Ontological Disproof of God

[negatio]

than to risk having it criticized directly.

The only person who has genuinely attempted to criticize the OP is Jormungandr.  Everyone else attacks my person, not my position.  It is incredibly ugly what some persons have said to me here; not one shred of civility is exhibited by many, appearing to have absolutely zero manners, or, basic respect, irregardless of what the person addressing me may think, whether insultingly thinking I must be enacting some enormous original project to troll, or whatever; persons who insult me are trolling me, the way I see it...Negatio.
Now, I am failing to understand why, when this quote came up on the thread, it did not show So and So Wrote ?! That is happening constantly, and, honestly, I have no idea why !  Negatio.

[Losty]

You with all your fancy words and then you go and say “irregardless”. Fucking irregardless? Why? Why!? 😩

[Fidel_Castronaut]

responding without quoting will not alert them,

Wow, thank you so much for such a beautiful attempt to help. I was told by a member that I can simply click on Reply, and the BB code is automatically set into play, and I just type my reply in the box below where the quote appears.  That is precisely what I have been doing, and, thereby I thought I was making progress.

Now I think I hear you saying that I always have to quote by clicking on Quote, and, using BB code, each and every time.
You clearly appear to be using "quote'' in at least two different senses, perhaps three senses, and, OP is being used in what appears to be different senses.  Thank you for explaining how I am being perceived by others, however, believe me, I am being authentically inept here, and am not attempting to mess with anyone's head, or, to surreptitiously troll.  Thanks a million. Negatio.

Not that you care I suspect but attempting to troll an administrator (poorly) will not end well for you.

You know very well that quoting me whilst taking out my handle from the BB code will create a quote tag without alerting me. (Un)fortunately it’s my job to read through the threads and siphon out the dross.

[negatio]

Losty, what was "so hard" about a Newbie trying to do what you see as so simple is, when the Newbie gets to "beneath the quote", whatever, or, wherever that was supposed to be, the normal figure-ground function of his consciousness cannot see the figure which you describe as "beneath the quote", for, as I now see, is a purely blank white space; so, the Newbie cannot, does not, see what you are talking about...user unfriendliness par excellence ! Negatio.

I don’t know why you’re responding to this old post that you’ve already previously responded to. But...it’s not really fair to say the site isn’t user friendly. Hundreds of people use it just fine. You’re the only person I have ever seen struggle with it this much. And I honestly can’t tell whether you’re faking not being able to quote as a part of your trolling. ! Losty.

Losty, then you are saying that it is not correct to respond to a quote more than once ?  For instance, I am in an interchange with Robvalue, and, I want to respond/quote his post repeatedly, else I cannot give him feedback and discuss his questions.  Right this moment I want to respond to him, and, wanting to do it right in the eyes of others...I admit I am both improving and progressively becoming more confused ! Why is it improper to reply to or to quote his post more than once ? Now, I do admit that what I have just written you appears to be some sort of intent to bug you, but it really is my true expression of my ongoing frustration. From what I read about trolling it is when a person causes discord among members, how do you correlate my ineptitude at quoting with causing discord among the members ?!Negatio.

Hmm...

My pro-tips for operating on this forum, OP. First is to accurately use the quotation function. I can see you’re able to edit posts quite easily, and indeed utilise common forum languages and shorthand (OP is an example), so I’m not sure why you’re unable to use this when the BB code is actually very simple and user friendly.

Not doing this is both frustrating for other members who are trying to communicate with you (responding without quoting will not alert them, and if you start cutting and moving text and not adding in additional quotation tags it stymies the flow of your post at best and makes it unreadable at worst) and, to be frank, draws suspicion.

In addition, I’m not here to tell people how to write their posts, but from my long experience moderating and posting on a wide number of forums, people who refer to themselves in the 3rd person, and write in an overly verbose and tangential fashion, are often not genuine in their attempts at discourse. Again, I’m not here to tell you how to write, but the reaction you will (continue) to get from posters is one of frustration and annoyance as people will find it very difficult to decipher what it is you’re trying to say (and that’s not due to a lack of comepetencies on their part, many of our members are very well read in a wide variety of disciplines as you’ll see from perusing previous threads). People want to talk to other members, but if it feels like they’re having a conversation with a poorly programmed chat bot, they’ll soon lose interest.

Those are my pro tips - take them or leave them.

OP can mean original post or original poster. So they’re either referring to your first post or to you specifically.

Yes, thank you.  Why is a box with KevinM1's "I am not a troll." constantly appearing in some sort of sub-ground on my thread, from August 21st ??? Negatio.

---

I can see you’re able to edit posts quite easily, and indeed utilise common forum languages and shorthand (OP is an example), so I’m not sure why you’re unable to use this

You lost me at "this", what this ?  Negatio.

---

Hmm...

My pro-tips for operating on this forum, OP. First is to accurately use the quotation function. I can see you’re able to edit posts quite easily, and indeed utilise common forum languages and shorthand (OP is an example), so I’m not sure why you’re unable to use this when the BB code is actually very simple and user friendly.

Not doing this is both frustrating for other members who are trying to communicate with you (responding without quoting will not alert them, and if you start cutting and moving text and not adding in additional quotation tags it stymies the flow of your post at best and makes it unreadable at worst) and, to be frank, draws suspicion.

In addition, I’m not here to tell people how to write their posts, but from my long experience moderating and posting on a wide number of forums, people who refer to themselves in the 3rd person, and write in an overly verbose and tangential fashion, are often not genuine in their attempts at discourse. Again, I’m not here to tell you how to write, but the reaction you will (continue) to get from posters is one of frustration and annoyance as people will find it very difficult to decipher what it is you’re trying to say (and that’s not due to a lack of comepetencies on their part, many of our members are very well read in a wide variety of disciplines as you’ll see from perusing previous threads). People want to talk to other members, but if it feels like they’re having a conversation with a poorly programmed chat bot, they’ll soon lose interest.

Those are my pro tips - take them or leave them.

OP can mean original post or original poster. So they’re either referring to your first post or to you specifically.

Yes, thank you.  Why is a box with KevinM1's "I am not a troll." constantly appearing in some sort of sub-ground on my thread, from August 21st ??? Negatio.

---

I can see you’re able to edit posts quite easily, and indeed utilise common forum languages and shorthand (OP is an example), so I’m not sure why you’re unable to use this

You lost me at "this", what this ?  Negatio.

Wow, thank you so much for such a beautiful attempt to help. I was told by a member that I can simply click on Reply, and the BB code is automatically set into play, and I just type my reply in the box below where the quote appears.  That is precisely what I have been doing, and, thereby I thought I was making progress.

Now I think I hear you saying that I always have to quote by clicking on Quote, and, using BB code, each and every time.
You clearly appear to be using "quote'' in at least two different senses, perhaps three senses, and, OP is being used in what appears to be different senses.  Thank you for explaining how I am being perceived by others, however, believe me, I am being authentically inept here, and am not attempting to mess with anyone's head, or, to surreptitiously troll.  Thanks a million. Negatio.

Not that you care I suspect but attempting to troll an administrator (poorly) will not end well for you.

You know very well that quoting me whilst taking out my handle from the BB code will create a quote tag without alerting me. (Un)fortunately it’s my job to read through the threads and siphon out the dross.e 

 I most certainly am not purposely leaving out your name in order to troll an administrator ! I totally forgot that it should be [quote= Losty].  Truly I did forget that.
I will restudy the teachings others have sent me, and read the rules Pandemoniam is referring to. Now, something is not going to end well for me because you are absolutely mistakenly convinced that I am purposely trolling an administrator.  I do apologize, that is not the case. I am simply making the mistake of forgetting about the = author.  Sincerely, Negatio.

[negatio]

Remember that you can select "preview post", to view how your reply is going to look. This avoids posting something in a messed-up state, giving you the chance to correct it first. (It keeps everything you've typed ready to edit, or to submit if you are happy with the results.)

Yes, Robvalue, That is a treacherous space, where just one slip has lost me hours of writing. I do not go there at all now.  Negatio.

Hmm...

My pro-tips for operating on this forum, OP. First is to accurately use the quotation function. I can see you’re able to edit posts quite easily, and indeed utilise common forum languages and shorthand (OP is an example), so I’m not sure why you’re unable to use this when the BB code is actually very simple and user friendly.

Not doing this is both frustrating for other members who are trying to communicate with you (responding without quoting will not alert them, and if you start cutting and moving text and not adding in additional quotation tags it stymies the flow of your post at best and makes it unreadable at worst) and, to be frank, draws suspicion.

In addition, I’m not here to tell people how to write their posts, but from my long experience moderating and posting on a wide number of forums, people who refer to themselves in the 3rd person, and write in an overly verbose and tangential fashion, are often not genuine in their attempts at discourse. Again, I’m not here to tell you how to write, but the reaction you will (continue) to get from posters is one of frustration and annoyance as people will find it very difficult to decipher what it is you’re trying to say (and that’s not due to a lack of comepetencies on their part, many of our members are very well read in a wide variety of disciplines as you’ll see from perusing previous threads). People want to talk to other members, but if it feels like they’re having a conversation with a poorly programmed chat bot, they’ll soon lose interest.

Those are my pro tips - take them or leave them.

OP can mean original post or original poster. So they’re either referring to your first post or to you specifically.

Yes, thank you.  Why is a box with KevinM1's "I am not a troll." constantly appearing in some sort of sub-ground on my thread, from August 21st ??? Negatio.

---

I can see you’re able to edit posts quite easily, and indeed utilise common forum languages and shorthand (OP is an example), so I’m not sure why you’re unable to use this

You lost me at "this", what this ?  Negatio.

[LastPoet]

I will get an english dictionary. BRB.

[Whateverist]

I don’t know why you’re responding to this old post that you’ve already previously responded to. But...it’s not really fair to say the site isn’t user friendly. Hundreds of people use it just fine. You’re the only person I have ever seen struggle with it this much. And I honestly can’t tell whether you’re faking not being able to quote as a part of your trolling. ! Losty.

Losty, then you are saying that it is not correct to respond to a quote more than once ?  For instance, I am in an interchange with Robvalue, and, I want to respond/quote his post repeatedly, else I cannot give him feedback and discuss his questions.  Right this moment I want to respond to him, and, wanting to do it right in the eyes of others...I admit I am both improving and progressively becoming more confused ! Why is it improper to reply to or to quote his post more than once ? Now, I do admit that what I have just written you appears to be some sort of intent to bug you, but it really is my true expression of my ongoing frustration. From what I read about trolling it is when a person causes discord among members, how do you correlate my ineptitude at quoting with causing discord among the members ?!Negatio.

Yes, thank you.  Why is a box with KevinM1's "I am not a troll." constantly appearing in some sort of sub-ground on my thread, from August 21st ??? Negatio.

---

You lost me at "this", what this ?  Negatio.

---

Yes, thank you.  Why is a box with KevinM1's "I am not a troll." constantly appearing in some sort of sub-ground on my thread, from August 21st ??? Negatio.

---

You lost me at "this", what this ?  Negatio.

Not that you care I suspect but attempting to troll an administrator (poorly) will not end well for you.

You know very well that quoting me whilst taking out my handle from the BB code will create a quote tag without alerting me. (Un)fortunately it’s my job to read through the threads and siphon out the dross.e 

 I most certainly am not purposely leaving out your name in order to troll an administrator ! I totally forgot that it should be

.  Truly I did forget that.
I will restudy the teachings others have sent me, and read the rules Pandemoniam is referring to. Now, something is not going to end well for me because you are absolutely mistakenly convinced that I am purposely trolling an administrator.  I do apologize, that is not the case. I am simply making the mistake of forgetting about the = author.  Sincerely, Negatio.

Remember that you can select "preview post", to view how your reply is going to look. This avoids posting something in a messed-up state, giving you the chance to correct it first. (It keeps everything you've typed ready to edit, or to submit if you are happy with the results.)

Yes, Robvalue, That is a treacherous space, where just one slip has lost me hours of writing. I do not go there at all now.  Negatio.

Yes, thank you.  Why is a box with KevinM1's "I am not a troll." constantly appearing in some sort of sub-ground on my thread, from August 21st ??? Negatio.

---

You lost me at "this", what this ?  Negatio.

Whateverist no like when you quote half the forum in one post and then have almost nothing to say to any of them.  See what I mean?

[negatio]

It would seem characters such as Yahweh can't exist as literally written, because they are not internally consistent. How it could work that a real being contradicts itself, I don't know.

The only way it could exist is by allowing deviation from the text, and by doing so, enough deviation can produce a mundane and very possible being. The remaining question would be how much deviation is "allowed", and whether you can produce a deity within that restriction. I don't think there's a sensible answer to that, as we're already way past blurring the line between reality and fantasy at this point.

Robvalue.  Your concern appears to revolve around my attempting to disprove what appear to be mere literary characters when, no one now knows for sure whether these Biblical literary characters once existed, in fact, on the face of the earth.  The central thing is that for thousands of years now we have worshipped these putative deities as God, and we mistakenly think that the law exercised by Yahweh, Jehovah, and Christ is a language efficient to determine our actions.  I am merely saying language of law is not an efficacy efficient to determine men to action, that these gods mistakenly think their laws are efficient to determine men to action, or, to refrain from acting; and, that via showing themselves to be mistaken, these gods show that they are not indeed gods.  My "ontological" basis for proffering my position is the ontological structure of the man the gods are universally believed to have created. It matters not at all that they may or may not be fictions, we have  believed what the fictions have told us, and, the fictions are wrong. Humans have structured their civilizations for thousands of years now based upon an incorrect view of what we are, as originally presented by these gods, and, that has led, leads to our having an unhappy/foibled civilization.  Negatio.

Hmm...

My pro-tips for operating on this forum, OP. First is to accurately use the quotation function. I can see you’re able to edit posts quite easily, and indeed utilise common forum languages and shorthand (OP is an example), so I’m not sure why you’re unable to use this when the BB code is actually very simple and user friendly.

Not doing this is both frustrating for other members who are trying to communicate with you (responding without quoting will not alert them, and if you start cutting and moving text and not adding in additional quotation tags it stymies the flow of your post at best and makes it unreadable at worst) and, to be frank, draws suspicion.

In addition, I’m not here to tell people how to write their posts, but from my long experience moderating and posting on a wide number of forums, people who refer to themselves in the 3rd person, and write in an overly verbose and tangential fashion, are often not genuine in their attempts at discourse. Again, I’m not here to tell you how to write, but the reaction you will (continue) to get from posters is one of frustration and annoyance as people will find it very difficult to decipher what it is you’re trying to say (and that’s not due to a lack of comepetencies on their part, many of our members are very well read in a wide variety of disciplines as you’ll see from perusing previous threads). People want to talk to other members, but if it feels like they’re having a conversation with a poorly programmed chat bot, they’ll soon lose interest.

Those are my pro tips - take them or leave them.

OP can mean original post or original poster. So they’re either referring to your first post or to you specifically.

Yes, thank you.  Why is a box with KevinM1's "I am not a troll." constantly appearing in some sort of sub-ground on my thread, from August 21st ??? Negatio.

---

I can see you’re able to edit posts quite easily, and indeed utilise common forum languages and shorthand (OP is an example), so I’m not sure why you’re unable to use this

You lost me at "this", what this ?  Negatio.

[Losty]

Stop quoting things you’re not even responding to. I’ve got 3 alerts here for nothing.

[emjay]

Stop quoting things you’re not even responding to. I’ve got 3 alerts here for nothing.

I think he's multiquoting without meaning to. And I think there's a bug in that process anyway, since it sometimes leaves one of the posts in the multiquote list selected even after posting the post with the quotes in, when it should be completely clearing that list. So I've had the same problem several times in the past as what seems to be happening for him; of it dragging around a single old post of mine because it didn't properly clear the multiquote list after posting.