Archive for the ‘EssayHelpForHire’ Category

I am not to fall for your anti-semitism canard.

Monday, October 29th, 2018

Related Discussions:Reported Post – chadWhy are less obvious jokes funnier?Dark suckersA good cheap essay writing service us
joke!I am not boring <.

Sungenis is not merely dishonest. Originally Posted by Strange why the obsession with release forms? Does it say “I hereby give you permission to selectively quote me so that I appear to support your ridiculous idea”? Joe and his handful of cranks cannot dispute that Krauss et al say they have been misrepresented. You can think what you want.

Hardly an unbiased opinion. Originally Posted by JoeSixPack I am not to fall for your anti-semitism canard. I cannot say that. Delano refused to show a copy of the release he says Krauss signed to Popular Science after that magazine requested to see it. Which he has condemned, and which this contract does not mitigate at all.

JSP should be ashamed at supporting him (and if he is actually Sungenis, he should be still more ashamed). First, you and your ilk have already shown a willingness to lie (I point out again your shameful selective quoting of scientists as but one example that backs up my accusation). I immediately ran over and said “Stop!Don’t do it!””Why shouldn’t I?” he said.I said, “Well, there’s so much to live for!””Like what?””Well … are you religious or atheist?””Religious.””Me too! Are you Christian or Jewish?””Christian.””Me too! Are you Catholic or Protestant?””Protestant.””Me too!

Are you Episcopalian or Baptist?””Baptist.””Wow! Me too! Are you Baptist Church of God or Baptist Church of the Lord?””Baptist Church of God.””Me too! Are you Original Baptist Church of God, or are you ReformedBaptist Church of God?””Reformed Baptist Church of God.””Me too! Are you Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of1879, or Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915?””Reformed Baptist Church of God, reformation of 1915!”To which I said, “Die, heretic scum!” and pushed him off A bit brutal, just alittle bit 8) If sungenis is dishonest enough to deny the overwhelming evidence that the Holocaust happened, then he wouldn’t even give a second thought about deceiving Professor Krauss and distorting his words.

I think some of them are starting to have second thoughts, or at least wonder about exactly what they said in the interviews. Originally Posted by stonecutter Originally Posted by Strange I suppose if God is dishonest enough to have created the world 6,000 years ago then fake all the evidence that so that it looks 4 billion years old, then one must expect similar levels of dishonesty from His followers. Originally Posted by Absum!

Jesus! LOLDid you really push the guy off? No,I am a Muslim..But I want to push….(to usame bin ladin) Originally Posted by Yash devrimci_kurt, bro i think you should give some respect to the word Joke !! English is not my native language I’m not sure what some of the abbreviations – symbols- titles and so on Originally Posted by Strange I suppose if God is dishonest enough to have created the world 6,000 years ago then fake all the evidence that so that it looks 4 billion years old, then one must expect similar levels of dishonesty from His followers. In any case, they all spoke for themselves, and no one is misrepresented.

I dunno, all mentioning of documentaries made me want to post one.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qcfN_HN4TVg Me and my friend drink beers watch Ancient Aliens and laugh are butts off.Maybe I will watch it. He is a big growing up scientist. A presentation of Church Militant TV. The truth is that this is just a simple cosmology movie with interesting ideas in it, and unfortunately, some of the scientist realized after the fact that it doesn’t fit perfectly to their world view. I think some of them are starting to have second thoughts, or at least wonder about exactly what they said in the interviews.

The very fact that the filmmakers feel the need to resort to devious tactics is itself an acknowledgment that their arguments are weak, if not completely baseless.Pathetic, Joe. All of them interviewed before the Planck satellite return it’s data. You can think what you want.

Originally Posted by Yash Well… i’am sorry to interupt in between but weren’t you about to leave this forum Absum ?_?^_^ Yes YashWell spottedBut I did say I would occasionally pop in when I had time Maybe both Krauss and Barbour forgot I do not know. Here is a finalized video: Mic’d Up “The Principle, Under Attack” – YouTube The truth is that this is just a simple cosmology movie with interesting ideas in it, and unfortunately, some of the scientist realized after the fact that it doesn’t fit perfectly to their world view. I get the Joke, being a reformed Catholic I really do get the joke. It’s not all that funny…but I do get it.

So you claim they are lying about having been tricked and misrepresented. [QUOTE=exchemist;571714] Originally Posted by JoeSixPack There were some technical snafoos…./QUOTE]Naturally, for an enterprise run on a shoestring, out of someone’s garden shed, by a handful of madmen. That mocks religion a bit too much I have an excellent sense of humour but that was just too much, crawl back into your Reptilian controlled mind you wierdo 😉 Terribly cruel and evil. Originally Posted by Strange why the obsession with release forms?

Does it say “I hereby give you permission to selectively quote me so that I appear to support your ridiculous idea”? I’m sure that’s what all creos/IDiots/cranks think any contracts they are a part of declares. Krauss and others have spoken out – you apparently think they are lying. If sungenis is dishonest enough to deny the overwhelming evidence that the Holocaust happened, then he wouldn’t even give a second thought about deceiving Professor Krauss and distorting his words. And yet…

True, livestream.com is far from perfect. This movie has absolutely nothing to do with Semitism or the Jews. Sorry guys. They all cried foul, it is clear there was no foul. That seems more plausible based on past history of the people involved.

It’s a musty propaganda campaign whose odor can be detected a parsec away.If scientific evidence truly existed to support the claims of the film, that by itself would suffice. I am sure Laurence spoke for himself, can handle himself. They all cried foul, … {BS dissembling excised}.

Evidence of dishonesty is a sound reason for ignoring what someone has to say. Since science is all about what best fits the evidence, the overwhelming scientific judgment is that the filmmakers are the dishonest ones and that Krauss was duped (just as he has claimed). Have you no shame? Krauss and others have spoken out – you apparently think they are lying. Don’t forget how they interpret the evidence for any scientific conclusions to say what it doesn’t say; why should contracts be any different?

But that’s fine for the cretinists and IDiots ‘cos we all know lying for God doesn’t count as lying… They all cried foul, it is clear there was no foul. Well… i’am sorry to interupt in between but weren’t you about to leave this forum Absum ?_?^_^ [QUOTE=JoeSixPack;571609]There were some technical snafoos?./QUOTE]Naturally, for an enterprise run on a shoestring, out of someone’s garden shed, by a handful of madmen. All of them interviewed before the Planck satellite return it’s data. He is a big growing up scientist.

Originally Posted by JoeSixPack Sorry guys. The truth is that this is just a simple cosmology movie with interesting ideas Or it is a bit of religious propaganda made by some fundamentalist nutters. Which he has condemned, and which this contract does not mitigate at all. It says nothing about his being informed about the religious and ideological distortions. It is more likely than not that the release forms they signed just gave permission to use the content of the interview they had provided, in the context of some platitudinous general statements about the type of file being made.

The evidence does exist and the interviewees tell us about it in their own words. I am not to fall for your anti-semitism canard. So they belong in the same intellectual dustbin as Intelligent Design. Originally Posted by AlexG Krauss signed a contract giving right to the producers. Originally Posted by stonecutter Originally Posted by Strange why the obsession with release forms?

Does it say “I hereby give you permission to selectively quote me so that I appear to support your ridiculous idea”? I’m sure that’s what all creos/IDiots/cranks think any contracts they are a part of declares. I hope some of you have an open enough mine to see the film, but if you do not, it is your loss.

Second, it makes no sense to suggest that Krauss would participate willingly and then repudiate his participation (unless you are arguing that he is mentally ill). However, the makers of the film certainly have much to gain by employing the same unethical tactics in filmmaking (e.g., quote mining, quote editing, etc.) that you have already demonstrated personally is part of the standard bag of tricks. It is clear that Julian Barbour was quoted as claiming he did not give permission, but he did sign a release form. He is a big growing up scientist. Well obviously they are lying, it goes against Joe”few cans short of a”SixPacks crank agenda Originally Posted by JoeSixPack Sorry guys.

I hope some of you have an open enough mine to see the film, but if you do not, it is your loss. Originally Posted by Strange Originally Posted by JoeSixPack I am sure Laurence spoke for himself, can handle himself. This movie has absolutely nothing to do with Semitism or the Jews. I was walking across a bridge one day, and I saw a man standing onthe edge, about to jump off. why the obsession with release forms?

Does it say “I hereby give you permission to selectively quote me so that I appear to support your ridiculous idea”? Originally Posted by JoeSixPack Sorry guys. I suppose if God is dishonest enough to have created the world 6,000 years ago then fake all the evidence that so that it looks 4 billion years old, then one must expect similar levels of dishonesty from His followers. Don’t forget how they interpret the evidence for any scientific conclusions to say what it doesn’t say; why should contracts be any different? Agreed.

Originally Posted by JoeSixPack I am sure Laurence spoke for himself, can handle himself. It says nothing about his being informed about the religious and ideological distortions. Krauss signed a contract giving right to the producers. Jesus! LOLDid you really push the guy off?

They have clearly been tricked, just as Dawkins and others were tricked by the makers of “No Intelligence Allowed”, or whatever the hell it was called.The makers of the film are beyond doubt dishonest people, whose zealotry leads them to an “ends justifies the means” approach. The filmmakers clearly have an agenda to push, and are willing to bend the truth however and whenever they see fit. He’s actively evil.

So the idea is to change the argument into one about whether the film makers were operating within the law or not. In any case, they all spoke for themselves, and no one is misrepresented. That is a matter of record. devrimci_kurt, bro i think you should give some respect to the word Joke !! They all cried foul, it is clear there was no foul.

Sorry JSP, your argument fails miserably on several levels. Originally Posted by tk421 If scientific evidence truly existed to support the claims of the film, that by itself would suffice. It clearly shows how people can all worship the same thing yet kill each other over the tiny little differences.

And presumably you base that on the statements of the person who tricked and misrepresented them.