talk for you?
I guess it was my mistake trying to have a mature discussion about this with you. Go back and read what I wrote. If you don't know about intelligence collection and analysis, then you probably know about something else that I don't know about. At least one would hope so.
The funny thing is, I have a lot of questions regarding these topics and a lot to learn. But you, and others here, are so lost on the basics that we can't get to the point of actually discussing the finer details and broader concepts at work. Hell, you are even basically arguing that saddam could have had large stockpiles of chem weapons other than mustard gas, even though it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
You know, just from the info on your website you are clearly a smart, caring and likable guy. You are clearly a good person, and regardless of what you believe, that's how I see you.
And watch you now try to twist that into me somehow insulting you..
Is this old thread still bumping along? PowerDoc, you must be a sadist to still let poor crippled thread live....look at how ridiculous our friends are acting! Poor Giant is practically foaming at the mouth over here!
Somebody get him some coconut liqueur and an Utne Reader before he pisses himself!
Is this old thread still bumping along? PowerDoc, you must be a sadist to still let poor crippled thread live....look at how ridiculous our friends are acting! Poor Giant is practically foaming at the mouth over here!
Somebody get him some coconut liqueur and an Utne Reader before he pisses himself!
Naw, the way I write makes it look like I care more than I do. It's like doodling, you know? It's a good way to waste some time.
Since you bring nothing to the table that is your own, but just parrot crap that you come across, it is only good form you know that you provide references. Al Arabia, Al Jazira, BBC, The Gardian, your wife, your local imam, etc., are all valid sources. No need to be embarrassed by them. Trust me, I don't think any of us will think any less of you.
Post, for me a list of articles, books, blogs, papers or whatever you think I need to read. I want to debate you, and so that I do not have to hear or reply to your weak argument about research or lack thereof, please do so, for me. I WILL read your required list and I will use your own reading and my own research to punch so many holes in your thinking it will look like a sieve.
Sounds like a challenge? It is.
Bring it.
Oh I would like all of AI to witness it also, that is why I challenge you this.
This has already been done! Give it up nobody's buying today.
" I think that you and jimmac are just multiple personalities of the same person "
Man what is it about people when they get backed into a corner on any given subject they start questioning the reality around them!
No NaplesX we aren't the same person. What you refuse to believe is that we have a similar viewpoint.
This reminds me of when I was recently defending ( on a forum ) the new Battlestar Galactica as a very good program and ultimately superior to the original. My opponent started accusing me of working for the SciFi channel!
I hope you weren't serious NaplesX because if you were it's an act of desparation.
Well, that's just freakin' dandy. Not only are we all too inexperienced and unread to even hope to debate with giant, the actual reading is inaccessible and unfeasible to get to "giant's level" of understanding. So all we have left is to simply take his word for it wherever and whenever he invokes it? Well that certainly makes for an invincible debate device. Not only that, but we must endure his continued condescending tone to the effect that we are not in possession of the knowledge he possesses and never will (for all intents and purposes of talking about anything on this forum while the subjects are remotely up-to-date). The icing on the cake is that he gets to say all of this while not offering the slightest inkling of information for us to chew on, as we are most certainly too dense to handle his superior knowledge, even in bits.
I have to agree with NaplesX- there is essentially zero point for giant to stick around here for political discussion, other than for him to harass us (or for him to "doodle", as he likes to put it). There is nothing for him to gain from us in a discussion (if he is truly as omniscient as he claims), and he is certainly not bothering to share the finer points of his position (because we would mentally choke and die on it if we tried). All there is left is for him to post in his position on the matter and declare all opposition as wrong and hopelessly incapable of discovering the truth he has found.
The fact that you can't understand a post that says in plain english
Quote:
If you don't know about intelligence collection and analysis, then you probably know about something else that I don't know about.
really demonstrates that maybe you really are as far behind as you imagine I was saying.
So maybe your hallucinations about what I am saying are actually more accurate than what I am really saying. I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt, but apparently you aren't deserving of it.
Anyway, there is a group of folks here that are pretty damn smart. There are a few people that actually do real research on political issues and have interesting things to say. Even scott actually bothers to inform himself most of the time, which keeps things interesting. We even have a few professors, grad students and professionals with graduate degrees in topics discussed here. I learn a lot from some of the folks here.
A whole lot.
So I'm sorry if you can't get it in your head that when you say something that is factually wrong it is and always will be factually incorrect, and that pointing it out doesn't make me elitist. And it doesn't make me elitist to point out that standing behind clearly factually incorrect beliefs shows at best a lack of knowledge of the subject and at worst gross mental deficiency.
When it comes to Iraq, you people can just keep on dreaming about VX. I think that really goes to show where you guys stand. We should be happy that we were never in danger from Sarin dropped from a drone. But the info was there to see that it was a factually incorrect and even physically impossible belief way before the war even started. All of the nails have been in the coffin for months, so I don't see why it even comes up.
In the end, I just provide the facts for you. If that makes you insecure then that's really something you need to work through yourself. But when I have people arguing with me about the arsenic regulations and can't get a single number, date or event correct, that's pretty sad by any standard.
And what started this was someone claiming to know about admin motives and hasn't even studied all (or any) of the issues enough to know that Halliburton (only the holder of the largest contract in Iraq) isn't spelled, and I quote, "Halabuerten."
I mean, COME ON!
You know, I don't know squat about chip manufacturing processes, and you don't see me in the hardware forums making stupid arguments and then whining about it when people call them out.
Wow, you verified my post perfectly. Obviously one who does not agree with you is categorically wrong. What was I thinking?
Of course, you seem to overlook jimmac's misspelling as some great indicator of possession of knowledge.
None of this changes the fact that you have very little to offer or gain here due to your claimed supreme knowledge and anecdotal evidence to suggest your supreme knowledge.
You know, I don't know squat about chip manufacturing processes, and you don't see me in the hardware forums making stupid arguments and then whining about it when people call them out.
Even if you did, and you were corrected, you would most likely get an explanation of the guru's viewpoint along with the introduction of relevant information- essentially, a discussion. Far more than a snide, "You lack the knowledge, you are wrong, don't bother to argue, case closed." That's what makes a guru sticking around in the hardware forum worth their beans, and why YOUR continued presence here not worth it and logically boggling, altogether. I'm sorry if that makes you insecure.
Comments
Originally posted by rok
alright, in an attempt to...
a.) prevent this from becoming a naplesx vs. jinmac showdown thread (may be too late for that)
b.) to somehow wrangle this thread back to something in the blast radius of its intent (sorry, sdw, i'll do what i can...)
and
c.) introduce a little bit of levity to brighten the mood 'round here...
the xmas holidays have come and gone, and nothing happened. do you want to know why? do you really want the honest truth? it wasn't because the terrorists saw "terror alert: high" on fox news. it wasn't that joe public was on the lookout...
it was because they knew that trying to hijack a plane full of people who just had to spend the holidays with their in-laws would have to be the dumbest idea on earth. the collective lot of them would hogtie the son-of-a-bitch and rape him with every chia pet or clapper they recieved under the tree and had to smile and say "aw, how sweet!"
they won't do it on new years, either... no one wants to f*ck with a drunk new york crowd.
game. set. match.
The reason that is so funny is because it rings very true.
Seriously, who here would stand up to a potential hijacker and procede to pummel him with every ounce of your being?
(raises his hand)
I would, Christmas chia pets or not.
Originally posted by NaplesX
At one time, not too long ago I figured this was a great place to exchange ideas and learn from one another. I may be wrong about that. You and jimmac seem to think it is all about you and proving something to someone.
Debate can be a powerful tool in the human learning process. If you want it to be and if you don't think you know everything.
i like to learn, That is my agenda here. I think I know, but, what is yours?
I totally agree. However, problems start when folks come in with uninformed theories. There are some things I know jack shit about. Like speaking cantonese. I don't know anything about it. But if I go start arguing with a native cantonese speaker, telling them they aren't doing it right, that would be insane.
When your knowledge on a topic is clearly very limited, why make big conclusions and then proceed to tell other people that they are wrong, people who have actually spend a lot more time learning about that topic. In any situation of this kind it is extremely likely that your belief is wrong and that you could learn a lot if you just bothered to listen and learn.
Unfortunately, for some reason people think that when discussing foreign relations, or politics in general, that background knowledge is unimportant. I don't understand it. For instance, one thing I'm really interested in is intelligence collection and analysis. It's really odd to me when I see folks on here spit out their uninformed opinions when I know how increadibly detailed and complex it is.
9.11 (and everything surrounding it) is another PERFECT example. There is SO MUCH DETAIL it's rediculous. The more you learn the more confusing it becomes. But for some unknown reason people feel compelled to construct beliefs about it that fit into their predetermined systm of beliefs. It's odd.
As far as Iraqi WMD, there is a Mountain of info on the weapons program and there always was. The reasons people actually believed he had these big programs had nothing to do with the facts. It had to do with a belief unsupported by the facts. THAT IS CALLED IMAGINATION. Sure, it's needed sometimes, but if you live your life according to imagined scenarios unsupported by fact then we call you a crazy person and put you in a home. Plain and simple.
If your agenda is to learn, I can tell you where to start. But coming on here telling others how it is when you don't even know the basics, much less the background, is the quickest path to ignorance.
Note that I started a thread in GD about the xbox, asking for the opinions of others. I didn't know about it so I asked. Try it some time. It's not that hard.
I agree about complications when it comes to almost any matter. I would disagree with you that a relatively uninformed person can draw conclusions on all sorts of complicated things from anecdotal evidence.
For example:
A wee child can come to an understanding of the english language ( or just about any) long before they can break it down to it's simplest form, the letter. Long before they know all of the rules, they can communicate quite well.
You have stated many times that I or no-one has the ability to even form an opinion unless we have read as much as you have. At least that is what I am taking away from your comments.
From the sounds of it, you are well read. Likely more than a lot of us. So if we follow your own argument, it would seem you are slumming! I will ask again of you, why would you hang out in a forum of apple geeks if you really want to discuss foreign affairs or world economics or intelligence gathering theory? Surely there must be a "Know it all" world affairs forum somewhere. Oh wait...never-mind.
If you really feel the way you say you do, PLEASE, post a required reading list in order that we talk to you on an even standpoint. It seems to me that you dismiss anything or anyone that is not there. Now, I am sure you realize the chances of any one person reading the all the same things you have, is miniscule. Right?
You viewpoint is vary narrow and goes against what is commonly known, "opinions are like a**holes, everyone has one." Ask any backwoods redneck, they'll tell you the same.
Sorry, no offense to my family.
in order to make a truly informed, well-researched opinion, you have to devote a significant amount of your waking hours to it. by doing so, you lose perspective on what it's like to be an "average joe" who has a life to lead, yet is asked on a regular basis to make decisions about voting and expressing opinions.
needless to say, it's a catch-22 that i don't see an easy way out of, ever.
Originally posted by NaplesX
You have stated many times that I or no-one has the ability to even form an opinion unless we have read as much as you have. At least that is what I am taking away from your comments.
And apparently you aren't understanding them. On this particular topic I have devoted time to learning and you have not. What is the problem? Are you insecure about it? For lovers of learning, different people have different things they spend their time learning. You don't see me one here arguing about economics, do you? And the amazing thing is that I actually study that a lot (I studied finance for a couple years at Northwestern in the 90s) and invest, but I don't think I know enough to tell other people where they should focus their money.
From the sounds of it, you are well read.
Maybe, or maybe I just like learning about certain things.
I will ask again of you, why would you hang out in a forum of apple geeks if you really want to discuss foreign affairs or world economics or intelligence gathering theory?
Rok answered the question. I don't personally know people that buy into the craziness of the Bush admin. Maybe there just aren't as many suckers in chicago. I don't know what it is. But I meet a whole lot of people and almost never find anyone that buys into it. By coming on here I can see why folks believe the rediculous things they do.
Plus, I love all of my apple gear and software. For years I've made music on my apple computers and in the past couple of years have done video work as well. I use Logic, FCP, the adobe cs suite, some macromedia apps and a whole range of smaller apps. My work requires me to know and use a whole range of languages from perl to c++ to php and I like using the mac more than anything else. Why are you here?
If you really feel the way you say you do, PLEASE, post a required reading list in order that we talk to you on an even standpoint.
I've already posted short ones a couple of times.
You viewpoint is vary narrow and goes against what is commonly known
commonly believed, since you can't 'know' things that aren't true.
And how can you possibly know my viewpoint when you can't even spell Halliburton? You have no idea whether it's narrow or not since you don't know what it's based on since you simply haven't bothered to look.
Post, for me a list of articles, books, blogs, papers or whatever you think I need to read. I want to debate you, and so that I do not have to hear or reply to your weak argument about research or lack thereof, please do so, for me. I WILL read your required list and I will use your own reading and my own research to punch so many holes in your thinking it will look like a sieve.
Sounds like a challenge? It is.
Bring it.
Oh I would like all of AI to witness it also, that is why I challenge you this.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Sounds like a challenge? It is.
Bring it.
What are you, 9?
Post, for me a list of articles, books, blogs, papers or whatever you think I need to read.
Yeah. You are going to condense years of schooling, work and research in four days and come back to 'challenge' me. Grow the hell up. Next time I talk to my buddy who teaches history of science I'll say the same thing to him. "Give me a reading list and I'll come back in a few weeks and 'punch so many holes in your thinking it will look like a sieve.'"
Your post is one of the stupidest ever put on AO. Congrats.
I will use your own reading and my own research to punch so many holes in your thinking it will look like a sieve.
So this is basically all it is to you? You feel weak and only think about these topics in terms of who 'wins' an argument.
And here's a hint: in the upper right corner of the page you are reading right now, there is a search function. Use it. Of course, I shouldn't have to tell you where to look for this info. For example, there's no question about where to start when researching 9/11. If you don't know, then you are in no position to talk about it. It's like trying to be an authority on breast cancer without ever taking a biology class.
you putting everyone down like we all know nothing about nothing.
Good job at not understanding anything I just wrote. You need me to translate it into baby talk for you?
I guess it was my mistake trying to have a mature discussion about this with you. Go back and read what I wrote. If you don't know about intelligence collection and analysis, then you probably know about something else that I don't know about. At least one would hope so.
The funny thing is, I have a lot of questions regarding these topics and a lot to learn. But you, and others here, are so lost on the basics that we can't get to the point of actually discussing the finer details and broader concepts at work. Hell, you are even basically arguing that saddam could have had large stockpiles of chem weapons other than mustard gas, even though it is PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE.
You know, just from the info on your website you are clearly a smart, caring and likable guy. You are clearly a good person, and regardless of what you believe, that's how I see you.
And watch you now try to twist that into me somehow insulting you..
Somebody get him some coconut liqueur and an Utne Reader before he pisses himself!
Originally posted by drewprops
Is this old thread still bumping along? PowerDoc, you must be a sadist to still let poor crippled thread live....look at how ridiculous our friends are acting! Poor Giant is practically foaming at the mouth over here!
Somebody get him some coconut liqueur and an Utne Reader before he pisses himself!
Naw, the way I write makes it look like I care more than I do. It's like doodling, you know? It's a good way to waste some time.
Giant,
Since you bring nothing to the table that is your own, but just parrot crap that you come across, it is only good form you know that you provide references.
Originally posted by NaplesX
let.s make this simple.
Post, for me a list of articles, books, blogs, papers or whatever you think I need to read. I want to debate you, and so that I do not have to hear or reply to your weak argument about research or lack thereof, please do so, for me. I WILL read your required list and I will use your own reading and my own research to punch so many holes in your thinking it will look like a sieve.
Sounds like a challenge? It is.
Bring it.
Oh I would like all of AI to witness it also, that is why I challenge you this.
This has already been done! Give it up nobody's buying today.
Man what is it about people when they get backed into a corner on any given subject they start questioning the reality around them!
No NaplesX we aren't the same person. What you refuse to believe is that we have a similar viewpoint.
This reminds me of when I was recently defending ( on a forum ) the new Battlestar Galactica as a very good program and ultimately superior to the original. My opponent started accusing me of working for the SciFi channel!
I hope you weren't serious NaplesX because if you were it's an act of desparation.
I have to agree with NaplesX- there is essentially zero point for giant to stick around here for political discussion, other than for him to harass us (or for him to "doodle", as he likes to put it). There is nothing for him to gain from us in a discussion (if he is truly as omniscient as he claims), and he is certainly not bothering to share the finer points of his position (because we would mentally choke and die on it if we tried). All there is left is for him to post in his position on the matter and declare all opposition as wrong and hopelessly incapable of discovering the truth he has found.
Originally posted by Randycat99
Not only are we all too inexperienced and unread
The fact that you can't understand a post that says in plain english
If you don't know about intelligence collection and analysis, then you probably know about something else that I don't know about.
really demonstrates that maybe you really are as far behind as you imagine I was saying.
So maybe your hallucinations about what I am saying are actually more accurate than what I am really saying. I would like to give you the benefit of the doubt, but apparently you aren't deserving of it.
Anyway, there is a group of folks here that are pretty damn smart. There are a few people that actually do real research on political issues and have interesting things to say. Even scott actually bothers to inform himself most of the time, which keeps things interesting. We even have a few professors, grad students and professionals with graduate degrees in topics discussed here. I learn a lot from some of the folks here.
A whole lot.
So I'm sorry if you can't get it in your head that when you say something that is factually wrong it is and always will be factually incorrect, and that pointing it out doesn't make me elitist. And it doesn't make me elitist to point out that standing behind clearly factually incorrect beliefs shows at best a lack of knowledge of the subject and at worst gross mental deficiency.
When it comes to Iraq, you people can just keep on dreaming about VX. I think that really goes to show where you guys stand. We should be happy that we were never in danger from Sarin dropped from a drone. But the info was there to see that it was a factually incorrect and even physically impossible belief way before the war even started. All of the nails have been in the coffin for months, so I don't see why it even comes up.
In the end, I just provide the facts for you. If that makes you insecure then that's really something you need to work through yourself. But when I have people arguing with me about the arsenic regulations and can't get a single number, date or event correct, that's pretty sad by any standard.
And what started this was someone claiming to know about admin motives and hasn't even studied all (or any) of the issues enough to know that Halliburton (only the holder of the largest contract in Iraq) isn't spelled, and I quote, "Halabuerten."
I mean, COME ON!
You know, I don't know squat about chip manufacturing processes, and you don't see me in the hardware forums making stupid arguments and then whining about it when people call them out.
Of course, you seem to overlook jimmac's misspelling as some great indicator of possession of knowledge.
None of this changes the fact that you have very little to offer or gain here due to your claimed supreme knowledge and anecdotal evidence to suggest your supreme knowledge.
Originally posted by giant
You know, I don't know squat about chip manufacturing processes, and you don't see me in the hardware forums making stupid arguments and then whining about it when people call them out.
Even if you did, and you were corrected, you would most likely get an explanation of the guru's viewpoint along with the introduction of relevant information- essentially, a discussion. Far more than a snide, "You lack the knowledge, you are wrong, don't bother to argue, case closed." That's what makes a guru sticking around in the hardware forum worth their beans, and why YOUR continued presence here not worth it and logically boggling, altogether. I'm sorry if that makes you insecure.
I made a challenge and you dismissed it.
As jimmac would say "End of story!"
Originally posted by jimmac
Man what is it about people when they get backed into a corner on any given subject they start questioning the reality around them!
You are right, it was a sarcastic remark.
But if you read it i was comparing your tactics.