Absolute Anime

Locke wrote:

black heart wrote:how does that not make sense?

It doesn't make sense because you lack the ability to type simple sentences in an coherent manner, and what it is you are trying to say is the type of thinking induced by the brainwashing of Christian fundamentalists.
Saying innocence is tantamount to virginity is very silly indeed.

hey, and here i thought you were an educated person locke, haveing to resort to insults when coming up to an opinian thats not your own

and P.S i am by no means a christian, i've never gone to church a day in my life, seems you like to jump to conclusions based on a persons individual opinian

and another thing, the context of the word inocence can be taken in many differant ways, like for example in story writeing inocence is a nice PG-13 way of saying virginity, i mean, haven't you ever read the bluest eye, by toni morrison?

Oh ok. Thanks. I appreciate you not blabbering about nothing and evading my question.

This is sooo funny but in a way ridiculous and pissing me off!


P.S Hold me back! I'm full of black man rage!!

P.P.S No offense..

P.P.P.S No, seriously..I have nothing against blacks, they just have this public persona..

P.P.P.P.S Nevermind T_T

Locke wrote:Oh ok. Thanks. I appreciate you not blabbering about nothing and evading my question.

evadeing your question?


now if you look back at all of locke's posts you'll notice the complete lack of any questions, statments like that really dont help you look any smarter locke

ROFL. Dude, you're awesome.

No offence to you locke. I still love you but I couldn't help but laugh at what was said..

((( )))

black heart wrote:

Locke wrote:Oh ok. Thanks. I appreciate you not blabbering about nothing and evading my question.

evadeing your question?


now if you look back at all of locke's posts you'll notice the complete lack of any questions, statments like that really dont help you look any smarter locke

argumentum ad hominem

You both failed to realise it was an informal question -- A conjecture. CON-JEC-TURE about what it is you were trying to say.

You're still evading.

well locke, i'm not one to beat around the bush, so, if you have a question, just ask it, stop trieing to sound smart, and be it, stop insulting people because of theyre thinking patterns, stop acting all high and mighty with your limited knowledge of latin (although that was a nice touch) stop asking questions without asking them and expecting people to know what you mean.

i ask you to just come out and ask this question that youve already secretly asked, and i promise to answer it to my fullest capabilitys

Locke wrote:

black heart wrote:

Locke wrote:Oh ok. Thanks. I appreciate you not blabbering about nothing and evading my question.

evadeing your question?


now if you look back at all of locke's posts you'll notice the complete lack of any questions, statments like that really dont help you look any smarter locke

argumentum ad hominem

You both failed to realise it was an informal question -- A conjecture. CON-JEC-TURE about what it is you were trying to say.

You're still evading.

Do I sense arrogance?


This is actually getting kinda funny. You know the two of you bickering. Please do continue.

hey hey hey, hold on there mai, i'm not bickering, i've been sitting here laughing my ass off most of the time, this is as funny to me as it is you, but i'm continueing this because i'm interested in what locke has to say, i'm open to new ideas and such, i like to hear what people have to say

It's not about understanding Latin, but rather the fallacies. Which you continue to base your posts in.

Locke wrote:

black heart wrote:how does that not make sense?

It doesn't make sense because you lack the ability to type simple sentences in a coherent manner, and what it is you are trying to say is the type of thinking induced by the brainwashing of Christian fundamentalists.
Saying innocence is tantamount to virginity is very silly indeed.

Locke wrote:It's not about understanding Latin, but rather the fallacies. Which you continue to base your posts in.

Locke wrote:

black heart wrote:how does that not make sense?

It doesn't make sense because you lack the ability to type simple sentences in a coherent manner, and what it is you are trying to say is the type of thinking induced by the brainwashing of Christian fundamentalists.
Saying innocence is tantamount to virginity is very silly indeed.

Wowzers. You do like to present yourself as an eff-tard. Really, I'm in bit of a down mood. You know, it being three months and what not.

Anyways. Locke, I really think you can figure out what black heart is saying.

It's called effort.

Joke!

Whoa. I'm easily amused..and I'm amusing myself..That..came out wrong.

Locke wrote:It's not about understanding Latin, but rather the fallacies. Which you continue to base your posts in.

Locke wrote:

black heart wrote:how does that not make sense?

It doesn't make sense because you lack the ability to type simple sentences in a coherent manner, and what it is you are trying to say is the type of thinking induced by the brainwashing of Christian fundamentalists.
Saying innocence is tantamount to virginity is very silly indeed.

fallacy: an, often, plauseable argument, but useing false information


how is my information wrong, when this is a question of opinian?


and if your question is how can i call inocence and virginity the same thing, i kinda already answered that. so if thats not the question, i'll ask again, come right out and ask it, or continue to make a fool of yourself, and if it is the question, then pay more attention

black heart wrote:fallacy: an, often, plauseable argument, but useing false information


how is my information wrong, when this is a question of opinian?

You are adressing the wrong issue completely. "Argumentum ad hominum"

black heart wrote:and if your question is how can i call inocence and virginity the same thing, i kinda already answered that. so if thats not the question, i'll ask again, come right out and ask it, or continue to make a fool of yourself, and if it is the question, then pay more attention

You have since made clear what was previsously incoherent. The fallacy* you continue to make, is that you are trying to cover your mistake by shifting blame on me, by saying I am unintelligent because I could not decipher your inaticulate utterings.

Thats the end of this. This thing's been resolved for some time.

*Invalid reasoning. We know a certain method of reasoning is fallacious if we are able to come up with a counter-example where, using similar reasoning, we can argue from true premises to a false conclusion. (Common fallacies include: the ad populum fallacy, the argumentum ad hominum, the fallacy of equivocation, and the argumentum ad ignoratium.) http://www.msu.edu/~susse/PHL200-Glossary.html

*has been sitting wtaching this all go on**sighs and stands up* Is this agrument not turned into spam even if it is confussion of a perfectly laible agrument within it when you begin commenting on each other in becomes another agrmuent in itself argumentum ad homnium-attack the agruement not the person Locke is suggesting that in all reality your avoiding the whole of the agrument by attacking him and throwing things off course ne locke?

Nanaki wrote:*has been sitting wtaching this all go on**sighs and stands up* Is this agrument not turned into spam even if it is confussion of a perfectly laible agrument within it when you begin commenting on each other in becomes another agrmuent in itself argumentum ad homnium-attack the agruement not the person Locke is suggesting that in all reality your avoiding the whole of the agrument by attacking him and throwing things off course ne locke?

Periods rock if you're not a girl.

Nanaki wrote:*has been sitting wtaching this all go on**sighs and stands up* Is this agrument not turned into spam even if it is confussion of a perfectly laible agrument within it when you begin commenting on each other in becomes another agrmuent in itself argumentum ad homnium-attack the agruement not the person Locke is suggesting that in all reality your avoiding the whole of the agrument by attacking him and throwing things off course ne locke?

Peeecisely.

black heart, your first post has a lot of syntax errors, and like you said yourself the word innocence can be taken in many contexts. Now that you've cleared this up it's all peachy. In future you're better off just explaining what it is you mean as opposed to trying to mask it with insults.