Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

What did Edgar Rice Burroughs know?


MasterFlint

Recommended Posts

Well I see the two are back. Don't ask stupid questions just so you can have some sort of battle; I'm not interested.

thanks for clarifying that it was Bee and I you refered to in previous post.

How is that a stupid question? I guess I must have mistaken this part of the forum as the UFO one as opposed to the religous section......for this I apologise....

edit to retract apology as I have now realised it is indeed the UFO section...so back to the question of UFOs? or maybe back to the direct discussion on the OP? or would you rather we discuss your 'mission'?

Edited by quillius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

My impression (obviously entirely seen from my particular perspective) was that "Slave2Fate" began posting just as I was being ganged up on by two other (normally not all that unreasonable) posters over my view that usually one should dismiss conspiracy theories and arrogant scientist theories out-of-hand -- that the authorities are generally more expert than we are and what they say can be accepted at face value, with occasional exceptions. He sort-of came to my rescue just in time as I had to go to bed (my time zone is very different from most here).

I still hold that view; we have to accept authority if we are to function efficiently. We can't do it all. Indeed, we can personally be expert in very few things.

Well I see the two are back. Don't ask stupid questions just so you can have some sort of battle; I'm not interested.

actually can you confirm that being challenged about something you say by more than one poster constitutes 'ganging up'?

what do you mean by 'not all that unreasonable'? this suggests that we (I) are unreasonable sometimes....personal attack?

who determines what should and shouldnt be taken at face value? the example of the duck or the Doc is ridiculous if that is the extreme you are discussing...that would be obvious to any fool....I guess maybe this begins the strawman Bee alluded to.

then you build another at the end of that opening gambit 'I still hold that view; we have to accept authority'

strawman, the argument wasnt about accepting authority but accepting what they say at face value.

One indicates an unwillingness to take things at face value (which I am part of) the other indicates an unwillingness to accept orders/structure etc that comes about with an authority...whether we agree or like it...(which I am part of)

So how can I be in both camps if the 'view' is the same? if it isnt the same then surely you are finishing with a strawman....right?

edit to add: the 'stupid' question? why is it stupid? unless you are just having a personal attack on me that the question is irrelevant because its me asking its stupid? without clarifying why you think its stupid one can easily misintepret ones intention......and we know how easily misunderstandings happen here on the net.

Edited by quillius
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well I see the two are back. Don't ask stupid questions just so you can have some sort of battle; I'm not interested.

Dont worry about it, Frank..... he does that A LOT. :yes:

Edited by DBunker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quillius in yet another nit-picking "you said I said" argument. :tsu:

endless-loop-17577419.jpg

Dbunker ....sneaking in to put the boot in without reading the thread (or if he did obviously not understanding it)

no surprise there...as I said I am sure you can man up one day and when you do I am happy to debate any point you wish.....but if all you can muster are personal attacks....then I dont feel right in responding as it would be like hitting a girl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.....but if all you can muster are personal attacks....then I dont feel right in responding as it would be like hitting a girl

Dont worry about it, quillius..... he does that A LOT. :yes:

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dont worry about it, quillius..... he does that A LOT. :yes:

actually I think its all he does...but hey maybe he can prove me wrong one day.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was hoping the sarcasm in my post was apparent......

Well unfortunately no one has come up with a sarcasm button for the computer and I learned long ago around here that people actually believe a lot of the crazy stuff they post about - the OP is a prime example.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quillius in yet another nit-picking "you said I said" argument. :tsu:

i don't think that's really fair; if there is nit picking going on, he's not the only one who precipitated it, and if people are going to accuse people of things it's only fair that they get a chance to clarify, is it not?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

actually I think its all he does...but hey maybe he can prove me wrong one day.....

As soon as I see you focus on something else than the all too common nit-picking, maybe I will. :tu: Think about it.... Is it all just a weird coincident that YOU always seem to end up start these stupid arguments.

Edited by DBunker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe its cultural and I am missing something, but I just do not enjoy people objecting to things I post for no reason than to stir things up. I got accused of taking the accusation that I was engaging in dishonest argument personally, well, I guess I did take it personally. What really fried me though is that I could get no response as to just what I was arguing that was dishonest.

When one of the idiots or one of the nutcases says things to me of that sort, I understand where its coming from. Please understand though that I develop a feel for who is normally sensible and I get miffed when they start seeming unreasonable just for the sake of somehow defeating me on something (and for the life of me I still don't get what was the objection).

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe its cultural and I am missing something, but I just do not enjoy people objecting to things I post for no reason than to stir things up. I got accused of taking the accusation that I was engaging in dishonest argument personally, well, I guess I did take it personally. What really fried me though is that I could get no response as to just what I was arguing that was dishonest.

When one of the idiots or one of the nutcases says things to me of that sort, I understand where its coming from. Please understand though that I develop a feel for who is normally sensible and I get miffed when they start seeming unreasonable just for the sake of somehow defeating me on something (and for the life of me I still don't get what was the objection).

Frank....I tried to explain how the 'dishonest' thing came about....although what I actually said was something along the lines of...

that the tactic of misrepresentation wasn't truly honest...not that you were engaging in a dishonest argument, as such.

But I can see it is still bothering you....

When you used the words 'peddled snake-oil' and 'gullible' in a post that I perceived to be replying to a post I made...

I just did a little fight-back post...that then escalated into confusion.

That's all.

That's how I see it anyway, from my perspective. I'm sorry if you were miffed or hurt by my words...that wasn't my intention....

There is a lot of rough and tumble on this forum and sometimes things can get out of hand...

Can we draw a line under it now?

Please

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Of course, and I will be more careful in future.

:tu:

thankyou...and I will try to be more careful as well...

.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well unfortunately no one has come up with a sarcasm button for the computer and I learned long ago around here that people actually believe a lot of the crazy stuff they post about - the OP is a prime example.

granted...a sarcasm button would be helpful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

granted...a sarcasm button would be helpful.

I think there ought to be a font called Sarcastic, like Italic.

or tags [sarcastic] ..... [/sarcastic].

Edited by Colonel Rhuairidh
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe its cultural and I am missing something, but I just do not enjoy people objecting to things I post for no reason than to stir things up. I got accused of taking the accusation that I was engaging in dishonest argument personally, well, I guess I did take it personally. What really fried me though is that I could get no response as to just what I was arguing that was dishonest.

When one of the idiots or one of the nutcases says things to me of that sort, I understand where its coming from. Please understand though that I develop a feel for who is normally sensible and I get miffed when they start seeming unreasonable just for the sake of somehow defeating me on something (and for the life of me I still don't get what was the objection).

ok, at the same time I do not think it was unreasonable to challenge your statement about taking what you are told at face value, let alone the ganging up you accused us of. I enjoy a good debate and will listen to all that is said. If you go back to the earlier part of this thread you made a post about 'believing' versus 'opinion' , I said it was a great post and saw the merit in what you said, to the extent I would change the way I 'labelled' myself, does this not show a 'reasonable' attitude?

I was annoyed that you said we ganged up on you and also that when I tried to bring the thread back to the subject matter, I was called stupid...or at least the question I posed was. I was genuinley interested to find out more about your thoughts and position on the subject as opposed to looking for a battle.

One thing it wasnt was 'nit picking' which reminds me..............

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As soon as I see you focus on something else than the all too common nit-picking, maybe I will. :tu: Think about it.... Is it all just a weird coincident that YOU always seem to end up start these stupid arguments.

and we all know that when you say 'nit picking' you mean if I challenge anything you say, right? Basically if I dont agree with whats said I must say nothing or else its labelled as nit picking by you? although its difficult to nit pick things you say as they are generally just digs and personal attacks......but hey maybe I will please you and try and do so

you say 'all too common' 'always start these stupid arguments'

so I assume if I ask you to show/discuss how you arrived at 'common' and show me where I have started these then we can have something to discuss or would this be nit picking?

If I say I saw an alien at christmas then tomorrow I post again and say I saw two aliens at christmas.....if anyone challenges what I have said, may I respond with an accusation of nit picking or is it not allowed if a believer does this to a skeptic? I assume not as I have never seen you kick up a fuss when its that way round.

as for your 'maybe I will' comment....yeah right and I will become the heavyweight champion of the world.

**by the way thats the last time you make a personal attack (that isnt moderated) without me biting you back outside of the UM rules seeing as you are allowed to play outside them

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think there ought to be a font called Sarcastic, like Italic.

or tags [sarcastic] ..... [/sarcastic].

thinking about it, I guess this emoticon :P can be used to convey sarcasm/tongue in cheek.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://www.freethoug.../wiki/Straw_Man

'woo woo crowd'....is another example of the above....

:innocent:

.

I am not using a sweeping generalisation, I am using two of them. I always say there afre two types of believer. And there is.

Edited by psyche101
Link to comment
Share on other sites

THe Two types of Believers ? Type # 1. Its real because I know it is, and Type # 2. I saw it ! THen again theres always the other type,THe septic ones ! They only believe in facts and proof of said facts!

I wonder which is the Real Believers ? :tu:

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

when a poster starts using emotive words like 'peddled snake oil' and 'gullible'...you just KNOW they are on a mission...lol

And determined to misrepresent anyone who dares to question anything...and dares to give consideration to any non-mainstream stuff...

People who "dare to question everything" and "dare to give consideration to non-mainstream stuff" almost invariable "dare" to refuse to learn anything at all about the subject they are "daring" to question the experts on.

This is because science is hard, and paranoids are lazy.

Harte

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

THe Two types of Believers ? Type # 1. Its real because I know it is, and Type # 2. I saw it ! THen again theres always the other type,THe septic ones ! They only believe in facts and proof of said facts!

I wonder which is the Real Believers ? :tu:

Type #1

Respected, evidenced, brilliant

TR-Frank-Drake-090208.jpgsagan_uc.gif1190.jpgpic_giant_120512_D.jpg

Type #2 - the nutters who steal credibility from the guys above

tumblr_mcdiuaKAA01rb3j7vo1_500.jpeggreermoney.jpgbob-lazar.pngSitchin_0002.jpg

Zechariah, we can see your hand buddy. Keep it out from under that skirt.

Type 3

Psyche101.gif

Because

lionelhutzalien.jpg

Edited by psyche101
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

People who "dare to question everything" and "dare to give consideration to non-mainstream stuff" almost invariable "dare" to refuse to learn anything at all about the subject they are "daring" to question the experts on.

This is because science is hard, and paranoids are lazy.

Harte

If you are going to paraphrase what I have said, try and do it correctly...or it makes you look, ........ lazy... ^_^

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.