SatansSon666 wrote: ↑September 23rd, 2023, 12:10 pm
That's how we know you lost.
Childish insults.
You don't even understand burden of proof in an argument, your logic is horrible.
Im not insulting you.
My logic is horrible??? Your argument is that it could ONLY be fraud ONE WAY. I pointed out that fraud can be more than one way, there is no evidence needed because THAT is tautological.
That is a subject that is true by its logical form alone.
So...you don't like the fact that there is a possibility that the film could be doctored in innumerable ways but it is only because you are a biased person.
Bias is the enemy of logic. As I said...I don't particularly care what the outcome REALLY is, my comment was based solely on the logic that fraud is not a one way street.
Vercingetorix wrote: ↑September 23rd, 2023, 12:53 pm
Im not insulting you.
My logic is horrible??? Your argument is that it could ONLY be fraud ONE WAY. I pointed out that fraud can be more than one way, there is no evidence needed because THAT is tautological.
That is a subject that is true by its logical form alone.
So...you don't like the fact that there is a possibility that the film could be doctored in innumerable ways but it is only because you are a biased person.
Bias is the enemy of logic. As I said...I don't particularly care what the outcome REALLY is, my comment was based solely on the logic that fraud is not a one way street.
THAT is logic.
Dipshit is an insult.
There is no evidence that he said what they say he said.
You can believe whatever you want bud, it confirms your bias, so of course you will find a way to argue something that's been debunked for months.
You be you.
Some 4chan troll probably edited it for lulz and here we are.
SatansSon666 wrote: ↑September 23rd, 2023, 10:14 am
It's my professional opinion that you got duped by a story that was debunked in June.
Also, it is my professional opinion that you want it to be true, so you'll play some dumb game all day instead of recognizing the fact that the original video doesn't show him saying the kid was sexy.
Debunked in June.
How?
Duped? Maybe you should reread my original post. You do this all the time - Assume too much based on your prejudices.
SatansSon666 wrote: ↑September 23rd, 2023, 1:25 pm
Dipshit is an insult.
There is no evidence that he said what they say he said.
It isn't your middle name??
You can believe whatever you want bud, it confirms your bias, so of course you will find a way to argue something that's been debunked for months.
You be you.
Some 4chan troll probably edited it for lulz and here we are.
As I said...I'm not arguing what is fact or not....only that they debunked something based on a bias. They say the scandalous version is doctored and say the mundane is not. It is impossible to come to any logical conclusion because if one was altered the other one very well could have been. That is how logic works, being able to recognize all possible outcomes.
As I also noted, this isn't important to me. I won't believe one way or another
Vercingetorix wrote: ↑September 23rd, 2023, 2:14 pm
It isn't your middle name??
As I said...I'm not arguing what is fact or not....only that they debunked something based on a bias. They say the scandalous version is doctored and say the mundane is not. It is impossible to come to any logical conclusion because if one was altered the other one very well could have been. That is how logic works, being able to recognize all possible outcomes.
As I also noted, this isn't important to me. I won't believe one way or another
The ORIGINAL VIDEO doesn't have him saying that at all.
If you think it's logical to assume that the dems made her delete that bit of audio before uploading it, only to have someone else somehow get their hands on that deleted audio and then added it back to the video to post on social media, then you don't understand logic.
Vercingetorix wrote: ↑September 23rd, 2023, 12:53 pm
Im not insulting you.
My logic is horrible??? Your argument is that it could ONLY be fraud ONE WAY. I pointed out that fraud can be more than one way, there is no evidence needed because THAT is tautological.
That is a subject that is true by its logical form alone.
So...you don't like the fact that there is a possibility that the film could be doctored in innumerable ways but it is only because you are a biased person.
Bias is the enemy of logic. As I said...I don't particularly care what the outcome REALLY is, my comment was based solely on the logic that fraud is not a one way street.
THAT is logic.
As usual, goat boi sees something and assumes you said another thing. It is a common trait among the less educated and people that let emotion rule their actions, rather than logic, reason and understanding.
He continues to assume I said Puddinhead said what is being implied when all I did was ask if he said it.
It's how wars are started, and how people go around knocking out other people's teeth based on a misunderstanding and/or ignorance.
SatansSon666 wrote: ↑September 23rd, 2023, 2:35 pm
The ORIGINAL VIDEO doesn't have him saying that at all.
If you think it's logical to assume that the dems made her delete that bit of audio before uploading it, only to have someone else somehow get their hands on that deleted audio and then added it back to the video to post on social media, then you don't understand logic.
Bud...you have no idea what the original audio was.
