Cont: Proof of Immortality VIII

Jabba said:
- Is there anyone here that would like to hear my responses to the fatal flaws if I insist on doing them one at a time?
Click to expand...

The fact that you are incapable of understanding the simplest instructions, and why those instructions were put forth, indicates that your responses are incapable of being worthwhile.
 
Jabba said:
- Is there anyone here that would like to hear my responses to the fatal flaws if I insist on doing them one at a time?
Click to expand...

No.

Also nobody believes you ever plan to even address them "one at a time" since you've never risen above "never at a time" in addressing anything.

You seem to think we're all stupid and will somehow just not notice you never addressing anything if you claim you are just doing it really slowly.
 
Jabba said:
- Is there anyone here that would like to hear my responses to the fatal flaws if I insist on doing them one at a time?
Click to expand...

No.

You were given a specific set of instructions to follow while addressing the list of fatal flaws. You were told the reasons behind those instructions. Another person even took the task upon himself and give you an example, thereby proving the task was neither onerous nor fruitless.

Instead you simply announced that you would be doing something else. Over many objections and despite continued assurances that your answers were not going to be accepted, you wasted several days doing your own thing and responding to almost no one. You all but admitted your goal was to create a different discussion to compete with what you had been asked to do, as an excuse not to do it. You seem to think your critics are stupid and can be gaslighted into believing Jay has asked you to do something impossible. Jay has asked you to do something productive.

It should be abundantly clear by now that no one is interested in yet another rehearsal of your failed argument in the same time-wasting fashion you have used for the past five years. They're interested in actually putting your proof to a real test and arriving at an answer within their finite lifetimes. It's up to you to demonstrate that this is something you actually want and are capable of doing. We proved your debate method doesn't work. So we're not going to be using it anymore.

Your one-post treatment of the list of fatal flaws is not where the debate has to end unless it proves there would necessarily remain at least one unaddressed fatal flaw even after a fuller and more detailed presentation. It's meant to determine whether there would be a purpose to such a presentation.
 
JoeMorgue said:
It's the "I have a really hot girlfriend, but she lives in Canada and you've never met her" of internet discussions.
Click to expand...
It's even better than that.

"I know it looks like I came to the party alone, but I bet if you asked all the hot people, they'd tell you they're with me."

And then all the hot people at the party say, "not even close."
 
theprestige said:
The Appeal to Friendly Lurkers is one of my favorite scenes in the fringe claim passion play.
Click to expand...

I assume he's scrounging for the next Least Critical Poster, or least someone to say, "Yes, please continue doing what you're doing." Then he can come back and say, "Okay, I'm going to do what this one person wants rather than what the other twelve people have asked for." He thinks we don't see these attempts to avoid responsibility for what they are. ETA: And if he gets a unanimous "no" vote he can try to make the case that we're all biased against his "obviously" effective approach and therefore he doesn't have to play along.
 
Last edited:
Hey everybody while we wait on Jabba I'm going to solve the energy crisis, present a plan for peace in the Middle East, turn lead into gold, reveal who Carly Simon is singing about in "You're So Vain," translate the Voynich Manuscript, pinpoint the resting place of Jimmy Hoffa, and decode the CIA's Kryptos cypher.

I'm going to be doing it one at a time really, really slowly, but I'm totally for realz doing it.
 
Dave Rogers said:
Jabba, how about you do them one at a time, but don't press the "Post" button until you've done all of them?

Dave
Click to expand...

Except that the problem isn’t that he’s doing them one at a time. The problem is he isn’t doing what JayUtah is asking, which is to explain HOW he is going to deal with these fatal flaws. His attempt at adressing them is irrelevant until he and JayUtah have agreed upon a course of action.
 
Five years, 8 threads (not including multiple spin-offs and side discussion), and two different boards and a half dozen people are still begging "The Master of Debate" to please at some point give a rough outline of when at some hypothetical point in the future he might maybe get around to perhaps thinking about addressing the possibility of considering getting started in forming the process of beginning to set up a framework at which he could possibly maybe start taking the first baby steps toward starting to make a point.

This makes rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic look proactive. This isn't shutting the barn door after the horses have left. This isn't even shutting the barn door after the horses have died of old age and the barn has burned down. This is trying to divert the asteroid 65 million years after it killed the dinosaurs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom