Evil-ution

[cotjones 10+ year member]

You made a topic to discuss it, yet when people do you can't handle it. I didn't ask for everything you knew. Once you were shown for what you are, you lied about it and moved the goal line. You started the topic precisely TO lecture people for free. Now that you've said "we're not arguing that, we're arguing this" you won't define what "this" is so that nobody can argue you on it. Very simple stuff. The whole thread you've been insisting you're smarter than everyone and calling me crazy. You clearly have no room to talk.
Ok and this phenomenon can show that living things mutate changes and remain the same living thing, but with slightly different appendages etc, and through natural selection these deformities usually die off. It is still an amazing leap of faith (since it has neither been observed nor can it be supported logically) that anything has mutated into something else entirely.

You avoided my question earlier in the topic that if the theory of evolution were absolute, wouldn't it make sense that older organism would show more mutations than relatively newer organisms. You avoided it because you know I can provide examples of this.

Your numbered list insists that random mutations happen all the time. What that implies is that given the same set of time, 2 different organisms should display close to the same amount of anomolies. They don't. What this does is shoot holes all in that theory, but since you believe it on faith, you will come up with some bs psychobabble to attempt to defend it and then when questioned say "nuh uh that isn't what we're talking about and you're crazy". LOL then they other guys who I've debated with in the past will personally attack me and the cycle will continue. Absolutely hysterical. The butthurt brigade strikes again!.... and they wonder why other forums sprout up all the time to get away from this one.

lol wut?

No, actually fossils show conclusively that more complex organisms ARE generally newer? Your argument here doesn't make any sense. Why would 2 organisms at any time display the same amount of anomalies?

The earliest multicellular life is thought to be sponges. Sponges are alive today along side all the other newer species. However as we travel back the timeline of fossils everything else disappears until we finally reach a point where there are nothing BUT sponges and single celled organisms. Just about any organism alive today can be traced via this method. That is very clearly indicative of the derived complexity in organisms today.

The selecting factor is what determines the extent of evolution. Mutations that don't contribute to fitness go extinct. You are asking me to dumb down the theory to something it's not.

Do me a favor, sum up Electronics theory for me. So that I can understand how a smartphone works enough to design one.

...And your posts are insult to human intelligence, btw.

Now this is 3 times I've given you summaries of Evolution despite the fact that the field entails so much information, and your still blabbing about me moving the goal line and all this garbage. Fact is you are just an idiot, and probably always will be.

 

[subzero 5,000+ posts]

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

Mantis, tl;dr

I glanced, and saw nothing that wasn't raw conjecture that could be contradicted by evidence.

If you'd like me to address specific points please give them to me one or 2 at a time, I don't have time to write a book.

Example, your author says that mutations have been induced in fruit flies and most are negative. DUH! I told you that. Population genetics eliminates the majority of the negative mutations that occur, but not the positive ones. Increasing the rate of mutations doesn't ensure faster evolution. Sometimes it can simply insure more mutation and death. X-rays are not a selective factor (unless you become immune to them, lol) A selecting factor would be that if color of flies was black, and a species of bird is introduced that is unable to see red. Red will win out over the other color. Red is a mutation. Flies that have that mutation will be more likely to reproduce and pass it on Simple.

I'll debate topics, not books. that's silly

 

[subzero 5,000+ posts]

Mantis, tl;dr

I called this...

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

I called this...

What did you expect? He wins on having no life. There is no way I could spend that long on this forum. I usually glance and make replies throughout my day in between classes or before bed.

I saw nothing in that post that wasn't simply biased misinterpretation of data or baseless conjecture.

Like I said, give me an argument out of that which you believe wasn't, I'll show you what's wrong with it. Actually give me any argument out of it and i'll show you how it does nothing to disprove evolution.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

"The book Nanomedicine states that the human body is made up of 41 chemical elements. These basic elements—carbon, iron, oxygen, and others—are all present in the “dust” of the earth. Thus, as Genesis states, humans truly are formed “out of dust from the ground.”...blah blah Too long

Again stating that the goal is proving or disproving evolution, not it's dichotomy with the Bible. That said, you are arguing multiple different things. Complexity is a human concept. Extremely complex things happen in nature all the time with no intervention. Evolution provides the explanation for such events. You look at the end product to describe the thing, scientists look at the entire process to describe the thing. This provides no evidence against evolution.

"There is, however, an area where many would say that modern science and the Bible are hopelessly at odds. Most scientists believe the theory of evolution, which teaches that all living things evolved from a simple form of life that came into existence millions of years ago. The Bible, on the other hand, teaches that each major group of living things was specially created and reproduces only “according to its kind.” Man, it says, was created “out of dust from the ground.” blah blah too long

Actually there are plenty of "Transitional" species. The fact is that Evolution suggests that the time it took to move from marsupials to placental mammals was on the order of 30 million years. This is a TINY change that took FARRRRR longer than language using humans have been around for. In the mean time in the last 100 years there have been all sorts of examples of organs developing outside the body and other bizarre things such as babies developing outside the womb. You really think its that much of a stretch to think the transition to placental birth couldn't happen in 30 million years? On the other hand, you claim speciation is impossible, yet we've accomplished it in labs. Then you claim that it's possible, but just not from category to category (IE: cat to fish or so on.) No one claims a fish spontaneously gave birth to a squirrel. But if you ask me this looks a HECK of a lot like a transitional species your book here claims doesn't exist:

"Many find it hard to accept this creation account. They contend that it is drawn from the creation myths of ancient peoples, primarily those from ancient Babylon. However, as one recent Bible dictionary noted: “No myth has yet been found which explicitly refers to the creation of the universe” and the myths “are marked by polytheism and the struggles of deities for supremacy in marked contrast to the Heb[rew] monotheism of [Genesis] 1-2.”3 Regarding Babylonian creation legends, the trustees of the British Museum stated: “The fundamental conceptions of the Babylonian and Hebrew accounts are essentially different.”blah blah too long

Actually, this entire thing is false. The Bible does directly contradict science all over the place. IE:

29 Who can understand how he spreads out the clouds,

how he thunders from his pavilion?

30 See how he scatters his lightning about him,

bathing the depths of the sea.

31 This is the way he governs[d] the nations

and provides food in abundance.

32 He fills his hands with lightning

and commands it to strike its mark.

The fact that the earth was (according to the bible) formed before the sun moon and stars contradicts science. Again this does nothing to disprove EVolution

"However, is the fossil record complete enough for a fair test of whether it is creation or evolution that finds support? Over a century ago, Darwin did not think so. What was “wrong” with the fossil record in his time? It did not contain the transitional links required to support his theory. This situation caused him to say: “Why then is not every geological formation and every stratum full of such intermediate links? Geology assuredly does not reveal any such finely-graduated organic chain; and this, perhaps, is the most obvious and serious objection which can be urged against the theory.”blah blah too long

Actually this is exactly what is expected. MOST things don't get fossilized. Mass extinction events, quickly flooding and area, or covering things in ash catalyze fossilization. Darwin was looking for Acquired characteristics. He was looking for a blend of species, not accurate to what we know of the development of species. Most speciation begins with one or 2 huge changes that adapt the organism to a new niche (ergo: a squirrel-like mammal gaining opposable thumbs.) This development changes the appropriate ecology niche so that it is different from squirrels, thus the squirrel's other characteristics change quickly. Many times too quickly to have a suitable fossil record millions of years later. Keep in mind 99% of species that have ever existed are extinct.

 

[cotjones 10+ year member]

I'm trying, but this is tedious. It's all false conjecture. The sheer amount of it is what is daunting.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

It didn't pis me off. I showed how you have a pattern of behavior. The reason we are still discussing it is because you are trying to spin it so you nobody sees you for what you are. You think if you can turn all the attention to me, nobody will notice what you have done. Don't let the people in here attacking me with you fool you. They always do that. There are far more people who see you for what you are than you know.
If you had any idea what you were talking about, you'd know how stupid you sound. You have no measuring stick to know whether my site is fail or not. That, like evolution is your opinion. You are free to express it, but you fail to realize on both that your opinion means squat because you are nobody.

There were several in this thread and others who disagree with me. It's only when they begin to attack me that I do this. You did, but like everything else you will say you didn't. That's ok... like everything else, it's in your character.

yeah

The pattern of behavior being shown here is yours. The behavior that we should all bow down to your knowledge, and if someone doesn't, that is an 'attack' against you, so you feel you are morally right to start throwing around childish names and being generally rude. You did it in the fatmat thread, and you've done it here.

My pattern of behavior? Its me showing my patience in dealing with you, even as you continue to insist I have ulterior motives for my moderating decisions, that I 'want to ban you', etc. I doubt many other people would be so patient with you, frankly.

The reason we are still discussing it is because you are trying to spin it so you nobody sees you for what you are.

You seem to think that if you just keep making this claim, people will forget that it was you (not me) who brought this year-old argument up that Id forgotten about like 2 days after it happened. You claim Im the butthurt one, and Im the reason we are talking about this, when YOU brought it up from the past... really bro, what's wrong with you?

The measuring stick I use for failure is that you still come here so often. If you want to tell us all, here, how great your site is, and how many members you have, go for it. Honestly, I dont care, it was merely a passing comment on my part. But obviously it touched a sore spot on you.... sorry? lol

There were several in this thread and others who disagree with me. It's only when they begin to attack me that I do this. You did, but like everything else you will say you didn't.

You seem to like to enter into these types of debates, but you usually get defensive and decide people are 'attacking' you very quickly. Go ahead, 'attack' back, just dont break a rule in doing so. If you DO break a rule, dont whine about it for a year afterwards.

Example 1: In post 120 of this thread, I replied for the first time. I replied, disagreeing with something you said. I did not call you an ahole, I didnt call you stupid, etc. Your immediate reply to that post was to call me an "elitist hypocrite" and "incompetent". Hurt feelings? Not at all, Im a big boy. But dont throw stones and then cry when YOU get hit back with one.

Example 2: the fatmat thread. Who started calling who an ahole? You did. When I told you to stop, or take it to the t-dome to call me names, you completely ignored my warning and continued to call me that. Now you blame ME for getting banned over it. Its laughably absurd.

I bumped the fatmat thread. Why haven't you bothered to go back and post in it? You claim I 'deleted all of the evidence from the thread', so I undeleted the two posts I had deleted. Where is this earth shattering "evidence" I deleted? Nowhere, that's where. Both replies that had been deleted contained nothing but personal attacks. I quoted them previously in this thread, and they are back in the fatmat thread for everyone to see. So why aren't you there pointing out that amazing 'evidence'? because it doesn't exist, you know it, and your petty little attempt to claim I deleted some sort of 'evidence' back fired on you. Instead of manning up and admitting you were wrong, you avoid the thread and just sit in this one continuing to make the same ridiculous and baseless accusations.

What 'pattern of behavior' is being shown when you alter my name to "ahole-ic" once Ive obviously upset you, and then later claim you didnt intend for that to suggest Im an asshole? The pattern it shows is that you will spin anyhting you think you can to avoid bruising your ego by admitting you were wrong, in the wrong, or even possibly maybe maybe being insulting.

So Im calling you out. Go back to the fatmat thread and quote for us *exactly* what "evidence" of yours I deleted, lied about, and abused my mod powers to cover up. Do it, I dare you. You wont, its not there. So go ahead, show us what a chickenshit you are by continuing to avoid that thread and this 'evidence' you say I removed. And oh yes, Im attacking you now, personally, because my patience with you, your double standards, your lies, and your spin is growing thin. This is the t-dome, I get to call a lying asshole a lying asshole here, if I want to. You, are a lying asshole. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif Dont like me calling you that? Prove me wrong by posting that 'evidence'. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

This thread was a call out. I replied to inject some logic...and I did that. Of course people were going to flame me. It's their religion we're talking about.

Wow, you make yourself sound so innocent. If you can quote someone calling you a name before you said this:

I know. cotjones is an ahole.

, then Id be glad to see it. But you cant. Sure, there were people before that post that were getting heated and making some somewhat insulting comments (including yourself), but you started name calling, just like the fatmat thread. You did, nobody else. When people disagree with you, you get mad. When you get mad, you decide its okay to start calling names and degenerating the thread into a schoolyard argument. You did it here, you did it in fatmat. You are childish, and that's honestly the nicest way I can put it.

 

[audioholic 5,000+ posts]

You can look at what I said to holic, or you can troll yourself. Frankly it's much more fun to watch your troll attempts than to shut them down.

Its funny, I dont recall you telling me what you meant by it either, if not to insult me. I remember you claiming it wasn't an insult, with absolutely no further explanation though. Only you would change my name to ahole-ic, claim its fair to say because its true, and then do a 180 and claim it wasn't meant to insult, and expect nobody to ask what it DID mean then.

I dont mean to derail this thread to discuss a year-old argument, because I think this thread did a decent job getting back on topic last night. But I also wont sit around and let you lie about my motives, lie about your motives, and then ignore every request for you to explain yourself.

So in conclusion, I look forward to you explaining how changing my name to "ahole-ic" was not an insult, and I look forward to you posting the "evidence" I deleted. Or, I look forward to everyone here seeing what a petty liar you are. Have a great day. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif

 

[i love wenn]

I think it's funny how people see the mechanics of evolution every day, yet don't recognize it. Just understanding how giraffes developed long necks (in order to reach food up high, in turn letting then survive and spread the long neck genes) or the fastest and most muscular gazelles pass on their genes when they got away from the lions, since the lions ended up eating all the slowest gazelles shows the mechanics at work.
Question to all who still don't believe evolution is fact, even though there is more evidence supporting it than you could ever imagine, and not a single piece of evidence challenging it: If life on earth (all life, from single cell organisms to humans) did not come about by natural selection, how did in come about? You cannot say it came about as talked about in the Bible, for one reason because Adam and Eve were only two people, and they cannot account for all the different races of humans... Unless they reproduced and their offspring populated the earth and EVOLVED to live in certain climates (black skin in tropical zones like Africa to protect their skin, for instance).

So in order for the religion answer to be true, evolution has to exist, which makes your point moot in the first place.

humans developing increased levels of melanin in their skin to resist warmer climates is a far, far cry from humans developing from single celled organisms.

 

[ahole-ic]

The pattern of behavior being shown here is yours. The behavior that we should all bow down to your knowledge, and if someone doesn't, that is an 'attack' against you, so you feel you are morally right to start throwing around childish names and being generally rude. You did it in the fatmat thread, and you've done it here.

You quoted my post and began telling me how i was arguing for religion. You framed an argument around it. You said I was applying "pro-religion spin" when I wasn't and said "it's not surprising". I replied basically laughing at that attempt and you replied by saying "I suggested you will continually hide behind what you do not say, rather than what you DO say." in post 136. These are not arguing the topic. They are comments regarding ME personally. So yes you attacked me first, by trying to frame my argument and then when I pointed out what you were doing you insulted me. No amount of lying will hide that fact ahole-ic.

My pattern of behavior? Its me showing my patience in dealing with you, even as you continue to insist I have ulterior motives for my moderating decisions, that I 'want to ban you', etc. I doubt many other people would be so patient with you, frankly.

I'm a member of MANY other forums, as it's my choice to do so. I own tens of forums and the best way to get people to your forum is to join other forums. I don't have problems at other places... or with other mods. It's just you.

You seem to think that if you just keep making this claim, people will forget that it was you (not me) who brought this year-old argument up that Id forgotten about like 2 days after it happened. You claim Im the butthurt one, and Im the reason we are talking about this, when YOU brought it up from the past... really bro, what's wrong with you?

You seem to think that if you keep lying about it people will forget you challenged me to produce that thread. LOL.

The measuring stick I use for failure is that you still come here so often. If you want to tell us all, here, how great your site is, and how many members you have, go for it. Honestly, I dont care, it was merely a passing comment on my part. But obviously it touched a sore spot on you.... sorry? lol

I never said my site in question was great. I said you weren't qualified to judge because you have no idea what you're talking about. The site was started in late 2010. There are tons of car audio sites that have spawned due to this one being run by egotistical mods on power trips, who run off members able to contribute which passively promotes a cesspool of misinformation. This is why you have tons of people saying "caps hurt more than they help", "just add tons of batteries instead of an alt it's cheaper", and ignorant things like that.

You seem to like to enter into these types of debates, but you usually get defensive and decide people are 'attacking' you very quickly. Go ahead, 'attack' back, just dont break a rule in doing so. If you DO break a rule, dont whine about it for a year afterwards.

You have seen me dish out what I received. Lol yes that is the definition of defensive but if you think I'm going to allow an egotistical mod to put me down when he is clearly lying you are mistaken. I showed what you were doing, just like in the deadener thread. I predicted it, and just like the deadener thread you got mad and now you're on a tirade, which is why you took a thread that was no longer discussing that issue just like the deadener thread and continued your personal onslaught. You can't let things go because you're a petty power hungry egotistical jerk. You have some sort of self-esteem tied up in this forum and you NEED to appear superior. That's fine man, do it to someone else. By now you should know that you don't possess the intellectual ability to logically hang with me. Lie and spin and put me down, but there was no reason for your insults that caused me to defend myself other than your acknowledgement that your attempts to argue my points had failed.

Example 1: In post 120 of this thread, I replied for the first time. I replied, disagreeing with something you said. I did not call you an ahole, I didnt call you stupid, etc. Your immediate reply to that post was to call me an "elitist hypocrite" and "incompetent". Hurt feelings? Not at all, Im a big boy. But dont throw stones and then cry when YOU get hit back with one.

Wrong. I accurately called you an elitist along with all of the other people in the thread saying they were intellectually superior and did not have to prove what they were saying. Then I called you hypocrites for denouncing all religion because it cannot be proved, yet saying that evolution doesn't have to be proved and it is unquestionably accurate. Those things are dead-on accurate. You can't dispute them. They are not insults. You took them as derogatory, but that's your fault. I called your argument incompetent... not you. Check post 132 on page 9 for that. I even explained why I called the group you belong to hypocrites. It has not been challenged that I have seen.

Example 2: the fatmat thread. Who started calling who an ahole? You did. When I told you to stop, or take it to the t-dome to call me names, you completely ignored my warning and continued to call me that. Now you blame ME for getting banned over it. Its laughably absurd.

Who banned me? Seems pretty straight-forward and anything but absurd. You deleted the posts where I foretold what you were doing. You refused to move the thread to the dome at the poster's request after there was no technical information contained within. You did so, so the tech section rules would apply and you would have grounds to ban me. ahole-ic is a shortened version of your name whether you like it or not. You knew who I was talking about didn't you? I don't remember explaining who that name was for. So because you knew what that was for, you understand it was a shortened version of your name, and you implied a curseword. You weren't called on. ALL of my posts before and after contain that word, yet you deleted the two that foretold your intentions. You cannot hide that fact. Now, a year later you have undeleted them and that somehow undoes the reason you deleted them to begin with? No. It just puts it on full display for all to see.

I bumped the fatmat thread. Why haven't you bothered to go back and post in it? You claim I 'deleted all of the evidence from the thread', so I undeleted the two posts I had deleted. Where is this earth shattering "evidence" I deleted? Nowhere, that's where. Both replies that had been deleted contained nothing but personal attacks. I quoted them previously in this thread, and they are back in the fatmat thread for everyone to see. So why aren't you there pointing out that amazing 'evidence'? because it doesn't exist, you know it, and your petty little attempt to claim I deleted some sort of 'evidence' back fired on you. Instead of manning up and admitting you were wrong, you avoid the thread and just sit in this one continuing to make the same ridiculous and baseless accusations.

Why would I go back and post in it? The only reason you could be baiting me to do it, is so you look justified when you ban me again. Nothing backfired on me. That's plainly obvious. I know you want it to, just like you wish I'd have argued from some religious standpoint. The problem is, those are both figments of your vivid imagination and you simply cannot make them reality.

What 'pattern of behavior' is being shown when you alter my name to "ahole-ic" once Ive obviously upset you, and then later claim you didnt intend for that to suggest Im an asshole? The pattern it shows is that you will spin anyhting you think you can to avoid bruising your ego by admitting you were wrong, in the wrong, or even possibly maybe maybe being insulting.

You can't upset me. You're just a forum mod on a power trip. It's a lot of fun showing you for what you are. I admitted I was wrong IN THIS VERY THREAD to another member, so you cannot possibly justify this comment. The fact remains when it comes to you and I, I have not been wrong yet... or at least you have failed to prove otherwise. You have got visibly mad and banned me...and in this thread resurrected a dead off-topic argument for the sole purpose of making yourself look superior. There was no other reason.

So Im calling you out. Go back to the fatmat thread and quote for us *exactly* what "evidence" of yours I deleted, lied about, and abused my mod powers to cover up. Do it, I dare you. You wont, its not there. So go ahead, show us what a chickenshit you are by continuing to avoid that thread and this 'evidence' you say I removed. And oh yes, Im attacking you now, personally, because my patience with you, your double standards, your lies, and your spin is growing thin. This is the t-dome, I get to call a lying asshole a lying asshole here, if I want to. You, are a lying asshole. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/smile.gif.1ebc41e1811405b213edfc4622c41e27.gif Dont like me calling you that? Prove me wrong by posting that 'evidence'. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

I see you want me to go back to the fatmat thread and get off topic in a technical section, giving you clear grounds to ban me. Look don't bother telling me you can ban me at any time for any reason.... your appearance is clearly important to you. You want some justification for it so you don't tell on yourself so badly. I'm not going to fall for your trap.... because I'm not ego driven like you. I just like making you tell on yourself.

 

[RAM_Designs 5,000+ posts]

So what did you mean by ahole-ic again? I mean, if it was so light-hearted and not an insult, then it should be pretty easy to explain. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/laugh.gif.48439b2acf2cfca21620f01e7f77d1e4.gif

Still evading this question ecrack?

 

[RAM_Designs 5,000+ posts]

You quoted my post and began telling me how i was arguing for religion. You framed an argument around it. You said I was applying "pro-religion spin" when I wasn't and said "it's not surprising". I replied basically laughing at that attempt and you replied by saying "I suggested you will continually hide behind what you do not say, rather than what you DO say." in post 136. These are not arguing the topic. They are comments regarding ME personally. So yes you attacked me first, by trying to frame my argument and then when I pointed out what you were doing you insulted me. No amount of lying will hide that fact ahole-ic.
I'm a member of MANY other forums, as it's my choice to do so. I own tens of forums and the best way to get people to your forum is to join other forums. I don't have problems at other places... or with other mods. It's just you.

You seem to think that if you keep lying about it people will forget you challenged me to produce that thread. LOL.

I never said my site in question was great. I said you weren't qualified to judge because you have no idea what you're talking about. The site was started in late 2010. There are tons of car audio sites that have spawned due to this one being run by egotistical mods on power trips, who run off members able to contribute which passively promotes a cesspool of misinformation. This is why you have tons of people saying "caps hurt more than they help", "just add tons of batteries instead of an alt it's cheaper", and ignorant things like that.

You have seen me dish out what I received. Lol yes that is the definition of defensive but if you think I'm going to allow an egotistical mod to put me down when he is clearly lying you are mistaken. I showed what you were doing, just like in the deadener thread. I predicted it, and just like the deadener thread you got mad and now you're on a tirade, which is why you took a thread that was no longer discussing that issue just like the deadener thread and continued your personal onslaught. You can't let things go because you're a petty power hungry egotistical jerk. You have some sort of self-esteem tied up in this forum and you NEED to appear superior. That's fine man, do it to someone else. By now you should know that you don't possess the intellectual ability to logically hang with me. Lie and spin and put me down, but there was no reason for your insults that caused me to defend myself other than your acknowledgement that your attempts to argue my points had failed.

Wrong. I accurately called you an elitist along with all of the other people in the thread saying they were intellectually superior and did not have to prove what they were saying. Then I called you hypocrites for denouncing all religion because it cannot be proved, yet saying that evolution doesn't have to be proved and it is unquestionably accurate. Those things are dead-on accurate. You can't dispute them. They are not insults. You took them as derogatory, but that's your fault. I called your argument incompetent... not you. Check post 132 on page 9 for that. I even explained why I called the group you belong to hypocrites. It has not been challenged that I have seen.

Who banned me? Seems pretty straight-forward and anything but absurd. You deleted the posts where I foretold what you were doing. You refused to move the thread to the dome at the poster's request after there was no technical information contained within. You did so, so the tech section rules would apply and you would have grounds to ban me. ahole-ic is a shortened version of your name whether you like it or not. You knew who I was talking about didn't you? I don't remember explaining who that name was for. So because you knew what that was for, you understand it was a shortened version of your name, and you implied a curseword. You weren't called on. ALL of my posts before and after contain that word, yet you deleted the two that foretold your intentions. You cannot hide that fact. Now, a year later you have undeleted them and that somehow undoes the reason you deleted them to begin with? No. It just puts it on full display for all to see.

Why would I go back and post in it? The only reason you could be baiting me to do it, is so you look justified when you ban me again. Nothing backfired on me. That's plainly obvious. I know you want it to, just like you wish I'd have argued from some religious standpoint. The problem is, those are both figments of your vivid imagination and you simply cannot make them reality.

You can't upset me. You're just a forum mod on a power trip. It's a lot of fun showing you for what you are. I admitted I was wrong IN THIS VERY THREAD to another member, so you cannot possibly justify this comment. The fact remains when it comes to you and I, I have not been wrong yet... or at least you have failed to prove otherwise. You have got visibly mad and banned me...and in this thread resurrected a dead off-topic argument for the sole purpose of making yourself look superior. There was no other reason.

I see you want me to go back to the fatmat thread and get off topic in a technical section, giving you clear grounds to ban me. Look don't bother telling me you can ban me at any time for any reason.... your appearance is clearly important to you. You want some justification for it so you don't tell on yourself so badly. I'm not going to fall for your trap.... because I'm not ego driven like you. I just like making you tell on yourself.

It's like reading a delusional person's ramblings. //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/crazy.gif.c13912c32de98515d3142759a824dae7.gif

HE DIDN'T BAN YOU BRO, THE INFRACTION SYSTEM DID. WHEN YOU'RE A DOUCHE OVER A LONG PERIOD OF TIME, YOUR INFRACTIONS ADD UP AND YOU GET AN AUTOMATIC 1 WEEK BAN. STOP PLAYING THE VICTIM.

 

[ahole-ic]

Wow, you make yourself sound so innocent. If you can quote someone calling you a name before you said this: , then Id be glad to see it. But you cant. Sure, there were people before that post that were getting heated and making some somewhat insulting comments (including yourself), but you started name calling, just like the fatmat thread. You did, nobody else. When people disagree with you, you get mad. When you get mad, you decide its okay to start calling names and degenerating the thread into a schoolyard argument. You did it here, you did it in fatmat. You are childish, and that's honestly the nicest way I can put it.

If you wanted to be specific cot sarcastically called me "brain child". I started name calling? Pro rabbit made an implied slam on me, and I countered by using his un-specificity against him. CLEARLY I wasn't actually calling cot an ahole. Please refer to post 63 where I say this to cot " My insult of you earlier was purely satire to demonstrate a point to rabbit." It was satire. He also lost a debate to me in the past and hates me, the same with Rammed, manti5, and yourself. You all have alterior motives. If you look through past political threads I've been in you'll find I"m telling the truth. Rammed is particularly upset because I proved him wrong on Iraq... but that's beside the point.