theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
I think it's a reasonable, if figurative, characterization of your epistemological paradigm, in much the same sense as when people talk about a Large Language Model "hallucinating".
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire part II
- Thread starter phiwum
- Start date
- Status
W.D.Clinger
Philosopher
You can't even stop them from lying.
You can, however, identify their lies.
If you are feeling charitable, you can refer to those lies as mistakes.
If you are feeling even more charitable, you can suggest those mistakes were not deliberate.
One way to suggest a mistake was not deliberate is by playfully suggesting alternative explanations such as mind-altering drugs.
For example: I must be bombed out of my mind to hallucinate that what I have written here will help certain people to understand the broader context of this conversation.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
I see that you need to be reminded how we got here again. Here you go:
As you can see, I didn't mention hallucinations until after you introduced them in post #1231. And I didn't use the concept as an insult; I suggested it as an explanation for your having posted something totally irrelevant to the post you were replying to.
I'm perfectly prepared to accept that you weren't hallucinating when you responded to this:
...as if it was saying something about hallucinations. There are alternative explanations for your behaviour, but they are less charitable: are you functionally illiterate, or merely dishonest?
As you can see, I didn't mention hallucinations until after you introduced them in post #1231. And I didn't use the concept as an insult; I suggested it as an explanation for your having posted something totally irrelevant to the post you were replying to.
I'm perfectly prepared to accept that you weren't hallucinating when you responded to this:
...as if it was saying something about hallucinations. There are alternative explanations for your behaviour, but they are less charitable: are you functionally illiterate, or merely dishonest?
TheGoldcountry
Philosopher
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2011
- Messages
- 8,382
Well, that's certainly one way to put it. I'm not going to rush to judgment, though. I'm sure there are different ways of interpreting "wasn't an EV."
Can't you spot propaganda when you see it?
Since you didn't quote the chassis number, that can't possibly be true.
junkshop
Otto's Favourite
Clearly it was a pedal car what went BOOM! And then FWOOSH!, and the apocalyptic fire happened because the owner had used bear grease and nitro cellulose as lubricants.
The powers that be (damn their eyes) haven't specifically denied this unlikely situation, therefore it must be what happened.
I have it on good authority that this is what happened. Here is my proof that totally backs up my claim.
If you dumb rubes can't recognise PR puff peices for the bear-grease-and-nitro-cellulose lobby when they're right there, then I can't help you. I will judge you, though. Think on it.
TLDR: Any "official" explanation is suspect, because PTB=corrupt. Therefore made-up arse pullings are legitimate, and must be discussed at length.
Also, how dare you quote me! That's defamatory, or sexist, or...something. IDK, it's not fair, anyway. Also none of this makes sense, and that's why I'm demonstrably right.
ETA: Sorry about that, I'm not sure what came over me there.
Anyway, Vixen: are you able to answer my question regarding the source of your claims? I won't ask again, I promise, but please note that refusal to answer will be taken as an admission that the claim was (and I apologise for using legitimate English words that upset prissy Victorian maiden aunts) pulled out of your arse.
Please note: if you find that language a bit too much, then I do have a less fruity way of saying the same thing. If you would rather I used that, then let me know and I will happily oblige.
I have it on good authority that the First Lord of the Admiralty's wife's neighbour's dentist is heavily into bear grease.
Finacially, you perverts! I'm looking at you, [redacted], and you [redacted].
[redacted], I am both surprised, and deeply disappointed.
Last edited:
malbui
Beauf
- Joined
- Nov 8, 2004
- Messages
- 5,126
Chassis numbers and VIN plates and the like are easily forged. Open your eyes to the conspiracy!
Roger Ramjets
Philosopher
But they can't hide the truth from us!
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Before anyone wastes their time, can you point out what qualifications he might have?
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Last edited:
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
Some random dude on the internet, spouting off then.
But "properly sourced and referenced" of course.
gabeygoat
Master Poster
It's just some boring guy battling a straw man.
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
Some random dude on the internet, spouting off then.
How dare you suggest that someone calling themselves "EV Carnage" isn't a balanced and unbiased source of factual information who definately doesn't have any kind of bee in their bonnet about the subject..
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 37,036
Mojo
Mostly harmless
P.J. Denyer
Penultimate Amazing
He's probably a professor at a recognised academic institution and has a history of investigating accidents of this type.. Oh, sorry, that's JayUtah.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Please cut out the snobbery. Tony is some kind of car dealer. Okay, so he probably has fewer O-Levels than the suit who writes PR copy for the press, has a provincial accent (Cornish) and wears a t-shirt with a rude slogan. Who would you rather buy a car from? Someone who has been in the trade for decades or some crusty academic who hasn't picked up a spanner or got oil on his hands since college days? Put another way, if your home was flooded, would you want a qualified plumber to fix it or Jenny from Communications to write up a puff piece about 'nothing to worry about'?
Let's not be snobs, peeps. Shame on you, List, shame on you.
- Status