[bad_quote]

Originally Posted by Kevin

BTW Rob, according to Christian belief, before Christ no one went to heaven cept a few.

That isn't a fact. There might be a scroll that we haven't uncovered that clearly states that according ot Christian belief, only albino people get into heaven. To think otherwise is mere assumption.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by bad_quote

That isn't a fact.

You are correct. It's just an idea.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Kevin

No, there is no evidence anyone took anything. That too is a guess.

Not a "guess", - a "conclusion"! You forgot the little part about "evidence" there.

Originally Posted by Kevin

Well lets post some then. If there is that much facts about the matter. Post it.
You aren't understanding what I am saying. I am not saying it's not POSSIBLE that he was. I am saying there is no PROOF that he was. We don't have all the information.

SO FU<KING WHAT (AGAIN)?

Why should I RATHER!!!!!!! believe in something for which there is no evidence whatsoever, than in something for which there is a LOT OF evidence, just not 100% proof positive (BTW, there never is)?

Just because there isn't 100% conclusive truth? BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHAAAAAAAA

You fundamentalists are such FU<KING IDIOTS!!!

Originally Posted by Kevin

Now, using your "logic" that would mean that Cola did NOT exist before 1970 because the oldest reference said people found so far was said Pepsi bottle from 1970.

And UNTIL THEY FOUND A BOTTLE OF COKE from before 1970, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE A ****ING CLUE WETHER COCA COLA was there first (as a matter of fact, how in the FU<K do you KNOW! that somebody didn't invent Coke BEFORE!!!! COCA COLA?????? Could be, eyh?)

BUT YOU DON'T SEEM TO HAVE ANY PROBLEM ACCEPTING THE FACT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THAT COCA COLA INVENTED COKE!!!!

Funny that! NOW S. T. F. U.!

[Warung]

EVIDENCE!!!! is the word of the day.

Main Entry: 1proof
Pronunciation: 'prüf
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, alteration of preove, from Old French preuve, from Late Latin proba, from Latin probare to prove -- more at PROVE
1 a : the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact b : the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning.

[bad_quote]

Warung, I refuse to accept that definition of evidence. Why? Because there might be a better definition that says the same thing in red letters somewhere else, that we haven't uncovered yet. You might have some things to back up what you say, but although I have none, I will believe in my wholly unsupported viewpoint because there COULD be something out there that supports it.

[Warung]

Originally Posted by bad_quote

...I will believe in my wholly unsupported viewpoint because there COULD be something out there that supports it.

YES!!!!! IT'S ALL JUST IDEAS! HERE-SAY! NO PROOF NO PROOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOF!

[bad_quote]

Owned.

[besson3c]

Do you guys think I'm wrong, and that this conversation will lead somewhere, or are you just having fun?

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by Warung

Not a "guess", - a "conclusion"! You forgot the little part about "evidence" there.

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ANYONE STOLE ANYTHING. If there is, please provide it for the class to see.

SO FU<KING WHAT (AGAIN)?

Why should I RATHER!!!!!!! believe in something for which there is no evidence whatsoever,

Who is telling you what to believe? I surely am not.

than in something for which there is a LOT OF evidence, just not 100% proof positive (BTW, there never is)?

Please provide this "lot of" evidence.

You have yet to.

Just because there isn't 100% conclusive truth? BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHAAAAAAAA

You fundamentalists are such FU<KING IDIOTS!!!

No, because there is no proof anyone STOLE anything.

And UNTIL THEY FOUND A BOTTLE OF COKE from before 1970, YOU WOULDN'T EVEN HAVE A ****ING CLUE WETHER COCA COLA was there first (as a matter of fact, how in the FU<K do you KNOW! that somebody didn't invent Coke BEFORE!!!! COCA COLA?????? Could be, eyh?)

what are you going off about now. Coke = Coca Cola.

My point was, it didn't matter that the oldest bottle found was a Pepsi bottle. That doesn't automatically make it the oldest Cola ever!11 And that Coke copied off Pepsi1!@

Under you and Rob's assumptions, they would! And that would be factual!

But we know better don't we.

BUT YOU DON'T SEEM TO HAVE ANY PROBLEM ACCEPTING THE FACT!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THAT COCA COLA INVENTED COKE!!!!

Funny that! NOW S. T. F. U.!

No... because they did. THAT IS A FACT.

Originally Posted by Warung

EVIDENCE!!!! is the word of the day.

Main Entry: 1proof
Pronunciation: 'prüf
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, alteration of preove, from Old French preuve, from Late Latin proba, from Latin probare to prove -- more at PROVE
1 a : the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact b : the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning.

Uh how does this help you in any way? You are full of irrelevant posts.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by bad_quote

Owned.

[bad_quote]

Edited because I was making fun of retarded people and that was mean so I take it back.

[deomacius]

Originally Posted by bad_quote

Remarkably incoherent blabbering...

Have you considered....

[besson3c]

Rob,

Once again, your responses are predictably over the top in being intensely pointed and insulting.

I ask you again: why do you feel that MacNN owes you a lifetime MacNN forum membership? I'm sure this thread will get locked, you will get banned, and the cycle will renew.

Why not start up your own board?


(and no, I'm not a Christian defending Christianity, just somebody who thinks that you should be held accountable for your inappropriate behavior.)

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by bad_quote

... jesus titty ****ing christ you are stupid.

Example that Zimphire is apparently too god damn retarded to understand even though a 5 year old with down syndrome would understand the ****ing concept here because honestly it ISNT THAT COMPLICATED:

In other words, Rob has nothing to add but personal attacks, And still no proof or substance.

Idea "X" does not exist in the history of the world.

We don't know when Idea X existed first.

Person "A" comes up with idea "x". A few centuries after person "A" dies, Person "B" tries to come up with another ******** story in order to control the masses (most of which are apparently too ****ing dumb to understand something as simple as this concept that I'm currently explaining).

And here is where you go off in incoherent tangents.

HENCE, Person "B" took person "A"s idea and started using it themself.

For someone who can supposedly decipher all the bible's double meanings, contradictions, and other total ******** into something that makes reasonable sense (if you ignore even bigger holes and contradictions), I'm surprised you can't grasp a concept this simple.

Rob you did nothing to legitimize your original claims in this post. I don't know what you think you accomplished. You should have just not posted anything really.

Originally Posted by deomacius

Have you considered....

Exactly.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by bad_quote

Nor will he admit that Zoroaster in mesopotamia was the one who started the whole one god thing with heaven and hell, which christianity later just stole and incorporated.

Still waiting Rob.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Kevin

In other words, Rob has nothing to add but personal attacks, And still no proof or substance.

Neither of you have any substance in which you can connect on, it just can't happen. Period.

And you, you need to practice restraint. You know what you're getting into, you know full well where this is going. Don't you have anything better to do? You aren't going to convince Rob you are right. You aren't going to "win". What do you expect to happen here?

[bad_quote]

Holy ****! ZIMPHIRE IS RIGHT! I JUST TALKED TO JESUS AND HE IS THE ONE! ALL THE SCIENCE STUFF AND DINOSAUR BONES IS JUST EVIL TRICKERY BY THE DEVIL! JESUS IS MY SAVIOR!

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Neither of you have any substance in which you can connect on, it just can't happen. Period.

Besson, I am not trying to say anything is factual, or that I know who the person that "came up with it" I am saying we don't know.

So no real proof on my part is needed.

And you, you need to practice restraint. You know what you're getting into, you know full well where this is going. Don't you have anything better to do? You aren't going to convince Rob you are right. You aren't going to "win". What do you expect to happen here?

I actually expect Rob to either back up his statements, or admit he may be wrong.

I think he can do it.

But we will see.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Kevin

I actually expect Rob to either back up his statements, or admit he may be wrong.

I think he can do it.

But we will see.

What is gained by getting him to admit he is wrong? Why do you have to be right?

[bad_quote]

Originally Posted by besson3c

What is gained by getting him to admit he is wrong? Why do you have to be right?

Because Zimphire believes he is infalliable like Jesus.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c

What is gained by getting him to admit he is wrong?

Something I have yet see him do. That either means.

1. Rob has never been wrong.

or

2. Rob can never admit to being wrong

Why do you have to be right?

I don't, read above.

[bad_quote]

I have been wrong multiple times in MacNN history and admitted I was wrong. Do a search. You, on the other hand, I don't believe have ever admitted it.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by bad_quote

I have been wrong multiple times in MacNN history and admitted I was wrong. Do a search.

Under which nickname? show some examples please

You, on the other hand, I don't believe have ever admitted it.

Not only do I admit when I am wrong, I apologize to said person I was arguing with.

Originally Posted by Zimphire

I apologize. I must have missed that part.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...ze#post2609117

Originally Posted by Zimphire

I am sorry, I apologize. You are correct.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...ze#post2548001

Originally Posted by Zimphire

You are correct. I apologize.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...ze#post2342528

Originally Posted by Zimphire

You are correct, and make a good point. I apologize

http://forums.macnn.com/search.php?searchid=517500

I am sorry, I might have knee-jerked there. I apologize.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...ze#post1990181

I can post more if you want. I've been wrong lots.

[besson3c]

double post

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Something I have yet see him do. That either means.

1. Rob has never been wrong.

or

2. Rob can never admit to being wrong

I don't, read above.

You sure like to twist things around to suit your tastes. Sometimes your posts make my head explode.

You are trying to expose the error in Rob's reasoning, and by doing so prove that you are right that Rob doesn't have a case. Pretty much most of your bickering seems to revolve around your need to be right.

I like you, but I do think that you need some self-confidence. It doesn't always have to be publicly known that you are right, you should be able to have quiet confidence in your belief.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c

You sure like to twist things around to suit your tastes. Sometimes your posts make my head explode.

What have I twisted?

You are trying to expose the error in Rob's reasoning, and by doing so prove that you are right that Rob doesn't have a case.

No, I am trying to get Rob (And Warung) to either back up his assertions, or admit he was wrong. I assure you that is my intentions. Or are you trying to tell me you know my intentions better than I do?

Pretty much most of your bickering seems to revolve around your need to be right.

If being right mattered to me so much, I would never admit to being wrong. Obviously I have, so it does not.

I like you, but I do think that you need some self-confidence. It doesn't always have to be publicly known that you are right, you should be able to have quiet confidence in your belief.

Again, not about being right. This is a classic example of projection me thinks.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Kevin

What have I twisted?

No, I am trying to get Rob to either back up his assertions, or admit he was wrong. I assure you that is my intentions. Or are you trying to tell me you know my intentions better than I do?

If being right mattered to me so much, I would never admit to being wrong. Obviously I have, so it does not.

Again, not about being right. This is a classic example of projection me thinks.

blah blah blah bicker bicker bicker... you two are some of the most incredibly stubborn people I know. There is no getting through to you.

Think about what I've said. Why is it so important to you that Rob back up his assertions? Because you want to prove that he is wrong and doesn't have a case. If Rob admitted that he was wrong, that would make you right, right?

It really couldn't be any more transparent.

[Kevin]

besson, why do you feel the need to give me motivations I simply do not have or share?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Kevin

besson, why do you feel the need to give me motivations I simply do not have or share?

Because it's incredibly annoying to constantly run into your endless bickering with Rob (and, occasionally, others), and because I'm surprised that somebody with your intelligence is unable to recognize the futility of your attempts, and because I think that I think you are the one more likely to transcend the immaturity of Rob's aggressions and learn to deal with them appropriately.

[andi*pandi]

People. I made a perfectly horrid pun back there on page 4, and you are all too wrapped up in your petty squabbling to even acknowledge it?

For shame!

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Because it's incredibly annoying to constantly run into your endless bickering with Rob (and, occasionally, others), and because I'm surprised that somebody with your intelligence is unable to recognize the futility of your attempts, and because I think that I think you are the one more likely to transcend the immaturity of Rob's aggressions and learn to deal with them appropriately.

besson I wasn't really trying to change his mind... Like I said, this wasn't about being right or wrong.

I've seen too often "ideas" in here being treated as fact and then people getting offended if you ask for some references on that fact.

They know they can't prove what they say. So instead of saying so, they spin and spin and spin and try their hardest from admitting they may be wrong.

I have an IDEA, that IDEAS are good things. I am actually attempting to show rob and warung it's not really actually important that you are right or wrong. That impresses no one.

But what does impress people is the ability to admit when you are wrong.

People have more respect for people that admit they are wrong when they are. They also gain more credibility that way.

If someone has a habit of backing off and admitting they are wrong when they are, they are more likely to look right when they don't back off because they are right.

If that makes any sense.

Not trying to be pretentious here in a "grasshoppahh" sort of way.

Someone let me in on this "secret" once.

Just passing it on.

Also, it would be nice once in awhile to discuss something without a bunch of CAPITOL LETTERS and over-usage of PUNCTUATION!111 and using sentences that sound like "OMG U R A RETARD OMG RAWFLMAYO!!!" which both Rob and Warung are known for...

But that's just me.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Kevin

besson I wasn't really trying to change his mind... Like I said, this wasn't about being right or wrong.

I've seen too often "ideas" in here being treated as fact and then people getting offended if you ask for some references on that fact.

They know they can't prove what they say. So instead of saying so, they spin and spin and spin and try their hardest from admitting they may be wrong.

I have an IDEA, that IDEAS are good things. I am actually attempting to show rob and warung it's not really actually important that you are right or wrong. That impresses no one.

But what does impress people is the ability to admit when you are wrong.

People have more respect for people that admit they are wrong when they are. They also gain more credibility that way.

If someone has a habit of backing off and admitting they are wrong when they are, they are more likely to look right when they don't back off because they are right.

If that makes any sense.

Not trying to be pretentious here in a "grasshoppahh" sort of way.

Someone let me in on this "secret" once.

Just passing it on.

Also, it would be nice once in awhile to discuss something without a bunch of CAPITOL LETTERS and over-usage of PUNCTUATION!111 and using sentences that sound like "OMG U R A RETARD OMG RAWFLMAYO!!!" which both Rob and Warung are known for...

But that's just me.

Okay, but it seems like he is not going to do what you ask, so why not just let it go?

[bad_quote]

Jesus is my savior!

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Okay, but it seems like he is not going to do what you ask, so why not just let it go?

Yeah it doesn't seem like it to me either.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by bad_quote

Jesus is my savior!

Here is a great opportunity to practice ignoring him!

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Kevin

Yeah it doesn't seem like it to me either.

I could have foreshadowed that pages ago

[Warung]

Originally Posted by Kevin

THERE IS NO EVIDENCE ANYONE STOLE ANYTHING. If there is, please provide it for the class to see...

Let me try and make this as simple as possible.

Fact = Theory + EVIDENCE (no, doesn't have to be 100% conclusive) + Standing up to scrutiny and testing

Now, do you honestly believe, that if hundreds, maybe even thousands, of historians make claims about certain things that they have NO IDEA! of what they are talking about?

Do you really think that having a lot of evidence is the same as having "NO CLUE AS TO WHAT WAS GOING ON"? (as you have stated again and again in this thread)

Here is a wake up call for your fundamentalist a55: NO THEORY IS EVER, I REPEAT E_V_E_R, 100% conclusively proven. To constantly smear and spread FUD about conclusions other people have arrived at after years, maybe even decades of studying the subject matter is nothing but asshattry beyond any level of acceptance.

I know that spreading bullsh1t like you are doing here is very popular among ID proponents, young earth creationists and other brain damaged nitwits. But rest assured, your FUD only affects the most feeble minded.

If you aren't interested in the subject matter, and have no opinion on it (and in addition are COMPLETELY uneducated (not only concerning the issue at hand)) I suggest you just S.T.F.U.

Some people actually are quite fascinated with history and trying to reconstruct how things (may) have happened. Maybe in 100 years we will find that the earliest forms of monotheism were practiced by some obscure cult 8000 years ago. You know what though, - people like you won't be discovering it, because all you're interested in is spreading your completely UNSUPPORTED, IRRELEVANT and mind numbingly STUPID literal interpretations of religious texts.

Just like the Taliban and other religious extremists, you aren't part of the solution, but just part of the problem. Why? Because for all your lame a55 rhetoric, lies and destructive narratives, you have 0 evidence for your claims, and your "beliefs" are nothing but hallow wishes to sooth your sick little meaningless existences.

Here are your "FACTS"!

Monotheism first practiced by the ancient Egyptians (and first thought of by Zoroastrians) = Highly fu<king likely

The cross being an ancient symbol and at some point in history adopted by Christians as their symbol of choice = Highly fu<king likely

The earth being 6000 years old = Highly unlikely

The moon being made out of cheese = Highly unlikely

There existing some being that controls, and created the universe = Highly unlikely

The theory of evolution being true = VERY very likely

The theory of gravity being true = Very highly likely

The earth revolving around the sun = Highly likely

An Aramaic carpenter who lived around 2000 years ago being the son of the afore mentioned being which controls the universe = HIGHLY fu<king unlikely

The hebrews being the first people to implement and come up with monotheism = HIGHLY unlikely

...

Anybody who wants to present EVIDENCE to change any of the afore mentioned equations is more than welcome to do so. Until then, they stand as presented.

[Kevin]

Warung you haven't presented any evidence to prove your staements yet, so why should anyone disprove statements that show no proof?

You think you can post a long post of verbal masturbation that ads NOTHING to the discussing or to further back your point.

And until you do, don't expect anyone to do anything. Because you and Rob have YET TO BACK UP YOUR ASSERTIONS!

AGAIN if the professionals in the field don't call it a FACT, why are you and Rob?

Do you two know something these people do not?

The only people in here spreading BS is you and Rob. The fact after 6 pages you STILL haven't shown ANY PROOF that backs up your claims. Heck, I even looked the guy up for you, and posted information about him to maybe give you guys a head start (Too bad no information backed up your claims)

BTW Go back and re-read what I had to say about people not even going to heaven till after Jesus died.

It makes your two points totally irrelevant as well.

I know you and Rob wont ever admit to being wrong, nor will you show me any proof to back up your assertions (No proof exists in the matter)

But if you want, we can do this all day.

[Kevin]

Double Post.

[bad_quote]

Zimphire, I hate to say this, but if Jesus reads this thread you're going to hell for being a dumbass.

[Kevin]

Originally Posted by bad_quote

Zimphire, I hate to say this, but if Jesus reads this thread you're going to hell for being a dumbass.

[bad_quote]