(06-24-2012, 11:15 AM)nackidno Wrote: [ -> ]But what you are saying isn't definite either.
While the capacity for all sexualities may at some point be shown to be the capacity for just one, it hasn't happened yet. Given human nature, i don't expect it to be.
(06-24-2012, 07:27 PM)Your Computer Wrote: [ -> ] (06-24-2012, 11:15 AM)nackidno Wrote: [ -> ]But what you are saying isn't definite either.
While the capacity for all sexualities may at some point be shown to be the capacity for just one, it hasn't happened yet. Given human nature, i don't expect it to be.
You totally missed my point, it's that what you are saying is not true because it's just speculation. Therefore, you are extremely doubtful, just like the video.
(06-24-2012, 11:06 PM)nackidno Wrote: [ -> ]You totally missed my point, it's that what you are saying is not true because it's just speculation. Therefore, you are extremely doubtful, just like the video.
I suppose i have no choice but to agree that i missed your point, though this is not entirely my fault. You said what i was saying isn't definite. Since you didn't explicitly specify what it was that i said, i had to rely on implication. The only possible conclusions i could come up with in figuring out what statements of mine you were referring to were either my position on homosexuality or what i said about the video. You have been very pervasive in ipse dixit statements against my arguments and anyone who said similar to me. And the video is there for anyone to listen to and count how many times "could," "could be," and "may be," were used, how the statistics provided in the video contradict other statements within the same video, and see the video cut off without showing that such microscopic interactions do in fact lead to changes in sexuality that are not affected by choice.
I took the assumption of the one i thought to be most logical on trying to figure out which statement of mine you were referring to (though, obviously, you would disagree and may claim what you quoted is the most logical): that you were being pervasive again. For how is it possible that a video being in plain sight, being capable of being replayed to ad infinitum, could one not listen to what was said in the video and formulate what i said? Replay the video if you must; i've played it enough times and formed the same conclusion each time: that the video does not provide any evidence to prove that sexuality of any kind, though specifically homosexuality vs heterosexuality, is not of choice. Does it make the suggestion? Sure, but it doesn't
prove it.
I was actually talking about like 99% of your posts in this thread. It's too much to quote. You haven't posted any scientific studies nor do you have any evidence that what you are saying is true. That's why I doubt anything you say in this thread.
(06-22-2012, 01:05 PM)Lucas Wrote: [ -> ]This is how people are, you can't change that. Just deal with it. Stop this argument for your own good. And don't speak your mind, and no harm would be caused.
I feel like posting a reply in which I pummel the fuck out of you with my mind logic, but I'm sure that's already been done. IF IT HASN'T THOUGH, then I shall be back! Mwahahahahahahahaha!!!!
(06-25-2012, 12:36 AM)Your Computer Wrote: [ -> ] (06-24-2012, 11:06 PM)nackidno Wrote: [ -> ]You totally missed my point, it's that what you are saying is not true because it's just speculation. Therefore, you are extremely doubtful, just like the video.
I suppose i have no choice but to agree that i missed your point, though this is not entirely my fault. You said what i was saying isn't definite. Since you didn't explicitly specify what it was that i said, i had to rely on implication. The only possible conclusions i could come up with in figuring out what statements of mine you were referring to were either my position on homosexuality or what i said about the video. You have been very pervasive in ipse dixit statements against my arguments and anyone who said similar to me. And the video is there for anyone to listen to and count how many times "could," "could be," and "may be," were used, how the statistics provided in the video contradict other statements within the same video, and see the video cut off without showing that such microscopic interactions do in fact lead to changes in sexuality that are not affected by choice.
I took the assumption of the one i thought to be most logical on trying to figure out which statement of mine you were referring to (though, obviously, you would disagree and may claim what you quoted is the most logical): that you were being pervasive again. For how is it possible that a video being in plain sight, being capable of being replayed to ad infinitum, could one not listen to what was said in the video and formulate what i said? Replay the video if you must; i've played it enough times and formed the same conclusion each time: that the video does not provide any evidence to prove that sexuality of any kind, though specifically homosexuality vs heterosexuality, is not of choice. Does it make the suggestion? Sure, but it doesn't prove it.
Complex words. Intricately definable, yet so refined and to the point! Aaaagh, my head hurts trying to compensate this anything readily graspable! I need something to dumb myself down to abysmal cataclysm!
Must. . . Watch Naruto!
Can somebody explain to me why everyone is spending their valuable minutes debating a subject that never and will never lead anywhere? This happens literally EVERYwhere on the internet..
I just don't understand what the point is in writing these huge walls of text
I said "no" .
I'm just very homophobic and i cant do nothing about it .
(my opinion)
(06-28-2012, 08:24 PM)Damascus Rose Wrote: [ -> ]Can somebody explain to me why everyone is spending their valuable minutes debating a subject that never and will never lead anywhere? This happens literally EVERYwhere on the internet..
I just don't understand what the point is in writing these huge walls of text
It happens with every thread similar to this; I approve of and support a good-hearted debate, but sadly very few people on the internet are mature enough to do so without allowing it to elevating to flame war status (which is generally religion and moral bashing).
In the end, it's a battle of egos more than a battle of whits; no one wants to admit they're wrong, and they will try to defend their view point on a subject that cannot be proven either way. Rather pointless if you ask me.
(06-28-2012, 08:32 PM)BlingBoyOt Wrote: [ -> ]I said "no" .
I'm just very homophobic and i cant do nothing about it .
(my opinion)
Yes you can, knowledge is key. How much do you know about homosexuality? How many homo people have you spoken to? It's all about knowledge, friend.