BANG! GOT ONE AGAIN! BWAHAAAAHAAAAHAAAA!
Again, there's a purpose behind every word, sentence, paragraph, that I use in debate against you people. As I told you during this thread, the more you reply, the more of your psychological profile you present to me. I use this information to adjust what I say to get you to react the way I want you to react.
You reacted wonderfully, just as I expected.
You're proving to me that your desperation is reaching new levels. You're reading my posts with more emotion than what you've done in the past. Your replies, this time around, reeks of desperation, and reeks of you letting emotion get into your way when replying to me.
Now watch me demonstrate not only how stupid you are, but the extent that you're willing to lie just to score points, because you've been destroyed badly.
MT Cranial Cavity: Note the placement of the punctuation . His placement of them imply he ^^^has^^^ been here longer.
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
False. The only thing that you demonstrated here was your colossal failure at understanding English generated so that a fifth grader could understand what's being said. You need to look at the entire statement, in context, and not attempt to read in my statement what I'm not arguing, simply because of what you feel about where I placed my punctuation.
"When I started to debate liberals, on this message board, liberals vastly outnumbered the conservatives." -- herfacechair
What you're addressing:
"This has been the situation since I started debating liberals, online. This has been ongoing for 13 years. This is also the situation with other message boards, as well as on social media." -- herfacechair
The first sentence talks about my history of debating liberals, online. Context is everything here. What's meant by online.? On the internet maybe? Yes, that's what I meant, on the internet. What have I been doing online., as stated in that sentence? I've been debating liberals online for 13 years.
Here, let's put these two side by side:
1. ONLINE
2. This message board
Let's break this down.
Online = Internet
This message board = ECCIE
Do you see that?
When I made the statement about first debating on this message board:
"When I started to debate liberals, on this message board, liberals vastly outnumbered the conservatives." -- herfacechair
Now, let me go reeeeaaaaaallll sllllooooooowwwwww fooooorrrrr youuuuu....
Ready?
Look under my avatar. Do you see it? It should be to your left. Under it, it says, Join Date!
Join Date: Aug 16, 2010.
So, let's put this together:
"When I started to debate liberals, on this message board, liberals vastly outnumbered the conservatives." -- herfacechair
On this message board, as opposed to ONLINE. If you had any common sense, you'd realize that the first sentence in the paragraph that you quoted could not have taken place before August 16, 2010.
Meaning, any statement that I make, regarding what I did here, did not take place before I joined this message board.
MT Cranial Cavity: See where he ^^^ tries to cover himself by repeating himself^^^^^^
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
WRONG, there's no effort to "cover for myself", and no, what you mistake as my "repeating myself" is my making two independent statements, talking about two independent topics that are both related to what I'm getting across with the entire statement that I made.
The only "try" that's going on here is your efforts to advance a strawman argument. Let me break this down for you.
Let "X" be my statement that you quoted above.
Let "Y" be your colossal failure at understanding English.
You subsequently argue that "Y" is BS...
By illogical extension, my "entire argument" is "BS".
What you're doing is acting in desperation. You can't win an argument, you can't win in a flame war, none of your efforts to prevent me from hammering you are working, so you're attempting to take me out of context, and arguing against an argument that I'm not making.
This demonstrates your lack of integrity and honor. You're every bit as shady as I suspected you to be. Whatever works for you at your mobile gloryhole I guess...
MT Cranial Cavity: And gives an implied contrast to the original statement.
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
WRONG. That's not "implied", but two different factual statements that you're attempting to tie in as "meaning the same thing". They aren't. If you were capable of understanding English generated in a way that even a fifth grader would understand, you'd understand that I was talking about two different things:
1. I was hammering you people on this board since I got here, in August of 2010.
2. I've been doing this on other message boards, ONLINE, for 13 years.
"This is also the situation with other message boards, as well as on social media." -- herfacechair
What, exactly, do I mean by "with other message boards"? You do realize that I was expanding on this:
"This has been the situation since I started debating liberals, online. This has been ongoing for 13 years." -- herfacechair
The placement of the punctuation is meaningless, as the entire quote has to be taken together in CONTEXT:
"When I started to debate liberals, on this message board, liberals vastly outnumbered the conservatives. And yes, it was the liberals that resorted to the grammar police tactic in the face of getting destroyed in debate. This has been the situation since I started debating liberals, online. This has been ongoing for 13 years. This is also the situation with other message boards, as well as on social media." -- herfacechair
Let's break this down the way someone, with reading comprehension abilities, would've broken it down:
"When I started to debate liberals, on this message board, liberals vastly outnumbered the conservatives. And yes, it was the liberals that resorted to the grammar police tactic in the face of getting destroyed in debate." -- herfacechair
This part of my statement rebutted your claims that "the conservatives are the ones that do this/started doing this". I called BS to your statements, and relayed my own experiences on this board, which started in August, 2010.
I took it for granted that even with the problems you have understanding English generated so that even a fifth grader would understand what's being said, you would've been able to make that connection. But you didn't.
Now, for the next part of what I said:
"This has been the situation since I started debating liberals, online. This has been ongoing for 13 years." -- herfacechair
You do realize that my bringing this statement in expanded the area that I was talking about to elsewhere on the internet, in addition to what I observed on ECCIE. Meaning, not only did I observe this going on at ECCIE, I've observed this going on at other locations, indicated by the next statement:
"This is also the situation with other message boards, as well as on social media." -- herfacechair
This statement expands on the statement about what has been going on for 13 years.
I'm seeing you go into overdrive to take me out of context to make up for the fact that you can't argue against what I actually say.
MT Cranial Cavity: SO let me get this straight
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
You didn't get anything straight, you fucked up colossally in the reading comprehension department due to your desperation to score points in this argument. You failed partly because you're driven by narcissism driven emotion whenever you read my replies.
MT Cranial Cavity: you have been kicking ass
here for 13 years?
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
Again:
"This has been the situation since I started debating liberals, online. This has been ongoing for 13 years." -- herfacechair
You misinterpreted what I said. I've been destroying you liberals, as an international/national group spread across the internet, for 13 years.
MT Cranial Cavity: Really?
Yes, I've been destroying liberals in debate, online, since I've been debating with liberals online.
MT Cranial Cavity: I like how you worded it though.
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
No you didn't, you don't like how I word my replies to you. I do it in a way that you're unable to argue against what I actually said, leaving you with no other option but to resort to strawman arguments, and to using liberal tactics and ploys that I've seen other liberals use.
MT Cranial Cavity: You almost left a possibility for plausible deniability
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
"Plausible deniability" doesn't apply to my posts. I present a fact based, reasoned, logical arguments against your drivel, as well as that of your liberal allies. The only deniability that is going on, between the two of us, is your denying my actual message in favor of one where you take me out of context, and insist that I'm making an argument, or statement, that I'm not making.
MT Cranial Cavity: but the fact that you have been posting like this in every thread does not afford you the luxury of a pass.
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
Wrong, you imply that I've been making "out of context" statements throughout this thread, and elsewhere. You're assuming, willingly or through inability to understand simple English, that I'm arguing something that I'm not arguing. However, the fact that you took me out of context, because you can't argue against what I actually say, removes the need of a "pass" considering that you missed.
If your ability to hit the water after falling from a boat were anything like your argument here, you'd completely miss the water if you were to fall from a boat in the middle of a lake.
MT Cranial Cavity: Everything you post is full of hyperbole and riddled with inanity's.
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
False. In order to make that statement, you have to prove, with facts, that is the case. You've colossally failed to do that. Instead, you ran from the original argument that you made, because I destroyed you on it. I destroyed you on your follow-on arguments. With each instance of you retreating from what you originally argued, you got destroyed. You failed to effectively argue with me.
You couldn't. It's easier for you to lie about my posts being "full" of "hyperbole" and "riddled" with "inanities", than it is for you to actually do the hard work of actually trying to argue against the points that I make... Or to actually have the integrity to know that you've been defeated.
The reality is that everything that I post is relevant to the argument, to what you and your allies say that I'm rebutting, is full of logic, and forms a logical, reasoned, argument, one that you can't argue against as is.
MT Cranial Cavity: So I am looking forward to seeing
Wrong. You're not looking forward to seeing my replies. You've demonstrated, with your strawman argument taking my post out of context, that you've sunk deeper into desperation. Like others that have done this before, you're attempting to get me to stop hammering you. As with the others that tried this attempt before, it's not going to work.
MT Cranial Cavity: what load of absurdity's you are gonna compose next
The only load of absurdity that I'm seeing is what you're posting. Even you have to see how desperate you're coming across by arguing against an argument that I wasn't even remotely making, because both of us know that you can't argue against what I'm actually saying.
This is a mark of a narcissistic person that's driven by emotion, and pride, to keep engaging in a debate where he's getting destroyed in.
MT Cranial Cavity: So here you say the ratio is the other way now.
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
Wrong. You stated that the ratio favored conservatives today. I countered by stating my observations that the ratio was the other way around when I started posting here... Then followed up by describing the ratio that I've seen online... as in on other message boards and now on social media.
MT Cranial Cavity: How convenient for you isn't it.
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
Not "convenient" by my stating a fact that when I started debating on ECCIE, liberals outnumbered the conservatives. That's a fact. What's "convenient" is your taking me out of context, because you can't argue the actual argument that I'm making.
MT Cranial Cavity: What you are doing is tell a fabrication then follow up with a known fact .
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
Wrong. I'm countering your arguments with the facts. The comment that you quoted, that I made, is fact, not fabrication. The only fabrication that was presented is your claim that I'm attempting to state that I've been on ECCIE for 13 years. Nothing in any of my posts here supports that lie of yours. Your entire argument, that I'm taking apart, is a fabrication. One that you wished I made in lieu of the one that I actually made.
MT Cranial Cavity: It is your attempt to certify your lie with a known fact attached to the end of it.
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
False, nothing in the quote, that you took out of context, is a lie. Everything that I said, that you quoted, is a fact. The above breakdown is an explanation of what I'm actually arguing. The only liar, between the two of us, is you. Absent an argument, and absent the ability to flame, you've straight up became a liar just so that you could stay in an argument that you're getting destroyed in.
MT Cranial Cavity: The two factors are not dependent on each other in a normal persons mind,
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: STRAWMAN)
A normal person's mind wouldn't have gotten, out of my post, what you argued here. My statement was clear. The fact of the matter is that you liberals resort to grammar police tactics when you get destroyed in debate. I witnessed that here and elsewhere and, to counter your claims that conservatives outnumber the liberals now, I mentioned the fact that liberals outnumbered the conservatives when I started debating on this message board (not to be confused with the entire internet). However, that doesn't stop me from also pointing out that liberals do this elsewhere in addition to this message board.
MT Cranial Cavity: just in a follower such as your cronies here.
(INDUCTIVE FALLACY: PROJECTING OWN TRAIT TO OPONENT)
Again, anybody with reading comprehension capabilities wouldn't have seen, in my post, what you wanted to see. But, speaking of cronies...
When you took me out of context, and exposed the fact that you're a liar, your subconscious buddy fucked you. Read your entire accusation against me in your reply, that's you subconsciously admitting to YOUR tactics, which is something that I've seen on this thread and elsewhere.
You essentially confessed to the fact that you're a liar, that you splice half-truths with fabrications, that you'll be as shady as possible just to stay in a fight that you've been getting crushed in. That makes you a crook, a liar, a coward, etc.
Now run back to the bathroom, put your head back into the toilet slave toilet bowl, and receive your next round of arguments.