StarGateWars Forums

Admitedly this is both a personal attack (if it is considered as such by Apophis himself) and a fruity topic, however i'm hoping that, in the pursuit of illumination, we will have our discussion.

Apophis, i'm not attacking you.

My name is Ste, and if G.G. is too long to type out (since i've started to call you 'Pophy) you can call me Ste. I think your name is Jim?

The purpose of me starting this discussion? You continually refuse to provide sourceable, acredited or even otherwise, citations. I'm wondering why? I'm not saying you don't have a reason, simply trying to understand you better.

I've seen time after time that people debating with you provide source material which can be viewed and opinined upon however you simply naysay, everytime.

This in not healthy argument as dictated by the highly intellectual comical example of "the argument" by monty python...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=teMlv3ripSM
(apologies if this is not a god quality, my internet does not allow me to view such wonders)

..this is an example of my point. It compounds my argument. It is both sourceable, viewable and opiniable. Do you see?



Surely you realise that this lack of source material makes you out to be a very uncredible voice? Can you show me anywhere, in any debate current or concluded, in which you have provided even the simplest of viewable sources to refute your opponent as opposed to simply "word of your mouth"?

Sources sir?!!

Can you tell me, then...why?

-Goo™

if this discussion is deemed to be a personal attack i will BOTH accept it's immediate removal AND a warning regards the rules of conduct.
Let it never be said that the ghost don't play fair.

You should watch more then before assuming stuff about me.
The topic I posted into lately was reforms proposal. It was long time derailed into something being out of topic and regarding side line issue(s).
If you look at topic, you will see that I started #1 try bringing it on topic few times, #2 bringing sources to my claims. But I didn't bother doing too much sources researches, as I *knew* subject would be changed again into who knows what.

Sadly you have stayed true to the basis of my concern.

You have elected to skirt the issue by mouthing varying degrees of nonsuch instead of doing exactly what could have emancipated you from your alleged position.

Show me your sources.

This discussion/debate is regards your lack of source material. Is not your reputation worth enough consideration that you would BURN to find an example of where you source material? I'm not even pedifying what is credible or not, do you see? I even just made up a word to describe it, all be it based upon essential etymology of an existing word. I don't care if you even wrote the source yourself, at least SHOW ME where you bothered to supply it!

I have, in our discussion on reform (as you have pointed out), cited historical fact accepted by both websters, wikipedia (a collection of some of the most unbiased minds we have in the world) and other credible historians, provided you with massively considerable information. How have you dealt with this information? You have simply said, essentially, that you have no proof against it merely an opposition to it. So then, can i safely assume that you have no clue as to the point either way? That your whole argument is based on personal opinion with no credible source but your own belief in what you believe?

It's crazy.

Imagine if science were considered as you continue to argue, we'd be falling to the moon by simply sailing boats off the end of the world. It's preposterous.

-Goo™

I see NO point on this Earth in me bothering about this "topic" anymore.
If you don't see what I post *on topic*, it's not my fault. Or perhaps you lost your way into the article I posted, or perhaps the video? As I said, I knew those would be ignored. And I was right, they were. So now mr proves master, before accusing me of *anything* check your facts straight.
I am definitely not going to do the effort of linking every post where I linked stuff to back my claims, because it would be...enormeous waste of time for me!


Enjoy your little diggings alone,

Goodbye.

This doesn't seem like a thread that belongs in this part of the forum. I'm not really sure where it should be but just seems a tad odd being here. In my opinion if you want to seem Apophis's links why don't you search for them, Topics in this part of the forum can go on for quite some time.

What is this thread meant to accomplish that a simple PM couldn't have solved. Just seems a bit pointless...

Poppler, is this not presented as a debate open to consideration by the entire of the forum? Sorry, like i said in my opening statement, if i'm deemed to be acting outside of common interest i'll respite and accept punishment.

Jim? On your (apparently) good word i shall review my position. You are telling me i should look at the topic of reform for where you provide sources to back your posistion? I will look. I'll go out of my way then, to disprove the popular belief of your position? Ok. For your honour, i will try.

-Goo™

Ok, let us nail this.

These are only approximations as i've already spent enough time on revealing you to be a noteworthy opponent.

All your arguments are based upon personal belief and are utterly unfounded from the viewpoint of analytical debate. In the example you yourself wished me to consider you have participated in 8 pages of debate. You have contributed to about 31% of the posts contained within the topic. in that 31% contribution you have cited one single reference to a muslim member of parliament which, despite it's interest (and i mean that sincerely and i apologise for not seeing it in the first place) is but 1 consideration in an OCEAN of opinion. Your opponents, myself admittedly included, have provided honestly countless sources of information ranging from recent political considerations to documents from the 14th century BC, all accepted sources and (apart from a couple of sources cited by Avenger) credible.

You can see my point surely?

Unless your pictue of the smoking man on page one trumps my argument in some unforseen way?

-Goo™

And the bada$$ spoilered post?

Also, I mentionned already I debate in a political forum. Problem is, it's in my native language, not being english, same as sources being used in said forum. I could try to translate articles myself, use a translator. As sadly, many times it's hard if not impossible to find an english language equivalent of said articles. I mention them as I read them and commeted them, and therefore not have to "discover" them when I open them.

Apophis The Great wrote:And the bada$$ spoilered post?

Also, I mentionned already I debate in a political forum. Problem is, it's in my native language, not being english, same as sources being used in said forum. I could try to translate articles myself, use a translator. As sadly, many times it's hard if not impossible to find an english language equivalent of said articles. I mention them as I read them and commeted them, and therefore not have to "discover" them when I open them.

Actually that is a very valid point. english is not your native language? In some respects i apologise, i had no idea.

It still does not excuse your lack of source material. I can read Hebrew (i hate to speak it) and even speak some Urdu, it's not going to be such the long haul you might think for me to understand or even translate your source.

Language barriers.

If only we all spoke the same language eh? *slips the babel building into his ear*

Apophis The Great wrote:And the bada$$ spoilered post?

My man, if it truly is that badbutt could you link me to it please? Afterall, i've trawled through 8 pages and my 32 year old eyes are threatening to leave home.

-Goo™

Apophis The Great wrote:And the bada$$ spoilered post?

Also, I mentionned already I debate in a political forum. Problem is, it's in my native language, not being english, same as sources being used in said forum. I could try to translate articles myself, use a translator. As sadly, many times it's hard if not impossible to find an english language equivalent of said articles. I mention them as I read them and commeted them, and therefore not have to "discover" them when I open them.

Aside of the valid point regarding the language barrier, in fact, you should not be the judge of the usefulness of the information regarding your citations.
Your 'responsibility' is to cite which sites, books or manifestos you used, and people will read them (or not, if their linguistic ability cannot swim across the Channel), and you *will* have given sources.


For all I care, you have read something in some Papuan language that only 3 people in this world can actually write, but if you can quote it, you can mention where you got it. Useful, or not, it gives (some) credence to your story.
Of course, there's also the possibility of abuse of citations.. for example by posting which book you got your idea from, but not which chapter, or which page.. or by posting a link to a website, which we must then research in it's entirety.. only to find that the conclusions drawn there are too far-fetched to be reliable.

GhostyGoo wrote:Your opponents, myself admittedly included, have provided honestly countless sources of information ranging from recent political considerations to documents from the 14th century BC, all accepted sources and (apart from a [u]couple of sources cited by Avenger)[/u]

which links are you referring to, the prison planet (Alex Jones) site/links?

if so, then i enjoy using prison planet allot due to the fact that all the articles they post on Joneses site are hyperlinked to the mainstream sources. the hyper links are the bolded words.


if its some of the other links, then all i can say in my defence is that i dont post links unless i know the information is correct, the site or the name of the site doesn't really interest me so much as long as the info is correct.
i do allot of on the spot searches when posting on these boards, all i do before posting the link is a coursery scan of the info to make sure its the info i'm looking for before posting the link...


my apologies for going off topic

Avenger, i was merely pre-empting an "oh you tinhat blah blah" attack on your sources. Let's face it, despite you providing some of the most inconclusive evidence in the whole of this forum....your sources DO sometimes get aloof. Don't worry though, as incredible as it seems, you cited it, which IS the topic of debate.

-Goo™

you do know there is a "pm" function? >.>

Reschef wrote:you do know there is a "pm" function? >.>

There's also this section, which is not much used.. and since this *is* a public debate, no matter who chose to participate or not .. please keep that kind of spam out, thank you kindly. *cracks whip*

GhostyGoo wrote:your sources DO sometimes get aloof.

-Goo™

banksters wanting to wipe a huge portion of the worlds population, that's aloof.... as you well know, you cant make that stuff up!