Government is...

[saxitoxin]

The entire field of psychology is based on the fallacy of misplaced concreteness...

You started so well ... a cold, detached, Spock-like conjurer of Reason - an architect of Logic, albeit one with an understanding of which had not entirely developed.

But, as soon as the Tickle Typhoon hit you cast all that into the bin and became a purveyor of irrationality, tossing rotten fruit and galumphing through the streets, mumbling incomprehensible rants at the head of the crazed and screaming mob.

And all it took was a few tickles.

*tickle tickle*

*Saxi tickles Metsfanmax*

(don't fret, Player got it worse, once)

I am glad to see that you have conceded my point.

I accept your apology.

[Metsfanmax]

The entire field of psychology is based on the fallacy of misplaced concreteness...

You started so well ... a cold, detached, Spock-like conjurer of Reason - an architect of Logic, albeit one with an understanding of which had not entirely developed.

But, as soon as the Tickle Typhoon hit you cast all that into the bin and became a purveyor of irrationality, tossing rotten fruit and galumphing through the streets, mumbling incomprehensible rants at the head of the crazed and screaming mob.

And all it took was a few tickles.

*tickle tickle*

*Saxi tickles Metsfanmax*

(don't fret, Player got it worse, once)

I am glad to see that you have conceded my point.

I accept your apology.

Every post you make convinces me further that you have no actual cognitive ability to use reason to defend against arguments made; you are only able to state comments or Latin phrases that you believe are witty, but which, in reality, are totally out of context and do nothing but muddle the discussion.

[saxitoxin]

The entire field of psychology is based on the fallacy of misplaced concreteness...

You started so well ... a cold, detached, Spock-like conjurer of Reason - an architect of Logic, albeit one with an understanding of which had not entirely developed.

But, as soon as the Tickle Typhoon hit you cast all that into the bin and became a purveyor of irrationality, tossing rotten fruit and galumphing through the streets, mumbling incomprehensible rants at the head of the crazed and screaming mob.

And all it took was a few tickles.

*tickle tickle*

*Saxi tickles Metsfanmax*

(don't fret, Player got it worse, once)

I am glad to see that you have conceded my point.

I accept your apology.

Every post you make convinces me further that you have no actual cognitive ability to use reason to defend against arguments made; you are only able to state comments or Latin phrases that you believe are witty, but which, in reality, are totally out of context and do nothing but muddle the discussion.

There is no discussion occurring. As I previously said, many comments ago (here: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=121424&start=45#p2673717), I'm not taking you seriously, I'm continuing to poke at you to get these amusing reactions as above. You're not a serious person. I save discussions for serious-minded people. I save pokes and tickles for Elmo.

You've been driving by through threads pooping out "logical fallacy!" -- "er, that's a logical fallacy!" -- "oopsy! logical fallacy!" -- in a way that would offend even the most elementary student of Reason. You have a 101-level of logical reasoning and use it in haughty tonality to justify exigencies in a way that is, at best, purile and, at worst, mind-numbing.

To anyone in The Club who has a higher-order education in Reason it's quite painfully clear you had a PHIL 120 professor who got you really excited about Logic and really jazzed up to apply it in on a situational basis. Unfortunately, you're just not doing a very good job about it and are leaving glaring gaps in your reasoning large enough to drive Snorri's ego through.

Now, what is amusing - and why I get a kick out of you - is that you are unwilling to have these gaps critiqued and - when someone does - you fall back into the kind of illogical ranting for which you'd just censured others.

Instead of mantling yourself with a credential you don't possess try acting like a human being. You might like it!

[Metsfanmax]

There is no discussion occurring. As I previously said, many comments ago, I'm not taking you seriously, I'm continuing to poke at you to get these amusing reactions as above. You're not a serious person. I save discussions for serious-minded people. I save pokes and tickles for Elmo.

You've been driving by through threads pooping out "logical fallacy!" -- "er, that's a logical fallacy!" -- "oopsy! logical fallacy!" -- in a way that would offend even the most elementary student of Reason. You have a 101-level of logical reasoning and use it in haughty tonality to justify exigencies in a way that is, at best, purile and, at worst, mind-numbing.

To anyone in The Club who has a higher-order education in Reason it's quite painfully clear you had a PHIL 120 professor who got you really excited about Logic and really jazzed up to apply it in on a situational basis. Unfortunately, you're just not doing a very good job about it and are leaving glaring gaps in your reasoning large enough to drive Snorri's ego through.

Now, what is amusing - and why I get a kick out of you - is that you are unwilling to have these gaps critiqued and - when someone does - you fall back into the kind of illogical ranting for which you'd just censured others.

I implore you to actually go back and read this thread, and you will see how everything you've just said applies to yourself, and not me. I have never taken a formal logic or philosophy course. I only believe in saying things that make sense and which are based on the assumptions we've set out with - that's the nature of being a scientist. What is puerile is throwing out phrases in Latin and expecting that they prove your point, when in fact that does nothing when you fail to explain exactly why you believe a logical fallacy has occurred. 90% of your posts in this topic contained the word "fallacy," and every single one of those failed to include an explanation as to why you believed there was a fallacy. So no, you're not "critiquing" my gaps in logic - to do that, first you'd have to actually point out what they are.

You're right, this hasn't been a discussion. The only way you could start to participate in this discussion is to actually find one of my supposed fallacies and explain to my unsophisticated mind, in simple terms, where I went wrong. If you won't do that, then you'll concede every point I've made.

[saxitoxin]

I implore you to actually go back and read this thread, and you will see how everything you've just said applies to yourself, and not me. I have never taken a formal logic or philosophy course. I only believe in saying things that make sense and which are based on the assumptions we've set out with - that's the nature of being a scientist. What is puerile is throwing out phrases in Latin and expecting that they prove your point, when in fact that does nothing when you fail to explain exactly why you believe a logical fallacy has occurred. 90% of your posts in this topic contained the word "fallacy,"

*sigh*

again: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=121424&start=45#p2673717



It's fun to put people on a leash and take them for a walk. Not so fun when they insist on keeping the leash on once the walk is finished.

[Metsfanmax]

So, in this thread, you have conceded that your field is based on a logical fallacy, and that you have no idea how to construct a logical argument. Apparently you have no desire to argue those points.

(BTW: In your last post you committed the logical fallacy of saxitoxin; however, in honor of the person whose name was used in this fallacy, I won't explain what the fallacy actually is)

[saxitoxin]

So, in this thread, you have conceded that your field is based on a logical fallacy, and that you

OMG

[Woodruff]

Saxi's concreteness.

If that's code for irregularity ...

I was thinking more along the lines of the endzone of Giants stadium...

Every post you make convinces me further that you have no actual cognitive ability to use reason to defend against arguments made; you are only able to state comments or Latin phrases that you believe are witty, but which, in reality, are totally out of context and do nothing but muddle the discussion.

You're finally catching on...that last IS the point of his postings.

[Metsfanmax]

But see, Woodruff, not only is he a troll; I believe further that he is actually incapable of posting in a more intelligent manner.

[saxitoxin]

But see, Woodruff, not only is he a troll; I believe further that he is actually incapable of posting in a more intelligent manner.

it's "I further believe"

[Woodruff]

But see, Woodruff, not only is he a troll; I believe further that he is actually incapable of posting in a more intelligent manner.

He's capable, I believe...but if he did so, he would likely give away completely which former user he's a multi of.

[saxitoxin]

But see, Woodruff, not only is he a troll; I believe further that he is actually incapable of posting in a more intelligent manner.

He's capable, I believe...but if he did so, he would likely give away completely which former user he's a multi of.

it's "of which he's a multi"

(My regrets for interrupting the MENSA confab. Please continue.)

[Metsfanmax]

But see, Woodruff, not only is he a troll; I believe further that he is actually incapable of posting in a more intelligent manner.

He's capable, I believe...but if he did so, he would likely give away completely which former user he's a multi of.

Do you have suspicions? I have not been around too long.

[jimboston]

Jim ,did that represent your best effort at presenting yourself as a mature and intellectual adult to the world?

Or are you applying to be the pitchfork bearer in the mob Mets and Player are organizing to chase the "angry spirits" out of our cyber-village to appease the snake god Glycon?

Not any effort made towards presenting myself to the world as mature there.

Some mild effort at trying to be funny. Perhaps it failed?

Not interesting in being in any mob with Mets or Player... thanks for asking.

[Woodruff]

But see, Woodruff, not only is he a troll; I believe further that he is actually incapable of posting in a more intelligent manner.

He's capable, I believe...but if he did so, he would likely give away completely which former user he's a multi of.

Do you have suspicions? I have not been around too long.

I have suspicions of a great many things. <laughing> Others are more of a certainty.

[Woodruff]

But see, Woodruff, not only is he a troll; I believe further that he is actually incapable of posting in a more intelligent manner.

He's capable, I believe...but if he did so, he would likely give away completely which former user he's a multi of.

it's "of which he's a multi"

That was just for you, Saxi, after I saw your response to Metsfanmax.

[Metsfanmax]

But see, Woodruff, not only is he a troll; I believe further that he is actually incapable of posting in a more intelligent manner.

He's capable, I believe...but if he did so, he would likely give away completely which former user he's a multi of.

it's "of which he's a multi"

That was just for you, Saxi, after I saw your response to Metsfanmax.

WOODRUFF SAID

[saxitoxin]

But see, Woodruff, not only is he a troll; I believe further that he is actually incapable of posting in a more intelligent manner.

He's capable, I believe...but if he did so, he would likely give away completely which former user he's a multi of.

it's "of which he's a multi"

That was just for you, Saxi, after I saw your response to Metsfanmax.

WOODRUFF SAID

Mets, just be careful putting too much into what Woodruff says. When a grown man throws a cringe worthy tantrum in the middle of a message board, sticks his big ol' bottom lip out and loudly announces "I ain't never comin' back!" that's usually the kind of person whose excuses for poor grammar you don't want to take to the bank.

That was just for you, Saxi, after I saw your response to Metsfanmax.

> Post by saxitoxin » Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:42 pm

> Post by Woodruff » Thu Jul 08, 2010 6:42 pm

Keep chasing your dreams, Mets. The sky's the limit!

( P.S. - Woodruff / Mets: let's keep this MENSA confab between the two of you running. The Club, I'm sure, wants to hear more from the CC Brain Trust as it's been quite delicious so far. Let's do it! Let's make it happen! )

[Metsfanmax]

Mets, just be careful putting too much into what Woodruff says. When a grown man throws a cringe worthy tantrum in the middle of a message board, sticks his big ol' bottom lip out and loudly announces "I ain't never comin' back!" that's usually the kind of person whose excuses for poor grammar you don't want to take to the bank.

[saxitoxin]

Mets, just be careful putting too much into what Woodruff says. When a grown man throws a cringe worthy tantrum in the middle of a message board, sticks his big ol' bottom lip out and loudly announces "I ain't never comin' back!" that's usually the kind of person whose excuses for poor grammar you don't want to take to the bank.

ROOAAAAARRRRR!!! ***TANTRUM***

Love your new friend, Woodruff!

You two are gonna get along famously, I just know it.

[Metsfanmax]

Mets, just be careful putting too much into what Woodruff says. When a grown man throws a cringe worthy tantrum in the middle of a message board, sticks his big ol' bottom lip out and loudly announces "I ain't never comin' back!" that's usually the kind of person whose excuses for poor grammar you don't want to take to the bank.

ROOAAAAARRRRR!!! ***TANTRUM***

Love your new friend, Woodruff!

You two are gonna get along famously, I just know it.

[jimboston]

Back on Topic...

Government is...

... about to take over Big Brother style.

[the.killing.44]

saxi has officially jizzed all over this thread.

*killing waves at saxi*

[saxitoxin]

saxi has officially jizzed all over this thread.

*killing waves at saxi*

i bested my last time, though

when you're my age, it's just a big accomplishment at all

*saxi waves at .44*

[jimboston]

saxi has officially jizzed all over this thread.

*killing waves at saxi*

Yuck!

*typing comment with gloves on*

Can Saxi still Jizz? He was talking about incontinence issues... are you sure he didn't instead just shit all over this thread?

Wir lieben Sie Saxi!