Stupid World

[bogan]

Do Stupid Worlders vote

Not often, that just gives power to 'the man'.

[husaberg]

Do Stupid Worlders vote for stupid people?

Both of the ones in the picture have Daddy to thank.

Donald Trump

[mashman]

Actually, it is a perfect summary; since it is an objective one. Your subjective waffel about how right you are is up to fuck all. It's why the stupid worlders and the conspiracy theorists fail time and time again; they don't understand how a rational mind works, so fail to effectively engage with them; leaving you shitters as the whinging minority you deserve to be.

... you claim objectivity yet are unable to understand what someone else has written but claim that what they say makes no objective sense ... You get an A+ for that one.

[Voltaire]

Donald Trump

[mashman]

Do Stupid Worlders vote for stupid people?

Dunno. Do you?

[Voltaire]

Dunno. Do you?

Yes as they are the only ones on the voting form....maybe go BREXIT next time and vote Green.

[Akzle]

..

a ...merkin??

[mashman]

Yes as they are the only ones on the voting form....maybe go BREXIT next time and vote Green.

lol... you're a rebel arencha

[bogan]

... you claim objectivity yet are unable to understand what someone else has written but claim that what they say makes no objective sense ... You get an A+ for that one.

Of course, objectivity is the reason I don't buy into your blither. Objectivity, or your lack of it is why you fail to explain your concepts (the idea that I should understand a concept you refuse to explain is quite absurd).

Failure two understand takes two forms, either a failure in explanation, or in comprehension. Only by engaging in discussion can those options be whittled down to one. Thus, we can objectively conclude one who refuses to engage in discussion is not looking to promote understanding.

[Voltaire]

lol... you're a rebel arencha

Featuring the Phil Spector ( now in jail) Wall of Sound.

[mashman]

Of course, objectivity is the reason I don't buy into your blither. Objectivity, or your lack of it is why you fail to explain your concepts (the idea that I should understand a concept you refuse to explain is quite absurd).

Failure two understand takes two forms, either a failure in explanation, or in comprehension. Only by engaging in discussion can those options be whittled down to one. Thus, we can objectively conclude one who refuses to engage in discussion is not looking to promote understanding.

No, that's confirmation bias. I've explained the concept to you in many different ways over the years. You didn't understand any of them. Plenty of other people understand what I have to say. And to top it off... You have NO objectivity were you openly admit that you don't understand what I have said to you. Pretty fuckin moronic really, but hey, when the cap fits.

[husaberg]

No, that's confirmation bias. I've explained the concept to you in many different ways over the years. You didn't understand any of them. Plenty of other people understand what I have to say. And to top it off... You have NO objectivity were you openly admit that you don't understand what I have said to you. Pretty fuckin moronic really, but hey, when the cap fits.

I don't agree with your post at all, everytime you post all I see is.

[Scuba_Steve]

Why? they're stupid obviously, but what part of the worlder term applies? Common usage of the 'word' worlder is to come from or reside in a world, ie, 3rd worlder. Both of those people come from and reside in the US, which is reasonably well educated.

I apply the term to morons who deliberately see the world as a negative place, a stupid world; since that is their mindset, it can be said that is where they reside and come from. The uninformed drivel, and unwillingness to enter rational discussion further validates that they are coming from, and residing in stupidity.

America "reasonably well educated"
That last paragraph isn't very selective as I could quite easily put yourself & ocean1 into that cat (especially the latter) but you'll prob sit here & tell me "we ain't stupid worlders"... Either way don't matter I already know you can't change he opinion of someone on teh interwebs cause humans are fucked up like that; you just can't have a rational discussion on teh interwebs & to believe differently would be irrational

[bogan]

No, that's confirmation bias. I've explained the concept to you in many different ways over the years. You didn't understand any of them. Plenty of other people understand what I have to say. And to top it off... You have NO objectivity were you openly admit that you don't understand what I have said to you. Pretty fuckin moronic really, but hey, when the cap fits.

Since you seemd to have missed the obvious, what you are describing is subjective recollections. For my subjective recall, you made some bullshit explanation that didn't hold up to even cursory investigation, then hid behind ambiguities and more illogic. In fact, I also recall phrasing questions to you in different ways just to manipulate you into giving answer directly contradictory to others you had given. But as I say, all that is subjective recall, anything objective, must be shown. And you're claiming many things, but showing nothing...

America "reasonably well educated"
That last paragraph isn't very selective as I could quite easily put yourself & ocean1 into that cat (especially the latter) but you'll prob sit here & tell me "we ain't stupid worlders"... Either way don't matter I already know you can't change he opinion of someone on teh interwebs cause humans are fucked up like that; you just can't have a rational discussion on teh interwebs & to believe differently would be irrational

Only by any recognised standard...

We do not view the world as a negative place, nor spout uninformed drivel about how the system could be improved. So no, we do not fit into that category at all.

You can have rational discourse online, I've had plenty, this cesspit is actually the minority there; so perhaps if you can't have rational discussions online, look to the common factor...

[mashman]

Since you seemd to have missed the obvious, what you are describing is subjective recollections. For my subjective recall, you made some bullshit explanation that didn't hold up to even cursory investigation, then hid behind ambiguities and more illogic. In fact, I also recall phrasing questions to you in different ways just to manipulate you into giving answer directly contradictory to others you had given. But as I say, all that is subjective recall, anything objective, must be shown. And you're claiming many things, but showing nothing...

I never claimed I was being objective