Why is This Thread Closed For Replies? : Pardon Trump from all charges if he just leaves??

@Rebelofnj,

Rebelofnj wrote:

However, you haven't showcased any level of genius here, unless you are also skilled in mathematics like JGoldman (a skill that can't be easily displayed on online forums.)

I'm not sure there is much opportunity to showcase intelligence on a discussion board. However, you could look at my factual record. How often does anyone find an untrue statement in my posts?

Yes, I know it happens on rare occasions. But those occasions are pretty rare.

I am skilled at math, but I'm not much interested in it. There is probably quite a bit that I've forgotten over the years. Although I'd pick it up again very rapidly if I tried.

Have a go at solving this problem. See if your answer comes closer to the correct answer than mine does:
https://able2know.org/topic/553195-1

0 Replies

@oralloy,

You just keep carrying on what you’re doing while expecting different results.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

I'm not sure what results you think I'm expecting. I'm satisfied with my posts.

0 Replies

That you two are spending pages and pages arguing about your intelligence doesn't say too much about your intelligence.

I have an IQ of 817. You don't see me bragging about it.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Is it bragging to set the record straight when people say untrue things about you?

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

I’ve not said anything about my intelligence, but comprehension has never been your thing.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

Actually Ive pointed out and verified your errors in 100% of the posts I was interested in. History, paleo, firearm firing, the Constitution (the most recent stupee you pulled), and your several malapropisms.

Those are the only ones that were info based disagreements

I dont count our disagreements on car engines. They are just life choices

2 Replies

@farmerman,

PS it was my thread, and half jokingly posed. It started going downhill a few pages in as the thread was being used as political propoganda by both camps. Then it started getting a bit vile and it only took one reference of a word that, when used as color, is apprently acceptable, but when cast at an opponent, becomes unacceptable. hey , write yer congressmen.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Actually Ive pointed out and verified your errors in 100% of the posts I was interested in. History, paleo, firearm firing, the Constitution (the most recent stupee you pulled), and your several malapropisms.

You talk big, but aside from one error about the Constitution, you cannot provide links to these alleged errors, and you cannot provide links to posts where you correct these alleged errors.

I suppose I should give you an honorable mention regarding a point several years ago about Mr. Obama's war on mentally disabled people, but you didn't seem to even understand that you were right. You were only regurgitating propaganda. It was someone else who established that I had made an error.

farmerman wrote:

I dont count our disagreements on car engines. They are just life choices

You're right. They are. Which is why it was wildly inappropriate for you to erupt into childish name-calling over what should have been a friendly rivalry.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

I’ve not said anything about my intelligence, but comprehension has never been your thing.

When you insult the intelligence of other people (which you seem to do quite often)... the implication is that you believe you are smarter than them. Am I wrong?

Are the people whose "comprehension" you are questioning actually more intelligent than you are?

1 Reply

IzzyThePush wrote:

You are more intelligent than I am, but you are a complete moron.

Why isn't this thread closed yet?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

All you can do is lie.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

You have shown time and again your problems with the English language.

And now you’re twisting yourself in knots.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

You have shown time and again your problems with the English language.

And now you’re twisting yourself in knots.

What exactly do you think is going on here Izzy? This is a thread about nothing. There is absolutely nothing to prove here. We are just ******* around. I am just playing with you. But, It doesn't seem like you are enjoying yourself here. You are still acting as if you are fighting some righteous cause.

What we are doing here is consensual. There is nothing to it... it is just a quick roll in the sack until we find something more interesting to pay attention to.

I hope this is good for you too. You seem so earnest here, as if there is some point to win. Just relax... I will do the work.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

As I recall, you were the one who lanced out and called all NON nat aspirated cars a "car for girlie men"

It started with me discussing with blatham and LEadfoot how I didnt like some of the BMW's and Porsches for their "Turbo-lag". I was told that thyd resolved that feature , and I dont think they had to rely on returning the carburetor.
I drive mostly trucks , having twin turbos and intercolers. Id race anyone of your "nat aspirated" engined cars over the continental divide and see who makes it from Denver to Reno AT ALL.

Oh yeh, that road(rt 50) includes Estes PArk (where you claimed there is no national PArk)

Your intellectual malaprops are legend. Of course I have em. I just dont take some defiant stance that my "MIGHTY INTELLIGENCE" doesnt allow me to admit being wrong. Youre claims are thusly quite laughable in that regard.

BTW, I only keep posts that I consider important and let all the others drift away. I rely on my very good memory for fact, as well as lit, art, and a few others.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

What’s going on here is that you feel neglected, you keep unsuccessfully trying to get my attention. So you stick yourself into an argument between Oralloy and myself in some last ditch attempt to give your miserable life some meaning.

You’re hardly enigmatic.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

I’ve not said anything about my intelligence, but comprehension has never been your thing.

I don't understand.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

As I recall, you were the one who lanced out and called all NON nat aspirated cars a "car for girlie men"

Actually I referred to the engines as little girly engines.

I was referring to the size of the engines, not to their aspiration. But regardless, I was referring to engines and not to people.

Although... it would be fair to presume a raised eyebrow on my part when I hear people extol the virtues of little girly engines.

farmerman wrote:

Oh yeh, that road(rt 50) includes Estes PArk (where you claimed there is no national PArk)

Estes Park is a town of more than 6000 people. It is not a national park.

farmerman wrote:

Your intellectual malaprops are legend. Of course I have em.

A malaprop is like a spelling or grammar error. Who cares?

That said, I'm calling your bluff. I say that you can't link to any malaprop on my part.

farmerman wrote:

I just dont take some defiant stance that my "MIGHTY INTELLIGENCE" doesnt allow me to admit being wrong.

Neither do I. I'm always quick to admit when I'm wrong about something.

farmerman wrote:

Youre claims are thusly quite laughable in that regard.

You talk and you talk and you talk, but I'm not seeing any links to these supposed errors of mine.

I do of course admit to two errors in our past conversations. It is your claim of further errors beyond that that is at issue.

farmerman wrote:

BTW, I only keep posts that I consider important and let all the others drift away. I rely on my very good memory for fact, as well as lit, art, and a few others.

So does this mean you can't back up your claims about me?

1 Reply

@oralloy,

Apparently the only thing you know about estes park is what youve read in wikipedia. Walter was fairly clear(at lleast to someone who knew of the area) that estes park includes the entrance to RMNP. Only someone of small frames of reference would even have thought that Estes Park was actually THE Rocky Mtn Nat park.
It makes you seem even more dull when you continue arguing sucha dim point of which everyone knew what walter was about. BTW, Hes been there,Ive been there,youve not apparently.

When you call stuff "girly" its implicit that you are referring sideways to the people who own them.

You wear" girly undies".

Ats enuff, I think Ive made a -point so Im not going to give you any more time.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Walter was fairly clear (at lleast to someone who knew of the area) that estes park includes the entrance to RMNP.

Actually he said that the town contained the headquarters of the park. He didn't say that the town included the entrance to the park.

farmerman wrote:

Only someone of small frames of reference would even have thought that Estes Park was actually THE Rocky Mtn Nat park.

I'm not the person who said that the town was THE park.

I am the person who corrected the person who said that the town was THE park.

farmerman wrote:

It makes you seem even more dull when you continue arguing sucha dim point of which everyone knew what walter was about.

I did not argue with Walter or his point even a little bit. I didn't even reply to his post.

I didn't check to verify his point, but I take him at his word when he says that the town contains the headquarters of a park.

You are the only person who keeps arguing about this.

1 Reply

Why is This Thread Closed For Replies? : Pardon Trump from all charges if he just leaves??

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know