- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: My Pillow Guy Talk
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:07 pm to Forever
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:07 pm to Forever
quote:
I’m not even sure how to communicate with someone with a sub-100 IQ on something that you just have to have the mental capacity to understand, but you can disprove things.
Give it a shot. As you’ve told us repeatedly, you’re way smarter than I am and I have no doubt you can explain how to absolutely disprove something.
quote:
the long history of “guilty until proven innocent” legal systems being an absolute humanitarian disaster and easily exploitable
it’s like you’re right there but you just won’t open that underlying box as to why this ^ happened This post was edited on 8/6/21 at 12:10 pm
2
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:10 pm to RiverCityTider
quote:
. I do think he's insane
Ah, we now have a chance for dialogue because this is one point we are in total agreement on.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:15 pm to RiverCityTider
I’ve also heard Mike will be serving refreshments out of Russell’s teapot.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:31 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
you’re way smarter than I am and I have no doubt you can explain how to absolutely disprove something
I am. I know that every lawyer who graduated from Southern University thinks they’re the next coming of Einstein, but your profession is filled with frickups and morons who Adderall’d their way through law school and you’re one of them based on your long history of saying stupid shite on this board.
The fact that your political views are dependent on the postmodernist worldview that every single leftist is required to accept as doctrine makes it impossible for me to explain it to you. By arguing that things can’t be disproven, you’ve already demonstrated that you’re completely unreasonable because you think there’s no such thing as objective truth, which is an irrational viewpoint. There’s no way for you to accept the fact that if someone claims that you have 4 apples and you actually have 2, then you’ve disproven their statement simply by having 2 apples and taking no further action. That’s just how the world works in an objective reality. You don’t need to “prove” anything to disprove something, which is where you’re wrong.
A void objective statement = disproof. Disproof is a state, not a physical action. You would disagree and argue that disproving a false claim about the number of apples someone has is just proving that you have X number of apples, but again, that’s a completely irrational viewpoint and a “Ministry of Truth”-esque play on language. The world “false” wouldn’t exist if disproof didn’t exist.
That being said, you’re trying to get into a really deep philosophical discussion about postmodernism and other ways to see the world that you clearly haven’t spent much time researching, or you wouldn’t have the political views and worldview that you currently have, and I’m not really up for it.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:34 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
As one of the maintainers of the steady drumbeat of "Nothing is going to happen" and "Only impeachment can remove Asterisk & Vice-Asterisk", are you admitting to an impossible standard of Lindell being able to deliver?
I’m merely holding Mike to his claims. As one of the resident retards, do you ever get tired of the constant disappointment from falling for all this fake news? Too bad they whacked your Pfizer CEO thread yesterday. That was gold.
This post was edited on 8/6/21 at 12:35 pm
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:36 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
it’s like you’re right there but you just won’t open that underlying box as to why this ^ happened
And no, I’m extremely far off from the way you see the world. You think I’m “right there” because you don’t understand where I’m coming from, and you can’t quantify or defend your own views on this because you’re not aware of what they are. We could not be further apart from a philosophical standpoint, which I’d be fine with if you even knew what your own philosophical standpoint was and admitted to it
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:40 pm to Esquire
I'm the one who RA'ed it, jackass. Emerald bumped a story from March, I posted it, and then I was the one who posted the tweet refuting it.
Jesus Christ, you can't stay on topic without trying to deflect/pivot to save your life.
Jesus Christ, you can't stay on topic without trying to deflect/pivot to save your life.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:40 pm to Esquire
Your obsession with Vox is noted. Please stop trying to derail the thread with thinly veiled personal attacks that add nothing.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:42 pm to Korkstand
Not just laws but NDA's so not only would they go to jail, they'd be sued to death on the spot as well if they couldn't get whistleblower status.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:42 pm to VoxDawg
quote:
I'm the one who RA'ed it, jackass. Emerald bumped a story from March, I posted it, and then I was the one who posted the tweet refuting it.
You RA’d because you looked like a dumbass
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:43 pm to ShinerHorns
quote:
Your obsession with Vox is noted. Please stop trying to derail the thread with thinly veiled personal attacks that add nothing.
Your safe space was deleted.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 12:57 pm to Forever
quote:But the only way to disprove that he has 4 apples is to prove that he only has 2. The statement has well-defined bounds and truth is easily verifiable. It is falsifiable.
There’s no way for you to accept the fact that if someone claims that you have 4 apples and you actually have 2, then you’ve disproven their statement simply by having 2 apples and taking no further action. That’s just how the world works in an objective reality. You don’t need to “prove” anything to disprove something, which is where you’re wrong.
Not all statements are falsifiable. For example, Russell's teapot, as boosie mentioned. We can't really prove that it doesn't exist. There is no alternative (like 2 apples vs 4) that we can prove in order to disprove the claim. We would have to perform an exhaustive search for it, which given that the bounds for the claim are essentially limitless is not possible.
Network packets only exist for an instant, and it is easy to create fake ones. I can generate and capture packets which contain any information I like, and which appear to come from any machine that I like and destined for any machine that I like. The claim is that these packets existed at one time and that they were legit, but we obviously cannot go back in time to verify that. The best we could do is claim that we also captured these exact packets at these exact times, and then it is a case of who is lying.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:01 pm to Korkstand
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:05 pm to VoxDawg
Do you think that tweet goes against what I just said?
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:07 pm to Korkstand
I do not. It wasn't posted as a refutation of your point, but rather an illustration.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:08 pm to VoxDawg
It illustrates something that is not pertinent to the topic.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:10 pm to Korkstand
If you don't see the connection now, I doubt you ever will. Carry on.
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:12 pm to RiverCityTider
Remember when we all made fun of the left rallying behind creepy porn lawyer?
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:19 pm to RiverCityTider
Posted on 8/6/21 at 1:21 pm to boosiebadazz
quote:
You can’t disprove something.
Then why is disprove even in the dictionary? If you can’t disprove things then disprove isn’t a real word.
Page 5 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News