On 8/2/2012 7:51 AM, Rupert wrote:
> On Aug 2, 4:50 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
>> On 8/2/2012 7:43 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 2, 4:39 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
>>>> On 8/2/2012 6:59 AM, Rupert wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Aug 2, 3:39 pm, George Plimpton > wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> No. The things he says that are lies don't contradict his statements of
>>>>>>>>>> belief.
>>
>>>>>>>>> Well, I must have misunderstood you
>>
>>>>>>>> They don't contradict his statements of belief because the apparent
>>>>>>>> contradictions are lies. His statements of belief are "true" in the
>>>>>>>> sense that they accurately state his beliefs. When he says that the
>>>>>>>> "unborn animals" will experience some loss if their conception and birth
>>>>>>>> are prevented, he is expressing a belief that is in accord with all of
>>>>>>>> his other unsolicited statements of belief. When he says he couldn't
>>>>>>>> believe "they" would experience a loss because he considers them to be
>>>>>>>> "nothing", that is a lie, and so it cannot contradict his statement of
>>>>>>>> belief.
>>
>>>>>>> You appear to be confused about what "contradict" means.
>>
>>>>>> No.
>>
>>>>> I'm afraid
>>
>>>> Because you've not been taking your anti-psychotic meds.
>>
>> You should get back on them, or else very unpleasant wobbliness will result.
>>
>
> I am taking them as prescribed.

Clearly you aren't. Increased wobbliness is in stark evidence.


>>>>>>>> Only if he truly believed that the unconceived farm animals are
>>>>>>>> "nothing" could it be contradictory, but he doesn't believe that, as I
>>>>>>>> have proved.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ****wit *still* believes that the "getting to experience life" is
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> important - *morally* important - to the animals themselves, even before
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> they are conceived and born and exist as rational people think of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> existence. The *only* way he can believe that is if he believes they
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "pre-exist in some sense." He does believe that. He is an idiot.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well, you certainly seem to be convinced.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm right.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So you would appear to believe.
>>
>>>>>>>>>> You know I'm right. You just like being an asshole.
>>
>>>>>>>>> You seem to react in a very hostile way when someone isn't persuaded
>>>>>>>>> by your argument.
>>
>>>>>>>> You just like being an asshole - a bloated-ego asshole.
>>
>>>>>>> You seem to be rather intolerant of differences of opinion.
>>
>>>>>> No.
>>
>>>>> That's very funny.
>>
>>>> No.
>>
>>> Well, I laughed.
>>
>> Psychosis.
>>
>
> That was quite funny as well.

That's lovely.


>>
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't hate you
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ha ha ha ha ha ha! Yes, you do, Woopert. It's irrational, but that's
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> consistent for you.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why do you think I hate you?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Irrationality.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> No,
>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes.
>>
>>>>>>> What led you to the conclusion that I hate you
>>
>>>>>> What you write here, and your obsession with me.
>>
>>>>> Where do you see the evidence of hatred?
>>
>>>> In your posts.
>>
>>> Can you be more specific?
>>
>> <yawn>
>
> Your belief that I hate you is irrational.

It isn't.