(July 26, 2012 at 4:36 pm)genkaus Wrote:(July 25, 2012 at 5:18 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: How you got that is beyond me.
Clearly, since plain logic is beyond you.
Unfortunately your 'plain' logic consists of I am right as I am right. People who want some form of credibility commonly outline their position.
(July 25, 2012 at 5:18 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: I never realised this was only about the points you were making.
Quote:That is only one of the things you don't realize.
This statement admits you don't consider what I say, so I wonder why you're responding at all. How you claim to address any points or questions I have made, will remain a mystery inside your own head. Even if they do come out they still will remain a mystery.
(July 25, 2012 at 5:18 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: If you claim that only science can determine what reality is, and science measures, then....
Quote:Fallacy of composition. Science measures does not mean that science can only measure.
Comprehension fail and strawman. Where did I say science can "only" measure? You claimed the ability to measure is non-sensical. If you have a point I would suggest making it.
(July 25, 2012 at 5:18 am)Selliedjoup Wrote: I asked you to outline what you think, if I got it wrong. You didn't do it, just reiterating that I got it wrong.
Quote:Read the post again if you want to know what really think.You have written several posts all of which say very little. It you feel one of these posts perfectly illustrates your position, that's up to you to highlight and not for me to assume.
