The Gaming Den

Zinegata wrote:Learning stuff along the way is an added bonus, but it's not the main reason to argue.

WHAT?

That IS the reason to argue. Because if you aren't there to potentially LEARN from an argument then the other person can't TEACH you with an argument. And if BOTH of you take that attitude NEITHER of you can learn OR teach.

So if you can neither teach OR learn there is NO reason for an argument at all. No "correction" can genuinely be "clarified" if YOU aren't open to learning, because you might be wrong.

To walk into an argument with the attitude "I will not learn from this" is an utterly intellectually dishonest approach. It is effectively in advance coming to the conclusion that any and all information, from your opponents OR your own research, will NOT sway your opinion.

I have to admit though that DOES seem to be how your argument style played out. Your conclusions had already been reached, any amount of explanation or evidence was simply ignored or transformed with the magic of intellectual dissonance.

Much as another poster has put it. You are not arguing, you are not debating, you are simply engaging in either the most vile and shallow propaganda or an attempt to stifle actual debate and truth with lies and blank denials.

Even now "More information, no thanks, I'm just here to say "you is wrong no backsies" all day every day." is just plain despicable of you.

Really PL? Really?

You are going to get mad at someone else for coming into the argument with a preconceived end point that is not subject to any change whatsoever?

You of all people?

Just because you personally have failed to influence me or even provide me with information does not mean I am not open to it.

It just means you suck.

PL->

Dude, seriously, you're a retard.

I'm not gonna discuss "what's the main purpose of an argument". That depends entirely on each person's opinion. Instead, I will address your personal attacks against me and how you're just using me to satisfy a fucking ego-trip.

You say I don't want to listen... but you never even considered that "Maybe what I'm saying is wrong"?

I have listened. And you have failed to convince me to believe anything you say. Why the hell should I learn things that are clearly wrong? Just because they're coming from you?

You failed because you could not come up with a reasonable, coherent argument. You confused everybody to the point that Frank didn't even know which pipeline you're talking about.

You failed because you were lazy about producing sources, and when you did they proved to directly contradict known facts

You failed because every time your points were countered, you resorted to villifying other people. You call them stupid, stubborn, or a propagandist. You blame everyone but yourself

But it seems your ego can't take the fact that you're ultimately no great thinker. That you're just another voice with an opinion.

Well, while you are entitled to your opinion, I'm entitled to mine. I am in no way required to change my opinion and follow yours to soothe your ego.

Also? In my opinion, there have been several teachers in this thread. They linked actual journalistic articles. I have since modified my stance on the RoE due to links provided.

You are not one of them.

And that's the only reason you're mad. Because you thought you were good at arguments and found out instead that you fail at it.

Get over yourself. You're not the Messiah.

PhoneLobster wrote:Just because you personally have failed to influence me or even provide me with information does not mean I am not open to it.

It just means you suck.

Right... but everyone you failed to influence is automatically a knucklehead who is not open to being influenced.

You really are a retard. And you suck.

Zinegata wrote:You confused everybody to the point that Frank didn't even know which pipeline you're talking about.

I think you might find that actually you were the only one ever confused on that, or indeed pretty much all of the other issues I, or indeed pretty much anyone, raised on this thread.

That you apparently still don't comprehend that there can be multiple proposals for essentially the same project with different costings during a planning stage is well... entirely YOUR problem.

Or more specifically your dishonest choice.

Crissa wrote:Well, by reading more blogs, you can see who has an hasn't substantiated their stories.

Experience does count, alas.

-Crissa

Crissa, while I end up with the same conclusions as you do as far as Afghanistan/Iraq are concerned, the way you argue is bullshit. Basically you are throwing out your take on the situation and back this up with nothing at all. No sources, no links to similar opinions, no reasoning, nothing. You just expect those who disagree with you, to just take you at face value. Failing that you point them at the web and say "just search, the answer is out there". Do you really expect to convince anyone who does not already agree with you? Heck, I agree with you, and your inevitable lack of substance has me wondering whether I might not be wrong after all.

PhoneLobster wrote:

Zinegata wrote:Learning stuff along the way is an added bonus, but it's not the main reason to argue.

WHAT?
That IS the reason to argue.

Seconded.

If you are not, at the very least, interested in learning why the other person thinks the way he does, you should just get the fuck off the net and stop wasting time and electrons.

Sometimes you shouldn't have to provide references for everything.

Especially material that is common knowledge, on the public record and widely talked about in the media and on the Internet.

Do we really NEED to have fully annotated references to the Trans Afghan oil pipeline when so MUCH information on it is out there and has been for so long?

What next? Do I have to back up the claim that the excuses Bush gave for going to war in Iraq were lies? That experts and the general public at the time knew that?

What about the claim that experts at the time said the invasion of Afghanistan would lead to chaos and probably NOT capture Bin Laden or even reduce terrorist resources in the process? Do I really need to dig up articles and links on that?

Sometimes when someone doesn't know something it is NOT because of a failure to provide a link for every single off hand claim. Some information it is just plain impossible not to know already unless you actively don't WANT to know.

Some information you just damn well should be expected to know, or be prepared to find out for yourself.

If someone had mentioned the Trans Afghan pipeline without a link, or claimed that the Taliban offered to hand over Osama and it was news to me I certainly would find some background on that on my own and very easily. Why shouldn't I expect the same from anyone else?

It's not like we live in a pre Google dark age.

Not initially doing so on topics you think to be common knowledge, sure. But refusing to cite sources or provide reasoning, after the debate has already started? That just ends up with both sides yelling "I am right and I can't hear you NANANANA".

PhoneLobster wrote:

Zinegata wrote:You confused everybody to the point that Frank didn't even know which pipeline you're talking about.

I think you might find that actually you were the only one ever confused on that, or indeed pretty much all of the other issues I, or indeed pretty much anyone, raised on this thread.

That you apparently still don't comprehend that there can be multiple proposals for essentially the same project with different costings during a planning stage is well... entirely YOUR problem.

Or more specifically your dishonest choice.

Right. So why was Frank constantly citing a 2.5 billion dollar pipeline, while you repeatedly called me an idiot for dismissing a 7.6 billion dollar pipeline?

Oh, that's right. Because you failed to link any sources. And it turned out the 7.6 billion dollar pipeline was for Natural Gas.

Again, the reason you whine is you always find a way to blame someone other than yourself.

Murtak wrote:

PhoneLobster wrote:

Zinegata wrote:Learning stuff along the way is an added bonus, but it's not the main reason to argue.

WHAT?
That IS the reason to argue.

Seconded.

If you are not, at the very least, interested in learning why the other person thinks the way he does, you should just get the fuck off the net and stop wasting time and electrons.

There's a difference between not being interested in learning (which is frankly an incorrect conclusion about me drawn by PL - read my ENTIRE fucking post instead of his asshole response), and dismissng something because it's not properly cited.

Which is, I might add, what you are whining to Crissa and PL about.

-------

BTW, just to make it clear, PL is saying my conclusion is:

Even now "More information, no thanks, I'm just here to say "you is wrong no backsies" all day every day." is just plain despicable of you.

When in fact, I concluded is this:

So again, while I thank you for taking the time to offer for more information, I would have to kindly decline. You are entitled to believe whatever you wish to believe, but I am likewise entitled to not believe you, especially when you can't provide a source.

Yeah. He turned "I won't believe you until you show me your source" into "I don't want any more information from you".

Again, PL, you're a fucking liar. That's why, like always, you took one comment completely out of context and throw more mud my way. Because you don't want to admit you're not the fucking Messiah.

PhoneLobster wrote:Do we really NEED to have fully annotated references to the Trans Afghan oil pipeline when so MUCH information on it is out there and has been for so long?

Absolutely. Because the Afghanistan Oil pipeline costs 2.5 billion, and is a completely cancelled project.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Afghanistan_Oil_Pipeline

Whereas the the Trans-Afghanistan Pipeline (it is NEVER referred to as the Trans Afghan Oil pipeline) is a natural gas pipeline that costs 7.6 billion. That's why it's never called an oil pipeline. It doesn't carry oil.

You, on the other hand, claimed:

Wait did you just actually brush a 7.6 Billion dollar project intended to open the entirety of the Caspian sea oil reserves to US interests without Russian interference

So which pipeline were you referring to? Because there is no 7.6 billion dollar oil pipeline anywhere in the record. It's a 2.5 billion dollar oil pipeline, or a 7.6 billion natural gas one.

Which is it?

The fact is, you're probably quoting barely remembered snippets from questionable blog sites. Which is why you refuse to provide sources (because you're lazy and your sources are questionable), and why your details are all mixed up.

And now you're backed into a corner and are being a sleezy son of a bitch instead of manning up to it.

Excuse me, but I'll now just laugh at you from this point on.

Oh gosh look, they are piping a different product derived from oil extraction out of pretty much the same hole in the ground (and certainly the same Congress declared region of "Strategic" energy significance) along the same route by the same companies as part of the same proposed projects.

Forgive my terrible error.

Now do you care to admit that the Afghan invasion was in order to secure access to strategic energy resources including oil AND natural gas or not?

Or is someone going to have to explain to you that natural gas is a closely related resource to oil and teach you the economics and production of both those resources as well?

PhoneLobster wrote:Just because you personally have failed to influence me or even provide me with information does not mean I am not open to it.

It just means you suck.

No PL, the list of people who have failed to influence you consists of the entire forum.

You have never changed your mind about any subject whatsoever at any point on this forum.

That's why it's ironic that you would fucking complain about it.

It's as ironic as if I complained about people insulting me.

PhoneLobster wrote:Oh gosh look, they are piping a different product derived from oil extraction out of pretty much the same hole in the ground (and certainly the same Congress declared region of "Strategic" energy significance) along the same route by the same companies as part of the same proposed projects.

Forgive my terrible error.

Actually, by claiming that oil and natural gas are pretty much the same, you've checkmated yourself into making an argument that can never be correct.

I was totally expecting you to make this argument, because it's obvious you can't tell the difference between oil and natural gas. You probably don't even realize that the two don't even share the same state of matter. Or that while natural gas is primarily a heating/energy producton fuel, oil is useful for a lot of other things - like running tanks and other war machines. You generally can't use natural gas to run a car or a tank.

Still, even if we consider oil = "oil and natural gas" (never mind the fact the proper term for both is fossil fuels), your argument is still wrong. You know why?

Because you said:

Wait did you just actually brush a 7.6 Billion dollar project intended to open the entirety of the Caspian sea oil reserves to US interests without Russian interference

You referred only to the 7.6 billion dollar natural gas pipeline. Which cannot carry oil. So how can it carry the entirety of the Caspian Sea Oil Reserves? It can't even carry a single drop of liquid oil!

Details do matter, dimwit.

And you've just been check-mated.

Congrats on making an argument so bad that even if you twist the definitions of "oil" around, it'd still be wrong. It takes serious amounts of retardation to pull of something this momentously bad.

*takes a screenshot to preserve this moment for posterity*

I will now laugh at you for your pathetic attempts to villify me to cover up the fact your argument was shit... even if you were actually stupid enough to believe oil = oil and natural gas.

*laughs mockingly at PL*

Now do you care to admit that the Afghan invasion was in order to secure access to strategic energy resources including oil AND natural gas or not?

*points to my comments to Frank*

Building the pipline was a reason. Not the primary reason.

Already said this. Had to bap Frank in the head to make him see I said this because you're such a lying twit. Why are you bitching again? Oh, right, because you completely fail at influencing anyone in this board and you're no Messiah. And because you don't read.

*laughs mockingly at PL*

What the fuck? When did this become the debate team?

Apparently when Zinegata thought some tiny technicality means he can ignore the entire rest of an argument.

See cause you know, because a region of significant energy resources contains MULTIPLE fossil fuel resources, and Afghanistan was invaded to secure access to ALL of them, why that means, as far as he is concerned it no longer was invaded for ONE of them! And all those things about catching some terrorist weren't actually transparent lies!

So he wins the argument!

Inside his head. But sadly there is some continuation of rambling insane ravings in public.

PL->

I mockingly laugh at you while ignoring whatever you've written, because like I said - checkmate.

violence in the media wrote:What the fuck? When did this become the debate team?

I dunno. Ever since people started saying shitty arguments that either proved to be untrue when links were tracked down, or arguments that simply had no supporting evidence at all?

If you're gonna argue on the Internet, you might as well provide links. That's what Google is for.

PhoneLobster wrote:And all those things about catching some terrorist weren't actually transparent lies!

See PL, right here.

You decided that everything about Osama was a "transparent lie" and even though you have presented no evidence for this, and there is no reason to believe that, and instead there is in fact a lot of reason to believe that it was an important reason motivating the invasion, you decided it must be true, so therefore it is.

And you continue to repeat this retarded claim without even recognizing that it is retarded.

And that's why I can't take you seriously, ever, because once you have decided something stupid, nothing could ever convince you that you are wrong, so everything you ever say is suspect.

Kaelik wrote:You decided that everything about Osama was a "transparent lie"...And you continue to repeat this retarded claim without even recognizing that it is retarded.

I have you on ignore so I hadn't realized.

Have you SERIOUSLY been arguing that in here?

Man you really DO suck.

And you wonder why I (literally) ignore you.

PhoneLobster wrote:I have you on ignore so I hadn't realized.

Right... you give a long lecture on how I shouldn't ignore people... and then admit you have Kaelik on your ignore list.

*points to PL and laughs at him some more*

Why do you ignore poor Kaelik? You will learn something from him!

Specifically, you're a retard AND a hypocrite.

*points to PL and laughs at him even more*

Christ on a dumptruck...Just shut the fuck up, Zine. You just don't know when to quit.

Seriously man, this thread would be six pages or less if it wasn't for your bullshit spamming of rants. If you think pretro chemicals had nothing to do with it, makes you sound like a retard. And constantly demanding sources for the smallest thing makes it worse.

This isn't wikipedia, and there's something called Google. Try using it.

PhoneLobster wrote:

Kaelik wrote:You decided that everything about Osama was a "transparent lie"...And you continue to repeat this retarded claim without even recognizing that it is retarded.

I have you on ignore so I hadn't realized.

Have you SERIOUSLY been arguing that in here?

Man you really DO suck.

And you wonder why I (literally) ignore you.

So do you have any evidence to back up your assertion? Or are you just going to declare that it must be true because you personally believe it and everything you have ever believed is 100% correct, so why bother with evidence?

Meikle641 wrote:If you think pretro chemicals had nothing to do with it, makes you sound like a retard.

You know, that's the exact opposite of what he has said on multiple occasions.

So, maybe you should actually read something that he has posted.

This fucking thread is awesome.