29 Jul 17
Originally posted by @ghost-of-a-dukeYou mean, he knows he is a loser?
I think, deep down, he knows that to be true.
Or, he thinks that Solar Eclipse is intelligent design?
I think both.
I learnt the dynamics about Solar Eclipses when I was a child. Wasn't he? Did he only attend the sunday school, nothing more? Did he think that high school was the place to be high in?
29 Jul 17
Originally posted by @fabianfnasGosh, and to think some folks herein were humble-bragging just recently about how they were happy to see conversations extended without resorting to insult...
You mean, he knows he is a loser?
Or, he thinks that Solar Eclipse is intelligent design?
I think both.
I learnt the dynamics about Solar Eclipses when I was a child. Wasn't he? Did he only attend the sunday school, nothing more? Did he think that high school was the place to be high in?
29 Jul 17
Originally posted by @freakykbhThen, what do you think about Solar Eclipses? Do they exist or are the idea planted by the government just to confuse the citizens?
Gosh, and to think some folks herein were humble-bragging just recently about how they were happy to see conversations extended without resorting to insult...
29 Jul 17
Originally posted by @fabianfnasHot damn, that would be something if they could fake the ones I've seen in my lifetime!
Then, what do you think about Solar Eclipses? Do they exist or are the idea planted by the government just to confuse the citizens?
It's one thing to fake the moon landings in a Hollywood basement, i.e., a controlled environment, but it's something else entirely to do it before a mass and live audience.
30 Jul 17
Originally posted by @freakykbhThe Freak continues being a traitor to the USA.
Hot damn, that would be something if they could fake the ones I've seen in my lifetime!
It's one thing to fake the moon landings in a Hollywood basement, i.e., a controlled environment, but it's something else entirely to do it before a mass and live audience.
30 Jul 17
Originally posted by @fabianfnas"Learnt"?
You mean, he knows he is a loser?
Or, he thinks that Solar Eclipse is intelligent design?
I think both.
I learnt the dynamics about Solar Eclipses when I was a child. Wasn't he? Did he only attend the sunday school, nothing more? Did he think that high school was the place to be high in?
Genius, lol.
30 Jul 17
Originally posted by @fabianfnasExplain? Really?
Please, explain.
Learnt is not a real word, yet you used it to define your intelligence.
Humble yourself, and we will get along just fine.
30 Jul 17
Originally posted by @chaney3So you make this into a matter of language? My second language against your native language? Oh, I tremble.
Explain? Really?
Learnt is not a real word, yet you used it to define your intelligence.
Humble yourself, and we will get along just fine.
What is your second language? Third? Forth? And you think you win the debate about an intelligent designer designed solar eclipses? Weak, I say, weak!
This is what I googled: "These are alternative forms of the past tense and past participle of the verb learn. Both are acceptable, but learned is often used in both British English and American English, while learnt is much more common in British English than in American English."
So you lost. Again! And again, again and again. And you will lose again, and you will always lose! You are a loser. And you just defined your own intelligence, or lack thereof.
Originally posted by @chaney3Since "learnt" IS in the English dictionary, in what sense is it "not a real word"?
Learnt is not a real word, .
http://www.dictionary.com/browse/learnt
"...learnt
verb
1. a simple past tense and past participle of learn.
..."
http://writingexplained.org/learnt-vs-learned-difference
"...Learnt and learned are two different spellings of the same verb...."
Thus "learnt" IS a real word and it is YOU, not him, that is clearly wrong here (as usual).
yet you used it to define your intelligence.
Humble yourself, ...
It is clearly YOU that needs to "Humble yourself" here (as usual) because it is clearly YOU that is wrong (as usual). HE was right.
So IF this, as you imply, defines "intelligence", then, if anything, it defines YOUR "intelligence" as being low; NOT his.
30 Jul 17
Chaney made an error in assigning error to the person who used an unfamiliar form of an otherwise common word, learnt for learn.
Two posters have so little else to seize upon in terms of actual compelling arguments, they opt to make a federal case out of his syntax misunderstanding instead.
Content.
Let's focus on content, lest this place devolve into Debates.
30 Jul 17
12 edits
Originally posted by @freakykbhNo, he made the mistake of arrogantly moronically and ignorantly belittling someone for correctly using a perfectly familiar common word. Sorry! No excuse!
Chaney made an error in assigning error to the person who used an unfamiliar form of an otherwise common word,
Two posters have so little else to seize upon in terms of actual compelling arguments,
No, two posters criticize someone for having so little else to seize upon in terms of actual compelling arguments that he moronically resorts to seize upon the use from a poster of common English word "learnt" ignorantly thinking it isn't a word;
-Shame on you for hypocritically supporting such appalling double-standards; but that is exactly what you made clear we should expect from you.
Let's focus on content,
in another post in the "is God logical" thread you said to me "I’m not going to debate ";
Yet more double standards; you say we should focus on content while refusing to do so yourself. Shame on you.
30 Jul 17
1 edit
Originally posted by @chaney3Did you actually take the time to look up 'learnt'? I guess not, it wasn't taught in your old jail cell.
Explain? Really?
Learnt is not a real word, yet you used it to define your intelligence.
Humble yourself, and we will get along just fine.
https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/usage/learnt-vs-learned