In reply to the person who posted...as Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 07, @03:54PM (#2969848).
Scarcely have I seen such a terrible argument and utter disrespect for fellow human beings. I would be ashamed if I held the same views you do, for you would have dishonoured us both, giving us both a bad name and reputation.
Not only did you not answer the questions he asked, but you insulted him, calling him ignorant countless times. On what basis can you claim that he is ignorant? What, then, does it say about you, if you are incapable of arguing, proving as such by your resorting to declaring him to be ignorant? It tells me that you are more ignorant than you claim he is.
>>>
>
Obviously you haven't looked around at all. I have found numerous websites saying the same thing. Supposedly, the numbers were from NASA. I hadn't had the opportunity to check every page on their website, however, that does not mean it doesn't exist.
>
Obviously, you haven't heard of nuclear powerplants...those have nuclear reactions going on all the time, and yet, I think it is safe to say, nuclear powerplants are smaller than planets, particularly this one.
>>>
>
How is it that you have become omniscient? How is it that you know what is the truth and what is not? Methinks you're afraid you won't have a hero anymore.
>>>
>
I find it ironic that it makes complete sense to me. Perhaps you've got it mixed up. Maybe it's really "A six-year old could understand it." Yet, it made no sense to you.
>
It looks like you have memory problems. Perhaps it's intelligence problems. Time, as he said, is the fourth dimension. I don't know about you, but I, like the rest of humanity, am incapable of physically seeing time.
>
Pray, tell me: How is it that that response answered his question? Seems to me like you just accuse him of being ignorant everytime you see a question you can't answer.
>>>
>
Couldn't call him ignorant that time, could you?
>>>
>
For a change, you dodged his question by dismissing the true relevance of it instead of your usual "call him ignorant" tactic. Methinks you can't answer the question.
>
Again with the insults. Further, you have generalized. Having generalized a group of people, you insulted that group of people. You're not very diplomatic, are you?
Slashdot Mirror
Agreed. People this stupid don't deserve to live - killing innocent people like that...*shakes head* There is no excuse whatsoever. Death_penalty++
In reply to the person who posted...as Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 07, @03:54PM (#2969848).
Scarcely have I seen such a terrible argument and utter disrespect for fellow human beings. I would be ashamed if I held the same views you do, for you would have dishonoured us both, giving us both a bad name and reputation.
Not only did you not answer the questions he asked, but you insulted him, calling him ignorant countless times. On what basis can you claim that he is ignorant? What, then, does it say about you, if you are incapable of arguing, proving as such by your resorting to declaring him to be ignorant? It tells me that you are more ignorant than you claim he is.
>>>
>
Obviously you haven't looked around at all. I have found numerous websites saying the same thing. Supposedly, the numbers were from NASA. I hadn't had the opportunity to check every page on their website, however, that does not mean it doesn't exist.
>
Obviously, you haven't heard of nuclear powerplants...those have nuclear reactions going on all the time, and yet, I think it is safe to say, nuclear powerplants are smaller than planets, particularly this one.
>>>
>
How is it that you have become omniscient? How is it that you know what is the truth and what is not? Methinks you're afraid you won't have a hero anymore.
>>>
>
I find it ironic that it makes complete sense to me. Perhaps you've got it mixed up. Maybe it's really "A six-year old could understand it." Yet, it made no sense to you.
>
It looks like you have memory problems. Perhaps it's intelligence problems. Time, as he said, is the fourth dimension. I don't know about you, but I, like the rest of humanity, am incapable of physically seeing time.
>
Pray, tell me: How is it that that response answered his question? Seems to me like you just accuse him of being ignorant everytime you see a question you can't answer.
>>>
>
Couldn't call him ignorant that time, could you?
>>>
>
For a change, you dodged his question by dismissing the true relevance of it instead of your usual "call him ignorant" tactic. Methinks you can't answer the question.
>
Again with the insults. Further, you have generalized. Having generalized a group of people, you insulted that group of people. You're not very diplomatic, are you?