Off Topic Aliens

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Nope, I said it was pagan, and showed you where it originated before your man invented his version.

My God Alan confirms this, and as it is the word of god, you cannot deny or argue. <ok>

Alan is a giant chicken, who lays giant eggs, and I imagine would make one hell of a meal (peas be upon him). He gave them to Maureen, the rabbit, who scattered them around the universe, hence the stars and planets. Something still celebrated at Easter.

Proof of this is Earth, which gets its name from Oeuf. As further proof, there is the phrase an ouef is an ouef.

Allan is in the process of scratching out his gospels in a book he'll call the Quackran , but he's having difficulty holding his pen. He's tried whispering his story to ghost writers, but they've made a right mess of it. The last one legged it, when it became obvious he was twisting Allan's gospels for his own ends, plus his literacy skills were far worse. He left in the dead of night, talking Allan's flying horse with him.

So, there you have it, undeniable evidence from god, that you carry out pagan traditions.

Allan is great. <peacedove>


Ahh yes the last Bastian of one who has lost an argument, mockery

Please show me where you have shown the pagan origins of SAI

That is all
 
So you want me to re read 45 pages of to and fro between you and DMD?
Yeah no one is gonna do that.
You could have just said it again, or referred to the post number, or, there is also something called "Copy and paste".
Again, this whole assumption, and DMD is equally as guilty of this, that everyone who pops in to the thread has memorised every previous comment both of you have said, or is willing to slog through 100's of posts of crap to see what you are talking about is just not gonna happen.

You're doing it again. <doh>
 
In this case, you did. I will freely admit.
I read back your posts, and you did post evidence.

But you know damn well you have been guilty of it many times on the politics thread <laugh>

So you accept your claim was wrong. There are no buts.
 
I never saw "si" (who is that?) make the comment.
I never said I saw "si" make the comment.
I dont even know who "si" is.

I expressed shock when you claimed Dunc wanted to rape your child, and I was lying?

Dunc is si

And you are lying when you said you were involved in a discussion with me

I think in anger you have confused yourself mate

Go have a lie down and come back later
 
You're doing it again. <doh>
You have done this a million times DMD, I have seen it.
You posted something, then 16 pages later, someone has asked you to answer something and instead of saying
"Read post no.16" or whatever, or copying and pasting what you wrote, you simply tell them to "read back what you wrote" in a politics thread with 3000 pages <laugh>
 
Dunc is si

And you are lying when you said you were involved in a discussion with me

I think in anger you have confused yourself mate

Go have a lie down and come back later
I am pretty sure we were talking when you made that claim....and even if we weren't...is that really the issue? He says he wanted to rape your child and you are going off at me for saying we were talking, when we werent?
I think you have your priorities mixed up mate.
 
Dunc is si

And you are lying when you said you were involved in a discussion with me

I think in anger you have confused yourself mate

Go have a lie down and come back later
dick ****...

read posts 902, 903, 904 and 905 sequentially.......i literally responded to your post just as you said that..


boom.
 
You swallow the bullshit of others.
I have seen it with my own eyes.
You may have answered the question, but it was 60 pages back, and you expect someone to trawl through 3000 pages to find your answer when you could just say "look at post No 1981" or better yet, copy and paste the post again.
 
Ahh yes the last Bastian of one who has lost an argument, mockery

Please show me where you have shown the pagan origins of SAI

That is all

Hardly. I'm more than happy to answer you and have a conversation, but you're simply not capable.

You've yet to answer the questions asked, nor to clarify what ever blind alley you're trying to steer it up.

My reply wasn't mockery, although you are more than deserving of mockery, it was satire, aimed at showing you how ridiculous your argument has been.
 
@thefanwithnoname you never addressed what you meant by gay peoples arguments are similar to atheist arguments.
I would like you to clarify exactly what that means.

You mean when a gay couple have a row, they use atheist arguments?
 
I have seen it with my own eyes.
You may have answered the question, but it was 60 pages back, and you expect someone to trawl through 3000 pages to find your answer when you could just say "look at post No 1981" or better yet, copy and paste the post again.

So you expect me to look for an answer from pages back, because some arsehole wants to drag out a dead conversation? If they're that arsed, they can look for it. <doh>
 
So you expect me to look for an answer from pages back, because some arsehole wants to drag out a dead conversation? If they're that arsed, they can look for it. <doh>
Not really how a debate works tho is it.

Can you imagine if, in a political debate, May or Corbyn just stood up there and answered every question with "It's in the manifesto.....read it".
"But Mr Corbyn....." "NO, its in the manifesto"
 
Not really how a debate works tho is it.

Can you imagine if, in a political debate, May or Corbyn just stood up there and answered every question with "It's in the manifesto.....read it".
"But Mr Corbyn....." "NO, its in the manifesto"

You're right, it's not, but quite often there are circumstances when that does occur.

It's not what this is about though. You need to have a word with the aresholes that seem to want someone else to dig out an answer they themselves can't be arsed to look for, or want to pose it in a different context. Don't bore me with your bullshit.
 
My claim was that you both adopt that tactic and you do. so no, not wrong
They both got very upset with me when I mentioned it, too.
@thefanwithnoname you never addressed what you meant by gay peoples arguments are similar to atheist arguments.
I would like you to clarify exactly what that means.

You mean when a gay couple have a row, they use atheist arguments?
He means that they should both be stoned to death. <whistle>
 
  • Like
Reactions: DUNCAN DONUTS
You're right, it's not, but quite often there are circumstances when that does occur.

It's not what this is about though. You need to have a word with the aresholes that seem to want someone else to dig out an answer they themselves can't be arsed to look for, or want to pose it in a different context. Don't bore me with your bullshit.
Maybe they dont know that you answered it.
Or maybe, as I said, the prospect of trawling through 3000 pages seems a little daunting, you presumably know when and where you said it.....surely if you want to win the debate, pointing them in the direction of the answer seems more conducive to winning than "Already answered.....find my answer in this chronicle of bullshit"
 
And you also had to face the reality that you were talking ****e. <doh>
Yes, everyone's independently accusing you both of the same thing, for no apparent reason. Funny that.
You have a similar posting style. I'm sorry if that offends you, but it's true.