Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
A rose by any other name....
Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on
11/29/10 2:13 PM: .... Are you trying to argue that the former contains truth and the latter needn't? (be careful. Snit... this path is fraught with pitfalls LOL! I am noting, Steve, that you have struggled and confused two concepts for years (since 2003): * Proof: as in that found in a mathematical proof, an absolute concept * Proof: as in adjudication, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" And from this you jump to asking what I am "arguing". Nothing - I am noting a fact. You have confused the two concepts *today* with your rants. Today. -- [INSERT .SIG HERE] |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
A rose by any other name....
On Nov 29, 2:17*pm, Snit wrote:
Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on 11/29/10 2:13 PM: ... Are you trying to argue that the former contains truth and the latter needn't? (be careful. Snit... this path is fraught with pitfalls LOL! I am noting You forgot the 'h' Poor Snit... now he's trying to argue that "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't need to contain any true statements from which a deduction can be made. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
A rose by any other name....
Steve Carroll wrote:
On Nov 29, 2:17 pm, Snit wrote: Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on 11/29/10 2:13 PM: ... Are you trying to argue that the former contains truth and the latter needn't? (be careful. Snit... this path is fraught with pitfalls LOL! I am noting You forgot the 'h' Poor Snit... now he's trying to argue that "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't need to contain any true statements from which a deduction can be made. LOL! -- You Ain't the Biggest Fish in the Crotch |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
A rose by any other name....
|
#50
|
|||
|
|||
A rose by any other name....
On Nov 29, 2:34*pm, Snit wrote:
Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on 11/29/10 2:32 PM: ... Are you trying to argue that the former contains truth and the latter needn't? (be careful. Snit... this path is fraught with pitfalls LOL! I am noting, Steve, that you have struggled and confused two concepts for years (since 2003): * Proof: as in that found in a mathematical proof, an absolute concept * Proof: as in adjudication, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" And from this you jump to asking what I am "arguing". *Nothing - I am noting a fact. *You have confused the two concepts *today* with your rants.. *Today. You forgot the 'h' Poor Snit... now he's trying to argue that "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" *doesn't need to contain any true statements from which a deduction can be made. You have No, you have... and it's more than bizarre that you convinced yourself of this guilt while you admit you had no proof. Political agendas are funny like that, though... |
#51
|
|||
|
|||
A rose by any other name....
Steve Carroll wrote:
On Nov 29, 2:34 pm, Snit wrote: Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on 11/29/10 2:32 PM: ... Are you trying to argue that the former contains truth and the latter needn't? (be careful. Snit... this path is fraught with pitfalls LOL! I am noting, Steve, that you have struggled and confused two concepts for years (since 2003): * Proof: as in that found in a mathematical proof, an absolute concept * Proof: as in adjudication, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" And from this you jump to asking what I am "arguing". Nothing - I am noting a fact. You have confused the two concepts *today* with your rants. Today. You forgot the 'h' Poor Snit... now he's trying to argue that "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" doesn't need to contain any true statements from which a deduction can be made. You have No, you have... and it's more than bizarre that you convinced yourself of this guilt while you admit you had no proof. Political agendas are funny like that, though... LOL! -- You Ain't the Biggest Fish in the Crotch |
#52
|
|||
|
|||
A rose by any other name....
Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on
11/29/10 2:56 PM: .... You have struggled and confused two concepts for years (since 2003): * Proof: as in that found in a mathematical proof, an absolute concept * Proof: as in adjudication, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" And from this you jump to asking what I am "arguing"... and then insisting you know what I am "arguing" (once again you are telling people what they think). To the contrary, I am merely noting a fact. You have confused the two concepts *today* with your rants as you have done repeatedly since 2003. No, you have... Ah, the ol' grade school "I'm rubber and you are glue" defense. Just brilliant... LOL! But then you immediately prove me right *again* by misrepresenting my comments in a way that proves you are confusing the two concepts. Again. And since 2003. Really, Steve, that is *pathetic*. and it's more than bizarre that you convinced yourself of this guilt while you admit you had no proof. Political agendas are funny like that, though... LOL! -- [INSERT .SIG HERE] |
#53
|
|||
|
|||
A rose by any other name....
On Nov 29, 3:02*pm, Snit wrote:
Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on 11/29/10 2:56 PM: ... You have struggled and confused two concepts for years (since 2003): * Proof: as in that found in a mathematical proof, an absolute concept * Proof: as in adjudication, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" And from this you jump to asking what I am "arguing"... and then insisting you know what I am "arguing" (once again you are telling people what they think). *To the contrary, I am merely noting a fact. *You have confused the two concepts *today* with your rants as you have done repeatedly since 2003. No, you have... . and it's more than bizarre that you convinced yourself of this guilt while you admit you had no proof. Political agendas are funny like that, though... Ah OK, glad to see we agree on this. |
#54
|
|||
|
|||
A rose by any other name....
Steve Carroll wrote:
On Nov 29, 3:02 pm, Snit wrote: Big Crotch on a Small Fish stated in post on 11/29/10 2:56 PM: ... You have struggled and confused two concepts for years (since 2003): * Proof: as in that found in a mathematical proof, an absolute concept * Proof: as in adjudication, "proof beyond a reasonable doubt" And from this you jump to asking what I am "arguing"... and then insisting you know what I am "arguing" (once again you are telling people what they think). To the contrary, I am merely noting a fact. You have confused the two concepts *today* with your rants as you have done repeatedly since 2003. No, you have... . and it's more than bizarre that you convinced yourself of this guilt while you admit you had no proof. Political agendas are funny like that, though... Ah OK, glad to see we agree on this. LOL! -- You Ain't the Biggest Fish in the Crotch |
#55
|
|||
|
|||
Are all trolls bad at math?
Some tiny-dicked mere male wrote:
Steve Carroll wrote: LOL! LOL! Gawd! A supine cocksucker with nary an imagination or a dick. |
#56
|
|||
|
|||
Are all trolls bad at math?
Some tiny-dicked mere male wrote:
**** you. That's more than you can do, tiddler-cock. |
#57
|
|||
|
|||
Are all trolls bad at math?
Some tiny-dicked mere male wrote:
LOL! Got any other lines, small-balls? |
#58
|
|||
|
|||
Are all trolls bad at math?
Some tiny-dicked mere male wrote:
LOL! Apparently not. |
#59
|
|||
|
|||
Are all trolls bad at math?
Some tiny-dicked mere male wrote:
LOL! You're a parrot, right? |
#60
|
|||
|
|||
Are all trolls bad at math?
Some tiny-dicked mere male wrote:
LOL! Ok, not even parrots have such a tiny repetoir. Perhaps you're just a drooling ****wit? |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|