Whinge, Moan, Rant And Anything Else Put It Here ...

[cambgull]

A big problem with a serial killer is that they believe that their actions are justified by a form of mantra.

A big problem with psychopaths is that their minds are clouded with thoughts which they believe to be right but go against the grain of modern society.

A big problem with preachers is that they take an opinion, no matter how flawed, and attempt to impress that on others whilst believing that their actions are justified and whilst their minds are clouded with thoughts which they believe to be right but go against the grain of modern society.

A serial killer is dangerous and may kill several people. A psychopath is dangerous and may kill several people. Preachers are far more dangerous and throughout the years have caused the deaths of millions of people through religions and oppression. Despite this, a serial killer will understand what he has done. A psychopath will understand what he has done. A preacher will never fully understand the full result of his actions and will never be held accountable in a world where we are supposedly allowed free speech.

The problem is Gullscorer, although your choice of subject seems fairly mundane, you cannot ever truly understand the actions of what your words do as tomorrow's news story of Jeff Smith going around his local town murdering every woman he sees will be taken with shock and maybe some digust, but you don't realise that Jeff Smith's username stops posting on here, because you didn't realise that "Torquayfan1982" was Jeff Smith. And Jeff Smith had read every word of every article you post because he can't see his child due to his wife being a bitch and withholding rights. All because she wants to play games with him.

See why I don't like you preaching on the internet now?

[Gullscorer]

Luke I see that your argument is flawed and fallacious. Are you perhaps viewing my posts through the distorting lens of your own bigotry (if that's what it is) or is it that you have been raised, educated, indoctrinated, and steeped in the false ideology of modern feminism?

I am NOT preaching. That's what the religion of feminism does. I am protesting. I am pointing out the truth. The facts I have presented are accurate and verifiable, the studies I linked to are reliable and their findings are incontrovertible. Those who are unable to reply to arguments, news, and information with reasoned cogent responses of their own always attempt to silence, censor and ridicule. Such behaviour is typical of totalitarian ideologues.

If your flawed argument about Jeff Smith's behaviour was correct, nobody should be saying anything, for fear of the response of those who might be mentally deranged. There would be no violent scenes in films or on television for fear of their effect upon impressionable minds. And so on, and so on..

The truth is the truth, even if there is only one person expressing it. And contrary to what you and the other fella claim, serious posts are allowed on this forum, and on the tubes and videos thread. I have also posted funny videos and numerous jokes on that thread, at least as numerous as the serious posts on a certain subject to which you take such exception.

I'm not sure, though, that you share my sense of humour..

[ferrarilover]

This from the bloke who went full on nuclear a year or so ago when I made a gag on your thread about depression, suggesting that it may push a depressed lunatic over the edge.

Luke, I've given up, it's like arguing with religious nutters, they just keep quoting their truth. You can't logically argue with an illogical premise.

Scorer believes his mantra and his sources just the same as those he opposes believe theirs. The left and the right, religion and science, City and United.

You can prove anything with enough bluster and a game man of 'carry on regardless'.

You know and I know full well that feminism isn't taking over the world. We as men aren't being downtrodden or discriminated against. Scorer thinks we are. You and I know that the world won't end next Tuesday, but someone, somewhere does and you know what, he can prove it.

Matt.

[Gullscorer]

This from the bloke who went full on nuclear a year or so ago when I made a gag on your thread about depression, suggesting that it may push a depressed lunatic over the edge.

Luke, I've given up, it's like arguing with religious nutters, they just keep quoting their truth. You can't logically argue with an illogical premise.

Scorer believes his mantra and his sources just the same as those he opposes believe theirs. The left and the right, religion and science, City and United.

You can prove anything with enough bluster and a game man of 'carry on regardless'.

You know and I know full well that feminism isn't taking over the world. We as men aren't being downtrodden or discriminated against. Scorer thinks we are. You and I know that the world won't end next Tuesday, but someone, somewhere does and you know what, he can prove it.

Matt.

Matt as usual you exaggerate. We argued about your 'gag' on pages 11 and 12 or thereabouts of the Thought for the Day thread. Here is an excerpt from the points I tried to get across to you:

'Matt you’re still completely missing the point. Your remark was intended for the amusement of the public at large? Obviously it was not intended for the amusement of the depressed and suicidal (“Or just hang yourself, you f**king losers...”)! It may have been an attempt at humour, but how many people actually thought it funny? I venture to suggest very few.

Poking fun? The spirit in which it is so ‘obviously’ meant? I put it to you that, far from being an enjoyable throwaway gag, most people would say it really comes across as a malicious and hateful posting, a deliberately callous, sadistic targeting of those who are mentally and emotionally suffering a serious condition which is truly deserving of sympathy and compassion rather than cruel and inanely juvenile mockery.'

Given up? I'm almost doing that myself. You (and those other two) and feminists have much in common. Rather than admit defeat in a debate and defer to the superior argument (I'm being somewhat rhetorical here) of someone you illogically oppose with all the vehemence of the totalitarian ideologue, you (and they) resort to ad hominem personal attacks, juvenile mockery, and attempts to silence and censor your opponents.

And when that sort of thing happens, I know I'm on the right track..

[cambgull]

A couple very interesting sentencess in your last paragraph there Gullscorer.

Firstly, "You (and THOSE other two)" is distancing language used mostly at a time of shame or guilt towards your own actions. A perfect example of this is Bill Clinton's, "I did not have sexual relations with THAT woman." It is designed as a barrier between yourself and the person you attempt to make out to be the guilty party, purely for self preservation purposes.

Secondly, "Rather than admit defeat in a debate and defer to the superior argument..." is a negation with a positive reinforcement. A textbook example of someone doubting their own beliefs but attempting to convince themselves as well as their opposition.

As for the rest of your post and the ones beforehand, you worryingly resort to the same tactics used by many religious fundamentalists. "of someone you illogically oppose with all the vehemence of the totalitarian ideologue". Similar to the above, you use your wording as if you are part of the minority, being oppressed by the majority. A fundamental part in the language used by radicals to convince their latest suicide bomber that he/she would be doing the right thing. Protesting against "Big Brother" or "The Man" is a crucially important part of convincing someone to join a cause as it gives all parties a unilateral goal.

My conclusion is simple, your opinions are based on some very powerful Neuro Linguistic Programming techniques which cause you to believe every aspect of what you read. Something you'll see much more regularly in a piece written by someone with a point to prove.

[Gullscorer]

Ha ha.. Good try, Luke, but no, it was the middle of the night, I was extremely tired and I could not remember your names, and wanted to get to sleep pretty quickly.

Methinks you've been studying the pseudo-science of Psychology (or some other -ology) too much. But then psychology these days is heavily influenced, if not by now almost totally controlled (a little more rhetoric here), by feminist ideology.. I suggest you open your mind, open the links below (which will open your eyes) and, if not study, then certainly think and decide for yourself, something you are not supposed to do in modern higher education.

I'm surprised you haven't studied the behaviour of teenage girls and the way they behave towards boys they consider to be 'creepy' or towards one of their own who does not conform to the group mentality, and then looked at their elder 'sisters'..

I'm most definitely 'creepy', and proud of it.. :~D

[AustrianAndyGull]

I'm lost.

Just don't take the piss out of people with disabilities or people less fortunate than oneself unless it is Man Utd and their fans because it is not nice. I think that's all we need to read.

[AustrianAndyGull]

You can take the piss out of chavs too, I find that acceptable. Oh and people who spend about a hundred quid on a pair of jeans and then wear a t-shirt that covers the brand label. If the said t-shirt happens to say, "I spent a hundred quid on these jeans you know but I'm just letting you know on this t-shirt because you can't see the label, otherwise I may as well have gone to Sainsburys and picked up just as good a pair for fifteen quid". It is ok to take the piss out of them too. Also people who buy branded trainers for their BABIES!!! What a great idea it is to spend £40 on a pair of adidas for a 6 month old. First of all it can't even **** well walk, secondly I doubt you can even see it's feet, thirdly it would have grown out of them in about 4 days and lastly it will look like a chav. Oh and please don't get your babies ears pierced please. If it wants to get them done when it is old enough to make that decision for itself then that's absolutely fine but until then leave it. It also doesn't look good. What the hell, rock and roll, may as well give the little sprite a celtic arm tattoo whilst you're at it.

[Gullscorer]

I'm lost.
Just don't take the piss out of people with disabilities or people less fortunate than oneself unless it is Man Utd and their fans because it is not nice. I think that's all we need to read.

You can take the piss out of chavs too, I find that acceptable. Oh and people who spend about a hundred quid on a pair of jeans and then wear a t-shirt that covers the brand label. If the said t-shirt happens to say, "I spent a hundred quid on these jeans you know but I'm just letting you know on this t-shirt because you can't see the label, otherwise I may as well have gone to Sainsburys and picked up just as good a pair for fifteen quid". It is ok to take the piss out of them too. Also people who buy branded trainers for their BABIES!!! What a great idea it is to spend £40 on a pair of adidas for a 6 month old. First of all it can't even f**king well walk, secondly I doubt you can even see it's feet, thirdly it would have grown out of them in about 4 days and lastly it will look like a chav. Oh and please don't get your babies ears pierced please. If it wants to get them done when it is old enough to make that decision for itself then that's absolutely fine but until then leave it. It also doesn't look good. What the hell, rock and roll, may as well give the little sprite a celtic arm tattoo whilst you're at it.

[Gullscorer]

Summertime all the year? Double Summertime in the summer? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15490249 This is absolute madness.

We should stick with Greenwich Mean Time all year round, so that midday is really midday, the time of day when the sun is highest in the sky. If at different times of year people find it too dark or too light, they should change their timetables, itineraries, diaries, appointments, starting times, opening and closing times accordingly. Not the bloody clock! Not a whole two hours! Disgraceful and ridiculous...!!

[EmetEdadsBeard]

Summertime all the year? Double Summertime in the summer? http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15490249 This is absolute madness.

We should stick with Greenwich Mean Time all year round, so that midday is really midday, the time of day when the sun is highest in the sky. If at different times of year people find it too dark or too light, they should change their timetables, itineraries, diaries, appointments, starting times, opening and closing times accordingly. Not the bloody clock! Not a whole two hours! Disgraceful and ridiculous...!!

I disagree with you completely and agree totally behind the reason behind the proposal.
At the moment I work 8am to 4pm, although up until July I worked 9ish to 3.30ish in a school. Under the current time system we go to work in broad daylight from October when the clocks change until March when they change back, yet we go home in the dark. I, and many others would rather have an extra hour or two of daylight after work, not before, so I can walk the dog, potter in the garden, wash the car, clean the roof, whatever, things you aren't likely to do BEFORE you get ready to go to work (well maybe walk dog).
I do agree with you about moving the 'time' about, stupid concept, but unlike yourself I would have the lighter part of the day after work and leave the clocks alone, not before it for the reasons stated. :ping:

[ferrarilover]

You see Luke, Scorer has done it again. Have a read of the bits he's quoted. He makes a couple of assertions ("I venture to suggest" "I put it to you") but then adduced absolutely no evidence to back it up.

He then claims to have the 'superior argument'. What he's doing is having a fight that he cannot lose. He just blusters on, never accepting anything anyone else says and having arguments that no one else is having. Regards the argument in question, we've seen absolutely no evidence at all that anyone was harmed by the comments I made, but I've a number of people who would support my view that they were, at least to some slight degree, humourous and obviously not in intended to harm. That evidence will now by countered by more bluster from the man himself (with no basis in fact or counter-evidence, of course).

In 3...2...1...

Matt.

[Gullscorer]

Okay Matt, here we are; I know you couldn't wait for this..

I venture to suggest that you need to get a dictionary and educate yourself as to the differences between 'comment', 'opinion', 'assertion', 'fact', and 'evidence'. And I put it to you that it is actually you, yourself, who is blustering on, because this is an argument you cannot win.

'No evidence at all that anyone was harmed'..? As usual, you completely miss the point; or is it that you deliberately try to obfuscate and deflect people away from the point? Austrian Andy, not normally known for his brevity and succinctness, puts it very well in his penultimate post above, which I repeat here: 'Just don't take the piss out of people with disabilities or people less fortunate than oneself unless it is Man Utd and their fans because it is not nice. I think that's all we need to read.'

Presumably you will now argue that the comment you made ("Or just hang yourself, you f**king losers...") was not actually taking the piss or that there's insufficient 'evidence' that it's 'not nice'. Bluster on, Matt. Bluster on...

Rangeroverlover... :na: :~D

[cambgull]

You see Luke, Scorer has done it again. Have a read of the bits he's quoted. He makes a couple of assertions ("I venture to suggest" "I put it to you") but then adduced absolutely no evidence to back it up.

He then claims to have the 'superior argument'. What he's doing is having a fight that he cannot lose. He just blusters on, never accepting anything anyone else says and having arguments that no one else is having. Regards the argument in question, we've seen absolutely no evidence at all that anyone was harmed by the comments I made, but I've a number of people who would support my view that they were, at least to some slight degree, humourous and obviously not in intended to harm. That evidence will now by countered by more bluster from the man himself (with no basis in fact or counter-evidence, of course).

In 3...2...1...

Matt.

I'm getting a bit bored of this all now to be honest Matt. I've tried two different tacts now and neither will work because the screw isn't even lose, it's fallen out and rolled down the manhole cover.

I'll reply to your PM in a moment as there is something worrying that I read from him which should perhaps stay away from public eyes.

Let's just say that I hope Gullscorer is a very different person when not behind his keyboard. If anyone who knows him personally could PM me, that would be great.

[Pea]

Methinks you've been studying the pseudo-science of Psychology (or some other -ology) too much. But then psychology these days is heavily influenced, if not by now almost totally controlled (a little more rhetoric here), by feminist ideology..

I'm not here to start an argument so let's make that clear for the get go. Just need to correct your statement.

Psychology is NOT almost totally controlled by feminist ideology. You're making yourself to be out as a mug now Gullscorer. I've been studying psychology for five years now, three of which at degree level. I've been asked to present at the British Psychological Undergraduate Conference this year, so without blowing my own trumpet, for a good 90% of the time, my Psychological knowledge is bloody good.

I can count on one hand the amount of female produced theories. And they're nothing to do with feminism. In fact, in all my years studying psychology, I've never come across a single 'feminist ideology' approach or theory.

By the same notion, if our 'ologies' which you seem to have SUCH a problem with are so feministically ruled, why isn't Luke (whom I assume has studied psychology from his in depth knowledge) a raging feminist, why am I not stood burning my bra at every opportunity I get?

Perhaps you ought to give ologies more of a chance. We've clashed on this subject before so I don't feel I should have to go into too much great detail here, but the manner in which you present your opinions on subjects that you haven't even given the time of day, is worrying.

I, personally, would suggest from lots of the comments I've seen you post on here that its not a good idea for me to engage any further, but this is something I couldn't let slide.

Please stop making stupid accusations about things, because one day, somebody might just believe you - and that's not fair on the rest of us for whom this falsity has been thrust upon.