There was something fishy about this thread to begin with. Words can be just another self-evident truth that speaks for itself, such as someone shouting "Shit!" when they stub their toe. The more we give our words the freedom to speak for themselves, the more obvious it becomes they are doing so.
To believe that Republicans organize like chickens, it's illegal to vote for Mickey Mouse, and that robots have taken over the country.
there are often interesting opinions between those repetitions, anyway. i think a lot of people here only see the bits they recognise like knowing only the chorus to a song they skim read the post and think it's the same old nonsense, when it both is, and isn't.
I might just put him on ignore, because he makes me not even want to post here anymore. I can't get through one thread without some guy ranting about how his poetry is soon to be spewed out by computers and that robots have taken over the world.
I do skim all of woo's posts, because they're all the same goddamned thing. And no, what he writes isn't true. You really think there was a forty year study that concluded that Republicans organize like chickens? Look around you...do you see any super intelligent AI or robots?
did i say it was true? they only look like the same thing when you skim them. but i don't care, i'm not trying to convince you, or anyone else.
And I'm so sure the Pentagon and the NSA have determined his jokes (?) poetry, potty humor, is highly sensitive material. It just seems like the ravings on a lunatic, and no one calls him out on it and it just goes on and on. Day after day. I'm not about to sort through the bullshit to get to his glimmer of light, as he tries to convince us all he's the most enlightened person in the history of the world.
no-one calls him out on it? i see people commenting the way you have all the time just don't read it if you don't like it. i don't see this undertone of superiority that you seem to see. of course he is a lunatic : )
I called out one bullshit thing last week about the Asian Knights. And I won that convincingly without a response because it was such a convincing victory. Anyway. Let's talk about fish again.
Initially it was plausible to me. As in all things.....prove yourself to be whatever you wish to be, and you are that. Once your card is struck, then you’ve to prove yourself otherwise. Shame it isn’t about fish, but that is one thing I didn’t like about some places, straying off topic only to have (in many cases) a really thoughtful conversation decimated as it does not conform to the thread title. I guess I now know why such event take place.
Fish books..... And why I thought it plausible. The works of Jan Veron (corals of the world) Sits proudly on my shelf, that is the life work of Mr Veron, and probably took in excess of 30 years focus, it is his lifetimes research. Again for Scott Micheal, reef fishes series, he’s the chap who’s work may never be complete. A younger bloke but still a lifetime under the sea studying his craft. So yes, it is plausible to spend such an amount of time compiling a book. And given it’s an assumed reference, it must be accurate. But that’s where it ends for me!
I'm a linguist, and don't expect people to comprehend what I write, because half of them debate the definition of stupid and who is the best example. I've had linguists, philosophers, and physicists ask my advice, while most people struggle to ask for directions to the bathroom. Actually sharing their words and playing nice are not terribly popular online. If Americans in particular become anymore instant gratification and cheap thrills oriented, I expect them to start dropping like flies and killing each other more often. Again, I am writing a theory of everything, that includes everything, including how to stop all these idiots from babbling nonsense.