Ontological Disproof of God

[negatio]

brilliant

No, Kevin, you misquote yourself, you originally used the term 'elegant'. It appears as if all you can do is hurl insult at me; what the fuck ?! Were you saying the writing was elegant, or not elegant ? That is your clarity for you....

Astreja No, only just when our entire American/World legal system is predicated upon the model of an exhalted [sic] high placed jurist passing judgement upon others via an ontologically nonsensical language of law. 

What are you on about?  One does not need a god, or even a god-myth, to have a functional legal code.

---

Of course, I can't help appreciate the irony of someone who claims they're too intelligent to clarify and condense what they mean in the same breath as patting themselves for how much studying they've done themselves.

Why tart up one's language to make it smugly incomprehensible, unless the underlying ideas are pure bollocks and the author wants it to be incomprehensible to hide that fatal flaw?

Obvious troll is obvious..but you gotta let it play out.  Just fyi, this will have to continue for about 500 pages before it even get's in the running for best troll.  32 down, 468 to go.  Are you committed?

Such is the task before you OP. 

Oh yeah, very obvious. He overplayed his hand with the "I take it to mean that you think my writing is brilliant, but then you insulted me by rewriting my thoughts." Someone so brilliant should be able to understand what I meant - that his writing style is ridiculously terrible (do you even paragraph, bro?), and it stands in the way of any content he's purportedly trying to convey - given I wrote it without flourish.

Similarly with the excuse of posting his screed on a random internet forum as a way of archiving. Go to Staples and print out a physical copy. Get a memory stick and save a digital copy to it. Put both somewhere safe, like a safety deposit box. Put how you want both copies to be handled upon your death in your will.

I have to admit, butchering the quote system is a new one for me.

---

brilliant

No, Kevin, you misquote yourself, you originally used the term 'elegant'.  It appears as if all you can do is hurl insult at me; what the fuck ?!  Were you saying the writing was elegant, or not elegant ?  That is your clarity for you....

What are you on about?  One does not need a god, or even a god-myth, to have a functional legal code.

---

Why tart up one's language to make it smugly incomprehensible, unless the underlying ideas are pure bollocks and the author wants it to be incomprehensible to hide that fatal flaw?

Oh yeah, very obvious.  He overplayed his hand with the "I take it to mean that you think my writing is brilliant, but then you insulted me by rewriting my thoughts."  Someone so brilliant should be able to understand what I meant - that his writing style is ridiculously terrible (do you even paragraph, bro?), and it stands in the way of any content he's purportedly trying to convey - given I wrote it without flourish.

Similarly with the excuse of posting his screed on a random internet forum as a way of archiving.  Go to Staples and print out a physical copy.  Get a memory stick and save a digital copy to it.  Put both somewhere safe, like a safety deposit box.  Put how you want both copies to be handled upon your death in your will.

I have to admit, butchering the quote system is a new one for me.

Oh, you're still going on about how I must be a troll !?  And, Khemikal has joined in on that nonsense !  Kevin is simply harassing me, on and on, what bullshit. He's up to attempting to sow contention the minute I ask him to come back into my thread ?!  Kevin's a dangerous dude who knows only one approach to me via argumentum ad hominem...Kevin has just exhausted himself in some mafia game, and now he is pulling his mafia bull on me ! Very Funny. Negatio.