- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
12 Nov 15
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI am not fretting. I am not wrong.
[b]Define what YOU mean by 'at eye level'
Don't overthink it, son.
In those pictures wherein the subjects are looking directly at (not up or down) the photographer, their line of sight must be nearly identical to the photographer's.
It can safely be assumed that their line of sight will be the same as the photographers, albeit in the exact ...[text shortened]... u've been wrong many, many times before and you'll be wrong many, many more times in the future.[/b]
You are.
You are also gibbering incoherent nonsense.
You are a laughing stock, a bad joke, a pathetic looser.
The answer to the question "can people really be that stupid?".
You appear to be here to make RJHinds seem cogent.
I am not over-thinking, you are not thinking at all.
12 Nov 15
Originally posted by googlefudgeAnother cogent nugget of truth, a pearl of wisdom which speaks to your ever-weakening argument, thus proving you are sitting at the table "all in," whilst holding the worst hand possible.
I am not fretting. I am not wrong.
You are.
You are also gibbering incoherent nonsense.
You are a laughing stock, a bad joke, a pathetic looser.
The answer to the question "can people really be that stupid?".
You appear to be here to make RJHinds seem cogent.
I am not over-thinking, you are not thinking at all.
This is not about me, little one.
It is concerned with a topic, about which you have continually proven you know little about, but you are more than willing to make up for all of that by making demonstrably false claims followed by attacks on the person.
Simply answering the questions in a satisfactory manner will make all your troubles go away.
By all means, do not double down on a hard twelve at this point in your losses.
12 Nov 15
Originally posted by googlefudgeSince you're struggling so mightily with this otherwise fairly easy exercise, try Google-ing "images of horizon from airplane" and see if that helps clear things up for ya...
You mean can I answer the question I just posted a complete worked example for?
Yeah, I could do that. Or I could tell you to learn to read.
I see no reason to expend any effort to deal with your dribbling madness.
I will jump through precisely zero hoops for you.
Please remember I despise you and everything you stand for, before you think that I might do stuff
for you.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
12 Nov 15
Originally posted by FreakyKBHYou are merely offering your own delusions.
You are totally free to disguise your inability to perform the function behind the shrubbery of your disdain for me.
I get why you would feel the need to, given your fragile psyche and compliant world-view.
I am merely offering what I claim to be proofs of your position's untenable nature.
I am further challenging your ability to express the informati ...[text shortened]... you cut and paste in a cohesive manner which would adequately and accurately solve the equation.
You're only interesting in that you are perfectly demonstrating why rational [sane] thinking is valuable, and
what happens when you let irrational religion and conspiracy madness rot your brain.
However, I don't think that there are any levels of gibbering madness left for you to plumb.
The only thing left, is to summon the rubber truck.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
12 Nov 15
Originally posted by FreakyKBHI'm not making an argument you piece of bull excrement.
Another cogent nugget of truth, a pearl of wisdom which speaks to your ever-weakening argument, thus proving you are sitting at the table "all in," whilst holding the worst hand possible.
This is not about me, little one.
It is concerned with a topic, about which you have continually proven you know little about, but you are more than willing to make u ...[text shortened]... oubles go away.
By all means, do not double down on a hard twelve at this point in your losses.
I am insulting you pure and simple.
You can't even get that right.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
12 Nov 15
Originally posted by FreakyKBHNope.
Since you're struggling so mightily with this otherwise fairly easy exercise, try Google-ing "images of horizon from airplane" and see if that helps clear things up for ya...
Not playing.
You have done nothing asked of you.
I will thus do nothing you ask.
12 Nov 15
Originally posted by FMFMaybe 'self ordained' is a better way of saying it. If it isn't self explanatory then I'm sorry, but I have better things to do than use up a few pages here in what undoubtedly would be a futile attempt to expain this.
No. Not rhetorical. You used the term "self defined intellectuals" in your first contribution to this thread. I don't remember FreakyKBH ever having 'defined' himself as an "intellectual", nor have any of the people he's been in discussion with on this thread. So I am wondering who you are referring to when you mention "self defined intellectuals" and when was it you think they "self-defined" themselves in that way?
Originally posted by lemon limeIt would seem that you were using the term "self defined intellectuals" ~ and now "self-ordained" ~ to sneer at people on this thread. I'm curious, having read the debate, who is it you are sneering at? FreakyKBH? Is he "self-ordained"? Or do you mean those who disgree with him? Or do you mean everyone?
Maybe 'self ordained' is a better way of saying it. If it isn't self explanatory then I'm sorry, but I have better things to do than use up a few pages here in what undoubtedly would be a futile attempt to expain this.
12 Nov 15
Originally posted by FMFIf it isn't self explanatory then I'm sorry, but I have better things to do than use up a few pages here in what undoubtedly would be a futile attempt to expain this.
It would seem that you were using the term "self defined intellectuals" ~ and now "self-ordained" ~ to sneer at people on this thread. I'm curious, having read the debate, who is it you are sneering at? FreakyKBH? Is he "self-ordained"? Or do you mean those who disgree with him? Or do you mean everyone?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
12 Nov 15
Originally posted by lemon limeBut you apparently have the time to waste writing you don't have the time to waste.
If it isn't self explanatory then I'm sorry, but I have better things to do than use up a few pages here in what undoubtedly would be a futile attempt to expain this.
In which time you could just as well have answered FMF's very simple question/s.
And No. Your posts are not self explanatory.
If you cannot be bothered to make posts that are understandable, or to explain them.
Then you shouldn't bother to make them in the first place.
Originally posted by lemon limeYou didn't explain which people you were referring to when you used the term "self defined intellectuals" and it isn't self-explanatory. It won't take "a few pages" for you to say.
If it isn't self explanatory then I'm sorry, but I have better things to do than use up a few pages here in what undoubtedly would be a futile attempt to expain this.
12 Nov 15
Originally posted by googlefudgeYes, his questions are very simple... not at all difficult to understand.
But you apparently have the time to waste writing you don't have the time to waste.
In which time you could just as well have answered FMF's very simple question/s.
And No. Your posts are not self explanatory.
If you cannot be bothered to make posts that are understandable, or to explain them.
Then you shouldn't bother to make them in the first place.
Originally posted by googlefudgeYou can 'prove' almost anything you want to see proven using selective evidence. It happens all the time in the *real* world of science.
IF he has some other point, He is utterly and completely failing to convey it.
The only thing he is currently conveying is his own ignorance and stupidity, as well as
lack of basic communication skills.
I don't personally believe he has the intellect to have an underlying point. Certainly not
one that is in any way worth while or interesting.
Should he actually wish to make some other point, he should just get it over with and make it.