Nigeria: Man stoned to death, set ablaze in front of police by radical Islamist mob on charges of bl

[A Vestigial Mote]

Is calling someone foolish not a personal attack? ... and please don't put your words in my mouth.

But you said that to answer my question would see YOU breaking the RF rules. Now you have me confused.

 

[nPeace]

But you said that to answer my question would see YOU breaking the RF rules. Now you have me confused.

You have not answered my question. Ah Dios

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

You have not answered my question. Ah Dios

Ahh... the smell of fear. Nothing better than that.

If you actually wanted an answer to your question (and let's remember, this particular path we are now down started with YOU refusing to answer MY question because you said your answer would violate RF rules!! Oh the irony!), then no problem at all.

Here's my answer: Yes, calling A PARTICULAR PERSON "foolish" probably would be considered a "personal attack" - but really, we need a "person" in order for something to be considered a "personal attack" don't we? And I spoke only in general, of a type of person that might be considered foolish. Perhaps someone was insulted by my words, because they found that they, themselves used those phrases I mentioned. I'll readily admit that that was exactly my goal. What purpose would I have to hide it? I am very much unlike those who say something, infuse it with a particular nastiness, and then back-pedal out of it as best they are able when called out. I leave that kind of behavior for those who have a "moral code" they supposedly attempt to uphold or live by and don't want to be found to be falling short. If I am intending to be nasty, there is absolutely no good reason I can think of not to simply tell you that is exactly what I was doing when you pick up on it.

 

[nPeace]

Ahh... the smell of fear. Nothing better than that.

If you actually wanted an answer to your question (and let's remember, this particular path we are now down started with YOU refusing to answer MY question because you said your answer would violate RF rules!! Oh the irony!), then no problem at all.

Here's my answer: Yes, calling A PARTICULAR PERSON "foolish" probably would be considered a "personal attack" - but really, we need a "person" in order for something to be considered a "personal attack" don't we? And I spoke only in general, of a type of person that might be considered foolish. Perhaps someone was insulted by my words, because they found that they, themselves used those phrases I mentioned. I'll readily admit that that was exactly my goal. What purpose would I have to hide it? I am very much unlike those who say something, infuse it with a particular nastiness, and then back-pedal out of it as best they are able when called out. I leave that kind of behavior for those who have a "moral code" they supposedly attempt to uphold or live by and don't want to be found to be falling short. If I am intending to be nasty, there is absolutely no good reason I can think of not to simply tell you that is exactly what I was doing when you pick up on it.

No. It's just 1) whom I am talking to. Nothing to do with fear. Maybe you forgot about earlier conversations we had.
2) I am not interested in being drawn into whatever topic you want to bring into this thread,
...and calling someone inept and foolish is indeed a personal attack... Not probably.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Maybe they just like to play word games.

Nope. Laymen like to pretend they are knowledgeable enough in the fields to act within them, and because they don't they end up misappropriating a word like "theory" and keep twisting it around utnil it no longer reflects the scientific nature of the word.
Ultimately, evolution is a fact of life just as Newtons Laws of Motion are facts.

 

[Twilight Hue]

It does not matter what people murder other people over. Injustice is injustice.

Not blasphemy.

Killing a person over a belief is terrorism.

 

[nPeace]

Nope. Laymen like to pretend they are knowledgeable enough in the fields to act within them, and because they don't they end up misappropriating a word like "theory" and keep twisting it around utnil it no longer reflects the scientific nature of the word.
Ultimately, evolution is a fact of life just as Newtons Laws of Motion are facts.

I agree... some. So you admit you like to twist things by using the word fact as though we don't know the difference between a scientific fact and a fact, just as you think we don't know the difference between a scientific theory and a theory, or a scientific law and a scientific theory?

 

[nPeace]

Not blasphemy.

Killing a person over a belief is terrorism.

Is it not a belief that a person should be killed if they murder someone? Edit : Sorry @Twilight Hue that was a question. I put a fullstop instead of a question mark.
For example, if someone murders a person's son, if the person thinks that that person should die, is that not a belief?
If it's not a belief, what is it?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

So you admit you like to twist things by using the word fact

It's on you to prove this. Because I didn't.

 

[nPeace]

It's on you to prove this. Because I didn't.

I'll take your word for it. That's fine.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

I'll take your word for it. That's fine.

No, it's not fine, because you are saying things about me that I did not do.

 

[nPeace]

No, it's not fine, because you are saying things about me that I did not do.

Huh? What do you care what people believe about you?
I don't care that you believe things about me and other Christians, that are not true.
Why do you care? Does it bother you?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Why do you care? Does it bother you?

Do you like it when others make up things about you and try to defame you with baseless claims?

 

[nPeace]

Do you like it when others make up things about you and try to defame you with baseless claims?

Of course not, but I did not make up things about you. I really really really honestly 1000% do believe that you and Atheist on these threads twist these words used in science as a means of ... how should I say, trying to present something in a way other than it really is.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Of course not, but I did not make up things about you.

Yes you did.

So you admit you like to twist things by using the word fact

That is a false claim, you cannot substantiate it.
Such is why I said it is on you to demonstrate I did this. Otherwise you are making things up out of thin air (which you are doing anyways).

I really really really honestly 1000% do believe that you and Atheist on these threads twist these words used in science as a means of ... how should I say, trying to present something in a way other than it really is.

Then support this claim. If it's a matter of having to "present something in a way other than it really is," then you not trying to honestly present it if you have to make into what it is not.

 

[nPeace]

Yes you did.

That is a false claim, you cannot substantiate it.
Such is why I said it is on you to demonstrate I did this. Otherwise you are making things up out of thin air (which you are doing anyways).

Wow! Look at that quote. That's messed up.
So you admit you like to twist things by using the word fact as though we don't know the difference between a scientific fact and a fact, just as you think we don't know the difference between a scientific theory and a theory, or a scientific law and a scientific theory?
As though connects phrases, clauses, words, and is an indication the sentence cannot be abruptly ended before.
See what I mean? What do you call that?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Wow! Look at that quote. That's messed up.
So you admit you like to twist things by using the word fact as though we don't know the difference between a scientific fact and a fact, just as you think we don't know the difference between a scientific theory and a theory, or a scientific law and a scientific theory?
As though connects phrases, clauses, words, and is an indication the sentence cannot be abruptly ended before.
See what I mean? What do you call that?

Trying to get out of doing what you did. You will find nowhere--absolutely nowhere--on this forum where I have twisted words such as "fact" or "theory" into a way that is not congruent with how they are scientifically used.

 

[nPeace]

Trying to get out of doing what you did. You will find nowhere--absolutely nowhere--on this forum where I have twisted words such as "fact" or "theory" into a way that is not congruent with how they are scientifically used.

See what I mean? That's the next thing you do, try to find the nearest exit by accusing the person of trying to get out.
I'm not going anywhere.
I believe you did use the word in a way that's not in keeping with how it is rightly used.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

See what I mean? That's the next thing you do, try to find the nearest exit by accusing the person of trying to get out.
I'm not going anywhere.
I believe you did use the word in a way that's not in keeping with how it is rightly used.

Because you are trying to get out of accepting that you did infact state I was doing something that I did not do.

 

[nPeace]

Because you are trying to get out of accepting that you did infact state I was doing something that I did not do.

Now Now. Lying is bad Shadow.
I clearly expressed that I said what I said. Please, you are twisting this also.
I see you edited your earlier post also. Hmmm.