The Tanoubliette: Pussy Hurt and Delusions or TTPHAD for short.
- Thread starter hodj
- Start date
- Status
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,673
- 18,384
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
I thought you were leaving because I embarrassed you again?
Anyway, here's what we saw in that one slide:
"White people are a plague to the planet: The historical ties between homophobia in communities of color and colonization"
What part of that suggests that white people need to be exterminated?
Jhodi, you seem confused. I'm not claiming that the presentation is comedic. I don't have to prove that it is. I'm just stating the FACT that it's very easy to misinterpret things due to lack of context. Remember when you had all that "evidence" that MarMac and I were the same person? From your point of view, that evidence was rock solid. You literally could not conceive of a situation where it didn't hold up. That entire time, the only thing you were missing was context, and that context made your "evidence" collapse like a house of cards. You of all people should be more hesitant to commit wholeheartedly to things that have not been proven. But you're a slave to your religion, so you turn off your critical thinking skills when doing so won't support whatever narrative you're insulting people about that day.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,673
- 18,384
You are claiming that it plausibly could be, and the fact that you eschew any attempt of even trying to justify the claim is all we need from you.
Thank you, you're done here.
Your claim cannot be supported with evidence, you have admitted it as such, therefore we reject your hypothesis in favor of the hypothesis for which there is evidence.
Which is our position.
Your admission you have nothing, and won't even bother to try, and your attempt to abandon all burden of proof for your claim, is all we need to be able to say that, once again, you are a dishonest, dissembling liar.
Get fucked retard.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,673
- 18,384
For the record, here's your definition
You offer nothing but your BASE CONJECTURE to support that claim, ergo we have no reason to presume your rebuttal is even valid in light of your complete and absolute failure to support your positive claim with evidence.
Your assertion is that this image could be something besides what it appears to be, that it could be tongue in cheek, comedic in nature, or unserious.
You offer nothing but your BASE CONJECTURE to support that claim, ergo we have no reason to presume your rebuttal is even valid in light of your complete and absolute failure to support your positive claim with evidence.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
All right, Jhodi, let me know when you're ready to actually discuss something and I'll be more than happy to school you again. This circular non-logic you keep trotting out is evidence you have nothing of any substance to say. Take a rest, recharge a bit, don't forget your meds, and when you're up for it I'll be ready for you.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,673
- 18,384
If you think my logic is flawed, and you understand burden of proof and positive claims better than me, then by all means:
Give us the syllogistic explanation of why my logic is flawed.
You got nothing, and won't even bother trying, just like you won't bother supporting your claim that we all need to go live with black families to understand Trayvon's struggles better, that the Moon Landing and 9-11 were a hoax, that Anita wasn't talking about Hitman, and that this image could be anything beyond what it appears to be.
Put up or shut up, you little coward.
Give us the syllogistic explanation of why my logic is flawed.
You got nothing, and won't even bother trying, just like you won't bother supporting your claim that we all need to go live with black families to understand Trayvon's struggles better, that the Moon Landing and 9-11 were a hoax, that Anita wasn't talking about Hitman, and that this image could be anything beyond what it appears to be.
Put up or shut up, you little coward.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
Here is my stance:
It is foolish to jump to conclusions based on a single, context-free image.
Do you disagree? Oh, you think thatin this casethe odds are in your favor (just like you did with Sulkowicz, where there was also no conclusive evidence). You think that in this case your conclusion is safe. See, I don't give a fuck what YOU think the odds are. I don't give a fuck if YOU think you've got that student "dead to rights". The fact is (and it is a stone-cold FACT) that we don't know what's going on in that picture. You're an overconfident blowhard who cares more about dishing out insults than about discussing anything honestly. If you had any interest in being honest, you would admit that my above stance is 100% correct. But you didn't even have that honesty after you were proven wrong about me and Marmac with hard evidence, so why should I expect you to be honest now?
I literally never made this claim. You lie.
I absolutely never made either of these claims. You're full of lies today.
I gave PLENTY of evidence supporting this. Over and over again. It's all still there. You're a lying piece of shit.
I don't have to prove that something "could be", and I certainly don't have to prove that a single, context-free image might mean something other than what it superficially appears to be. You're an idiot for suggesting otherwise.
Oh, and Jhodi? You know how you keep calling me a liar, without ever once actually referencing a SINGLE lie I made? Well, I just caught you making several bold-faced lies in black and white. You are a proven liar. I can call you a liar, and I have backed it up with hard evidence. THAT'S how it's supposed to work. But in Jhodi-world, arrogance is worth more than honesty, so you can just keep pretending I didn't prove (with hard proof, nonetheless) that you're both happy to ignore evidence that contradicts your narrative AND that you're a lying liar who lies repeatedly.
*looks at watch*
Oh, it's about time for one of Jhodi's famous "Didn't read" comebacks where he once again dodges the things he is too ashamed to address.
- 17,781
- 25,897
- 17,781
- 25,897
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,673
- 18,384
Goal post shifting fallacy.
This situation is functionally equivalent to Matt Dillahunty's example of the jar full of gumballs
Where the two claims given for the situation are as follows:
1. The image accurately represents the situation in question when the photo was taken
2. The image does not accurately represent the situation in question when the photo was taken
Both of these are positive claims.
We have evidence in the image itself for our position, the first claim. We have no reason to believe the image does not accurately represent the situation in question when the photo was taken. There is no evidence it is a photoshop, or that it was faked. There is no evidence that it was tongue in cheek, or a joke.
We reasonably conclude that the image therefore accurately represents the situation in question when the photo was taken.
You come in and claim that we're all jumping the gun. This means you are making a positive claim for the second position.
Therefore, especially in light of the evidence whichsupportsour position, your inability to fulfill your burden of proof in regards to your counter claim means that we are fully justified in disregarding your counter claim, and calling you a retard repeatedly because you are.
And you better bet your ass I didn't read past the first sentence of that crap.
Why should I? You failed to offer the syllogistic explanation to support your claim that my logic was
and thereforenothing else you have to say matters until you put up or shut up on both of these issues, and all the others you have failed to support over the years.
Serially dishonest people don't get treated equally in debate formats.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,673
- 18,384
This did catch my eye.
That is pure Creationist logic right there.
"I don't have to prove that my god could exist"
"I don't have to prove that my positive claim could be plausible"
Yes, actually, you do.
That's exactly what you have to do, and that is exactly what you cannot do, and will never be able to do, because you do not base your arguments on face or reason, but only on contrarian trolling horseshit because you are a butthurt little faggot.
Deal with it, coward.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
The fuck? That was always my stance, dipshit. No goalposts have been shifted.
Evidence:
It's really not, and shame on you for wasting my time with your retarded derail that has fuck all to do with what we're talking about.
See, this is more dishonesty here, Jhodi. My claim isNOTthat the image does not accurately represent the situation in question. My claim is that a single image presented without context does not give us enough information to draw conclusions either way. I like how you keep trying to present this as some Creationist stance when "Let's hold off judgment until we have more evidence" is literally the diametric opposite of Creationism. In Jhodiland, anything means anything!
Not at all. Again, you're an idiot. I honestly can't believe you have sunken to this level of ignorant shitposting.
But since you can't shut up about proof, let me remind you:
1) I have PROVEN that you are willing to ignore evidence that contradicts your narrative.
2) I have PROVEN that you lie compulsively.
You are inno positionto claim the high ground here, Jhodi.
Tanoomba
ジョーディーすれいやー
- 10,170
- 1,439
No, it's not. You have this terrible, terrible habit of presenting falsehoods as facts. If this is literally your entire argument, then I accept your admission of defeat.
hodj
Vox Populi Jihadi
- 31,673
- 18,384
- Status