God created everything one hour ago!

Originally posted by googlefudge
Yes. But you post directly contradicted what I had just said on the same page of the same thread.

You clearly and emphatically contradicted my post in a thread I was active in.

Actually thinking about it not responding to me in the context seems a little insulting.
You took the trouble to tell me you think I'm wrong but didn't bother to address t up your claims and direct them to the person you are
contradicting.


Make sense?

He probably didn't have a vision like that, but I doubt you could prove he didn't, unless he admiited to faking it. I saw no proof of that in your post. 😏

P.S. How can I get a grammer & spelll checker for RHP, so I can look good like you?

Originally posted by googlefudge
Yes. But you post directly contradicted what I had just said on the same page of the same thread.

You clearly and emphatically contradicted my post in a thread I was active in.

Actually thinking about it not responding to me in the context seems a little insulting.
You took the trouble to tell me you think I'm wrong but didn't bother to address t up your claims and direct them to the person you are
contradicting.


Make sense?

That seems to be a rather self-centered viewpoint. It's not about you.

The person I directed my statement to was the person who created the thread and made the challenge, so naturally I directed my response to him. Why do you think it necessarily should have been addressed to you just because you had made a different response to him?

I may be wrong, but I suspect that part of his point was that it can't be proven.

BTW, that's an interesting use of the word 'curtsey'. People from the US wouldn't use it that way. Is it commonly used that way in the UK?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
BTW, that's an interesting use of the word 'curtsey'. People from the US wouldn't use it that way. Is it commonly used that way in the UK?

I think GF meant courtesy
Noun
1.The showing of politeness in one's attitude and behavior toward others.
2.A polite speech or action, esp. one required by convention.

Although the image of you giving GF a curtsey is amusing

Noun
1. A gesture of respect or reverence made chiefly by women by bending the knees with one foot forward and lowering the body

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I think GF meant [b]courtesy
Noun
1.The showing of politeness in one's attitude and behavior toward others.
2.A polite speech or action, esp. one required by convention.

Although the image of you giving GF a curtsey is amusing

Noun
1. A gesture of respect or reverence made chiefly by women by bending the knees with one foot forward and lowering the body[/b]

That was my initial thought, but then given how English has been altered here, I thought I'd ask.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
I'm not sure what you mean. I found the first sentence unclear.

Sorry!"biased" should have been based.

Originally posted by OdBod
Sorry!"biased" should have been based.

Actually, I had found that to be evident. Perhaps it'll help if you rephrase what you wrote.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
I think GF meant [b]courtesy
Noun
1.The showing of politeness in one's attitude and behavior toward others.
2.A polite speech or action, esp. one required by convention.

Although the image of you giving GF a curtsey is amusing

Noun
1. A gesture of respect or reverence made chiefly by women by bending the knees with one foot forward and lowering the body[/b]

Yeah I am always in trouble when I spell the word wrong but in such a way that it's a different word spelled correctly.

The trouble of proof reading your own work is that you know what it's supposed to say and thus read that instead of
what it actually says.

Apologies for the confusion.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
That seems to be a rather self-centered viewpoint. It's not about you.

The person I directed my statement to was the person who created the thread and made the challenge, so naturally I directed my response to him. Why do you think it necessarily should have been addressed to you just because you had made a different response to him?

I may be wrong ...[text shortened]... sey'. People from the US wouldn't use it that way. Is it commonly used that way in the UK?

You could well be right that a thought behind the op was that it can't be disproved.

However I had just done a post rebutting (and refuting) that exact claim.

And then you come along and just state that the premise in the op is true like it's obvious and
totally ignore the fact that I just rebutted/refuted it.

It's not self centered to respond by saying "hello, I just posted a great long argument rejecting
that point, am I invisible or something?"

It is evidently NOT a given that that it is unprovable.

If you want to claim that it is you need to back it up.

Originally posted by googlefudge
You could well be right that a thought behind the op was that it can't be disproved.

However I had just done a post rebutting (and refuting) that exact claim.

And then you come along and just state that the premise in the op is true like it's obvious and
totally ignore the fact that I just rebutted/refuted it.

It's not self centered to respond iven that that it is unprovable.

If you want to claim that it is you need to back it up.

It's not self centered to respond by saying "hello, I just posted a great long argument rejecting that point, am I invisible or something?"

No it isn't, pretentiousness aside. However that's not what you seem to be saying below. There you seem to be trying to make the case that I should have initially responded to you instead of OdBod. That does seem rather self-centered. As does what I explain at the end.

You took the trouble to tell me you think I'm wrong but didn't bother to address the comment to me
but instead "imparted your wisdom" to someone else...

It is evidently NOT a given that that it is unprovable.

No it was not presented as 'a given'. However, I'm reasonably sure that it cannot be proven wrong. Just as I'm also reasonably sure that your 'proof' is seriously flawed.

If you want to claim that it is you need to back it up.

Only from your point of view. If OdBod also does not believe that it can be proven wrong, then from the POV of my discussion with him, the 'claim' is moot.

Understand now?

Originally posted by OdBod
I had a vision I know it to be true ,God told me that creation occurred one hour ago. Everything we think we know is nothing more than implanted memories,and because God can do anything, the physical universe was set up exactly as we perceive it now. Prove me wrong!

What is proof in your world?

I like fiction too.

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
[b]It's not self centered to respond by saying "hello, I just posted a great long argument rejecting that point, am I invisible or something?"

No it isn't, pretentiousness aside. However that's not what you seem to be saying below. There you seem to be trying to make the case that I should have initially responded to you instead of OdBod. That does ...[text shortened]... from the POV of my discussion with him, the 'claim' is moot.

Understand now?[/b]

Well you're demonstrating that you're an ass well enough.

If you can be bothered to type that many words you could have explained why you think I'm wrong.

I don't give a damn that you think I'm wrong. Only why.

If your not going to tell me I will continue working on the basis that you are wrong and ignore you till
you prove otherwise.

And I understand what your saying perfectly. I'm disagreeing with what your saying.

Understand?

Originally posted by googlefudge
Well you're demonstrating that you're an ass well enough.

If you can be bothered to type that many words you could have explained why you think I'm wrong.

I don't give a damn that you think I'm wrong. Only why.

If your not going to tell me I will continue working on the basis that you are wrong and ignore you till
you prove otherwise.

And I ...[text shortened]... derstand what your saying perfectly. I'm disagreeing with what your saying.

Understand?

Tell you what, if you admit that your desire for an explanation as to why your proof is flawed has gotten the better of you and has caused you to behave in an immature manner and led you to have an unreasonable expectation that you be provided one, I'll be willing to provide you with an explanation - with the understanding that I'm under no obligation to get into a drawn-out discussion. Fair enough?

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Tell you what, if you admit that your desire for an explanation as to why your proof is flawed has gotten the better of you and has caused you to behave in an immature manner and led you to have an unreasonable expectation that you be provided one, I'll be willing to provide you with an explanation - with the understanding that I'm under no obligation to get into a drawn-out discussion. Fair enough?

That ole google some fudge will not admit he is wrong and wants everyone else to think he is right, so to disagree with him is unthinkable unless he believes you are a redneck moron like me. 😏

Originally posted by ThinkOfOne
Tell you what, if you admit that your desire for an explanation as to why your proof is flawed has gotten the better of you and has caused you to behave in an immature manner and led you to have an unreasonable expectation that you be provided one, I'll be willing to provide you with an explanation - with the understanding that I'm under no obligation to get into a drawn-out discussion. Fair enough?

No dice.