1. If this where a publication it would be different. You are a clown of a forum therefor I don't feel i need to have structure for you to read and comprehend what i am typing! If it is a problem I will structure my writing for you. You present what i call a typical argument. the first conception is attack his Grammar and Structure. You have poor grammar or spelling yada yada..
2. What the **** does that have to do with the discussion? Now you are being condescending. Fact is you really don't have a clue and its becoming apparent.
Furthermore I know that I can be supercilious at times BUT it is to get peoples attention and invoke a certain perception. ALso might I add dealing with people who are Ad Hominems like yourself is quite frankly irritating. Now you look THAT SHiit up buddy
3. In my book Its called Life you demand respect and try to get a Point or Facts across. I'm often relentless because people choose to ignore FACTS.
4. If i don't Know something and someone has more knowledge on the subject I don't mind saying I am Wrong. In this case I never insinuated it couldn't be done.
5. that doesn't make any sense because everything i said can be PROVEN and is ALREADY KNOWN. i Didn't say it is not possible but it not LOGICAL. the earth Is the best place to live as a human. it will take a very long time to get conditions that are ideal. we are better off focusing on expanding our range in travel. FYI that artical has nothing to do whit the discussion..
i sense some butthurt, here,... gettin all up in them feelings, typos, and defensiveness.
i guess you don't know what an inference is either, with my linking to nasa. fuggin' facepalm*
you got one thing right though... calling me a clown couldn't be further from the truth as i relish in the fact that you and your ilk make it just that easy to be so. mmfwcl mofakoo!
if you didn't notice, this is the THUNDERDOME, freud, anything goes and staying on topic is not a requirement. how you interpret what people post is your problem, not ours. im just entertained, as i am sure my buddies here are, at watching you feed into my trolling by trying to explain yourself. news flash; no one gives a sh
it, bub. this is a fun forum, and you're being a debbie downer trying to get all serious n' sh
it. what the fu
ck did you expect by posting here, supa's mom?
in my book, titled; 'f
uck yo life', using words you don't know the definition to in effort to look smart is possibly the funniest thing i see from clueless individuals across the net, with this forum being a great source of material, which i have been apart of for the past 10 years in many different forms of user.
i too, like facts. but it helps when you know them. you're using 'invoke' in place of 'evoke' or 'elicit', there is a difference. my point is to show you how you fail miserably in trying to get your point across and expect others to afford you an audience, in the mahfu
ckin' thunderdome, when you try to bout with higher intelligence consisting of a word game that is non-factual. step yo game up, bish. know how to word play and grow some thicker skin, 'cause you're not going to survive long with that outlook on life. maybe you should join s/m and ngsm's forum to see how it's done.