Who is more credible?

thefanwithnoname or Jip Jaap Stam? Poll to follow.

 

in what sense, this is a very vague poll

 

Its sam, are you suprised?

 

It was on the global warming thread where Jip would come top in a poll about which one was more credible so I decided to post it. I suppose we are looking at general credibility.

 

tbf this was jips response to being proven wrong

that in itself takes away any credibility he had/has ?

 

I think Fan actually kicked ass on the global warming bullshit thread.

 

In fairness iv never seen someone with the perseverence of fan. The idiocy of some of the stuff on the Iran/Israel thread nearly had me smashing my head against a wall. Fan merely calmly went on to debunk whatever ****e they could fling and keep rebuffing repeated stereotypes.

 

Don't encourage him

 

I just enjoyed the way he was fighting two battles at the same time, and ripped the silly ****s to bits, credit where credit's due i say.

 

Ths is the thing that I cannot understand when it comes to me or my viewpoints

I get accused of avoiding, yet try to answer every question
Some accuse me of not answering then accuse me of writing 5 posts in a go - usually all addressed to different folk
I dont tend to resort to insults unless specifically provoked, yet get accussed of resorting to insults

I acknowledge if people dont share a viewpoint but give a reason for why I do
I get accused of using particular sources, yet am given wikki links to read as evidence

Maybe you can explain it to me, as I value your opinion

 

You can't vote for yourself.

 

Its all just tactics to avoid an admission of fault. People arent going to be involved in a 500 post debate and suddenly admit to you when it may have clicked on them they were wrong ( even though the realisation may still have hit them), they just arent going to let someone have that victory when they have posted so much of their time, effort and future forum credibility into the debate. ( people like ST spring immediately to mind here)

So in the absence of their ability to counter points of debate you will get deflections, posts being ignored in the hope they wont be called on them, accusations being flung, all to keep up the appearance of being right in the hope that you will fatigue of the effort to keep countering them

 

thems just semantics and you know it

fact is I did a thread about global warming and you referred back to threads on creationism then tried to make out I bought it up

and i repeat saying something is possible IS acknowledgement

especially if initially your stance was it doesnt exist

As far as I am concerned if the starting point is someone saying god exists and a person argues he doesnt, and by the end of it the other person says it is possible and might have existed, its a victory

 

I just farted, sniff my arse hole.

 

.

 

Who's your arsehole, Toby?

 

FFS sam

since you outed yourself by admitting to your gay crush, its all arse this arse that isnt it?

why dont you just come out and say you want man sex with a not606er

 

Might as well run with it. None of you ****ers know who I am so I don't give a ****e.