liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Liar whoever, your comments have the intellectual content of a fart. I don't debate with that.
Wow!
Cornered and then a child like response.
Yet you “debate “ on an other thread.
Oh ! You have not realised you are cornered on that thread.
Cornered and exposed as a lying unreading contaminant.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
Liar whoever, your comments have the intellectual content of a fart. I don't debate with that.
Pitching your posts like a 6-year old on purpose is not debate.
There is nothing to debate with here, only falsehood, denial and sheer mental incompetence.
letsdrum wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
I hope you know them, because English isn't your strong point.
That's true, English isn't my strong language. This means I know other languages better and you have written nonsense again when claiming all the posters here know just one language.
The point is: why do you point on a misspelled word? Especially when you should know that not anybody (like you) has English as main language?
You are debating in English when it isn't a language in which you have any great competence. You claim to be able to identify my errors while failing to see your own, on matters such as basic spelling. That is a particularly stupid thing to do. But then reason, fact and logic are not your strengths, either. I didn't say other posters know just one language but that I hadn't seen language fluency of any kind on this thread.
straight to the point wrote:
Look, forget the previous 27 pages of waffle and read this: Gidey is doped TO_THE_GILLS beyond all reasonable doubt.
Exactly.
Armstronglivs wrote:
You are debating in English when it isn't a language in which you have any great competence. You claim to be able to identify my errors while failing to see your own, on matters such as basic spelling. That is a particularly stupid thing to do. But then reason, fact and logic are not your strengths, either. I didn't say other posters know just one language but that I hadn't seen language fluency of any kind on this thread.
Even English as a Foreign Language posters understand you comport yourself like a 6-year old, something you freely admitted, that you do, and do on purpose — I mean no offense to 6-year olds.
Accusing him of failing to see his (alleged) failures is the way you fail to address your own inabilities. It’s the old “I’m rubber and you’re glue…” or the “I know you are but what am I …” debate tactic we all honed on the playground before we grew up.
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Pitching your posts like a 6-year old on purpose is not debate.
There is nothing to debate with here, only falsehood, denial and sheer mental incompetence.
More tools we find in your “debate” toolbox.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You are debating in English when it isn't a language in which you have any great competence. You claim to be able to identify my errors while failing to see your own, on matters such as basic spelling. That is a particularly stupid thing to do. But then reason, fact and logic are not your strengths, either. I didn't say other posters know just one language but that I hadn't seen language fluency of any kind on this thread.
Even English as a Foreign Language posters understand you comport yourself like a 6-year old, something you freely admitted, that you do, and do on purpose — I mean no offense to 6-year olds.
Accusing him of failing to see his (alleged) failures is the way you fail to address your own inabilities. It’s the old “I’m rubber and you’re glue…” or the “I know you are but what am I …” debate tactic we all honed on the playground before we grew up.
I agree and remind that Armstronglivs lies and cheats in his posts and will not read the rules.
When cornered he goes in to hiding.
Armstronglivs wrote:
straight to the point wrote:
Look, forget the previous 27 pages of waffle and read this: Gidey is doped TO_THE_GILLS beyond all reasonable doubt.
Exactly.
What on earth to you depend upon for such an opinion.
Evidence perhaps?
Armstronglivs wrote:
rekrunner wrote:
Pitching your posts like a 6-year old on purpose is not debate.
There is nothing to debate with here, only falsehood, denial and sheer mental incompetence.
Could debate the rules that you have refused to read.
Why won’t you read and debate them?
liar soorer wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Armstronglivs has been cornered and goes into “ ignore” mode.
Seen it on all the threads he contaminates.
Also failed to explain what he means when he calls me and others “doping deniers”.
No response !
Said he will not respond.
I think because he is exposed as a fraud and an uneducated liar.
Armstronglivs wrote:
letsdrum wrote:
That's true, English isn't my strong language. This means I know other languages better and you have written nonsense again when claiming all the posters here know just one language.
The point is: why do you point on a misspelled word? Especially when you should know that not anybody (like you) has English as main language?
You are debating in English when it isn't a language in which you have any great competence. You claim to be able to identify my errors while failing to see your own, on matters such as basic spelling. That is a particularly stupid thing to do. But then reason, fact and logic are not your strengths, either. I didn't say other posters know just one language but that I hadn't seen language fluency of any kind on this thread.
I have not pointed on a single spelling error of yours, what are you talking about?
English is not my first language, but my English obviously is good enough to follow such a thread. Which errors of mine are you talking about? And what's the problem if I have done one or a few?
You have clearly questioned the capabilities regarding languages of all the posters in this thread.
You have agreed that the quality of your posts is on a 6-years old level. And this is one of the very few statements of yours I would agree to.
I have seen this same "discussion" behaviour from you on many other threads - hard to believe you are a grown up man.
letsdrum wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You are debating in English when it isn't a language in which you have any great competence. You claim to be able to identify my errors while failing to see your own, on matters such as basic spelling. That is a particularly stupid thing to do. But then reason, fact and logic are not your strengths, either. I didn't say other posters know just one language but that I hadn't seen language fluency of any kind on this thread.
I have not pointed on a single spelling error of yours, what are you talking about?
English is not my first language, but my English obviously is good enough to follow such a thread. Which errors of mine are you talking about? And what's the problem if I have done one or a few?
You have clearly questioned the capabilities regarding languages of all the posters in this thread.
You have agreed that the quality of your posts is on a 6-years old level. And this is one of the very few statements of yours I would agree to.
I have seen this same "discussion" behaviour from you on many other threads - hard to believe you are a grown up man.
You are correct and I admire how you control your criticisms of Armstronglivs.
I have found that he lies and cheats and refuses to read in a multitude of threads.
liar soorer wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
No response !
Said he will not respond.
I think because he is exposed as a fraud and an uneducated liar.
Still no responses.
liar soorer wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Said he will not respond.
I think because he is exposed as a fraud and an uneducated liar.
Still no responses.
There is nothing to respond to except your repeatedly breaking wind.
liar soorer wrote:
letsdrum wrote:
I have not pointed on a single spelling error of yours, what are you talking about?
English is not my first language, but my English obviously is good enough to follow such a thread. Which errors of mine are you talking about? And what's the problem if I have done one or a few?
You have clearly questioned the capabilities regarding languages of all the posters in this thread.
You have agreed that the quality of your posts is on a 6-years old level. And this is one of the very few statements of yours I would agree to.
I have seen this same "discussion" behaviour from you on many other threads - hard to believe you are a grown up man.
You are correct and I admire how you control your criticisms of Armstronglivs.
I have found that he lies and cheats and refuses to read in a multitude of threads.
I have never encountered a more stupid poster than your good self.
letsdrum wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You are debating in English when it isn't a language in which you have any great competence. You claim to be able to identify my errors while failing to see your own, on matters such as basic spelling. That is a particularly stupid thing to do. But then reason, fact and logic are not your strengths, either. I didn't say other posters know just one language but that I hadn't seen language fluency of any kind on this thread.
I have not pointed on a single spelling error of yours, what are you talking about?
English is not my first language, but my English obviously is good enough to follow such a thread. Which errors of mine are you talking about? And what's the problem if I have done one or a few?
You have clearly questioned the capabilities regarding languages of all the posters in this thread.
You have agreed that the quality of your posts is on a 6-years old level. And this is one of the very few statements of yours I would agree to.
I have seen this same "discussion" behaviour from you on many other threads - hard to believe you are a grown up man.
I find it reassuring to incur your disapproval. Praise from such as you would be most concerning.
rekrunner wrote:
Armstronglivs wrote:
You are debating in English when it isn't a language in which you have any great competence. You claim to be able to identify my errors while failing to see your own, on matters such as basic spelling. That is a particularly stupid thing to do. But then reason, fact and logic are not your strengths, either. I didn't say other posters know just one language but that I hadn't seen language fluency of any kind on this thread.
Even English as a Foreign Language posters understand you comport yourself like a 6-year old, something you freely admitted, that you do, and do on purpose — I mean no offense to 6-year olds.
Accusing him of failing to see his (alleged) failures is the way you fail to address your own inabilities. It’s the old “I’m rubber and you’re glue…” or the “I know you are but what am I …” debate tactic we all honed on the playground before we grew up.
You are merely a more verbose version of the vacuous plodders you defend. But you have at least found your "tribe".
Armstronglivs wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
You are correct and I admire how you control your criticisms of Armstronglivs.
I have found that he lies and cheats and refuses to read in a multitude of threads.
I have never encountered a more stupid poster than your good self.
You have been cornered and refuse to engage other than this latest series of contaminates.
Armstronglivs wrote:
liar soorer wrote:
Still no responses.
There is nothing to respond to except your repeatedly breaking wind.
Go away!
Armstronglivs is a narcissistic sociopath.
He will insult others because that makes him feel superior to them.
The truth is that he is extremely insecure so he plays the tough, smart, better-than-you guy because he is unable/scared to face his insecurities and faults.
In one picture:
:max_bytes(150000):strip_icc():format(webp)/understanding-the-narcissistic-sociopath-4587611-92dbd199b0df4b8487cde72372c95f0a.png){kind=link}