SCOOTERTECHNO.COM

Quoted

Going to insut you? for what purpose?

You minimalized my life by postulating that participating in an argument over the internet brightens what apparently is a dull and wholly mundane existence. In actuality, nothing is further from the truth. This was done with nothing substantive to back it up; nor was it acknowledged that you yourself were equally culpable for the proliferation of spam; therefore I must assume it was thrown at me as a cheap and devious insult. So I should probably be the one to ask you that very question. Keep in mind that this all started because I highlighted a particular part of your post that was intellectually ridiculous. You have yet to defend your highly dubious claim either. I'd like you to tell me how enjoying the music of a band makes us immune to the emotions of sadness and despair. That is, after all, what you are suggesting.

Quoted

And In fact it was you (!) whoo caviled at my post in where I tried to encourage that guy who felt f_cking upset.

So handing out disingenuous advice is going to alleviate his distress? Come to think of it, for someone who blindly puts his faith in a supernatural deity without the slightest bit of evidence to support its existence, it's really no surprise that you've gotten yourself into the business of distorting the truth about so many different things. Incidentally, which 'God' deprived me of my 'sense of tact'? Was it Zues? Apollo? Thor? Or any other the thousands of defunct deities that mankind has invented since the dawn of our species?

Incidentally, this is coming from someone formally religious.

Quoted

When I listen to Scooter I get energized and on the assunption of your words, you, listening to the band, think they are "a load of horse manure" .

Where did I say that listening to Scooter's music elicits images of horse excrement? Again, my initial rebuttal was directed at a particular highlighted bit of text from your post addressed to The KLF; which is concisely chastising the infantilism inherent in its supposition. How you've managed to link that to how I feel when listening to a favourite band of mine is positively beyond me. There is absolutely no logical pathway to explain how you mysteriously drew such an irrelevant and way off the point conclusion. In a nutshell, Scooter induces relatable feelings of euphoria and excitement. Something that we all understand, or else why would we be here?

Quoted

If I'm wrong, why then did you laugh at my opinion? I know why: you are simply a bully. Sad, but true. Sorry.

You're entitled to your opinions. But just because you're granted that luxury, it doesn't make you any less immune to criticism. Sometimes we all have to justify something we've said. If we didn't express ourselves at every opportunity, this wouldn't be much of a forum. Forums are spaces where parties can discuss and debate certain topics. Inevitably, disagreement will sometimes escalate-- but that's just the way it is. And for the record, I didn't actually laugh. The smiley emoticon was a just an exaggeration to how I truly reacted. I felt that the comment you made was very absurd for someone of your calibre. And indeed, I'm flabbergasted that you haven't picked up on its obvious falseness either. We all make mistakes.

I love Scooter. But, as someone who's been through quite bit in life, I've cried a fair few times. Doesn't this annihilate your theory? And I think it's safe to say that many of us go through emotional stages in our lives. These experiences originate from all sorts of things. One's musical preference is hardly going to eradicate these human ailments, is it? Let's just be realistic.

And I'm certainly no bully. I'm very friendly and approachable as a matter of fact. Besides, I'm like 5'4. I'm very small. I don't get alot of bullying done. And again, you're making claims that have little or no substance and generally just making things worse.

Nekholm, I was being Sarcastic Out Loud!!!

You aint the sharpest tool in the box now, are you?

Me and my friend are pissing ourselves laughing at most of you, plain people

It wasnt the least bit funny. When being sarcastic it oughta have a note thrown in the mix

Fantastic post, Nic.


On another note, I've debated this Imre -SP- in the same-sex marriage thread and was highly disappointed with his inability to argue an effective case. He conceded that LGBT people should be entitled to the same rights as heterosexual couples when it comes to the institution of marriage, but ineffectually tried to argue that LGBT couples be prohibited from adopting children. Much of his case carried the stench of obnoxiousness. His efforts were continuously marked with intellectual cowardice, with his posts failing to reasonably rebut any of the points to which contradicted and challenged his rather silly unsupported justification (if you can call it that) to be discriminatory and prejudicial. It was literally a conversational exchange whereby he was making statements without tackling any of the points to which he presupposed to be supportive of his claims. In other words, his entire case was predicated on the Iron Age dogmatism. Without evidence, he nevertheless asserted that adoption from gay parents was a negative thing. I also recollect a few unnecessary anecdotes. One of them centred around him trying to take the moral high ground, suggesting that he'd disagree with these people that would apparently insidiously take the life of someone because of their sexual orientation. But, amusingly, all this was negated when poorly attempting to argue against commited parents wanting to start a family. Imre -SP-, would deny them that right. Why? Yep. Beats me.


More to the point, Imre -SP- resorts to posting images for he lacks the intellect and creativity to contribute anything meaningfully worthwhile. And in light of his pitiful efforts in trying to combat reason and justice sheds him in a rather circus-like light. It would have been far more honourable to admitting to defeat, as opposed to cowering away knowing full well your argument lacked substance or evidence to support it. We must not lose sight of the fact that Imre -SP-, from a perspective of reason, who got absolostely oblierated by logical inference, still arrogantly claims that this place looks " kinda like the circus of fools sometimes". What a bloody rich thing to say coming from you!

I think using a playful or humorous image in a discussion is only justifiable when it's truly warranted. Besides, the sites that you suggested that I familiarize myself with aren't utilized or planned to have been established within the same intention. Scootertechno.com/forum is just that; a forum. A forum is a place where parties from anywhere on the globe can converge in one place to discuss a myriad of different topics. It isn't at all helpful to deviously add images here and there for no other reason other than to presumably get a few cheap laughs. The argument that is transpiring here doesn't need people randomly injecting bits of irrelevant humour. Well, if we are to maintain some coherency. Despite this thread being opened by a person that revels in the attention of those he deems inferior to him (a truly interesting paradox that I'm sure he hasn't noticed yet), a debate is nevertheless taking place. If you find it objectionable and are unwilling to defend your proclamations, you'd be wiser to just leave.

Additionally, I found it yet again remarkable that you say the following; "this forum looks kinda like the circus of fools sometimes", when guilty of posting images fit for the humour of the prepubescent persuasion! It's not just not on. If you were to say something truly relevant to the topic, I would have praised you for your contribution. Our debate in the same-sex marriage thread, however, shows me you're unable to sustain an argument in any reasonable or logical sense at all. You were asking me to just trust and accept your opinion... Why should I? What exactly entitles you to this demanded special respect? You should be just as accountable and open to defend your position as everyone else. I don't want to imagine a place where people are forbidden to express themselves and respectfully and professionally call people out for certain actions that warrent rebuttal and sensible criticism. Unless claims are so absurd as to require reductio ad absurdum. Scooterjeka's comment certainly cried for a good dose of correction.

Guys I dont think any of you can argue well enough. Actually the more you argue in a plain, classic way, the less effective it is.

"Speak with impact, or dont speak at all" Jay Abraham

Make more pauses, use new paragraphs, take a look at the bigger picture. Hit where unexpected

Learn to see through another people's minds, try standing in their shoes. Get in their reality and hit them from there.

Learn to observe situations like you're not involved. Or learn having a few aspects of a case before jumping in.

Its not even interesting for me anymore. Whatever I do, I already know how you're going to react before I do it.

May, you are losing your audience when using big words. The smartest people on the world use everyday words, so their message is clear.
A smart person knows how to express themselves using everyday words without those words being able to be misinterpreted.

Honestly, I think there were a number of transgressions committed.

Quoted

And though I'm completely tolerant against gay people (be them male or female), everyone should admit it: even if it's a harmless thing, it's against nature. (plz don't bother bringing up examples among animals)

A clear and open denial to reject evidence that contradicts your assertion that homosexuality is unnatural. That falls under the definition of a delightful little term called dogmatism.

Quoted

Well, I don't agree with homosexual people adopting children. I don't want anyone to agree with me, and of course I don't want anyone to change his/her way of thought. Actually I don't even want to change the World one bit. I just said my own opinion. You deal with it

Again, more unequivocal dogmatism.

While you certainly didn't say that we should blindly accept your opinion in the name of an imagined authority, it came across that way when you kept persistently neglecting to provide the slightest bit of evidence to substantiate your assertions. It was literally a case of you saying that I'm the ultimate authority in this, and therefore need not back any of it up. That to most people would imply you were dodging that bit of responsibility and subtly admitting that you were unwilling to change your mind. You also failed to provide us with any clear arguable points that we could have challenged-- leaving us unable to sufficiently debate with you in any fluent way. And even if that interpretation of mine is incorrect, and please feel free to disagree with me, you still explicitly said that you didn't want to see any evidence that negated your unnatural argument. What other impression is one supposed to get from this?

I do not tolerate any gay talk here.