CaracticusPotts wrote:
P.s…did England really get beat?🤣🤣🤣🤣🏴
Yes, you surrendered to the Americans at Yorktown in 1781.
Socialism on chess.com
Sort:
Optimissed wrote:
Haha, but I would say not, on the balance of probability. OK so I've got brains and you haven't but I wouldn't use them to invent all of this. You have no brains as you make clear. That's the only thing that could save you. Maybe they'll feel sorry for you and not all the people whom you constantly taunt, malign, lie about and worse. A cleverer person than you would not need to do it. Now I really have finished answering you every time the parrot squawks.
Delusional.
Optimissed wrote:
If you were innocent, you wouldn't be repeating your mantra that everyone is delusional whenever they disagree with you. If what I am saying is untrue, you would be able to show that you are acting in good faith. Repeating "delusional" like a parrot isn't that, so I'm finished answering your accusations. Your words will speak for you, as ever.
I have never implied everyone I disagree with is consistently delusional. Just you. This is the one and only way in which you are special, seemingly...
alexlehrersh wrote:
mpaetz hat geschrieben:
CaracticusPotts wrote:
P.s…did England really get beat?🤣🤣🤣🤣🏴
Yes, you surrendered to the Americans at Yorktown in 1781.
Lets not forget who helped you
The French, and some hired mercenaries, I believe.
Aug 21, 2023
0
#3846
PeaceandLove2U wrote:
Racism in public and political affairs became illegal in this country around 60 years ago.
Which has resulted in another example of rampant crime in America today.
Aug 21, 2023
0
#3847
Optimissed wrote: Now I really have finished answering you every time the parrot squawks.
Until tomorrow.
Aug 21, 2023
0
#3848
Spongebob---
" I think I do speak for virtually everyone here."
Nope.
DiogenesDue wrote:
Optimissed wrote:
You're a therapist? No, my wife's a psychotherapist and I think you're the one who is known to your local hospital services as a very odd person indeed. The bits that you bolded? I don't. I think they are going to watch you more carefully and stop giving you the benefit of the doubt whenever you try to discredit honest people who are sick and tire of your malicious behaviour.
Delusional. I'm sure your wife would agree, if she knew what was going on here and were privy to your body of posts over the years, that is...
Did you know that anyone can make things bold? I'm going to ask you a question. Hang on a mo.
mpaetz wrote:
Optimissed wrote: Now I really have finished answering you every time the parrot squawks.
Until tomorrow.
He didn't even make it...
Optimissed wrote:
Delusional. I'm sure your wife would agree, if she knew what was going on here and were privy to your body of posts over the years, that is...
Did you know that anyone can make things bold? I'm going to ask you a question. Hang on a mo.
If only you knew what words to bolden, this might mean something.
This is a conversation between Elroch and someone else in the Evolution thread.
696TheHarbingerOfDoom wrote: I’m sorry elroch but due to your unscientific approach to the subject
E deeply ironic, given that I refer solely to the science! it makes it difficult to have any sort of rational debate. what prevents you engaging in rational debate is a passionately anti-science viewpoint, refusing to accept 140 years of scientific consensus. You claim all of the scientists involve#44d in the field are unscientific! What are your qualifications? Sunday school does not count.
Just a word here. That's completely untrue. What makes it impossible is Elroch's dictatorial approach. I could and did explain it extremely well to Harbinger and Elroch falsely said none of my posts were on the subject and blocked me. Of course, I was blocked because Dio made personal attacks just like he does with everyone and naturally Elroch wouldn't like to ban his enforcer. The person who insults people when Elroch is tired of it. I think Elroch's misunderstanding which led to our argument about infinity has made him much more insecure than he's realised and now he's bottled up in is Evolution thread, still with his inflexible approach and lack of understanding of science. He confuses "science" with individual theories and doesn't understand science properly, even though he was a scientist for a number of years, he states. All theories, being theories are about as true, according to him, as the fact that the sun will rise tomorrow. Actually, if there was a prospect of a stellar collision, we'd know in advance.
You really need to have an objective view on the subject.This belief you hold that scientists are the pinnacle of intelligence in the universe
E You can be sure have gone disastrously wrong when you make false claims about the beliefs of others. Rely on them to express their own beliefs.
^^Pompous. And unnecessary and incorrect too. It was a generalised comment. Just from reading this I'm getting the pic. that Elroch doesn't know much. Definitely wouldn't trust him if he was a lecturer and I was trying to learn something. It would just be a subject to escape from with as little damage done as possible. and therefore their opinions instead of the evidence in front of you is astounding.
Man has not been able to create life.
This is a questionable claim. Scientists have designed a minimalist genome, very different to that in any organism, and were able to create a viable line of novel micro-organisms by implanting it in the inanimate husks of a different organism. Later generations were determined entirely by the genetic material, not the vessel.
If they had managed in their experiments to create a life form, what would that of proved? That life can be created or that it could have happened on its own? Aka evolution.
You point to the fact the sun keeps rising every single day as proof that it will rise again tomorrow. And I agree with you.
I didn't, and it is not proven.
While the naive reasoning that the Sun has risen on thousands of times makes it likely it will rise again, the scientific reasoning is to construct a theory of gravity, deduce the dynamics of the Solar system and predict the future evolution of the bodies within it. This is what leads to the scientific prediction that the Sun will rise tomorrow. Within this prediction is the possibility that some unseen very fast moving, heavy object will strike the Earth before the Sun rises tomorrow. It is possible, hence there is no proof of what will happen. Science is NOT about proof.
When you look at the order in the universe. The precise nature of it right down to protons and neutrons and electrons. The chemical table. The elements they new existed because of the order in the universe before ever they found them. You don’t see the order as design. You see it as mere chance. Are you sure the sun will rise tomorrow?
Order leads to scientific theories. Scientific theories lead to predictions. Are you beginning to understand yet?
It’s a shame you only see what you want to see.
Remove the plank from your own eye before commenting on any speck in mine!...
Bla bla bla. I explained to these people how life must have evolved into existence through a very long, complex series of reactions that ultimately formed the building blocks of life. It should be clear that life-giving organic chemicals are an extension of the natural building processes that lead to ever more complex inert organic compounds. Elroch's only reply was that I wrongly used the word "evolution" to refer to non-biological reactions. My point is that there is considered to be no boundary between life and non-life. Elroch doesn't know what he's talking about. It's obvious that I'm far cleverer than he is and compared with Elroch, Dio is an inert piece of wood. All we have is jealousy and the desire to attack people they can't understand or relate to.
Sorry I know I can't help winding people up who I think are completely ridiculous. I know I shouldn't
Optimissed wrote:
[snip]
Just a word here. That's completely untrue. What makes it impossible is Elroch's dictatorial approach. I could and did explain it extremely well to Harbinger and Elroch falsely said none of my posts were on the subject and blocked me. Of course, I was blocked because Dio made personal attacks just like he does with everyone and naturally Elroch wouldn't like to ban his enforcer. The person who insults people when Elroch is tired of it. I think Elroch's misunderstanding which led to our argument about infinity has made him much more insecure than he's realised and now he's bottled up in is Evolution thread, still with his inflexible approach and lack of understanding of science. He confuses "science" with individual theories and doesn't understand science properly, even though he was a scientist for a number of years, he states. All theories, being theories are about as true, according to him, as the fact that the sun will rise tomorrow. Actually, if there was a prospect of a stellar collision, we'd know in advance.
[snip]
^^Pompous. And unnecessary and incorrect too. It was a generalised comment. Just from reading this I'm getting the pic. that Elroch doesn't know much. Definitely wouldn't trust him if he was a lecturer and I was trying to learn something. It would just be a subject to escape from with as little damage done as possible.
[snip]
Bla bla bla. I explained to these people how life must have evolved into existence through a very long, complex series of reactions that ultimately formed the building blocks of life. It should be clear that life-giving organic chemicals are an extension of the natural building processes that lead to ever more complex inert organic compounds. Elroch's only reply was that I wrongly used the word "evolution" to refer to non-biological reactions. My point is that there is considered to be no boundary between life and non-life. Elroch doesn't know what he's talking about. It's obvious that I'm far cleverer than he is and compared with Elroch, Dio is an inert piece of wood. All we have is jealousy and the desire to attack people they can't understand or relate to.
Got completely sidetracked again, did we?
You have been blocked from that thread. Posting derogatory comments about the OP elsewhere is circumventing the TOS and is unethical regardless. Your ethical choices are:
- Be silent
- Start your own thread on evolution, or even to discuss being blocked in general
What you should *not* do is harass someone who has blocked you in another poster's thread where you are effectively spamming.
Optimissed wrote:
Sorry I know I can't help winding people up who I think are completely ridiculous. I know I shouldn't
Ridiculous would be the notion that you are winding anyone up when you are clearly the one who's wound up, all the time. The fact that you cannot let go even after claiming (twice) you didn't want to post anymore just shows how true this is...
Here's something I don't think many Americans know about...... Black jockeys and horsemen dominated the sport of Thoroughbred racing, from the first Kentucky Derby in 1875 through 1903, right before the Jim Crow era pushed them out. In fact, 15 of the first 28 Derby winners were ridden by Black jockeys. And ever since 1903, there has not been a black rider. 
Morgan Freeman did a show on CNN recently about the 101st Tank Squadron from WW2. An all black squadron who fought just as hard if not harder than other squadrons.
Ziryab wrote:
PeaceandLove2U wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
PeaceandLove2U wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
PeaceandLove2U wrote:
Ziryab wrote:
PeaceandLove2U wrote:
I provided a bunch of reasons debunking my assumptions from that title alone, that it is dubious to think that the "Legacy of the White Male 'America'" has much of any standing to toady. Unless that book is tearing down those false claims and that racist notion, I find it absurd on the title alone and called it out for such. For all sorts of factual reasons, like the Cracker Barrel take.
Racism in public and political affairs became illegal in this country around 60 years ago.
You find the title absurd on what grounds?
I already gave you the reasoning. Think about it, it's talking about race, a certain race too, as if it's still going on, hence "legacy" and that's absurd, that's been over for decades. I think, from the title that it is emphasizing a boogey man through one means or another.
What is it?
White does not exist?
Or, White is meaningless in terms of power?
You claim that “racism was outlawed” sixty years ago. What action accomplished this?
Hold up, now your being disingenuous.
I 'claimed' that public and political racism/discrimination was made illegal. Not that "racism was outlawed" as you so brutely and simply put it.
Also, of course white exists, it's just a skin a color.
White is just a skin color! That to be in power, it doesn't matter what skin color someone has, what matters is the money, the power, the skill, or the smarts. Not skin color, that type of discrimination has been dead for decades, and only hobbles on in the lowest of society.
No, I told you plainly before, it's the word "Legacy" what legacy of that bygone error exists today in America? To me that title is boarding on something disingenuous
So, how was it made illegal? Was a law passed? Which one?
What evidence do you have that it was effective?
The book you reject on the basis of the title, as well as several dozen more on my shelf, documents the persistence of the sort of discrimination the 1964 Civil Rights Act was designed to eliminate.
My whole point has been that rejecting information with no basis is far from laudable. Rather, you are cultivating ignorance.
Suspicion is not ignorance. And what major 'persistence' could that book even reference? It's not seen in politics, it's not seen in economics, or the various fields of study. It's not seen in the medical practices, or the public sector. It's not seen in the 'most racist town' in America.
It's not seen in my area with a bunch of 'Trumpers', there's a sex shop downtown and a very popular restaurant owned by Asian immigrants. We get people from all over the world and even had a peaceful BLM protest
Did you attend the BLM protest? Were they protesting nothing?
"Protesting nothing" what do you mean?
Haha, but I would say not, on the balance of probability. OK so I've got brains and you haven't but I wouldn't use them to invent all of this. You have no brains as you make clear. That's the only thing that could save you. Maybe they'll feel sorry for you and not all the people whom you constantly taunt, malign, lie about and worse. A cleverer person than you would not need to do it. Now I really have finished answering you every time the parrot squawks.