The isreal/palestine debate

comic boy · Post by **comic boy** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:17 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:
comic boy wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
got tonkaed wrote:eh you had a chance to rise above there or stoop low....your not at the point where you rise up yet.
No. When arrogant, smug bastards like laughable playboy make that kind of discriminatory, prejudiced statement, I'm going to take it all the f***** way to 'em.
In other words it is easier to throw insults about then answer awkward questions !

What awkward questions? That I'm 15 and therefore am stupid? Because I'd hope that would show you up for being a hypocritical, arrogant, snot nosed little brat more than discredit me any.

Well you have been asked a couple of questions in the last few posts and not answered them which rather proves my point. Its not being 15 that makes you seem stupid,its your lack of maturity,I suspect that at 20 you will be just as obnoxious . Now I asked you a question before about addiction and you have just been asked a question about your reference to God so either debate or retire to flame wars where your bile belongs.

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:23 pm

comic boy wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
comic boy wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
got tonkaed wrote:eh you had a chance to rise above there or stoop low....your not at the point where you rise up yet.
No. When arrogant, smug bastards like laughable playboy make that kind of discriminatory, prejudiced statement, I'm going to take it all the f***** way to 'em.
In other words it is easier to throw insults about then answer awkward questions !

What awkward questions? That I'm 15 and therefore am stupid? Because I'd hope that would show you up for being a hypocritical, arrogant, snot nosed little brat more than discredit me any.
Well you have been asked a couple of questions in the last few posts and not answered them which rather proves my point. Its not being 15 that makes you seem stupid,its your lack of maturity,I suspect that at 20 you will be just as obnoxious . Now I asked you a question before about addiction and you have just been asked a question about your reference to God so either debate or retire to flame wars where your bile belongs.

What? In the addiction thread? I've never claimed that drug use = addiction, that was plutoman, you pestiferous Thrasymach.

Frigidus · Post by **Frigidus** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:26 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:
comic boy wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
comic boy wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
got tonkaed wrote:eh you had a chance to rise above there or stoop low....your not at the point where you rise up yet.
No. When arrogant, smug bastards like laughable playboy make that kind of discriminatory, prejudiced statement, I'm going to take it all the f***** way to 'em.
In other words it is easier to throw insults about then answer awkward questions !

What awkward questions? That I'm 15 and therefore am stupid? Because I'd hope that would show you up for being a hypocritical, arrogant, snot nosed little brat more than discredit me any.
Well you have been asked a couple of questions in the last few posts and not answered them which rather proves my point. Its not being 15 that makes you seem stupid,its your lack of maturity,I suspect that at 20 you will be just as obnoxious . Now I asked you a question before about addiction and you have just been asked a question about your reference to God so either debate or retire to flame wars where your bile belongs.
What? In the addiction thread? I've never claimed that drug use = addiction, that was plutoman, you pestiferous Thrasymach.

Whoa, no need to throw out the T-word. Come on, we can keep this civil, in the end we're all fine friends, amirite? Am I? Er...

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:33 pm

ht[url]tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrasymachus#In_Plato[/url]

Frigidus · Post by **Frigidus** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:35 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:ht[url]tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrasymachus#In_Plato[/url]

No need to patronize Nappy.

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 8:43 pm

Frigidus wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:ht[url]tp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thrasymachus#In_Plato[/url]
No need to patronize Nappy.

Sorry buddy, not my intention. We're friends, rite...?

Colossus · Post by **Colossus** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:11 pm

Sweet Jesus, could you go hijack another thread, Nappy? You are such intellectual tripe. Seriously, dude, get away from your computer, find a girl to take to the movies and grow the hell up. I think there should be a dedicated forum for you and Deklorean to argue with each other ad infinitum.

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:14 pm

Colossus wrote:Sweet Jesus, could you go hijack another thread, Nappy? You are such intellectual tripe. Seriously, dude, get away from your computer, find a girl to take to the movies and grow the hell up. I think there should be a dedicated forum for you and Deklorean to argue with each other ad infinitum.

What is this bizarre vendetta you seem to have taken out against me? I don't recall ever talking with you over anything worth you having this bizarre hatred of me...are you frustrated? Is their pent up anger you need to release? Have you been off your medication long?

Neutrino · Post by **Neutrino** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:24 pm

You have enough spare time to compose incredibly high-quality insults with which you crush Colossus, but not enough time to engate in a debate with little old moi?
Odd...

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:25 pm

Neutrino wrote:You have enough spare time to compose incredibly high-quality insults with which you crush Colossus, but not enough time to engate in a debate with little old moi?
Odd...

What do you want to talk about?

Neutrino · Post by **Neutrino** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:30 pm

Neutrino wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
Who claims that the 'only evidence for god is the bible [sic]'?
Care to prove that there are non-Biblical sources that provide evidence for the Christian God, then? I didn't recall your ontological arguments having a great connection with reality last time, either.
Exactly how is humanity capable of imagining infinity, again?

P.S. Left/right wing is not an insult. Stop generalising.

Neoteny · Post by **Neoteny** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:31 pm

Neutrino wrote:
Neutrino wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
Who claims that the 'only evidence for god is the bible [sic]'?
Care to prove that there are non-Biblical sources that provide evidence for the Christian God, then? I didn't recall your ontological arguments having a great connection with reality last time, either.
Exactly how is humanity capable of imagining infinity, again?

P.S. Left/right wing is not an insult. Stop generalising.

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:40 pm

Neutrino wrote:
Neutrino wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
Who claims that the 'only evidence for god is the bible [sic]'?
Care to prove that there are non-Biblical sources that provide evidence for the Christian God, then? I didn't recall your ontological arguments having a great connection with reality last time, either.
Exactly how is humanity capable of imagining infinity, again?

P.S. Left/right wing is not an insult. Stop generalising.

The use of historical documents concerning the existence of Jesus and his Disciples' acts serve as evidence, however little you may like it.

You then have the teleological argument, transcendental argument, cosmological proof, and of course the various ontological proofs.

But of course. There is no evidence for God. How silly of me. Of course comic boy's magic circus bald undocumented, unevidenced assertions count for more than the combined wisdom of Anselms, Descartes, Kant, Godel, Leibniz, Paley and others.

comic boy · Post by **comic boy** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:40 pm

has the child been put to bed

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 9:42 pm

comic boy wrote:has the child been put to bed

Come back for more, have you? Is the best you can do "I am more older tahn him so i am teh clervererzor"? Frankly, you are just derisory.

Neutrino · Post by **Neutrino** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:05 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:
The use of historical documents concerning the existence of Jesus and his Disciples' acts serve as evidence, however little you may like it.

How does this prove God? No-one here is contending that Jesus and the Disciples didn't exist, just that there was no divine force to back them up.

Napoleon Ier wrote: You then have the teleological argument, transcendental argument, cosmological proof, and of course the various ontological proofs.

Telelogical is countered by the weak anthropic principle, transcedental utilizes circular reasoning and cosmological is based on flawed human understanding of the universe.

The most major flaw in your arguments, however, is that none of the arguments you provided can prove the existence of the Christian God. There are whole worlds of difference between God and the Greek Pantheon, for example, yet both have essentially the same chance of existing (i.e. infintely small).

0ojakeo0 · Post by **0ojakeo0** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:09 pm

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqtY88BU ... re=related

Grooveman2007 · Post by **Grooveman2007** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:22 pm

0ojakeo0 wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqtY88BU ... re=related

I remember that commercial!

Neoteny · Post by **Neoteny** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 10:33 pm

Grooveman2007 wrote:
0ojakeo0 wrote:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mqtY88BU ... re=related
I remember that commercial!

Me too! I was wondering why I called people turkeys... now I remember.

comic boy · Post by **comic boy** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:24 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:
comic boy wrote:has the child been put to bed
Come back for more, have you? Is the best you can do "I am more older tahn him so i am teh clervererzor"? Frankly, you are just derisory.

Act like a Child and you will be treated like one, now off to bed your priest is waiting for you

comic boy · Post by **comic boy** » Thu Feb 21, 2008 11:30 pm

Napoleon Ier wrote:
Neutrino wrote:
Neutrino wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
Who claims that the 'only evidence for god is the bible [sic]'?
Care to prove that there are non-Biblical sources that provide evidence for the Christian God, then? I didn't recall your ontological arguments having a great connection with reality last time, either.
Exactly how is humanity capable of imagining infinity, again?

P.S. Left/right wing is not an insult. Stop generalising.
The use of historical documents concerning the existence of Jesus and his Disciples' acts serve as evidence, however little you may like it.

You then have the teleological argument, transcendental argument, cosmological proof, and of course the various ontological proofs.

But of course. There is no evidence for God. How silly of me. Of course comic boy's magic circus bald undocumented, unevidenced assertions count for more than the combined wisdom of Anselms, Descartes, Kant, Godel, Leibniz, Paley and others.

Well they are all bolder than me because I wouldnt claim something without a scrap of proof to back it up

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 7:54 am

comic boy wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
Neutrino wrote:
Neutrino wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
Who claims that the 'only evidence for god is the bible [sic]'?
Care to prove that there are non-Biblical sources that provide evidence for the Christian God, then? I didn't recall your ontological arguments having a great connection with reality last time, either.
Exactly how is humanity capable of imagining infinity, again?

P.S. Left/right wing is not an insult. Stop generalising.
The use of historical documents concerning the existence of Jesus and his Disciples' acts serve as evidence, however little you may like it.

You then have the teleological argument, transcendental argument, cosmological proof, and of course the various ontological proofs.

But of course. There is no evidence for God. How silly of me. Of course comic boy's magic circus bald undocumented, unevidenced assertions count for more than the combined wisdom of Anselms, Descartes, Kant, Godel, Leibniz, Paley and others.
Well they are all bolder than me because I wouldnt claim something without a scrap of proof to back it up

Sancta Maria mater Dei....do you want to be any more ignorant? Have you heard of the Discourse on the Method? Of the Critique of Pure Reason? Discourse on Metaphysics? How dare an ignorant little cretin like you speak about these great men like that?

comic boy · Post by **comic boy** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 8:39 am

Napoleon Ier wrote:
comic boy wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
Neutrino wrote:
Neutrino wrote:
Napoleon Ier wrote:
Who claims that the 'only evidence for god is the bible [sic]'?
Care to prove that there are non-Biblical sources that provide evidence for the Christian God, then? I didn't recall your ontological arguments having a great connection with reality last time, either.
Exactly how is humanity capable of imagining infinity, again?

P.S. Left/right wing is not an insult. Stop generalising.
The use of historical documents concerning the existence of Jesus and his Disciples' acts serve as evidence, however little you may like it.

You then have the teleological argument, transcendental argument, cosmological proof, and of course the various ontological proofs.

But of course. There is no evidence for God. How silly of me. Of course comic boy's magic circus bald undocumented, unevidenced assertions count for more than the combined wisdom of Anselms, Descartes, Kant, Godel, Leibniz, Paley and others.
Well they are all bolder than me because I wouldnt claim something without a scrap of proof to back it up
Sancta Maria mater Dei....do you want to be any more ignorant? Have you heard of the Discourse on the Method? Of the Critique of Pure Reason? Discourse on Metaphysics? How dare an ignorant little cretin like you speak about these great men like that?

Insult away little child
There is still not a scrap of evidence for the existence of God and all your profanity will not change that one iota. Your constant abusive language is now becoming tiresome, either keep your temper in check or I will simply report you .

Guiscard · Post by **Guiscard** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 8:43 am

Anyone fancy getting this thread back on track? I believe I asked Suggs a question somewhere before the hate...

Napoleon Ier · Post by **Napoleon Ier** » Fri Feb 22, 2008 8:51 am

Guiscard wrote:Anyone fancy getting this thread back on track? I believe I asked Suggs a question somewhere before the hate...

Can i ask you something?What is porpose for you to open these Political topic in ConquerClub? Why you mix politic with Risk? Why you not open topic like HOT AND SEXY,or something like that.

The isreal/palestine debate

should there be a isreal?