*You're

>sees a typo of someone else
>doesn't see his own typo

: I have no spcific reason why I said that

*specific

O SHEIT MEIN NEINGAR ^ get ownd
^

Edited 8/18/2017 16:50:50

>sees a typo of someone else
>doesn't see his own typo

No one is perfect. However that doesnt mean I should not try to make the world better.
I sincerely thank you for pointing out.

People are hungry for spelling and grammar mistakes.

Edited 8/18/2017 17:26:42

"What has Trump ever done wrong? In what way is he not perfect and America's savior? How is not making america great again?"

"LOL"

"You have not proven anything or answered my questions in detail with citations and court rulings! That means he has never done anything wrong! He is perfect and America's savior! He is making america great again!"

"LOOOOOOL"

"That is not proof or court rulings! Proof or GTFO!"

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

People are hungry for spelling and grammar mistakes.

I see that you changed your link. I found the library card song pretty funny.

Earth is flat.

: Proof?

Let's try it with an equivalent claim:

"2+2=4"

"Proof?"

I don't need to prove that for it to be true. It is true.

I never claimed I have proven anything. This is not a peer reviewed academic journal, I have no duty to provide proof. I have a duty to be right and I am.

Edited 8/18/2017 19:02:02

^in which case your statement is an assumption that appeals to you due to your beliefs.. anyways. no one wants you to elaborate the proof. you could simply quote someone else who already did the job.

And people said NIGHT was a terrible troll...

in which case your statement is an assumption that appeals to you due to your beliefs.. anyways.

No, it's a statement of fact for which I have not provided proof.

I never challenged your argument. I never said you were wrong because you did not prove Trump is an idiot.

If you're not saying I'm wrong, we have no business to transact. I'm only interested in discussing whether I'm right or wrong.

"I told you so. See? I was right and you were wrong. I made a past statement that is now legitimized by something dumb Trump did recently

Correct. That's what I'm saying. And it's true.

I don't care if you think I have some obligation to more clearly explain what I'm referring to. I deny your authority to force me to state things which are obvious and objectively true.

I never claimed I have proven anything. This is not a peer reviewed academic journal, I have no duty to provide proof. I have a duty to be right and I am.


I'm only interested in discussing whether I'm right or wrong.


state things which are obvious and objectively true.

Wait, something is wrong here

I'm only interested in discussing whether I'm right or wrong.

I have a duty to be right and I am


I'm only interested in discussing whether I'm right or wrong.

obvious and objectively true


I'm only interested in discussing whether I'm right or wrong.

no duty to provide proof


I'm only interested in discussing whether I'm right or wrong.

I am right

so, let me get this straight:
You make a thread with the purpose of debating with people on whether your statement is correct or not. You then proceed to claim your statement is unfallible and objectively correct, without you requiring to point out anything about it?

Just admit you are here to whine. Stop being a liar.

EDIT:(for I failed to address your reply)

I don't care if you think I have some obligation to more clearly explain what I'm referring to. I deny your authority to force me to state things which are obvious and objectively true.

fair enough. That's not going to stop me from calling you an idiot for it though.

Edited 8/19/2017 00:39:13

Let's try it with an equivalent claim:

"2+2=4"

"Proof?"

I don't need to prove that for it to be true. It is true.

I never claimed I have proven anything. This is not a peer reviewed academic journal, I have no duty to provide proof. I have a duty to be right and I am.

By that logic I can claim that "4+6=7" and it is true since I don´t have to provide proof for
it to be right.
I can claim that >Monarchism is far-left winged< and that >WW2 never happened<.
How can you proove me to be wrong?-I could just believe in it and keep doing so by refusing all data that would falsify my claims.

If you're not saying I'm wrong, we have no business to transact. I'm only interested in discussing whether I'm right or wrong.

**If you´re not saying I´m left, [...]. [...] whether I´m right or left.

Edited 8/19/2017 00:23:26

Why are you all feeding this fool? Downvote such a poor thread already.

Edited 8/19/2017 02:23:19

I can claim that "4+6=7"

Yes, you can. You'd be wrong, but you can claim it.

it is true since I don´t have to provide proof for it to be right.

This only works if you begin with a premise that is actually true. That isn't true, so it's a non-sequitur.

How can you proove me to be wrong?

I can prove that 4+6 is not 7. I don't need your proof to do that. All I need is your claim.

You can also do that with a controversial claim. Such as:

"Donald Trump is making America great again."

"I don't have to provide proof of this for it to be true. It just is true."

There is no requirement for you to prove anything to state your opinion in this way. And it's true or false regardless of whether you attempt to prove it.

Edited 8/19/2017 03:04:04

You make a thread with the purpose of debating with people on whether your statement is correct or not. You then proceed to claim your statement is unfallible and objectively correct, without you requiring to point out anything about it?

Correct.

Anybody who has read this forum for more than a week knows my complaints about Donald Trump and anybody who pays attention to the news knows I've been proven right. I have no need or reason to spell all of that out. This is just weird pedantry you are using as a vehicle to personally attack me.

Edited 8/19/2017 03:16:45

Donald Trump is disgusting, it's already known that Trump is a stupid asshole.

anybody who pays attention to the news knows I've been proven right.

What you call 'news' is actually 'media.' All medias have agendas to uphold, and will not hesitate to cut out what they need to paint any story in their own preferred light. That is called 'half-truth,' and that is hardly news.

Trump himself has put idiots into positions of power, wanted to put a temporary bar on immigration from 7 countries, ordered a MOAB to be dropped on an ISIS operations site with permission from Pakistan's government, sent out some tweets, and didn't choose the best words to express what he wanted to get across regarding Charlotteville. There are a good number of presidents who have done worse and had no risk of being impeached and removed from office.

Oh no, you are right, all I wanted is to call you an idiot all along! My cover has been blown, I must be a secret Trump supporter! After all, the world revolves around you and everyone is out to get you, right?

Sure, my first comment about the title might have been dumb, but my last point still stands:

That you cannot make a conversation when according to you there is nothing to say and you are absoloutely correct.

"you can still debate while thinking you are absoloutely correct"

No one can debate you on this. What exactly do you want? According to you, whatever anyone says to try and prove you wrong is objectively wrong and you don't need to say why, so what is the point?