The "You Know What" Thread

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I just replied to you...I didn't give up

That example wasn't supposed to be a direct comparison, between this circumstance and that one. It was there to explain to you what falsifiable as judging by the previous response, you did not understand.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
At least repaste in ONE POST the one part that answers my request.

YOU DON'T GET THAT!

It's a LONG answer...that ALL culminates in answering your question.

This very idea seems to escape you.

No, that's you chickening out.

Post your reasoning for why one song or artist would be objectively good. It doesn't take 5 posts.

Also, stop dodging this:

Why do you keep posting if you "know" you're "right", we're "wrong", and "10 people" agree with you? What is your goal in this thread?

-AC

Originally posted by chillmeistergen
That example wasn't supposed to be a direct comparison, between this circumstance and that one. It was there to explain to you what falsifiable as judging by the previous response, you did not understand.

EPIIIBITES:

Post your reasoning for why one song or artist would be objectively good. It doesn't take 5 posts.

Also, stop dodging this:

Why do you keep posting if you "know" you're "right", we're "wrong", and "10 people" agree with you? What is your goal in this thread?

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It doesn't take 5 posts.

Also, stop dodging this:

[b]Why do you keep posting if you "know" you're "right", we're "wrong", and "10 people" agree with you? What is your goal in this thread?

-AC [/B]

And you said I either answer one question OR the other. I did answer the first question.

I'm not dodging anything you sly person.

If you want, I can copy and past the 2 posts again

I dont' even understand this other question.

It's the paradoxical idea that a proposition, or theory cannot be scientific if it does not admit consideration of the possibility of its being false. Which you have not done, you've outright shown you refuse to accept any other way of thinking on the subject.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I can't do it in one post. It takes at least 2...and that's the short version.

No, you can, you just choose to fill it with useless rhetoric and babbling that takes two posts. Everyone here can summerise their points in one post, even in the GDF. You can too, so do it.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
And you said I either answer one question OR the other. I did answer the first question. If you want, iIcan copy and past the 2 posts again

I dont' even understand this other question.

You claim to know you are right, you claim to believe you are right, you reference the "10 people" who voted in agreement with you (Who are either you or people you begged to vote without reading it.), so if you are so sure, why are you still here? What is your goal? What are you trying to achieve? None of us will ever agree, because nobody on this forum agrees with you.

Oh and this is interesting;

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
And I don't think the two words are interchangeable, becasue I think truth can exist apart from facts.

To which VVD replied:

Originally posted by Victor Von Doom
It can't, though.

I think you probably mean truth can exist despite a lack of available and accessible evidence. If it's true, it's also factual.

You ran away never to reply again.

-AC

You have officially ruined the Music Forums for everyone, Ep. Thank you very ****ing much.

How so? The last thread was due to a request.

And with this thread, BackFire himself said we can go ahead and make a new one after the last one closed...and again, it was due to people asking me to re-post my argument at the end of the last one.

If there was no interest, I would stop obviously.

Maybe be a bit more informed next time you make such a statement.

And how EXACTLY did I ruin the music forums...what a ridiculous statement. As AC said before, just ignore it.

No, you have ruined these forums, because you will not walk away from the debate you have lost, you just keep bumping it and creating threads, ignoring people and whining. There WAS no more interest, the thread died, YOU bumped it.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
How so? The last thread was due to a request.

BackFire himself said we can go ahead and make a new one after the last one closed...and again, it was due to people asking me to re-post my argument

Nobody requested the last thread, Morgoth's requested your argument. You decided it had to be in a new thread, nobody else.

Nobody is asking you to re-post your argument, people are asking you to prove it. You cannot, therefore you just keep posting.

Anyway;

Originally posted by Morgoth's Wrath
Fact and truth are firmly grounded in objective reality. If fact has nothing to do with it, then you must admit that good and bad music is determined by subjective tastes. There is no other option.

^Objective truth regarding this issue.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, you have ruined these forums, because you will not walk away from the debate you have lost

You won't admit you're wrong...YOU RUINED EVERYTHING!

WHAAAAAA!

^^^ That is precisely why you're ruining this forum.

You cannot debate for the life of you, and every single person here disagrees with you.

-AC

Actually, no they don't. The polls show that.

NO AC!

THIS IS YOU RUINING THINGS

PASTING THIS SAME QUESTION 20 TIMES...20 TIMES OVER AND OVER AGAIN GONG BACK TO THE LAST THREAD JUST TO PISS ME OFF AND TRICK PEOPLE INTO THINKING MY ARGUMENT IS ABOUT SOMETHING IT'S NOT.

DON'T TRY AND BE CRAFTY!

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

[b]Prove she's objectively good. Not quotes, not reviews, they prove nothing but opinion. YOU prove in your own words why she's objectively good, either a song or her music in general, in one post. [/B]

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

[b]Prove she's objectively good. Not quotes, not reviews, they prove nothing but opinion. YOU prove in your own words why she's objectively good, either a song or her music in general, in one post. [/B]

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri

[b]Prove she's objectively good. Not quotes, not reviews, they prove nothing but opinion. YOU prove in your own words why she's objectively good, either a song or her music in general, in one post. [/B]

...even after I answered him.

YOU'RE A PEST!

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Actually, no they don't. The polls show that.

The threads don't, so the polls don't matter. All four of them and not one person agreeing with your initial point. It's you voting for yourself.

This is proof you've lost, you'll allow any off topic discussion cos ON topic, you're dead.

Besides, you already PMed me and said you agreed with me.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
No, you can, you just choose to fill it with useless rhetoric and babbling that takes two posts.

It appears you don't understand such things as this...large ideas that need elaborate exaplantion of a number of things to be wholly taken into consideration at one time to get the point.

You don't think in those terms AC.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
So if you are so sure, why are you still here? What is your goal? What are you trying to achieve?

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Oh and this is interesting;

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
No actually I can't. It's one large idea that has to be wholly taken into consideration at one time to understand.

It appears you don't understand such things as this...large ideas that need elaborate exaplantion of a number of things to be wholly taken into consideration at one time to get the point.

You don't think in those terms AC.

No, you can, you just choose not to. You do possess the ability to make one post regarding your argument, you just don't want anyone to focus on it without having to sift through 5 posts of bs, cos you know what it would mean.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
I've already said why. To offer up something I think is beneficial and worthwhile. That's the only reason I argue anything adamantly. I want to make people actually think about what they're saying about music when they do.

But you won't. None of us here agree, none of us ever will, cos you're wrong, so why are you still here?

If 10 people truly did agree, you'd have achieved your goal, but you still haven't stopped, so it only suggests those people don't exist.

Originally posted by EPIIIBITES
Nope...things can tuly exist apart from fact.

Truths can exist without evidence to prove them, but if a truth does exist, it's factual.

You are the one separating the two, it doesn't make it right, it's wrong.

Truth and fact are both tied to reality, and if you cannot prove your argument to be either you have to accept it's all subjective, which you won't, cos you don't want to quit posting.

Besides, you've already agreed with me in PM. You know you did.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
It's you voting for yourself.

You're probably the only person I could think of who would actually do something so sly and underhanded...it'a pretty representative of the tactics you use all the time.

You need to be more honest with yourself when you argue AC...just a suggestion.

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Besides, you already PMed me and said you agreed with me.

-I say..."No I didn't agree with you"

-You say: "Yes you did. You PM'd me and said I can't prove it" <Then you write what I said in the PMd quote, trying to give the impresion that by saying I can't prove something, that then I'm wrong, even though I've explained my argument isn't about needing proof for things to exist>