Is there anything skeptics can't reduce

Tricky said:
I think you got the lipstick on the wrong one. Usually the females are larger. Unless these are Kinkygobies.
Click to expand...

These fish act like seahorses (male has the babies)...everything's opposite. Besides, didn't you see the beard and mustache on the larger one?
 
Huntster said:
Excuse the skeptic in me, but how do I know they exist?

All you have is a photo. It was sent from a computer. How do I know it wasn't enhanced?

Do you have any more credible evidence that those specific fish truly exist?
Click to expand...
Okay, ruach, you've got half a point.

There are indeed people who will use "skepticism" as an excuse for pointless wankery. If his sig is anything to go by, however, this one seems to have an imaginary friend, and to enjoy whining about imaginary defects of skeptics, so we have to ask --- is he really a skeptic?

By the way, for those more interested in fish than in entering for the tosser of the year award, they're called mandarin fish. Aren't they beautiful?
 
Last edited:
Dr Adequate said:
Okay, ruach, you've got half a point.

There are indeed people who will use "skepticism" as an excuse for pointless wankery.....
Click to expand...

Admission noted.

... If his sig is anything to go by, however, this one seems to have an imaginary friend, and to enjoy whining about imaginary defects of skeptics, so we have to ask --- is he really a skeptic?....
Click to expand...

Since, I've been told, science can't prove anything, than someone's skepticism is a matter of believing or disbelieving, isn't it?

You might have to have faith that I am as you perceive me to be based on my sig line.

...By the way, for those more interested in fish than in entering for the tosser of the year award, they're called mandarin fish. Aren't they beautiful...
Click to expand...

Yes, those images are absolutely beautiful.

"Prove it!"

Well, can't you see that they're beautiful?

Are they truly beautiful, or is it just your mind that perceives beauty, and their appearance is all an illusion of existence itself, and couldn't define beauty even if they truly existed?


Gee, now I really don't know. Thanks to your skepticism, I don't have to admit their beauty, because beauty isn't reality.

You're welcome.
 
You're talking to yourself, asking yourself questions, answering them, and you are convinced by the answers!

Seems you don't need us - shall we all go now, and leave you to it?
 
Zep said:
You're talking to yourself, asking yourself questions, answering them, and you are convinced by the answers!...
Click to expand...

I'm screwing around, and having quite a bit of fun doing it.:D

....Seems you don't need us - shall we all go now, and leave you to it?....
Click to expand...

No, please don't go! I need you! Like the desert needs the rain!
 
PixyMisa said:
Liquid water is wet.
Click to expand...
Actually, it's not very wet, which is rather surprising to most people. Soapy water is much wetter.

And really, our sensation of 'wetness' has more to do with the rapid loss of heat than moisture.
 
Melendwyr said:
Actually, it's not very wet, which is rather surprising to most people. Soapy water is much wetter.....
Click to expand...

Evidence, please?

...And really, our sensation of 'wetness' has more to do with the rapid loss of heat than moisture...
Click to expand...

Again, do you have any evidence of that?

Sorry. For some reason, I feel the need to apologize for my skepticism.
 
Dcdrac said:
The universe? do you not think the night sky is a miracle in itself and a thing of great beauty and wonder?
Click to expand...
[skeptic in me]: Define miracle

[just about everything else in me]: You betcha'. That and more!

(especially those tropical fish--grafitti and all) :)
 
Last edited:
Huntster said:
I'm screwing around, and having quite a bit of fun doing it.
Click to expand...
No, let's be clear. You are not screwing around, you are wanking off, you pathetic stunted little tosser. "Screwing" requires more than your own sterile self-indulgence in pointless fantasy.
 
Huntster said:
Yes, those images are absolutely beautiful.

"Prove it!"

Well, can't you see that they're beautiful?

Are they truly beautiful, or is it just your mind that perceives beauty, and their appearance is all an illusion of existence itself, and couldn't define beauty even if they truly existed?

Gee, now I really don't know. Thanks to your skepticism, I don't have to admit their beauty, because beauty isn't reality.

You're welcome.
Click to expand...
I suppose there's a reason why a pathetic coward armed only with a toy sword should prefer to fight only against straw men.

But does it not occur to you that everyone who reads this thread can see your thin drivel of lies for what it is?
 
Huntster said:
Evidence, please?

Again, do you have any evidence of that?

Sorry. For some reason, I feel the need to apologize for my skepticism.
Click to expand...
I have seen no evidence that you are a skeptic, and much evidence that you are a woowoo taking refuge in a pathetic fantasy world.

When you are able to cope with reality, I shall reassess your claim to be a skeptic.
 
Dr Adequate said:
Okay, ruach, you've got half a point.

There are indeed people who will use "skepticism" as an excuse for pointless wankery.
Click to expand...
And, ruach, as you can see, Huntster is a prime example of this disgusting breed. He prances around calling himself a "skeptic" --- and also mouthing lunatic gibberish in alternation with his peevish halfwitted whining about skeptics.

Just 'cos someone calls themself a skeptic doesn't mean that he is one. The definition is functional, and this halfwitted twerp is not a skeptic. He does not represent skepticism in any way. None of his lunatic drivel is connected with skepticism. Clear?

We disowwn the raving loon. Thank you.
 
Dr Adequate said:
No, let's be clear. You are not screwing around, you are wanking off, you pathetic stunted little tosser. "Screwing" requires more than your own sterile self-indulgence in pointless fantasy.
Click to expand...

Stunted? Little?

Do you have any evidence of that?
 
Dr Adequate said:
I suppose there's a reason why a pathetic coward armed only with a toy sword should prefer to fight only against straw men.....
Click to expand...

Of course there is. Fighting real men with guns is damned dangerous.

Been there, done that.

(BTW, I do have a real sword. I prefer to play with the toy one so I don't cut myself.)

...But does it not occur to you that everyone who reads this thread can see your thin drivel of lies for what it is
Click to expand...

Lies?

What lies?
 
Dr Adequate said:
And, ruach, as you can see, Huntster is a prime example of this disgusting breed. He prances around calling himself a "skeptic" --- and also mouthing lunatic gibberish in alternation with his peevish halfwitted whining about skeptics.....
Click to expand...

My, my, such strong language! I feel........well,.........corrected.

I mean, I've never felt so........well,.........impressed by such a..........well,........strong figure!

Is that what skepticism is really all about?

All these years, I've been adrift! All these years my soul has longed for such.......power!

Alas, but I'm just a pathetic stunted little tosser. I'll never be such a revered and capable skeptic.

Whoa (woo?) is me! I think I'll eat a worm.

......Just 'cos someone calls themself a skeptic doesn't mean that he is one. The definition is functional, and this halfwitted twerp is not a skeptic. He does not represent skepticism in any way. None of his lunatic drivel is connected with skepticism. Clear?......
Click to expand...

Oh, the cruelty of it! The cold, hard reality of it! I'll never be a skeptic? I don't have what it takes?
I'm not functional?

Oh!

Disowned, and adrift again!

And I only wanted to belong! I only wanted to be wanted! I only wanted to be loved!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom