Re: Answer to Jmpet..long
Jmpet;
Not that I am generally inclined to so, but I did go and look over your supposed proofs. Other than say, “you are a fake , because I have proven it.†You have not really sad anything other than your now trademark, “Shoo.â€
I'll go through your past few entries since you showed up all high and mighty and answer them in turn.
You popped your head in and said, “Shoo,†quite rudely, I might add.
I merely replied that if you don’t like what I am saying don’t read it.
You replied immediately (illustrating that you are not bored with me, or you were looking for a fight) that you’ve “taken down much smarter people†and that I want your supposed ever-growing list to be ignored. I can only surmise that your “wanting it to be ignored†comment stemmed from my comment of “stop tallying your list.†This amuses me, as any person could clearly understand that I was simply commenting on the fact that you say you are so bored, you’ve heard it all before, but yet find the inclination to make a list that you do not show. You accuse me of parrying focus and intent with ten-dollar words, but twist text to your own devices as well. If you want to badger holes in my prose, then do so, but don’t mutate obvious meaning to suit your own desires, that only shows your lack of the promethean (and yes, I used that word, in context, just to carry over to the next points)
So again I deign to respond to you and then you make that quaint comment about “speaking in all ten dollar words or using some wacky and annoying made up slangâ€. Before I move on to your incessant jumbling of your own ideas, I would like to point out that ALL slang is made up…in fact, all words are made up! To somebody not in your culture, any slang would seem odd. Just because you neither like nor appreciate it, does not make any less valid when I come from. And as far as myself using a florid manner of prose, I’ve already made comments about the general poor grasp of the language in this era, poor typing skills not withstanding.
You then command that I speak like a normal person. This is amusing to me because later on, in another entry, you put forth the fact that I do not talk like I’m not from this era as proof positive that I am not a time traveler. So your assumption is that a person, any person not just me, traveling to an era should not have a total grasp of the language. That’s interesting; maybe I should tell Dr. Franklin that we should speak in Esperanto or something, that would surely help us blend in!
You then attack my answers stating, in so many words, that if I am asked a ten-word question that my answer should be summarily as brief. So if I ask you “Why is the sky blue?†You should be answer that in four monosyllable words, correct? You then also state that my answers have no real answer in them but then go on to state that you do not read them. So how do you know? I imagine that you’ll respond with more brow-beating type answers akin to “you’re a fake and it is obvious so I don’t have to read your replies.â€
So you then go on, in the same entry and accuse me of being a surfer-dude when I feel like it and then turning myself in Merriam Webster when that suits me. That’s amusing. You expect me to not talk like you do, but call foul hen I do not, but yet if I do speak like you, then it is proof of fakery.
You then state that I have made no predictions. I started counting, but got quickly bored with it. I have made roughly 30-40 predictions, but you wouldn’t know that because although you do not have the time to read what I’ve said: you do have the time make up figures and then show off your lack of proficiency with the very subject that you failingly claim to have debunked.
In your next entry, you ignore me, personally, completely, and then jump on everyone that tells you, in so many words, to get off your high-horse. Again you state that I am worthless and weak (a Twisted Sister reference for Recall there!), but refuse to do anything but give your opinion, and then follow it up with the “that’s why he must go.†Statement as if you are judge and jury.
You do then go on to attempt to redeem yourself by showing a bit of pseudo-respect in another cross-armed insult, the one about “ignoring everything that I cannot answer.†And then at least try to support it with something that Titorite wrote beforehand. Well, I hate to burst you on this, but I don’t read anything else here, I have no interest in it. You won’t believe me, but it is the truth.
Now finally! We finally get to your actual “debunking†. This is even more amusing. You’ve already admitted that you don’t read my entries, do you read your own?
You state: RULE #1, TIME TRAVELERS MUST BE CONSISTENT.
OK, let’s look at your picking out of my quotes.
Time divergences, alternate realities, other time strings: Only one time sting, only one universe, no divergences: I state this three times in your examples, and do not state anything to the contrary other than the obvious hyperbole in the 100% comment about divergence, which is obviously stating that I have no rule to judge a fictitious concept by. So there is no inconsistency there. Yet you claim that this is not consistent?
You then add your view on my comment about time being a fluid like an ocean, and no matter what you do to remove pieces of it, it flows back into itself without a notable change to the rest of the full body. Shall I recap that for you without the imagery? Time and space is fluid. It all exists in the same vessel. No matter how you move the particles about, they still are, and they still are in the same vessel.
You then harp on the 9-11 attacks in New York. Let’s check my track record there, shall we?
“almost impossible to change in any notable way†This was a comment about the imposed value of T-mass. Stating that no matter what was done, including your pocket full of quarters argument, that the event, or something akin to it, would ultimately have happened. It ma not have happened on 9-11, but it would surely have happened. You may avert a singular event, but depending on the T-mass, that doesn’t mean that you averted the actuality in another form. Consider it like a ball falling from the sky. You might bat it back up into the sky, and then again, and again, but sooner or later, that ball will find terra. So on that first note, able to deflect or stop, is a resounding NO.
You then bring up another mention of it as I’m talking about available resources. This is good for your ill-thought argument, but it doesn’t change the truth. The organization I work for has better things to do than to concentrate our limited resources on something that is almost impossible to change. So again, you get a resounding NO.
Then I state the most probable outcome of curtailing the attacks and you find that to be repulsive BS! Well I’m glad that you can sit there in judgment and call me inhumane for stating the reality of obviousness. Just because the truth repulses you, does not make it any less true. Those that planned and made the attacks prepared for years; you cannot deny that. Cutting them off right before their moment of suicidal glory would have only made them thirsty not only for blood, but also for revenge. That would have made things worse, as well as give them more time to prepare a much more devastating attack. I’m sorry that you do not like the answer, but it is the true answer.
So again we have three examples of me saying what amounts to the same thing. Again you call this inconsistent.
Now when you read what the future in tomowhen is like, you call me inhumane and ask me why I’m not out to prevent all of this. You then say that you don’t care about me “hanging with my homies†(I had to ask somebody what this meant for clarification…talk about whacky and made-up slang). Wake up! This is what I am helping to do, prevent all of this. My part may not be a guns-a-blazing, up the irons, let loose the dogs of war, role, but at least I’m active and doing something to prevent this calamity. So who’s the inhumane one? Me, trying to help to avert it all (and more than likely leaving myself orphaned in time with no past and no home if we succeed before I get fragged), or you sitting there, doing nothing, in judgment?
So let me tally the score here:
Darwin: 8 for 8, jmpet: 0 for 8….I was going to say you stick to the “shoo†quote, but I see that in your next paragraph you simply say:
“step up or shoo.â€
I did step up. I also stated more than few times that I doubt that anyone here will believe me.
You then do another entry, just to show off a bit, and state that I am going to make 2 more entries, because I have been debunked and that you are the slayer of the Darwin Dragon. Make you proud does it? I don’t see why. It is obvious that you consider meself told. Well, you may now consider yourself told. You have done nothing other than to illustrate that you feel that if I say the same thing, three times, that you feel that I am not being consistent.
So you telling me to “shoo†was the easy way out? I call it a tie!
So I thought that we were done here…but NO!
Of course, I must admit guilt in this as I just couldn’t resist the temptation that you put forth.
So you pointed out my most glaring inconsistencies, did you?
So let’s look at that tally again shall we?
One universe, one time string, no divergence: I say that three time in your examples of my “flaws†and never state to the contrary at all.
9-11 attacks: Nearly impossible to counter, we cannot counter it even if we tried to, if ‘somebody’ else were to try and counter it it would make no difference or probably make it worse: Three times again on the same line.
So saying things the same over and over again each time I’m asked (of course allowing for whatever focus the inquirer puts on it) is not consistent?
Hmmm….let me see! The sky is Blue, the sky is Blue, The sky is BLUE!!!! You’re right! Those three statement are inconsistent.
Jmpet, you’ve proven nothing other than inability to prove your own points here. I’m sure that you’ll come up with a retort driven not by observation, but only fueled by your desire to “put me in my placeâ€. And that’s fine with me. I can only restate that there is only one time line, divergences do not happen, 9-11 in it’s full form would be nearly impossible to divert for a plethora of reasons that we call T-mass, and that the future sucks and we are trying to change it here in the past, so many ways.
If my each and every comment is not “See Spot Run†you seem to have no recourse other than to demand pictures and proof. This is, again, laughable. If you must know, I am really whom I claim to be, and I am actually here for a distinct reason that I have hinted at, but never outright said. I think that Pamela, perhaps (even in her skepticism or because of it) might understand, and a few others, but you’re too busy trying to show everyone that Noah’s a lunar that you don’t see the flood coming…or as you pasters say, can’t see the forest for the trees.
You also, I noted, popped in a few hours after I said that I am going to be gone for a few days and then accused me of ignoring you, or your accusations. I now feel almost fortunate that the trip didn't happen.
I shall put this in terms that you can understand, that being speaking like a “normal person†in this era: GET REAL!
So if call somebody on the telephone and they are not in to pick up the phone, do you come to the conclusion that they either do not live there or do not exist because they didn’t jump at your command?
If you are going to stand so high an dmighty and claim me fraudulent, you should at least come up with something diferernt than calling three of the same all different.
