I'm a bad Buddhist

[Jekyll]

Anger will arise in "all" seeing it for what it is and letting it pass is key ( I believe).

I know people will say anger will be agood driving force to getting something done. I believe logic an d aclear mind is a better driving force.

Just what I believe.

I'm not arguing with your beliefs, I just think that quote was some-what of a non-sequitur and doesn't justify that particular one.

 

[nabiscothejerd]

Thanks for the half-hearted retraction.

It was not a half hearted retraction for I was presented with a link to the subject and read it and came to the conclusion that I had to be wrong. If a person is wrong they should admit and although that doesn't mean you should praise me for it, you might want to give me some respect as to not look completely egotistical but i already know that you don't care about that.

As for "backed it up(finally)" I gave enough information in my first post for you to Google on it if you wanted further details.

Right, I could've googled it or you could've been a bigger man and a bigger critical thinker to have told me the exact short story by Washington Irvine and have helped me to get to as much info on the subject as possible or even told me the facts yourself (are you lazy), but I guess you don't care about helping others directly finding out about the truth and instead making me go through hundreds of items that might well have taken me days to go through and in direct consequence caused me to not post again for days.

Could I point out --- tactfully --- that when you posted about flat-Earthers in the middle ages, without any supporting links or evidence --- and were just plain wrong --- no-one complained that you were "forcing your beliefs down their throats".

No, but they should have, and they should of recommended that I stop it or look like a fool which I did. They should have said what evidence do you have and I would've stopped and thought about it and realized my rhetoric. (actually my evidence was what i learned in school, how could I have known that)

Nor did they say that you were "spitting at the screen". No-one complained that you were "spitting rhetoric" (as you complained about me, but didn't point out where).

No, but they could have and should have, but it took you to point out that my argument had very little point since I had no evidence besides what I learned in school. As for what I thought was you being rhetoric B]about your entire first post on this thread[/B] was that I had heard about the flat earth myth elsewhere but they could not provide me with any evidence so I thought that you we're spitting rhetoric that you had heard.

This is my second post to you

Dr. Adequate what is the name of the short story and what other evidence, not just sputtering words , but give me links and/or facts (i prefer both). The use of that rhetoric (it is not yet a fact that you are spitting rhetoric it's my belief) makes me think that you don't know what you're wrinting about but just trying to say something to feel important.

Now did I say that you we're completely wrong or say that I believe in that moment that you might have been. You started acting hysterical because you thought that somebody was saying that you we're being rhetorical when I actually just accused you of being rhetorical (which means I wasn't even fully convinced that you we're).

The use of these phrases is what I mean by "hysteria". We let people play as rough as they like on these forums, but if you go over the top like that at the most trivial factual correction, you're not going to look good.

I did not and I repeat I did not act hysterical but was acting upon the programmation that was put into my head when I was young and I was questioning you not attacking I never attacked till you seemed to just be sputtering words. These phrases such as being rhetorical is meant to imply that somebody is just speaking about something that they had heard and repeating it without any evidence. I was being rhetoical in the sense of what I had heard as a kid and you started acting hysterical because you thought that you we're being attacked which you weren't (now who's hysterical). And yes people can play as rough as they want and no I didn't look good but I did look good when I saw the evidence and admitted it . You might not want to be so egotistical and think of yourself higher than somebody because that caused you to look bad with your implications that i was being hysterical.

Above all, you posted: "you don't know what you're wrinting about but just trying to say something to feel important". I never felt the need to say any such thing to you even though I knew that I was right and you were wrong.

Right after posted: you forgot where I said it makes me think
you cherry picking egotistical wanting to look like the shi* while somebody is trying to figure the truth (think about next time you don't include all of a person's quote whenit might just matter when you might just look like as big a fool as me although I didn't look like quite the fool that you made me out to be.

I told you that in the very first post I made on this thread. Let me quote it.

Heck if you wanted to have looked better you could've given me the facts directly but you choose not to and decided unknowingly not to look as good as you could.

You also said and I quote"So you were complaining that I hadn't answered a question which:

(a) You say you had "forgotten to ask".
(b) I had answered in my first post. "

And oh yeah I asked for the name of the book (short story) which you still haven't given me and I can prove it because of the quote I Included but will include again just for your foolish mind that is trying to look better than it actually is

Dr. Adequate what is the name of the short story and what other evidence, not just sputtering words , but give me links and/or facts (i prefer both). The use of that rhetoric (it is not yet a fact that you are spitting rhetoric it's my belief) makes me think that you don't know what you're wrinting about but just trying to say something to feel important.

Remember I asked you to give me the facts first and you choose not to and you didn't even think to tell me to even google it which I would not have done because I thought that you we're spitting rhetoric

You know what you foolish mind you, you can just suck on that and swallow it, understand me. Do not attack me in this manner again or i will ignore your foolish mind (after all that's probably all that you can teach me) so just be happy with the fact that you helped another person to know the truth you self centered (even more than the bible) or as you would put it self awareness.

hint of advice you should not and I repeat you should not ever become a teacher because your students would be too pissed off at you to learn anything for I am open minded enough to get past the fact that you pissed me off and I still realize the truth unlike a little kid that I was and up until now when I believed that in the middle ages they all thought the earth was flat.

You remind me of the people that blame the rape victem for dressing too sexy.

I even thanked you for the little and confusing help that you did give me. Do remember this I have more heart than you do and why is that, well if you would've had heart then you would've helped me more. I really hate it when somebody doesn't just say you're welcome and instead tries to make them look like a complete fool instead of them being a fool on a certain subject.

 

[Dr Adequate]

completely egotistical ... you could've been a bigger man and a bigger critical thinker ... but I guess you don't care about helping others directly finding out about the truth and instead making me go through hundreds of items that might well have taken me days to go through...

Whereas you told us about the middle ages without giving any details or references at all (unlike, say, me) and you were wrong (whereas I was right) but it turns out that that doesn't matter --- it's me being right that's the real problem.

No, but they should have, and they should of recommended that I stop it or look like a fool which I did. They should have said what evidence do you have and I would've stopped and thought about it and realized my rhetoric. (actually my evidence was what i learned in school, how could I have known that)

No, but they could have and should have, but it took you to point out that my argument had very little point since I had no evidence besides what I learned in school. As for what I thought was you being rhetoric about your entire first post on this thread was that I had heard about the flat earth myth elsewhere but they could not provide me with any evidence so I thought that you we're spitting rhetoric that you had heard.

I chose to be tactful. I did not realise that you would prefer me to tell you that you looked like a fool, and I apologise (since you seem to be hurt) for not saying that you looked like a fool.

This is my second post to you Now did I say that you we're completely wrong or say that I believe in that moment that you might have been. You started acting hysterical

Oh look, baby leant a new word!

because you thought that somebody was saying that you we're being rhetorical when I actually just accused you of being rhetorical (which means I wasn't even fully convinced that you we're).

Is there any chance we could have that in English?

I did not and I repeat I did not act hysterical but was acting upon the programmation that was put into my head when I was young and I was questioning you not attacking I never attacked till you seemed to just be sputtering words. These phrases such as being rhetorical is meant to imply that somebody is just speaking about something that they had heard and repeating it without any evidence. I was being rhetoical in the sense of what I had heard as a kid and you started acting hysterical because you thought that you we're being attacked which you weren't (now who's hysterical). And yes people can play as rough as they want and no I didn't look good but I did look good when I saw the evidence and admitted it . You might not want to be so egotistical and think of yourself higher than somebody because that caused you to look bad with your implications that i was being hysterical.

Again, I would like to congratulate you on learning the word "hysterical". You are almost as intelligent as a parrot. Well done! One day you will learn what it means.

The rest of the post is pure shrieking twitching hysteria... and why? Because I corrected you about a minor detail in the history of science, and I was right.

 

[nabiscothejerd]

Whereas you told us about the middle ages without giving any details or references at all (unlike, say, me) and you were wrong (whereas I was right) but it turns out that that doesn't matter --- it's me being right that's the real problem.

No the real problem is you misquoting me you said a couple posts ago

Above all, you posted: "you don't know what you're wrinting about but just trying to say something to feel important". I never felt the need to say any such thing to you even though I knew that I was right and you were wrong.

I actually said

Dr. Adequate what is the name of the short story and what other evidence, not just sputtering words , but give me links and/or facts (i prefer both). The use of that rhetoric (it is not yet a fact that you are spitting rhetoric it's my belief) makes me think that you don't know what you're wrinting about but just trying to say something to feel important.

You know and I think that you purposely left out the words "makes me think that" is a attack on me since you either can't read right or purposely left it out to try to make me look like a complete fool when i was just being a fool on this subject (I obviously think that it's the latter if you can't read my now corrected english). You're almost worse than iacchus.

Now go and flagellate yourself with the Big Whip Of Truth until you're sorry.

Since I did that you should too but you can't because you have way too much ego. You know I have alot of ego but it doesn't stand in my way, and I see that as not being hysterical.

Whereas you told us about the middle ages without giving any details or references at all (unlike, say, me) and you were wrong (whereas I was right) but it turns out that that doesn't matter --- it's me being right that's the real problem.

Many people say things without giving any details or references at all until they are asked to back it up. You never asked me to back it up, you just told me that I was wrong and that you we're right and gave me the name washington irvine. I then asked you to please back it up with links and'or facts and you refused since you probably don't understand the subject yourself (that is what common sense tell's you when somebody won't provide facts, or you could just have a lazy mind) but found out about it from another person and since you believe that person gave you facts and references you believed then(is this the case? . I couldn't have believed anything about it until I saw facts on my screen. You lazy mind you the real problem isn't you being right, that's not the problem that your ego keeps filling your head up with. The real problems are and please, read it all .

1- you misquoted me ( this is a serious offense since I have corrected you already and you still can't admit it). That's the same way that a christian won't accept facts is that their high and mighty (ego) mind get's in the way just like you

2 - you never said you're welcome

3- You're trying to make me look like a all around fool when I was just a fool on this subject. (Even the all and high mighty god in the sky would have a problem with that.

I chose to be tactful. I did not realise that you would prefer me to tell you that you looked like a fool, and I apologise (since you seem to be hurt) for not saying that you looked like a fool.

Now tell me one thing o mighty smart one, how am I supposed to tell myself that i look like a fool when I don't even realize it? (hint: I can't because I didn't know that I was wrong, suck on those words and swallow them).

Oh look, baby leant a new word!

Why don't you stop plagerizing me, you cannot admit that you misquoted me and misinterpreted me. You had to practically fill in the blank with that quote (good one, by the way) since you can't respond without looking like a fool on that subject yourself.

because you thought that somebody was saying that you we're being rhetorical when I actually just accused you of being rhetorical (which means I wasn't even fully convinced that you we're).

now my true and original quote (although you'll still misinterpret me most likey) ( Oh yeah in dumb downed english this means that I'm not saying that you definitely will but that you most likely will because of past evidence.

Dr. Adequate what is the name of the short story and what other evidence, not just sputtering words , but give me links and/or facts (i prefer both). The use of that rhetoric (it is not yet a fact that you are spitting rhetoric it's my belief) makes me think that you don't know what you're wrinting about but just trying to say something to feel important.

Hey guess what this means Dr.Adequate, for ex:

Calling somebody a a hole means that you think they're a complete a hole

And saying that somebody looks like a ahole means that in that time they look like a a hole but aren't.

If you still can't understand then that means that you're not adequate enough and need to go back to school (please do wait to go back to school till they're modernized) (I do hope that he doesn't misinterpret that).

Again, I would like to congratulate you on learning the word "hysterical". You are almost as intelligent as a parrot. Well done! One day you will learn what it means.

Nabiscothejerd's definition of hysterical- showing senseless excitement, general lack of self control.

If you still can't understand then that means that you're not adequate enough and need to go back to school (please do wait to go back to school till they're modernized)

As for me calling you hysterical I was partially right for you're not showing much self control are you if you can't make yourself think with all the good arguments that i am now making (thanks for making me look a genius instead of a person who just had a idea changing revolution.

As for the idoitic remark about the parrot my IQ is high enough to be in mensa, and that has me worried, I have a fact fot you not even the smartest parrot is smarter than the dumbest human (unless that person is officially mentally retarded) and yeah I do think that you'll make a crack on that.

The rest of the post is pure shrieking twitching hysteria... and why? Because I corrected you about a minor detail in the history of science, and I was right.

Get out your freaking dictionary and learn the real meaning of words ( I do think that you know what tactful means but not hysteria for I am showing self control because of my open-mindededness, now how bout you).

Remember me when you get corrected on your myth's felllow non-fundie(see I actually read the entire post and I understood it).

Oh yeah I don't take back my thanks so thank you for helping me, and forget you for trying to make me look like a complete fool.

Now who looks like the fool of the moment (I don't always care about being tactful).

Stop trying to look so smart and actually be smart. That means admit that i admitted you we're right and admit that i'm now right.
Please I know you can and I look forward to the day with intelligent conversation.

Just to mess with you one more time you misspelled learned (at least I think you did)

Oh look, baby leant a new word!

 

[Ryokan]

Wow, you guys having fun..?

 

[nabiscothejerd]

Wow, you guys having fun..?

yeah but it's probably over since I don't think he can argue against that

sorry for the anger but the grudge is almost over I think.

 

[Ryokan]

I'm sorry to say this, but from where I am, you're the one looking like an ass, nabiscothejerd. And I don't say that lightly. It looked pretty much like you attacked him without provocation, and used, hmm, unneeded language.

And what's up with your signature? It's a mess...

 

[nabiscothejerd]

I'm sorry to say this, but from where I am, you're the one looking like an ass, nabiscothejerd. And I don't say that lightly. It looked pretty much like you attacked him without provocation, and used, hmm, unneeded language.

And what's up with your signature? It's a mess...

Quote me where I attacked him. I always said that he looked like not that he was that is not a attack to me. I only attacked him personally after he compared my intelligence to that of a parrot.

Oh look, baby leant a new word!

he called me a baby

Again, I would like to congratulate you on learning the word "hysterical". You are almost as intelligent as a parrot. Well done! One day you will learn what it means.

He attacked my intelligence

He also attacked me by misquoting me (my opinion). This really gets me because he turned my words around quicker than a republican.

Now tell me one thing o mighty smart one, how am I supposed to tell myself that i look like a fool when I don't even realize it? (hint: I can't because I didn't know that I was wrong, suck on those words and swallow them).

This is what I said but I was being satirical with the phrase o mighty smart one, not attacking him.

It looked pretty much like you attacked him without provocation, and used, hmm, unneeded language.

This is your quote, and I have to say what unneeded language! I never cursed at him or towards him. I never called him a a hole. I said that in a example. The only person that I attacked without provacation is iacchus because i felt that he deserved for many of his other posts (although I admitted that I was wrong and should've used much better words in my first post on this thread).

 

[Ryokan]

Dr. Adequate what is the name of the short story and what other evidence, not just sputtering words , but give me links and/or facts (i prefer both). The use of that rhetoric (it is not yet a fact that you are spitting rhetoric it's my belief) makes me think that you don't know what you're wrinting about but just trying to say something to feel important.

Your first response to Dr.A.

First, you demand evidence without first bothering to ask Google, while at the same time accusing him of sputtering words. Unnessesary and uncalled for.

Also, asking for evidence and facts suggest you believe he's lying. Unnessesary and uncalled for.

The words 'it is not yet a fact that you are spitting rhetoric it's my belief' also sound extremely hostile. Unnessesary and uncalled for.

You also accuse him of not knowing what he's talking about, and just saying stuff to make himself look important. Unnessesary and uncalled for.

Lastly, the fact that he was right all along makes you look very badly.

Edit : Woah, you're also the edit-master! Hehe...

Btw, the internet was around a lot longer before the Final Fantasy and Resident Evil games

 

[Dr Adequate]

To be fair to nabiscothejerd, he may have been completely wrong, but at least he can publicly humiliate himself by whining out pathetic lies and childish abuse in a semi-literate, hysterical, petulant, snivelling temper tantrum.

 

[clarsct]

Hmm.. back to the original post..
I wouldn't feel too bad, bud. I'd be a horrid Buddhist. Anger is part of the human experience. It happens. I believe that part of maturity is realizing that we control our emotions, our emotions shouldn't control us. I usually have a background rage going. I think it's just some of the messed up stuff that happened growing up. But in real life, I tend to be a laid-back kind of guy. I don't let it rule me. To let it rule me would give power over me to people who don't deserve it.

I 'Medium' to be quite entertaining, especially if you've studied any of her life story. I'm not sure that was MEANT to be amusing in that context, but I find it so. Revelations is pretty good. It turns out that the lotus position is just a comfortable position to sit in, I guess. Just look at how many gods/prophets use it.

I wouldn't take it to heart. I just try to do the best every day in my own way, and, in the end, what more can we ask?

 

[nabiscothejerd]

First to state what I should have at first said ryokan, I don't know if you're a bad buddhist or not but I can say you seem to be a moral person since you feel very bad for those people in india.


Now to the attack.

First, you demand evidence without first bothering to ask Google, while at the same time accusing him of sputtering words. Unnessesary and uncalled for.

First off I don't go searching for answers to what I think is a hypothesis, since he never directly refutted that part until he gave me a link. Second why did he never ask me to support my claim if he knew that all I would say is I learned it from school. He never asked me to offer proof but I did demand proof. If you are going to post something on a thread, you should be able to state your claim and not just say that you are right and he is wrong (that is what creationists do remember). I never said that I was completely right or wrong for that matter.

Also, asking for evidence and facts suggest you believe he's lying. Unnessesary and uncalled for.

No it suggests that I want to hear all the facts and evidence so that I can weigh them from what I learned in school and then I would've immediately came to the conclusion that I was programmed to believe that medieval christians believed that the world was flat, although I did believe that he was lying just to let you know. It's not unneccesary and uncalled for to demand evidence (so should I just believe the creationists without asking for evidence? No.). Refute that. You can't

The words 'it is not yet a fact that you are spitting rhetoric it's my belief' also sound extremely hostile. Unnessesary and uncalled for.

Was I so hostile that I would physically attack him? I was stating that basically until he stated in a very good argumentative case against The Flat Earth Myth that I believed he was just spitting the same rhetoric (what I thought was) I heard earlier from the rednecks. Since the rednecks never offered any evidence and neither did he until the link he posted, what was I to think? That he was right just because he said so. You're just sputtering those words for something to write. Refute that.

You also accuse him of not knowing what he's talking about, and just saying stuff to make himself look important. Unnessesary and uncalled for.

I did that because he never stated his case in a good point (no point at all since he just said that he was right and corrected me on copernicus and gallileo). If he is not going to refute me and just say that I was wrong, then doesn't that look like he doesn't know what he was talking about. Remember if someone cannot support their claim then that makes it look like they don't know what they're talking about (just like the creationists). Refute that.

Lastly, the fact that he was right all along makes you look very badly.

No it doesn't. I was programmed with the info in school and it got stuck in my brain, like a christian raised from birth is just programmed and acts upon their programming. And remember, I had to refute myself without much help from him besides a link (all he gave me was a link, he gave no facts on The Flat Earth Myth besides the Gallileo fact), and admit the truth which makes me look open-minded, which in turn makes me look good in the sense that when i'm presented with credible evidence I change my way of thinking (that's a man's man to me in my land). After all do scientists look bad when they are wrong on a hypothesis and have to admit that they're wrong, do they not look smarter and more credible. Just like me. He was just right about the flat earth myth not everything after. Not only that but he misquoted me and I pointed that out, but you seem to have skipped over that part completely (I suggest both of you read this entire thread again). Refute that.

Edit : Woah, you're also the edit-master! Hehe...

Whoa, that was weak, could you please attack me harder because I didn't feel anything from that. I edit because I mess up, i'm human after all and humans make mistakes and when it comes to english, well basically i'm a little bit less than average. You know what, go tell that to your nirvana because neither of you made much sense after I learned of the Myth of the Flat Earth, and not much sense before that either. Obviously, you don't know how to edit since you misspelled whoa. Refute that.

Btw, the internet was around a lot longer before the Final Fantasy and Resident Evil games

What does that matter (once again, making very little sense), the internet is greater since it contains just so much more is what you should have said, but of course it's still only a opinion. Final Fantasy and Resident Evil are great games (do you hate games or do you just hate these games, based on your anime name you most probably would like Final Fantasy at the very least), so why even attack me on this issue, it is unimperative and you had nothing else to attack me on since you never had a point on this issue in the first place. Leave that crap out because it just made you look like a idiot since you didn't even show where I attacked him without provacation, which is what I asked you to point out but you can't since it's impossible. Remember this, that signature of mine "Final Fantasy and Resident Evil are the greatest things on earth, even before the internet is just messing around, in other words for you, I wasn't serious. If you can even comprehend that. But I don't think you will. Refute that.

Now on to the inadequeteness of Dr. Adequate (not very imaginative but it works).

To be fair to nabiscothejerd, he may have been completely wrong, but at least he can publicly humiliate himself by whining out pathetic lies and childish abuse in a semi-literate, hysterical, petulant, snivelling temper tantrum

Once again, I wasn't completely wrong unless you're just talking about The Flat Earth Myth being a fact ( but I don't think that you meant just that). What whining, I am debating unless you're whining too you idiot, so come up with a better putdown or not one at all. What pathetic lies, like when I proved that you misquoted me (read the post your inadequateness).

The childish abuse of what. It wasn't semi-literate, it was literate since I can read and write at a very good level. Like I said before no hysterics in my writing. I don't get temper tantrum's so stop just sputtering words because now that is exactly what you're doing. Refute that and do not misquote me again or nothing (else would constitute a threat in my eyes so I just sputtered in the word nothing since it was a lot better attack than both of Dr. Adequate's and Ryoken's last posts (man those we're worse than iacchus' posts).

Now let's get to the learning

Oh yeah ryoken I didn't edit this post so say something else with a little intellect besides some crap like that.

 

[Dr Adequate]

To be fair to nabiscothejerd, he may have been completely wrong, but at least he can publicly humiliate himself by whining out pathetic lies and childish abuse in a semi-literate, hysterical, petulant, snivelling temper tantrum --- and then, having had more than a week to think about it, he can come back and do the same thing again.

 

[Ryokan]

Whoa, that was weak, could you please attack me harder because I didn't feel anything from that. I edit because I mess up, i'm human after all and humans make mistakes and when it comes to english, well basically i'm a little bit less than average. You know what, go tell that to your nirvana because neither of you made much sense after I learned of the Myth of the Flat Earth, and not much sense before that either. Obviously, you don't know how to edit since you misspelled whoa. Refute that.

Why all the hostility? I replied to you, and after the reply came up, you had editted. You're allowed to do that, it wasn't an attack on you in any way. It was merely an observation, as I reply to a post of a few sentences and came back to see two full screens of text. Again, you're allowed to do that and I don't mind at all.

As to talking to Nirvana and Myth of the Flat Earth, I honestly have no idea what you're talking about....

Originally posted by nabiscothejerd
What does that matter (once again, making very little sense), the internet is greater since it contains just so much more is what you should have said, but of course it's still only a opinion. Final Fantasy and Resident Evil are great games (do you hate games or do you just hate these games, based on your anime name you most probably would like Final Fantasy at the very least), so why even attack me on this issue.

First of, once again you're showing your ignorance. Just because my nick is Japanese doesn't mean it's an anime name. Japan is more than anime and computer games. Ryokan was a very well known Japanese Zen Monk.

Secondly, although not a huge fan, I like both Resident Evil and Final Fantasy games, and have played through many of them. I understood from your signature that you meant that they were _older_ than the internet, but I know see that I just interpreted your bad English the wrong way. I'm sorry.

 

[Dancing David]

To paraphrase the buddha,

slamming a buddhist is like pissing into the wind.

Nabisco, out of mistaken sense of compassion I have to admit that I think you have made yourself out to be a total fool, but if it makes you happy to sit in your own offense, then please carry on.

 

[epepke]

To paraphrase the buddha,

slamming a buddhist is like pissing into the wind.

But it is funny when they talk about someone finding a chink in their armor.

 

[Dancing David]

This morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas.....

 

[Ryokan]

This morning I shot an elephant in my pajamas.....

Wow, you must be pretty big if an elephant can fit in your pajamas!

 

[Ryokan]

But it is funny when they talk about someone finding a chink in their armor.

Yeah, having that chink would make me a bad Buddhist, huh? Oh, wait, that's what I've been saying all along...

Sadly, I'm not perfect.