19 Oct 2010, 4:38 pm
hyperlexian wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
waltur wrote:
LKL: dude, he's got a god. i'm pretty sure he's not worried about technical capacity.
EDIT: true, now where can i get one? i want one that is more powerful than his god.
Mocking my Christianity are we now? Shame on you, I thought you were so high above that.
nope, i think it's funny that he is implying that an all-powerful god would destroy the planet at a human's request. presumably, nobody on earth has that power, do they? and if you had that power, i would want a stronger god to oppose your god. they could fight it out.
funny you would nitpick at me instead of the person who made the joke though.... you sure get upset at me, don't you? poor you.
hey hey now, first off, that was a joke for LKL and iamnotaparakeet.
i purposefully refrained from mocking keet's deeply held faith. this takes effort as i'm naturally really good at being dick to biblical literalists and i take exception to your implication that i was being mean to keet this time.
i was saying that, as far as keet's concerned, there exists a being with the capacity to destroy whatever the hell he wants. keet's supposed to laugh at this because he believes this is true and that this being has already shown this several times. LKL's supposed to laugh because i'm saying "magic is magic."
no need to be mean about it and there's no reason we can't all laugh at something from a few angles.
complexity is a good thing.
19 Oct 2010, 5:24 pm
19 Oct 2010, 5:52 pm
waltur wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
waltur wrote:
LKL: dude, he's got a god. i'm pretty sure he's not worried about technical capacity.
EDIT: true, now where can i get one? i want one that is more powerful than his god.
Mocking my Christianity are we now? Shame on you, I thought you were so high above that.
nope, i think it's funny that he is implying that an all-powerful god would destroy the planet at a human's request. presumably, nobody on earth has that power, do they? and if you had that power, i would want a stronger god to oppose your god. they could fight it out.
funny you would nitpick at me instead of the person who made the joke though.... you sure get upset at me, don't you? poor you.
hey hey now, first off, that was a joke for LKL and iamnotaparakeet.
i purposefully refrained from mocking keet's deeply held faith. this takes effort as i'm naturally really good at being dick to biblical literalists and i take exception to your implication that i was being mean to keet this time.
i was saying that, as far as keet's concerned, there exists a being with the capacity to destroy whatever the hell he wants. keet's supposed to laugh at this because he believes this is true and that this being has already shown this several times. LKL's supposed to laugh because i'm saying "magic is magic."
no need to be mean about it and there's no reason we can't all laugh at something from a few angles.
complexity is a good thing.
so, it's a private thread all of a sudden? if you want to make a private joke, send a PM and don't put it in a public thread. and if mockery or meanness happened, it sure as heck wasn't me who did it.... i laughed at what i thought YOUR joke was saying, and i thought it was a great deal more innocuous than it actually was.
i'm not mocking his faith at all. i respect christian people, and i happen to be married to one.
question though - why would you say, "no reason we can't all laugh at something from a few angles" if you don't want me laughing? or does "we" and "all" not include me?
21 Oct 2010, 3:56 pm
waltur wrote:
i was saying that, as far as keet's concerned, there exists a being with the capacity to destroy whatever the hell he wants. keet's supposed to laugh at this because he believes this is true and that this being has already shown this several times. LKL's supposed to laugh because i'm saying "magic is magic."
I didn't LOL, but I did smile
.
21 Oct 2010, 4:53 pm
hyperlexian wrote:
waltur wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
hyperlexian wrote:
waltur wrote:
LKL: dude, he's got a god. i'm pretty sure he's not worried about technical capacity.
EDIT: true, now where can i get one? i want one that is more powerful than his god.
Mocking my Christianity are we now? Shame on you, I thought you were so high above that.
nope, i think it's funny that he is implying that an all-powerful god would destroy the planet at a human's request. presumably, nobody on earth has that power, do they? and if you had that power, i would want a stronger god to oppose your god. they could fight it out.
funny you would nitpick at me instead of the person who made the joke though.... you sure get upset at me, don't you? poor you.
hey hey now, first off, that was a joke for LKL and iamnotaparakeet.
i purposefully refrained from mocking keet's deeply held faith. this takes effort as i'm naturally really good at being dick to biblical literalists and i take exception to your implication that i was being mean to keet this time.
i was saying that, as far as keet's concerned, there exists a being with the capacity to destroy whatever the hell he wants. keet's supposed to laugh at this because he believes this is true and that this being has already shown this several times. LKL's supposed to laugh because i'm saying "magic is magic."
no need to be mean about it and there's no reason we can't all laugh at something from a few angles.
complexity is a good thing.
so, it's a private thread all of a sudden? if you want to make a private joke, send a PM and don't put it in a public thread. and if mockery or meanness happened, it sure as heck wasn't me who did it.... i laughed at what i thought YOUR joke was saying, and i thought it was a great deal more innocuous than it actually was.
i'm not mocking his faith at all. i respect christian people, and i happen to be married to one.
question though - why would you say, "no reason we can't all laugh at something from a few angles" if you don't want me laughing? or does "we" and "all" not include me?
i can see how i'm so easily misconstrued.
i wasn't saying that it was a private joke, i was pointing out that it was directed at two people and that i expected each to enjoy it for opposite reasons.
if you were keet and referenced GOD and someone pointed out that the technology needed to do what you want GOD to do, you would chuckle to yourself and say something along the lines of "um... why would GOD need technology?"
unlike keet (a biblical literalist), LKL doesn't come with an instruction guide, but i still wasn't too far off the mark.
i sincerely apologize for coming off like i was trying to shut you down or shut you out. my intention was to keep my humor more humorous than insulting and, while i agree that it's silly to think "that an all-powerful god would destroy the planet at a human's request," i know that keet doesn't actually think this and i didn't want him to get the wrong idea and think that that's what i was saying. it's not. i was saying "magic is magic."
21 Oct 2010, 4:59 pm
waltur wrote:
i can see how i'm so easily misconstrued.
i wasn't saying that it was a private joke, i was pointing out that it was directed at two people and that i expected each to enjoy it for opposite reasons.
if you were keet and referenced GOD and someone pointed out that the technology needed to do what you want GOD to do, you would chuckle to yourself and say something along the lines of "um... why would GOD need technology?"
unlike keet (a biblical literalist), LKL doesn't come with an instruction guide, but i still wasn't too far off the mark.
i sincerely apologize for coming off like i was trying to shut you down or shut you out. my intention was to keep my humor more humorous than insulting and, while i agree that it's silly to think "that an all-powerful god would destroy the planet at a human's request," i know that keet doesn't actually think this and i didn't want him to get the wrong idea and think that that's what i was saying. it's not. i was saying "magic is magic."
i wasn't saying that it was a private joke, i was pointing out that it was directed at two people and that i expected each to enjoy it for opposite reasons.
if you were keet and referenced GOD and someone pointed out that the technology needed to do what you want GOD to do, you would chuckle to yourself and say something along the lines of "um... why would GOD need technology?"
unlike keet (a biblical literalist), LKL doesn't come with an instruction guide, but i still wasn't too far off the mark.
i sincerely apologize for coming off like i was trying to shut you down or shut you out. my intention was to keep my humor more humorous than insulting and, while i agree that it's silly to think "that an all-powerful god would destroy the planet at a human's request," i know that keet doesn't actually think this and i didn't want him to get the wrong idea and think that that's what i was saying. it's not. i was saying "magic is magic."
that's okay. i felt briefly left out and was being oversensitive about it. i am glad that you understood i was sad and not mad.
iamnotaparakeet, i'm sorry if i came across like i was mocking your faith. i did not intend to be hurtful.
21 Oct 2010, 5:29 pm
hyperlexian wrote:
waltur wrote:
i can see how i'm so easily misconstrued.
i wasn't saying that it was a private joke, i was pointing out that it was directed at two people and that i expected each to enjoy it for opposite reasons.
if you were keet and referenced GOD and someone pointed out that the technology needed to do what you want GOD to do, you would chuckle to yourself and say something along the lines of "um... why would GOD need technology?"
unlike keet (a biblical literalist), LKL doesn't come with an instruction guide, but i still wasn't too far off the mark.
i sincerely apologize for coming off like i was trying to shut you down or shut you out. my intention was to keep my humor more humorous than insulting and, while i agree that it's silly to think "that an all-powerful god would destroy the planet at a human's request," i know that keet doesn't actually think this and i didn't want him to get the wrong idea and think that that's what i was saying. it's not. i was saying "magic is magic."
i wasn't saying that it was a private joke, i was pointing out that it was directed at two people and that i expected each to enjoy it for opposite reasons.
if you were keet and referenced GOD and someone pointed out that the technology needed to do what you want GOD to do, you would chuckle to yourself and say something along the lines of "um... why would GOD need technology?"
unlike keet (a biblical literalist), LKL doesn't come with an instruction guide, but i still wasn't too far off the mark.
i sincerely apologize for coming off like i was trying to shut you down or shut you out. my intention was to keep my humor more humorous than insulting and, while i agree that it's silly to think "that an all-powerful god would destroy the planet at a human's request," i know that keet doesn't actually think this and i didn't want him to get the wrong idea and think that that's what i was saying. it's not. i was saying "magic is magic."
that's okay. i felt briefly left out and was being oversensitive about it. i am glad that you understood i was sad and not mad.
iamnotaparakeet, i'm sorry if i came across like i was mocking your faith. i did not intend to be hurtful.
in my opinion, all of the world's problems can be (over)simplified to "misunderstandings and escalation."
and i'm not sorry when i come across as mocking someone's faith. i mock faith. i was mocking faith in that joke, really, but i saw a great opportunity to do so in a double edged fashion. besides, keet's more fun than other theists because he stands behind his faith. it doesn't make magic any more true, but it sure makes him more honest.
22 Oct 2010, 12:51 am
22 Oct 2010, 12:59 am
auntblabby wrote:
existing lie detector technology really functions quite well as detectors for the absense of psychopathy.
So, they wouldn't work on me since I'm a loony toon?
22 Oct 2010, 1:47 am
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
existing lie detector technology really functions quite well as detectors for the absense of psychopathy.
So, they wouldn't work on me since I'm a loony toon?
gosh, that is food for thought
has anybody actually studied the efficacy of such machines on people with disordered thinking? i am more of the belief that loony tunes would cause more false positives than not. as for myself, this loony tune would probably cause the machine to run of ink.
22 Oct 2010, 3:25 am
22 Oct 2010, 3:46 pm
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
existing lie detector technology really functions quite well as detectors for the absense of psychopathy.
So, they wouldn't work on me since I'm a loony toon?
unless your body doesn't respond like other humans to stress, i don't know that you'd be very well masked.
though it is something to consider. polygraph research is so convoluted i hesitate to go any further than that.
22 Oct 2010, 6:57 pm
waltur wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
auntblabby wrote:
existing lie detector technology really functions quite well as detectors for the absense of psychopathy.
So, they wouldn't work on me since I'm a loony toon?
unless your body doesn't respond like other humans to stress, i don't know that you'd be very well masked.
though it is something to consider. polygraph research is so convoluted i hesitate to go any further than that.
Or unless your body doesn't experience stress.
22 Oct 2010, 7:16 pm
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Do you expect the Spanish Inquisition?
Yes. Yes I am. Constantly.
There, you weren't expecting THAT, were you?
22 Oct 2010, 7:31 pm
adifferentname wrote:
iamnotaparakeet wrote:
Do you expect the Spanish Inquisition?
Yes. Yes I am. Constantly.
There, you weren't expecting THAT, were you?
How would you know what I was or wasn't expecting?
| Similar Topics | |
|---|---|
| DSM 5 and the elimination of AS , and serverity levels ... |
18 Jan 2014, 12:45 pm |
| MXC Most Extreme Elimination Challenge. |
12 Feb 2008, 1:29 am |
| WWE PPV Predictions Episode 5: Elimination Chamber |
16 Feb 2013, 7:18 pm |
| WWE PPV Predictions Episode 17: Elimination Chamber 2014 |
22 Feb 2014, 9:31 pm |
