The Inconstant Gardener

Originally posted by twhitehead
I understand every word. But it is nothing more than a restatement of the original post that I asked about. It does not contain an explanation at all.

If all we are is plants, then why is there nothing to be upset about if the owner does a bit of gardening?

What about my question do you not understand?

I understand it perfectly but you are just restating your question and I'm giving you the same answer. Let try a different approach

If as the OP analogy suggests all we are is vegetation, then why don't we eat each other?

Originally posted by divegeester
I understand it perfectly...

Obviously not, or you are just being obnoxious and deliberately not answering it to wind me up.

If as the OP analogy suggests all we are is vegetation, then why don't we eat each other?
Why would we? Do vegetables eat each other?

I am starting to suspect this is another one of those threads where you are wrong, know you are wrong, but are incapable of admitting it so you will just go on and on getting more and more ridiculous.

Garden update:

Robbie Has been evicted from the garden for bad behaviour.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
Garden update:

Robbie Has been evicted from the garden for bad behaviour.

Did you tell him in advance which tree he should not eat the fruit of?

Originally posted by twhitehead
Did you tell him in advance which tree he should not eat the fruit of?

I did, but he was evicted for creating a clan system in the garden and then corrupting it with his own weedy clan.

Originally posted by twhitehead
Obviously not, or you are just being obnoxious and deliberately not answering it to wind me up.

[b]If as the OP analogy suggests all we are is vegetation, then why don't we eat each other?
Why would we? Do vegetables eat each other?

I am starting to suspect this is another one of those threads where you are wrong, know you are wrong, but are incapable of admitting it so you will just go on and on getting more and more ridiculous.[/b]

Reading you accusing someone else of being "obnoxious" is quite amusing.

Originally posted by twhitehead
If as the OP analogy suggests all we are is vegetation, then why don't we eat each other?
Why would we? Do vegetables eat each other?

I am starting to suspect this is another one of those threads where you are wrong, know you are wrong, but are incapable of admitting it so you will just go on and on getting more and more ridiculous.[/b]

No, but neither are they human beings either.
The concept of the OP being an analogy seems lost on you.
Do you understand what the OP is trying to say?
Have you ever heard of anyone going to prison for mass-genocide of some carrots?
No...because no one cares about killing carrots.
So...if we are plants, no one will care about killing us
🙄

Originally posted by divegeester
Reading you accusing someone else of being "obnoxious" is quite amusing.

I know you have always reacted badly to me, but I suspect it is mostly all in your head ie you have made up this image of who I am and fight against that. Certainly you very rarely actually respond to the content of my posts and instead react to what you thought you perceived I was thinking (but wasn't).

Originally posted by divegeester
No, but neither are they human beings either.

And ?

The concept of the OP being an analogy seems lost on you.
No, but I suspect it is lost on you.

Do you understand what the OP is trying to say?
Yes, do you?

Have you ever heard of anyone going to prison for mass-genocide of some carrots?
No. But you seem to have got confused by the analogy. If carrots held a court, would they not send the rabbit to prison if they could?

No...because no one cares about killing carrots.
Carrots would, if they had brains to think.

So...if we are plants, no one will care about killing us
🙄
That is not what you said. What you said, was we shouldn't care.

Yes, I note that you have subtly attempted to change the statement from the victim to the perpetrator.

I bet your next tactic will be to say 'well plants can't think so they can't get upset'. But if we look back at your original post that is clearly not what you meant. You clearly admit the potential that we could get upset should our gardener choose to kill us all, but you advise us not to get upset. Now you claim that your advice was given on the basis that nobody cares about carrots?

You are officially part of the flat earth society (posters that will go to great lengths defending a belief in a flat earth rather than admit they just didn't think their original statement through).

Originally posted by twhitehead
What you said, was we shouldn't care.

Holy crap you are such a pedantic ass.

No, we shouldn't care, because they are ONLY plants - that's the whole point.

Originally posted by Ghost of a Duke
I did, but he was evicted for creating a clan system in the garden and then corrupting it with his own weedy clan.

tee hee 😀

Originally posted by divegeester
Holy crap you are such a pedantic ass.

I catch you deliberately changing your statement and your best response is to insult me?
It is not being pedantic to point out that you initially suggested that the murdered person should not care and later changed the statement to nobody else caring about the murdered person. If you cannot see the enormous difference between the two and simply think the difference is 'pedantic' then you might as well be a plant for all the brain cells you have.

No, we shouldn't care, because they are ONLY plants - that's the whole point.
A point which seems abundantly clear to you, but which you seem to be unwilling to share. If we are ONLY plants, why should we no longer care? I want an explanation not this question dodging, repetition of the claim and unwarranted insults.

Lets break it down:
I understand that people don't give a rats &*$%# about plants.
I understand that a gardener doesn't care if he commits genocide on his flowers.
I even understand that if God is the gardener that he might not care about committing genocide.
But it is your claim that the plants themselves whether real plants or us in the analogy SHOULD NOT care about being killed. I want to know why you come to that conclusion.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I catch you deliberately changing your statement and your best response is to insult me?
It is not being pedantic to point out that you initially suggested that the murdered person should not care and later changed the statement to nobody else caring about the murdered person. If you cannot see the enormous difference between the two and simply think the ...[text shortened]... the analogy SHOULD NOT care about being killed. I want to know why you come to that conclusion.

You started the "unwarranted" insults by calling me a "flat earther".
I was expecting you to take this tact; you like to slip a little jab in, wait for a response in kind and then claim you have been insulted. If you don't like insults I strongly suggest not using them yourself.

Originally posted by twhitehead
I catch you deliberately changing your statement and your best response is to insult me?
It is not being pedantic to point out that you initially suggested that the murdered person should not care and later changed the statement to nobody else caring about the murdered person. If you cannot see the enormous difference between the two and simply think the ...[text shortened]... the analogy SHOULD NOT care about being killed. I want to know why you come to that conclusion.

But it is your claim that the plants themselves whether real plants or us in the analogy SHOULD NOT care about being killed. I want to know why you come to that conclusion.

No. What you jumped on me about was my post on page which does not say that.

Your angry tub-thumping demands and cutting little jabs let down your facade of intellectual calmness twhitehead.

Originally posted by divegeester
You started the "unwarranted" insults by calling me a "flat earther".
I was expecting you to take this tact; you like to slip a little jab in, wait for a response in kind and then claim you have been insulted. If you don't like insults I strongly suggest not using them yourself.

OK, fair enough. It wasn't intended as an insult as such but rather pointing out your general behaviour is similar to Freakys and Sonships. You just cannot admit when you are wrong and will say the most ridiculous things to avoid doing so.