Your claim is based on pure biased opinion on your part and has no foundation in reality.

HELLA redundant.

I slay myself sometimes.

You need to be literally slayed.

You misspelled independent.

LMFAO.

Jared: Sanguis....bipimus....corpus....epidmus...Aaaaaave....Satani.

knock knock knock

Mom: You've been in your room for awhile Jared. We've talked about how little boys shouldn't play with themselves.

Jared: Gross, mom! I just wanted to talk to me friend, Satan.

Mom: Oh well excuse me. Is he joining us for dinner again?

Jared: No. We just had fresh goat.

When you think about it, our emotions is what helps us soldier through life. Without them, we waste away.

If you don't understand then you should ask questions before you respond so that you can understand.

How can you believe to respond relevantly if you don't understand the topic?

Its definitely a question. I added the question mark to make sure of that.

Do you really think everyone has the same reproductive system? That would mean that we'd all looked similar and process the same way.

It is not like asking "Is anxious people allowed to reproduce", the terms are not even similar.

Metabolism is genetics and if overweightness is metabolism then overweightness is genetics.

Weight is not just a number, it affects many bodily functions.

As if you know our intent.

Stop being so damn fake.

Hope this helps.

DPL.

What it is, is nauseating.

I just love tough guy charades over the internet.

Even if you are a potential threat....I've already told you what's up the first time you threatened me...

Come at me Bro.

I'm pretty sure I can imagine worse things that could be done to me. Your too much of a detailed oriented (fake) persona, so my imagination is greater.

Awww You're not going to respond to me anymore?

Just like the rest, but for different reasons.

At least I didn't rape my own mother, unlike you! Incestshot!

LOL.

If you're going to come shoot me or blow me up or kick my ass or whatever then you better come do it quick before I hurt more women.

LOL.

Rufus.

One time I put myself in 60 stitches just too look bad ass.

I don't believe your act one bit. I'm pretty sure your a sociopath.

You are not scary.

So it's OK for her to try and assault me with brooms and belts and sticks for simply not doing my homework or sleeping in church but it's wrong for me to hurt her to make her realize it's just pissing me off?

I lied. I kept on reading.

I noticed you used the word nigger to try and invoke a negative response in me.

Is that all it takes to get under your skin?

Hurting women. Ha. You're the weak one.

Inersting how you think that someone is a punk just because they hurt women. I hurt men too.

I just have a complete disregard for human life in general.

I agree. We should fight them to death as well.

quit reading your post right after that part.

And I quit reading here.

If you're not a punk bitch give me your name and address and we'll settle this.

No it doesn't...It just means that the BBC acknowledges the fact that the supposed alleged entity is called "Islamic State".

You acknowledge the So-Called God of religion, but dont acknowledge an existence of such.

Issue 1. No substantiation for this alleged "pride"

2. I've given out plenty of personal information. It's just vague to idiots. Which is the point...

3.My issues are with the general Arrogance of humans...and you frequently reinforce that

4. Define real debate and how can something be a fake debate.

5. My self confidence borders on arrogance.

If I'm not elaborating it's because I don't want your help and know you can't help.

Any advice you could possibly give me, I have already thought of or can do the research to find easily

I slung my 260lb mother across the room and to the ground when I was 105lbs and 10y/o and hurt her back because she told me I wasn't strong enough. Not out of anger, but just to prove her wrong. She had very little Authority over me.

Yes I'm bragging about hurting a woman.

More simple minded observations that miss the point.

Just what this world needs more of.

You threatened me and then tried to act nice and consolidating, and then act like my evasive responses to you are unreasonable?

Your psychology studies were a waste of time.

I don't see how people can talk so much shit , to my face or behind my back( I'm naturally intuitive about people so I tend to know what they're thinking) and then treat me like I'm the asshole when I don't or no longer continue to communicate with them.

I don't even fucking care about the trash talk, most of the time I'm trying to incite it and fairly aware of how certain people will interpret my strange behavior before I even start behaving. But it's the fact that I can't communicate with most people that pisses me off because of their frequent misinterpretation. Then I think, if they're the kind of person that cognitions in that manner then we're not going to communicate well anyway and therefore do not give a fuck about them.

I hope this helps your attempt in finding weaknesses in me.

Rufus.

Oh...and before you jump the gun and think it was something you said that incited this response...

I woke up from my nap to find my phone uncharged and the vibration that indicates it needs to be charged, fluctuating...due to a defective import and couldn't position it correctly to keep it charging and so I chunked it against the wall.

The answer to several of your questions is in that post.

Because everybody is and asshole!

Good job , IncestShot.

I suppose I've been trying to seem mysterious and cool my whole life.

I seem like a lot of things.

You've never seen me debate so that warrants the question "why r u her?*...interesting....I didn't realize that the purpose of this site was to show you how to debate.

Then he ^^^^^ is Danny? I thought you were Danny...

Or is Danny hellno?

Who the fuck is Danny...

Maybe I'm everyone.

You mean your other hemisphere.

I don't get the reference.

Instead of just YELLING AT THEM TO AVOID IT when they clearly have nothing better to do with their time, how's about you give them something to help them avoid it?

Their boredom is the culprit. If they could think of something better to do then they wouldn't be getting cyberbullied to begin with.

Is that a joke?

Figure it out smarty pants.

I thought you were a huge psychology nerd.

I guess that doesn't mean you're good at it, huh?

As if I believed your poop story.

Am 100% skeptical. .

Damnt. Guess I'm dumb then.

And naive.

And retarded.

Intelligence is something a shovel has more of in it's handle than I have in my whole body.

Immature as well. I don't know any better.

How people work and the world works escapes me.

I'm autistic.

I try to be cool

I do it for attention.

I'm staring at you.

I talked to you so that means I'm flirting.

I don't even know what you mean about worrying about giving out personal info. There's people I've known for years that I still hide much from. So why would I be so scantily clad with a stranger?

I just don't give a fuck about you or anyone else.

No I don't care to elaborate to assholes.

Speaking of assholes.. Is your mother's still sore from your bouts of incest?

LOL.

Rufus.

Thanks. And hallelujah.

I hate crayons. They're so blotchy.

I don't use a computer.

No I didn't. Look at my argument. I was specifying a kind of human and the "you" was to put emphasis on that.

How does saying "You" remove someone from a category?

Lol.

An army vet who smears shit on religious text and has the communication style of an adolescent...

Are you a Leo?

It doesn't take a certain mental state. It's just a trend.

People follow trends...plain and simple.

For them to be wired different, it means that they should inherently have no appeal to exist on social media, and social media should not cater to them unless it is profitable to do so.

I disagree. Maybe you could word it differently and remove inherently. It clearly isn't the case. It makes it sound like they want to be bullied.

So it isn't the cyberbullying that's harmful, but the self destructive behavior of putting your self in an optional position to be bullied, which is harmful?

So the victim is to blame? Or are they not really a victim?

Why would I ban you for giving a reasonable response?

Well except for the intellectual dishonesty, I CAN say the question like most of yours is stupid, , it is reasonable.

OK so he's Dbcooper.

Because it makes the browser act weird. :/

I think it's fair to say that not everyone can be like you.

Some people are wired to care more. If that makes sense.

Omg I was saying the same thing the other day.

He's been playing Pokemon Go .

Irrelevant.

Lol.

I've learned that threatening to kill someone while waving a knife is much more effective than waving a banana.

Thanks Joe.

Your ignorance of those mental states, does not surprise.

All of them can be dangerous, but not all of them are what people would consider evil.

How annoying someone is has nothing to do with how well they'll serve the country.

I don't believe good or evil exists.

You mad bro? If you're going to kill me just do it already.

Get mad all you want, but I fear no man or entity.

If God isn't real and there is no afterlife and I'm just a delusional nutjob then there is literally nothing to fear.

I've got nothing.

No job. No friends. No family.

But this is my fault. I got into this and chose to continue living the way I do.

God gave us everything we need to survive.

He made it our job to take care of our species.

WHY THE FUCK DONT MORE OF YOU HUMANS GO AND HELP ALL OF THOSE DISEASED PEOPLE IF YOU REALLY FEEL SO BAD ABOUT IT??

The number of diseased substantially fails in comparison to the number of those who can help them.

God made it so that there is always a chance to live longer and healthier.

You people are just being lousy in your endeavors.

STOP BLAMING GOD FOR YOUR OWN DAMN LAZINESS

Do you ever ask questions or do you just yammer on thinking you're being informative?

And you admit to being intentionally irrelevant.

You waste my time.

Even then it wouldn't be definitive. The only thing definitive would be, that one of'em lost to the other, but not that one style is better than the other in general.

That's why any argument made for or against the other side, is dumb.

Debates like this are asinine....

your shite about KM being only "throwing people" is only very partially correct.

I didn't say that KM was only that. Shit for brains.

Learn how to read.

The response of arrogance. "I'm right so he must be trolling."

Why even debate if you already think you're right?

People have NO choice in saying what they really want and so they just play mind games to try and get it?

Your argument is as dumb as mine.

The boxer cuz they throw punches and krav maga throws people.

Punches can be thrown faster than people can be thrown.

Therefore Boxers will inflict more damage per second than Krav Maga users.

Ha. Liberals and their bellowing about equality while at the same time believing that cops deserve more punishments for making a mistake.

With liberals , it's all about ridiculing those who are not like them. How is that equality?

Do the inconsistent opinions ever stop with these liberals?

There is no design within your retort, tis' only a stencil.

Have you not the pencil to fill it in? Perhaps a magic marker is more your style.

Boredom. I ask questions when I'm bored.

Come closssserrrrrrr, Cartman. Eeeyahheheheheeehhhhh.......

Is anything discussed on here something that we should worry about or care about?

Nope.

--CONVERSATION 1--

ProLogos: What's your point?

Bohemian: Civil liberties don't end at need.

ProLogos: No, moron. What's your point in stating that? Looks like you're just rambling.

--CONVERSATION 2--

ProLogos: Well then, Constitutional rights are irrelevant when it comes to need.

Bohemain: And...?

ProLogos: That's been my whole point about your argument from the start.

--LATER--

ProLogos: I never said it's irrelevant to the debate.

ProLogos: What's your point?

Everything looks consistent here.

No, it doesn't but I tire of arguing semantics with you. In any case I'm not sure what you mean 'non-combative'.

A dispute is combative.

If it's not combative then it isn't a dispute.

You chose your post as a dispute,without actually disputing .

That's why it's nonsense.

I posted, as we now both agree, relevant information in a gun control debate so your contention is what exactly?

I never had a contention. You disputed me so you should have the contention.

The 'Effect' was emphasis,

Emphasis on what? Fucking? What's fucking got to do with this discussion?

Nothing.

I suppose 'moron' and 'dipstick' are terms of endearment?

You really aren't making sense here.

by the extension of that logic, treat every non-necessity in an identical manner.

That's not logical because the terms on different.

None of those things listed are nearly as harmful to life as guns.

Because people only want things they need?

No.

I said a bit more than that, as did some of the other users you banned.

The only thing you had left to say was "that argument is terrible". If you don't want to be banned, add an actual argument with your insults.

The other guy was banned because he stated several things that I know he couldn't prove and we've already discussed how he's too lazy to go do the research and site his information.

For the apparent fact that you say so.

If you want a information, ask for it. Passive aggressive sarcasm only clouds communication and deludes yourself into thinking you've made a good point.

Well what else could I be?

But I do cartman.

I do.

I already see what you're saying, but that isn't irony

I just figured I ask.

Please explain. Irony is a very misunderstood concept. So I see it as very likely that you don't understand it.

This is easily observable by looking at how people are conditioned to respond a certain way.

What do brooms do? They sweep.

What were you doing? A Sweeping generalization.

A fallacy you intentionally use a lot or are unaware of.

Put away the broom cartman...just put it away...

So there's really no distinction. Gotcha.

If you do not grasp the relevance of Constitutional Rights in a debate about gun control, your incomprehension is self-imposed, and I can do nothing to remedy that. That being noted, I fail to see how this in anyway answers my question.

I never said it's irrelevant to the debate.

It's just noncombative, which makes your dispute nonsensical.

So let me see if I understand this correctly.

Herrrrrre we go.....

You have a problem with "cussin",

No. I never even said that. You're really bad at this interpreting thing. You're misunderstanding my literal and figurative responses, by either adding too much or not seeing what else is there.

explanation for why it had no rhetoric effect."

To say that one is 'not persuaded' is the definition of personal incredulity. Then you went on to infer ("So it is an explanation...") from personal incredulity that an explanation was therefore made.

Because simple declarations of personal incredulity are not explanations. If someone claims that Western Silverback Gorillas Have a propensity towards tool use more similar to chimpanzees than to Eastern Silverback Gorillas, and someone else responds "I'm not persuaded" has that person made an explanation as to why the aforementioned statement is untrue?

But the implication of it was the explanation.

To see the implication is a simple step by step process.

You want rhetoric effect.

You didn't get it.

Therefore you shouldn't do what you did.

I don't think you were but I won't dwell on it.

You dont think so because you get off on the idea of being attacked.

I think my point is pretty apparent; "You don't need guns" is a terrible argument in a gun control debate.

That's just your unsubstantiated opinion.

It's the perfect argument in a gun control debate.

When people stop wanting Guns, the demand goes down , and less guns are being put into the world.

Had this been your debate, I'm guessing you would have banned me already.

Again, you guesses wrong. I banned you from the other debate because the only thing you had to say was "Your argument is terrible." That's not even an argument, and that entails that the discussion is over. No need to let you keep posting non arguments as a dispute. There's enough of that bullshit around here as it is.

That may have very well been your intent, but the question was nevertheless still nonsensical.

You were clearly condemning insipidity.

But then said something insipid.

So that means you don't know what insipid means or you're being a hypocrite. It isn't nonsensical, you just couldn't make sense out of it.

I think I might become a murderer if the government won't let me smoke marijuana.

On the other hand, I feel like saving the world when I'm high off marijuana.

You're just a spoiled brat like the rest.

Always with the, "I want this, I want that. MAKE OUR LIVES PERFECT OR YOU DON'T REALLY LOVE US."

You've been given life and the ability to feel happiness and God has given you the free will to seek that happiness.

But nothing is Good enough for you humans , is it?

Take your lives then, if you don't want it. God is not your slave .

Yup, but from which direction?

From where I'm at you gotta go northwest to Dallas then keep going northwest and you'll probably see some road signs that say"Amarillo this way".

If you could use the internet to use create debate then why not Google search? Fishy!...

A good way to cock block somebody.

It's gross knowing other people are having sex in the other room....so I make sounds.

When you add "consider" then that changes the whole meaning.

Because what is considered Proof is irrelevant to what proof REALLY consists of.

I'm having a hard time seeing any distinction between "proof" and "evidence", if there is a distinction.

You're more psycho than psychic, Rufus.

How would you even know? Sure, you can observe Psychotic behavior, but only a Psychic can observe Psychic behavior. :)

The pineal gland is a pea sized tissue mass that sits behind the third ventricle if the brain, and it secretes chemicals like serotonin and melatonin that help regulate our circadian rhythm...as well as our sleep cycle.

Yeah, uh huh.

Any notions if it having metaphysical properties like a spirit antenna are silly and bogus psuedo science woo.

I didn't present it as a science.

Of course he was wrong as so far science has shown there is zero evidence for existence of a soul.

Absence of evidence isn't evidence of the absence of truth.

We can explain all aspects of self awareness and personality and even near death experiences without it. By using purely physical and materialist explanations.

Maybe one day it will explain why you're not experiencing God.

You cannot prove I don't have an invisible fire breathing dragon in my garage. I cannot believe you had to resort to the "you can't disprove me" lameness.

You're doing the same thing, but with verbosity.

But part of debate is to come to a point where either side can't disprove the opposition.

So I don't care if you think it's "lameness".

Why do you even debate if you think it's lame?

LOL..that old quote of yours still cracks my ass up!

SS

I knew that would make you laugh, but I didn't think it was that funny.

I can also put the fuck back into anything.

If that's all you have left to say, then we're done here.

Have you never looked into an Oreo? There's cream in the middle of those chocolate wafers.

Between "Knowing" and "Believing, is uncertainty.

I am not certain of whether you are my God or not because I don't always know what God is.

He can take any form he pleases and if he wishes for me to not know it's him then he will do so.

He could be using this as a test of my faith.

We know that the user nobodyknows is not your god,

That's the hole. No...we don't. Who knows what "God" really is? He can take any form he pleases and if he wishes for us not to know its him, then he will do so.

This could be a test of my faith.

What he tried to do was, fabricate undesirable circumstances to win the argument.

And...?

That's been my whole point about your argument from the start.

Now you get it, Dipstick...waiting...you need a goofy name....Slowhumian. :)

So implied personal incredulity is tantamount to explaining why something is wrong?

How did you reach that conclusion?

It's still not.

Why not?

Apparently it is, or you'd not have spent the effort you have to remonstrate over my choice of words.

What do ya mean? Please elaborate ohwise one....since specifics are so very important to you. Don't be a hypocrite.

Do you believe that I have cause to deny vulgarity?

No, Slowhumian, I was simply stating an exception.

Er.. no, it was more a rejection of your advice that I refrain from "cussin".

Then nobody knows what your point is, including you.

I don't know why i added "including you", but I felt as if you wouldn't know that "nobody" meant you as well.

Your question was nonsensical.

It was to point out your insipidity.

Apparently America needs the debators here to be pres. Since they're so good at talking shit about the candidates' character , the debaturs here must know what's best.

Y'know, a lot of the very successful people are, narcissistic, sociopathic and/or psychopaths.

Despite how unpleasant their personality is, they know how to get shit done good.

That's irrelevant. Would you like to redirect?

Or make your point clearer if it's pertinent.

If I recall correctly, and I do, you didn't use the word consider.

www.createdebate.com/debate/show/Proofconsistsmerelyofwhatisconvincing.

Different words, but means the same thing.

But yes I admit.

You said "You don't need all those guns", I was pointing out that need is irrelevant when it comes to constitutional rights. I don't think I can elucidate my position any more clearly than that.

Well then, Constitutional rights are irrelevant when it comes to need.

You said it makes me look mad, which is not the same as saying it has no rhetoric effort, nor is telling someone that something has no rhetoric effect equivalent to explaining why it has no rhetoric effect.

"I'm not persuaded" is implied. So it is an explanation for why it had no rhetoric effect.

Saying that something is "fucking insipid" adds flavorful emphasis in a way that "very insipid" will never achieve, and I use it mostly to that effect.

None of that is true here, except maybe your admittance to vulgarity.

Like it or not I reserve the right to swear, and anyone whose sensibilities cannot bear the sight of adult language I would advise to close their eyes.

So your point here is to argue that you have rights?

I never said you didn't. So you are just rambling.

I don't see how you could have come to that conclusion based upon what I have said.

Its not my conclusion...its exactly what you said in response to my question.

Maybe actually read before responding.

Where's your evidence that there is no evidence? Hmmm? I doubt there is any evidence for no evidence of God.

No, moron. What's your point in stating that?

Looks like you're just rambling.

I reserve the right to swear for rhetoric effect.

Good for you! But I just explained why it has no rhetoric effect. And since rhetoric effect is what you're aiming for, then don't be cussin.

It means precisely what I've already stated. Civil liberties don't end at need.

Insipid means " Civil liberties don't end at need". Gotcha.

I like how people think that they can know that there's "no evidence for something."

It really shows that mankind's reasonability...is getting nowhere. You guys can invent all the flying cars you want, but that won't give the bulk of humanity anymore wisdom or intelligence...

What's your point?

Don't be cussin like a sailor now, cuz it makes you look mad.

Also, what does insipid mean if "but I have a right to nevertheless.", isn't insipid?

Is you one of them Phantom Assumers?

So.......Care to tell me why you think or how you can prove that our ancestors communicated with the dead? Or with Spirits or gods or any other supernatural entities?

I'm a Psychic, actually. Not a fortune teller...mind you.

Proving it would require you to decalcify your pineal gland first, because that is our spiritual antenna.

I can't just make a spirit appear in front of you. One might already be there. But your dulled senses are preventing you from interacting.

Our ancestors may have indeed prayed for rain or chanted to their Rain Gods for it. And then maybe once or twice it actually DID rain after their chants. SO they thought they were talking with gods.

That's just the wrong information.

People today frequently get the wrong information whether through misinterpretation or word of mouth, it happens.

And since some people from this era have the wrong information then that makes everything we know today, false, according to you.

And technology cannot separate us from something that does not exist,

True. Too bad no one has proved that "it" doesn't exist.

And no one can prove it. Especially you.

Actually where I got the idea from is in the paragraph..,...,

Also, Half assery is an art to be reckoned with.

So much chaos can be caused by an ass's half ass.

I go that idea from your half assed observation....

I think we're at a 12.5th of an ass now?

Thanks.

I can't tell if this is relevant or not....well done dropigy..........

Yours.

Its just trash talk.