Posted: Dec 12, 2019 1:05 pm
by Spearthrower
ORZIL wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:
ORZIL wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:

1) Wrong - it's not in any language.

2) Your refusal to ever engage with substance is looking very suspicious now.

I've responded openly and substantively to you. Show you're capable of doing the same.

this video is
anecdotal evidence?
enable video captioning in English language :smile:

I don't know what that video is because I am not prepared to look at it until you start putting in some effort yourself to understand the other side of the conversation.

I've responded to all your questions with honesty and substance.

But you're not responding in a similar way. Even when I ask you to respond, you reply with nothing but a question.

Even a friendly discussion is like a game of tennis - you hit the ball to me, I hit it back to you... you don't get to keep hitting balls at me and expect me to continue playing tennis.

this subject
in this forum
should be prohibited
because there is no
empirical evidence

Anyone coming to this thread now has the opportunity to look at how I responded to your requests, and how you responded to mine.

I believe this shows what skepticism is about - fundamentally, it's about honesty. What can we honestly say about the world.

People like yourself aren't interested in what's true, so even if you had the best will in the world, you'd end up being dishonest to yourself.

But you don't have the best will in the world - you're basically just trolling, JAQing off, and generally failing to engage in any level of honest discussion.

I think this provides a good public measurement.