Quote :

"you want me to post all the PMs I sent you and the responses? all asking 1 simple, straightforward question...which was...What did you major in at State? Yet you refuse to answer? Why refuse to answer such a simple question? "

9/27/2006 11:16:15 AM

where do you work, treetwista?

9/27/2006 11:16:35 AM

I don't know, Tree. Why don't you do some speculating?

9/27/2006 11:17:41 AM

in Charlotte

9/27/2006 11:17:49 AM

no shit, what company?

9/27/2006 11:18:05 AM

a construction company

thats the field i work in

i'm not scared to tell you the field i work/study in

9/27/2006 11:19:45 AM

that wasnt the question. 1 simple, straightforward question

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 11:21 AM. Reason : d]

9/27/2006 11:20:34 AM

that was the question i asked your boyfriend gamecat

9/27/2006 11:20:53 AM

Quote :

"In simple terms, the guilty do have something to hide."

9/27/2006 11:21:31 AM

hey sober, whats your social security number?

you dont have a smartass response to that one do you

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 11:23 AM. Reason : .]

9/27/2006 11:21:46 AM

thats none of your business.

..and thats my point. im not the one bitching about gamecat not answering a "simple question". im merely pointing out that you (and myself) do the exact same thing. there are some things that simply arent other peoples business....and that can only be decided by the person being asked.

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 11:24 AM. Reason : df]

9/27/2006 11:23:47 AM

If I call a question simple and straightforward, does that make it so?

And what TreeTwista10's not telling you is that all I told him from the start was that I'd tell him what my major was, if he'd tell me why he was asking.

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 11:24 AM. Reason : ...]

9/27/2006 11:24:04 AM

SS# and workplace : major at State

=

apples : oranges

i was in MEA...Natural Resources Marine and Coast Concentration with a minor in Civil Eng

I have no fear of disclosing that information because theres no reason to

9/27/2006 11:24:53 AM

Quote :

"some things simply arent other peoples business....and that can only be decided by the person being asked. "

Quote :

"I have no fear of disclosing that information because theres no reason to"

and some people have no fear of saying where they work. obviously you do.

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 11:27 AM. Reason : df]

9/27/2006 11:25:12 AM

Quote :

"And what TreeTwista10's not telling you is that all I told him from the start was that I'd tell him what my major was, if he'd tell me why he was asking."

I told you the reason was that I was curious as to what you studied at State

and then you called me 'the enemy'

but whatever, you are vague about everything

9/27/2006 11:27:09 AM

I think I can do a fair job of demonstrating what I know and what I don't pretty well without having to appeal to the paper hanging from my wall or whatever academic designations were printed on it.

9/27/2006 11:27:40 AM

^

Quote :

"Sounds like a personal opinion to me. They're a dime a dozen in this world"

9/27/2006 11:27:54 AM

Please, inform the public discourse about what that reason was. Otherwise, quit speculating and shut the fuck up.

Oh look, you've cleverly (seemingly anyway) learned to "use my words against me." Well done. Unfortunately for you, I'm not like most of the people you're used to arguing with. I've already established that I don't know much. I admit my ignorance to start with, and don't presume to be right about pretty much any opinion I hold in the face of the logical possibility that I could be wrong.

Economically-valuing opinions is a pretty fair way of addressing that.

Or is that point too over your head?

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 11:32 AM. Reason : ...]

9/27/2006 11:30:39 AM

oh the mighty intelligent and always-composed Gamecat resorts to stfu comments

9/27/2006 11:31:34 AM

Look at how the mighty internet troll speculates and speculates, trying to box his prey into feeling emotion because of his wholely unimportant words.

I'm guilty of finishing school with a major I refuse to tell you about. Let's see you go beyond that, chief.

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 11:36 AM. Reason : ...]

9/27/2006 11:33:32 AM

its just damned hilarious that you're all about open information, not hiding anything, etc when it comes to the government, but you yourself, FOR WHATEVER REASON, dont want to admit something like what you majored in...I could care less if its Engineering, Communications, Business, History, Geology, Spanish, etc...I just don't know why you're so adamant about hiding it...seems pretty funny...it's not like listing your major is going to compromise your privacy or anything like that...pretty funny though that you won't come out with it

but the troll comments are a way to try and boost your own credibility while decreasing another's credibility...you usually would stick to more intelligent debating tactics but oh well, whatever persuades people of your perspective, even if its lowering your standards

9/27/2006 11:47:51 AM

What's hilarious is that I'd wager somewhere between 10-15% of people who've ever read my profile are pretty sure what I majored in. I've met people from The Soap Box in person. Many of them know what my major was or at least did at some point.

But accurate, personal information is an asset. Especially in a public forum. I can temporarily classify it or unclassify it if I want, but that doesn't stop a handful of people who post on TWW (and in TSB) from being fully aware of what my major was, when I graduated, and what grades I got even.

All I asked you was why you wanted to know. I ask most people that. I even ask them to guess most of the time before I tell them. I'd even tell you if you answered the question.

9/27/2006 11:55:47 AM

here's the reason i gave you

Quote :

"i'm wondering what you studied in college"

why so paranoid salisburyboy? afraid i will take what you majored in and use it against you? i thought i was so imcompetent that that would be impossible?

9/27/2006 12:05:41 PM

Because I have little to go on as far as inferring your intentions. Accurate information is an asset. Why should I transfer it to you without knowing what your intentions are? You haven't told me anything informationally about why you're wondering.

Use it against me? Nah, I'm pretty sure you're going to do that regardless of the answer. What I want to do is watch you pout and troll when you don't get your way.

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 12:11 PM. Reason : ...]

9/27/2006 12:06:31 PM

what do you fear i could do if i knew your major? what could i possibly do?

and for the record, if i worked at a large company like IBM or Wachovia I would tell you where I worked

i understand about privacy...i just cant fathom anything that i could harm you with just from simply knowing what you majored in at State

9/27/2006 12:11:16 PM

Unless of course, you didn't particularly think it was anyone's business where you worked. Or not particularly important.

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 12:13 PM. Reason : ...]

9/27/2006 12:12:46 PM

i'm not asking where you worked, i could care less

i was simply asking what you majored in at State...what courseload you took...what you primarily studied...I guess I'll never get an answer...I can only assume why

9/27/2006 12:15:37 PM

You can get an answer. Other people on TWW, and TSB have it. Many of them were up front about why they were asking int he first place, though.

9/27/2006 12:17:43 PM

i tried about half a dozen PMs before I even mentioned it in a thread

so i don't know why you're posting a "PM" picture

9/27/2006 12:19:53 PM

Because it's just about the only way you're going to be able to get out of speculating.

9/27/2006 12:20:24 PM

i already tried

and tried again

and tried again

and tried again

and tried again

and tried again

and tried again

and tried again

and tried again

and tried again


the funny thing is that is actually the number of PMs i sent...not exaggerating

9/27/2006 12:22:50 PM

And in any of those did you state what the information would mean or suggest to you about my credibility?

9/27/2006 12:27:14 PM

yes i did

do you think everything has an alterior motive? why am i starting to look at you in a similar light as salisburyboy?

9/27/2006 12:28:55 PM

I believe I've already explained that in an old thread. I'd advise you read it.

Meanwhile, I'll be over here laughing at you making a public spectacle of this.

9/27/2006 12:32:15 PM

let me guess what i'd find in an old thread:

pages of openended questions and no answers, with some latin phrases italicized to make people think you're smart?

you ought to work for the bush cabinet though...you know, since you say a whole lot, but you dont really say anything?

9/27/2006 12:37:59 PM

Quote :

"TreeTwista10: let me guess what i'd find in an old thread: pages of openended questions and no answers, with some latin phrases italicized to make people think you're smart?"

An interesting, and scientifically valid hypothesis. But how would one go about testing it? You could look in my Osama thread, but that'd be too easy. I make positive, arguable assertions about the nature of politics and the Soap Box Holiest of Holies, who will win in November and why.

But let's take a look at this very thread just to see how clearly full of shit you look, shall we? We'll call it an experiment to see who looks more like salisburyboy in this thread.

My positive assertions buried within my words from within this very thread that contradict your above statements (I trust you're intelligent enough to CTRL + F and read English):

1) (To Soap Box) Instead of bitching over who's right about the specific causes...

How? It doesn't matter who's right about the causes, the consensus is that warming is occurring.

2) (To TreeTwista10) Of course I am.

How? Look it up, it's clear enough.

3) (To TreeTwista10) I'm rather sure that sitting in some university, they've got a 12,000 YO sample as well.

How? In a university, a 12,000 year old core sample exists.

4) (To TreeTwista10) you're disputing fundamentally [i]how science has arrived at the conclusion. Your argument is: "OMF THEY'VE ONLY BEEN STUDYING THIS FOR 30 YEARS, THEY MUST ONLY HAVE DATA ABOUT 30 YEARS WORTH OF CLIMATE.[/i]

How? What your argument resembles, and what you're disputing.

5) (To TreeTwista10) Sure they can.

How? Look it up, it's clear enough.

6) (To TreeTwista10) And information can be extracted from a small sample that will tell you about the climatological makeup of the Earth at varying times.

How? Positive assertion about what type of information can be extracted and what used for.

7) (To TreeTwista10) Humans can certainly provide materials in different concentrations for those forces to act upon in ways they didn't before. Natural fluctuations must be taken into account, too, but establishing covariance is still ultimately a statistical process...

How? What humans can do and what effects they can reasonably have. What factors must be taken into account. How one goes about establishing covariance.

8) (To TreeTwista10) The entire post beginning with "Utter nonsense, like the rest of your "reasoning" on this matter." and ending before the questions begin.

How? Look it up. It's pretty clear even before the questions. And there's no Latin. Just English.

9) (To TreeTwista10) The rest of the same post after they end.

How? Same deal.

10) (To TreeTwista10) I don't have to drop a book of physics on you to prove that gravity's effects are quantifiable, or that the position and velocity of electrons covary.

How? Gravity's effects are quantifiable. So are the positions and velocities of electrons.

11) (To Randy) You paradoxically state that nothing much has changed, and then that it's a scam.

How? What Randy's statements meant to me.

12) (To TreeTwista10) I'd wager that voodoo queens aren't hitting at about 70% either. And that science doesn't (or shouldn't) make the infallability claim that it tries to establish. Hard science, even meteorology, works far more within the realms of probability than certainty, though.

How? Meteorologists are right ~70% of the time, QED. Oops. That was Latin.

13) (To TreeTwista10) 'certainty' stems more from emotionally-reinforced belief, than hard analysis over whether or not that belief has logical or rational merit.

How? Establishes where 'certainty' stems from according to my understanding of people. Argue with it if you want to.

Quote :

"TreeTwista10: you ought to work for the bush cabinet though...you know, since you say a whole lot, but you dont really say anything?"

And you ought to work for the news media at minimum, or as a political phraseologist at best. Because you're excellent at believing and propagating factually incorrect, illogical, or poorly reasoned bullshit.

---

Quote :

"Gamecat: Ladies and gentleman, start your engines! Let the latest TreeTwista10 trollfest BEGIN!"

I'll let you turn my thread into a trolling pit for a little while. No moderator seems interested in stopping us.

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 1:41 PM. Reason : ...]

9/27/2006 1:21:24 PM

how much of your life did you waste putting that together?

9/27/2006 1:44:50 PM

Clearly less than 30 minutes. I've got it to spare.

How much of your life did you spend speculating so stupidly with accurate information so obviously in your face?

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 1:45 PM. Reason : ...]

9/27/2006 1:45:25 PM

was it worth it?

9/27/2006 1:45:49 PM

Absolutely. Otherwise I wouldn't have done it.

9/27/2006 1:46:35 PM

Quote :

"How much of your life did you spend speculating so stupidly with accurate information so obviously in your face? "

back to the personal attacks...i thought you were above that childish nonsense...nope i guess not

9/27/2006 1:54:56 PM

I see. You never believed a factually inaccurate thing in your life.

9/27/2006 1:56:21 PM

Quote :

"Look at you speculate beyond the data. "

9/27/2006 1:57:43 PM

Well sure, the only speculation from here is whether you believed what you posted or not. Because now it's too late for you to unpost it. That much is true. With your deliberate deletions of your edits, you see to it that the truth is masked in your posts. Not unlike how I erase the ellipses in my own posts, which I do because I think multiple edits are a visually unappealing, and useless distractor to the reader most of the time.

But frankly, I think you believed it your own speculation. I don't particularly care to tell you why, but I'm only about 60% sure it's true. So I don't really have to concern myself with establishing anything resembling the dreaded idiocy of philosophically neutral absolute proof according to my operating handbook of knowledge.

I've defined rational speculation before in other threads. I'd go TGD on you and start quoting myself again, but unlike him, I like to waste my time sometimes. Instead, I'll just make you argue in hilariously incompetent ways to defend the notion that you're not a troll.

The trolling game ends when one party gets bored and stops. The end of it, like the end of political games, isn't permanent and doesn't really resemble victory in any concrete sense. There's no such logical basis to the idea of winning a thread, so frankly, either of us could give up at any time.

But I've got pride. And I'm pretty damned convinced that you're full of shit. I didn't have to speculate to prove you'll express bullshit already. Look at my long-fucking post again for debatably intellectually conclusive proof of that.

The only point from which I have to truly speculate on now is whether or not you've ever believed any speculation at any point in your life.

[Edited on September 27, 2006 at 2:09 PM. Reason : ...]

9/27/2006 2:06:57 PM

words

9/27/2006 2:12:43 PM

Has the central nervous system operating as TreeTwista10 demonstrated true philosophically-sound infallibility within the constructions of his belief systems from birth?

TreeTwista10: Maybe. I mean, all that stuff's just words.

9/27/2006 2:17:02 PM

i've stopped paying attention to you

all you do is speculate and ask questions

not worth my time

apparently its worth hours of your time

go try to reason with salisburyboy while you're at it...i'm sure you'll be successful and won't feel like you're wasting your time

9/27/2006 2:18:08 PM

Fair enough. Nonetheless, your latest trollfest, which you've left out here for The Soap Box to see, looks precisely like my argument with salisburyboy in the 9/11 Zionist thread.

I'll let the readers make up their own minds as to why, too. And unlike when they chat up with mr. tinfoil, they'll actually be able to reference my evidence!

9/27/2006 2:19:31 PM

this thread actually has the POTENTIAL to get back on track...but in that case, I'm

still waiting for a single solitary example of quantified human vs natural influence on global climate change...

9/27/2006 2:20:54 PM

What would you call a Carbon Footprint?

9/27/2006 2:23:05 PM