Tiberius Posted December 30, 2015 Author Share Posted December 30, 2015 And predictably, a devout SoProg finds it perfectly acceptable to mock someone because he thinks they're gay. Do you actively mock people you think are gay or just online where no one can see your face? Ah ha! So you don't like that? You are constantly calling people knobgobblers, and now you cry when faced with a question? Stupid people are hypocrites I don't post sources because I read books and primary sources. And you must be joking, pretending that I can't argue with twits like you unless I have an advanced degree in the subject. You want my credentials? I read books and primary sources. No one ever said it was, !@#$tard. You are an ignorant troll Check this guy out, he is just like Tom: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/29/opinion/verbatim-expert-witness.html?ref=opinion&mtrref=www.nytimes.com&gwh=07A4BB14CD868E2DCC04BDB50E0824A4&gwt=pay&assetType=opinion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Ah ha! So you don't like that? You are constantly calling people knobgobblers, and now you cry when faced with a question? Stupid people are hypocrites You are an ignorant troll Check this guy out, he is just like Tom: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/29/opinion/verbatim-expert-witness.html?ref=opinion&mtrref=www.nytimes.com&gwh=07A4BB14CD868E2DCC04BDB50E0824A4&gwt=pay&assetType=opinion i'm thinking more like this guy: http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=cliff+clavin+jeopardy+video&view=detail&&mid=3448E3BECCC068FAE4683448E3BECCC068FAE468&rvsmid=FEBF3BBC57C688B2540DFEBF3BBC57C688B2540D&fsscr=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 yup. an appeal to authority without any proof of authority. that's what I thought. so reference the books and primary sources that you are so familiar with that refute the initial sentence in the wiki article, will ya cliff? historical books almost always have footnotes and bibliographies. you might start there. by primary sources you likely mean established experts. they generally publish. and guess what? their publications virtually always contain bibliographies. so have at it... I never appealed to authority. I know more about it than you...but that's not an appeal to authority. That's recognition that a dumbass who makes broad, sweeping, classist generalizations that contradict the very obvious realities of the time and places is woefully ignorant. And no, by primary sources, I mean primary sources. Not analysis by published experts. You just find that impossible to believe, since every opinion you've ever espoused was given to you by someone else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 (edited) I never appealed to authority. I know more about it than you...but that's not an appeal to authority. That's recognition that a dumbass who makes broad, sweeping, classist generalizations that contradict the very obvious realities of the time and places is woefully ignorant. And no, by primary sources, I mean primary sources. Not analysis by published experts. You just find that impossible to believe, since every opinion you've ever espoused was given to you by someone else. so list your primary sources (a survivor from the civil war would have to be 175 yo ) and link your books. and refute that very clear wiki line about cruelty and slavery using some source...any source ... other than your inflated ego. oh, and every opinion just about anyone has ever espoused has been put forth by someone else previously. the are very few novel opinions. when they do occur they generally originate from extraordinary people. i'm thinking you don't qualify. Edited December 30, 2015 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 so list your primary sources (a survivor from the civil war would have to be 175 yo ) and link your books. Their writings aren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Their writings aren't. so they're published necessarily in order for you to read them. link them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 Ah ha! So you don't like that? You are constantly calling people knobgobblers, and now you cry when faced with a question? Stupid people are hypocrites You silly nutsucking knob-gobbling nutbag....the only person who inferred that my insults were about you being gay was you. And that's because you're too stupid to realize my insults were implying you're too dense to ever think for yourself, and will suck the nut and gobble the knob of any moron who says what you want to hear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 30, 2015 Author Share Posted December 30, 2015 i'm thinking more like this guy: http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=cliff+clavin+jeopardy+video&view=detail&&mid=3448E3BECCC068FAE4683448E3BECCC068FAE468&rvsmid=FEBF3BBC57C688B2540DFEBF3BBC57C688B2540D&fsscr=0 That's it! And the time period is perfect too. Tom still hasn't figured out that primary source documents are available all over the internet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 and what is the basis for your contention that you do? you rarely link sources. you haven't divulged your formal education or publications on the subject. are we to simply trust you? :lol: . not bloody likely... will wiki is flawed, it is peer reviewed and constantly revised based on that review (unlike statements made on ppp. here's the first line of gato'rs linked article: "The treatment of slaves in the United States varied by time and place, but was generally brutal and degrading. Whipping and sexual abuse, including rape, were common." given your self reported vast knowledge on the subject, an credible reference to refute this should easily come to hand. link it. And what is your proof you're actually a doctor? If you are you must really suck at it. I've never known a doctors with as much free time on their hands as you appear to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 30, 2015 Author Share Posted December 30, 2015 You silly nutsucking knob-gobbling nutbag....the only person who inferred that my insults were about you being gay was you. And that's because you're too stupid to realize my insults were implying you're too dense to ever think for yourself, and will suck the nut and gobble the knob of any moron who says what you want to hear. Well then, all apologies And what is your proof you're actually a doctor? If you are you must really suck at it. I've never known a doctors with as much free time on their hands as you appear to have. My doctor is in Florida right now. I can't see him to read my MRI results till Monday. And what's your excuse for having time on your hands? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 My doctor is in Florida right now. I can't see him to read my MRI results till Monday. And what's your excuse for having time on your hands? You don't need your doctor to give you the results of your MRI. I can tell you the scan of your brain showed nothing My workday is typically less taxing than a good doctors is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 so they're published necessarily in order for you to read them. link them. They don't have to be published online - or published at all, for that matter - to read them. You really are narrow-minded. Well then, all apologies My doctor is in Florida right now. I can't see him to read my MRI results till Monday. And what's your excuse for having time on your hands? You must be an awesome patient. "My knee hurts!" "That's because you have a dislocated kneecap and a grade 2 ACL sprain with an avulsion fracture..." "Stop obfuscating with detail! It hurrts! You're not a real doctor!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 You must be an awesome patient. "My knee hurts!" "That's because you have a dislocated kneecap and a grade 2 ACL sprain with an avulsion fracture..." "Stop obfuscating with detail! It hurrts! You're not a real doctor!" Gator visits birddog: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 I always liked the Gumby sketches but never got the rags on their heads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 (edited) And what is your proof you're actually a doctor? If you are you must really suck at it. I've never known a doctors with as much free time on their hands as you appear to have. i'm not making declarations of "fact" based on the premise that I hold a specific degree. but in healthcare discussions here I've linked to sources (ACP, Doctors for single payer http://pnhpcalifornia.org/, scholarly journals etc.) that those outside the field would likely be unfamiliar with. believe it or not. I don't care. it's not relevant to the argument since i'm not holding myself out as an expert. tom is...without any proof. Edited December 30, 2015 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 i'm not making declarations of "fact" based on the premise that I hold a specific degree. but in healthcare discussions here I've linked to sources (ACP, Doctors for single payer http://pnhpcalifornia.org/, scholarly journals etc.) that those outside the field would likely be unfamiliar with. believe it or not. I don't care. it's not relevant to the argument since i'm not holding myself out as an expert. tom is...without any proof. But you hold yourself out as an expert on experts, and that's where you are consistently going off the path. Just because you're told they're 'scholarly' doesn't actually make it so. I know a lot of degreed people who are dumb as bricks, but you are convinced that because they are degreed, they are intelligent and scholarly, and since they are intelligent and scholarly, they must be right exclusively because you believe what they are saying. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 30, 2015 Author Share Posted December 30, 2015 They don't have to be published online - or published at all, for that matter - to read them. You really are narrow-minded. You must be an awesome patient. "My knee hurts!" "That's because you have a dislocated kneecap and a grade 2 ACL sprain with an avulsion fracture..." "Stop obfuscating with detail! It hurrts! You're not a real doctor!" No Tom, he doesn't obfuscate, you do. All the time. It's what Trolls like you do Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 But you hold yourself out as an expert on experts, and that's where you are consistently going off the path. Just because you're told they're 'scholarly' doesn't actually make it so. I know a lot of degreed people who are dumb as bricks, but you are convinced that because they are degreed, they are intelligent and scholarly, and since they are intelligent and scholarly, they must be right exclusively because you believe what they are saying. disagree. Milton friedman is scholarly. I think he's also more often wrong than correct. there are people in my own field that are scholarly that I strongly disagree with on certain issues. the fact that they are scholarly doesn't hold sway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted December 30, 2015 Author Share Posted December 30, 2015 You don't need your doctor to give you the results of your MRI. I can tell you the scan of your brain showed nothing My workday is typically less taxing than a good doctors is. You are sinking to LaBillz levels insults now. Yawn. But, when you don't know anything at all on the topic that's all you can do i guess. You seem pretty ignorant of history, too. . Much like the rest of the Clown Brigade you run with here But you hold yourself out as an expert on experts, and that's where you are consistently going off the path. Just because you're told they're 'scholarly' doesn't actually make it so. I know a lot of degreed people who are dumb as bricks, but you are convinced that because they are degreed, they are intelligent and scholarly, and since they are intelligent and scholarly, they must be right exclusively because you believe what they are saying. Like the scientists and global warming! Come on tell us the truth, all ya need is right wing talk radio, a little anger and bingo you are ready to face the world! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deranged Rhino Posted December 30, 2015 Share Posted December 30, 2015 start a new thread debating the morality of buying apple products and the alleged link to slavery. i'd be pleased to thrash you there. as it is, this thread is about confederate monuments in NO and their links to slavery. apple is not salient to that discussion. i refuse to be complicit in your attempt to obfuscate the debate with tangential issues. it's a tactic much too often employed by the cons here regardless of the personal attacks on gator for pointing that out. So, in other words, you're an intellectual coward and a dishonest one at that. This thread is about those monuments, and you offered your position on the matter as "anyone who supports slavery is bad/morally inferior to those who don't". That was the logic YOU offered in this thread, is it not? How is that not relevant to the thread? Only an intellectual coward, or a dishonest poster, would then make the claim that what they said about this subject is suddenly tangential to the conversation. Because anyone with one iota of common sense knows the arguments made within a thread are fair game for discussion and follow up. The fact you think I'm obfuscating or a con (ha) just shows you're completely full of shite and are trying very hard to distance yourself from your own logical fallacy. So, let's try this again. According to your own arguments made in this thread about this subject you believe anyone who supports slavery is morally inferior, correct? So how do you, bird dog, possibly reconcile the fact that you yourself support slavery today while also trying to claim the moral high ground in a discussion about SLAVERY? Isn't it possible that people are not just black and white? That passing wholesale judgements on their lives and the times they live is an inherently risky proposition? Isn't it more honest to admit that thousands of motivations go into people's decision making, not just "slavery bad / slavery good"? I mean it must be true right? After all here you are fully supporting modern slavery without any sense of shame because they make a groovy iPhone while simultaneously judging people from the past for doing exactly what you're doing today. Or would you just finally like to admit that you don't have the foggiest idea what you're talking about in this thread other than offering emotional arguments devoid of logic or consistency? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts