Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: November 17, 2024, 7:38 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Ontological Disproof of God
RE: Ontological Disproof of God
(September 2, 2018 at 9:30 pm)negatio Wrote: [quote pid='1809197' dateline='1535885312']


Quote:

[/quote]
negatio Wrote:tell them  off later 
I know it looks nuts, practicing online, however, how the hell else can I experiment around with this form of flux...I typed in BB code which is supposed to exhibit Negatio Wrote, sometimes it does, sometimes not...more confusion and doubt, compounding in an infinite maze...
Reply
RE: Ontological Disproof of God
The actual code takes some practice to get a handle on. And it’s really going to be hard if you’re trying to get the pid and dateline numbers yourself. You’re better off sticking to replying with the reply button.
(August 21, 2017 at 11:31 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: "I'm not a troll"
Religious Views: He gay

0/10

Hammy Wrote:and we also have a sheep on our bed underneath as well
Reply
RE: Ontological Disproof of God
(September 2, 2018 at 10:37 pm)Losty Wrote: The actual code takes some practice to get a handle on. And it’s really going to be hard if you’re trying to get the pid and dateline numbers yourself. You’re better off sticking to replying with the reply button.

Yes, emjay taught me to stay well away from the Quote button, because that is for multi-replying, and I am not there yet.
What  pid and dateline numbers are I have no idea, except I did see them there on my last successful coding.
Yes, indeed, stick with the reply button.  So, when a member told me, once before, that when using Reply, it (whatever it is) is all done automatically, that was somehow misleading for me, because one actually does have to employ BB code to properly and respectfully show the name of the member to which you are replying, and, in order that the member receive a notification that you have quoted the member. You see, I  think, basically, I  have the method whereby Rely is accomplished on the forum !
How did KevinM1; Khemikal; and mh.brewer all post messages on my thread, when, I had them blocked ?! Thank you Losty. Negato. P.S., I'll ask you again, why does something KevinM1 wrote a long time ago, in small small letter, keep incessantly appearing in all my replies ?
Reply
RE: Ontological Disproof of God
Anyone can post a message in any thread, placing someone on ignore just hides their posts it doesn’t stop them from posting.
(August 21, 2017 at 11:31 pm)KevinM1 Wrote: "I'm not a troll"
Religious Views: He gay

0/10

Hammy Wrote:and we also have a sheep on our bed underneath as well
Reply
RE: Ontological Disproof of God
(September 2, 2018 at 6:59 pm)mh.brewer Wrote:
(September 2, 2018 at 3:22 pm)negatio Wrote:

In the beginning I saw run on sentences, fixations with word complexity and the law, in addition to grandiosity (I've got the proof and will put it here to be remembered by history). I thought these could be symptoms of mania, hypomania or  cyclothymia (hence the medication comment). Now I seem them as affectations of narcissism.

mh.brewe Wrote:I seem them as affectations of narcissism.
To so readily ascribe neuroses to my person is a totally mistaken take of what my writing is ultimately founded-in; my writing is grounded upon my radical alienation from the American legal system, which has been shitting on me all my life.  Then, after playing about in college over a forty six year span of intermittent matriculation, I finally degreed in Philosophy with a mere B.A..  During that forty six years I read, completely, theoretical philosophical works encountered in the classes; and, at a certain point after years of study, I thought I saw something in  my readings of very profound importance, so, I started reading the particular work all over again from the beginning, to see if I had indeed seen what I thought I saw.  What I saw was a modern theory of how a human act originates. My writing arises out of my profound and absolutely angry, angry, angry alienation from the American legal system, and, finds its expression via the language of modern philosophical theory of origination of human action.  My grammer school teachers of the 1950's were incredible, and, they taught me: "The pen is more powerful that the sword.", so, after writing college papers across a period of forty six years, I, incredibly, developed a power of the pen.  So, the OP is written via a radically intense expression of my alienation from the fundamental basis of our American society ,law.  I am absolutely fucking pissed at what is transpiring in American law, from my particular viewpoint, which is grounded in modern existential ontological theory of the origin of human action, and, I, like I have previously said, find myself in what I deem to be in a position to give our "great legal minds" a great fucking powerful kick in their jurisprudential nards.  I possess a theoretical  instrumentation efficient of kick American jurisprudence in its theoretical nuts !  My conduct upsurges out of  my alienation, not out of some drug(s) !  The OP stands, however grandiose it may appear; however run on it is structured, for, indeed there are minds able to undertake long, long, continuous thought(s), and, those minds are here now, and will be here in the future.  It is a damn good thing I came into this forum and am getting the fucking shit kicked out of me by the members; it has made me see absolutely, that the OP has to be recast  in ordinary language, which I am now doing only as a result of engaging in the dialogical dialectic which is interaction with the members. So, when you come into the dialogue with horrid accusations against me, with insult and indifference to my precious fucking existentialism, you are disrupting, via useless insults, the nobility of the dialogical process.  I now apologize for getting totally rude and  pissed off … however, you are responsible for my reaction to your  unbearable insults !  Thank you. Negatio.

(September 2, 2018 at 6:52 pm)Khemikal Wrote: Remote, kentucky....?

Well shit cuzzo, we may as well be neighbors!  There are a few of us on the boards.

Khemika Wrote: we may as well be neighbors!
It is improper to pry into your private life; however, now you have me curious.  What State are you in, Khemikal ?
Negatio.
Reply
RE: Ontological Disproof of God
(September 2, 2018 at 10:14 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: No one else gets the impression that we’re being had here?

Well, if only one could find an example where our protagonist has no problem formatting posts from last November. Wouldn't that be interesting?

https://forum.bitcoin.com/post110564.html#p110564
Reply
RE: Ontological Disproof of God
(September 3, 2018 at 5:40 am)Abaddon_ire Wrote:
(September 2, 2018 at 10:14 pm)LadyForCamus Wrote: No one else gets the impression that we’re being had here?

Well, if only one could find an example where our protagonist has no problem formatting posts from last November. Wouldn't that be interesting?

https://forum.bitcoin.com/post110564.html#p110564

Ontological disproof of good faith Tongue
"Every luxury has a deep price. Every indulgence, a cosmic cost. Each fiber of pleasure you experience causes equivalent pain somewhere else. This is the first law of emodynamics [sic]. Joy can be neither created nor destroyed. The balance of happiness is constant.

Fact: Every time you eat a bite of cake, someone gets horsewhipped.

Facter: Every time two people kiss, an orphanage collapses.

Factest: Every time a baby is born, an innocent animal is severely mocked for its physical appearance. Don't be a pleasure hog. Your every smile is a dagger. Happiness is murder.

Vote "yes" on Proposition 1321. Think of some kids. Some kids."
Reply
RE: Ontological Disproof of God
(September 3, 2018 at 5:47 am)Lucanus Wrote:
(September 3, 2018 at 5:40 am)Abaddon_ire Wrote: Well, if only one could find an example where our protagonist has no problem formatting posts from last November. Wouldn't that be interesting?

https://forum.bitcoin.com/post110564.html#p110564

Ontological disproof of good faith Tongue

Abbadon__ire Wrote:Wouldn't that be interesting?
You are absolutely incorrect Adaddon, posting on the Bitcoin Forum did not require me knowing BB code, I never, ever interacted with anyone, no one responded ! and, I have not checked to see if anyone ever has. I did not know BB code, and, now, I only know two little lines of it...Did putting my OP on this site require knowing BB code ? Absolutely not.  Abaddon, you blew your attempt to discredit me !  So sorry, too bad ! Don't you just love the smell of failed defamation in the morning ?! Negatio.
Reply
RE: Ontological Disproof of God
Quote:To so readily ascribe neuroses to my person is a totally mistaken take of what my writing is ultimately founded-in; my writing is grounded upon my radical alienation from the American legal system, which has been shitting on me all my life.  Then, after playing about in college over a forty six year span of intermittent matriculation, I finally degreed in Philosophy with a mere B.A..  During that forty six years I read, completely, theoretical philosophical works encountered in the classes; and, at a certain point after years of study, I thought I saw something in  my readings of very profound importance, so, I started reading the particular work all over again from the beginning, to see if I had indeed seen what I thought I saw.  What I saw was a modern theory of how a human act originates. My writing arises out of my profound and absolutely angry, angry, angry alienation from the American legal system, and, finds its expression via the language of modern philosophical theory of origination of human action.  My grammer school teachers of the 1950's were incredible, and, they taught me: "The pen is more powerful that the sword.", so, after writing college papers across a period of forty six years, I, incredibly, developed a power of the pen.  So, the OP is written via a radically intense expression of my alienation from the fundamental basis of our American society ,law.  I am absolutely fucking pissed at what is transpiring in American law, from my particular viewpoint, which is grounded in modern existential ontological theory of the origin of human action, and, I, like I have previously said, find myself in what I deem to be in a position to give our "great legal minds" a great fucking powerful kick in their jurisprudential nards.  I possess a theoretical  instrumentation efficient of kick American jurisprudence in its theoretical nuts !  My conduct upsurges out of  my alienation, not out of some drug(s) !  The OP stands, however grandiose it may appear; however run on it is structured, for, indeed there are minds able to undertake long, long, continuous thought(s), and, those minds are here now, and will be here in the future.  It is a damn good thing I came into this forum and am getting the fucking shit kicked out of me by the members; it has made me see absolutely, that the OP has to be recast  in ordinary language, which I am now doing only as a result of engaging in the dialogical dialectic which is interaction with the members. So, when you come into the dialogue with horrid accusations against me, with insult and indifference to my precious fucking existentialism, you are disrupting, via useless insults, the nobility of the dialogical process.  I now apologize for getting totally rude and  pissed off … however, you are responsible for my reaction to your  unbearable insults !  Thank you. Negatio.

Four run-on sentences.  
A spelling error.
Eleven punctuation errors.
Highly repetitive.
Poor word choices throughout.
Paragraph errors.
False apology.
Unjustifiably egocentric.

C-

Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
Reply
RE: Ontological Disproof of God
(September 3, 2018 at 6:44 am)negatio Wrote: You are absolutely incorrect Adaddon, posting on the Bitcoin Forum did not require me knowing BB code, I never, ever interacted with anyone, no one responded ! and, I have not checked to see if anyone ever has. I did not know BB code, and, now, I only know two little lines of it...Did putting my OP on this site require knowing BB code ? Absolutely not.  Abaddon, you blew your attempt to discredit me !  So sorry, too bad ! Don't you just love the smell of failed defamation in the morning ?! Negatio.

This board does not REQUIRE knowledge of BB code either. Stop pretending that it does.

Knowledge of BB code is not required to press the enter key twice. Stop pretending that this is too difficult for you to grok.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  The classic ontological argument Modern Atheism 20 803 October 3, 2024 at 12:45 pm
Last Post: The Grand Nudger
  The modal ontological argument for God Disagreeable 29 1427 August 10, 2024 at 8:57 pm
Last Post: CuriosityBob
  My own moral + ontological argument. Mystic 37 12259 April 17, 2018 at 12:50 pm
Last Post: FatAndFaithless
  Ontological Limericks chimp3 12 3701 December 22, 2016 at 3:22 am
Last Post: Edwardo Piet
  On Anselm's 2nd Formulation of the Ontological Argument FallentoReason 7 3436 November 21, 2016 at 10:57 am
Last Post: FallentoReason
  How would you describe your ontological views? The Skeptic 10 3229 July 29, 2014 at 11:28 pm
Last Post: Neo-Scholastic
  Ontological Arguments - A Comprehensive Refutation MindForgedManacle 23 6321 March 20, 2014 at 1:48 am
Last Post: Rabb Allah
  The Modal Ontological Argument - Without Modal Logic Rational AKD 82 34522 February 17, 2014 at 9:36 pm
Last Post: Angrboda
  The modal ontological argument - without modal logic proves atheism max-greece 15 5844 February 14, 2014 at 1:32 pm
Last Post: Alex K
  The Ontological Argument MindForgedManacle 18 6746 August 22, 2013 at 3:45 pm
Last Post: Jackalope



Users browsing this thread: 5 Guest(s)