I don't know.

(May 17, 2016 at 9:56 am)Mister Agenda Wrote:

Huggy74 Wrote:http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/timeless

*emphasis mine*
Where is the contradiction?

So you ARE using 'timeless' as in 'unaffected by the passage of time' when everyone else is using in they physics sense of 'no time existing'. That explains a lot.

I see we're down to arguing semantics now...

You clearly stated that the words "timeless" and "eternal" contradict each other when they are actually synonymous.

(May 17, 2016 at 10:07 am)Huggy74 Wrote:

(May 17, 2016 at 9:56 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: So you ARE using 'timeless' as in 'unaffected by the passage of time' when everyone else is using in they physics sense of 'no time existing'. That explains a lot.

I see we're down to arguing semantics now...

Isn't that your wheelhouse?

Ah well. It can be timeless and timeful and outside time and inside it and made of time. Since it's not real, you can safely make up whatever crap you want about it without worrying about being proved wrong. You wouldn't believe some of the things I could tell you about my dragon. It's eight foot tall, and twenty foot tall. If you want to prove either of those wrong, you'll have to find it first. Good luck with that.

But when you're all done with that and willing to discuss reality... we'll be waiting!

Nope, feel free to provide an example of me doing the above though.

(May 17, 2016 at 10:14 am)Huggy74 Wrote: Nope, feel free to provide an example of me doing the above though.

(May 17, 2016 at 10:14 am)robvalue Wrote: Ah well. It can be timeless and timeful and outside time and inside it and made of time. Since it's not real, you can safely make up whatever crap you want about it without worrying about being proved wrong. You wouldn't believe some of the things I could tell you about my dragon. It's eight foot tall, and twenty foot tall. If you want to prove either of those wrong, you'll have to find it first. Good luck with that.

But when you're all done with that and willing to discuss reality... we'll be waiting!

If you want to believe you have a dragon, go ahead, that's your business. Why would I have an interest in proving it wrong?

The funny thing is if a guy tells you he's a woman, you'll believe THAT despite the evidence proving otherwise...

So which is worse? Believing something without evidence, or believing something in spite of the evidence?

(May 17, 2016 at 10:20 am)Crossless1 Wrote:

(May 17, 2016 at 10:14 am)Huggy74 Wrote: Nope, feel free to provide an example of me doing the above though.

Laugh all you want but I on the other hand actually provide evidence to back up my accusations...

(May 17, 2016 at 10:28 am)Huggy74 Wrote:

(May 17, 2016 at 10:20 am)Crossless1 Wrote:

Laugh all you want but I on the other hand actually provide evidence to back up my accusations...

People can reach their own conclusions. The thread entitled "The Jesus Freaks Will Hate This" is littered with your typical style of argumentation, including arguing semantics.


So, yeah . . .

Then It shouldn't be all that hard for you to find an example to post...