Awesome Jakob Ingebrigtsen profile in The Times: When I'm done, I want there to be no doubt I'm the GOAT.

justanothercuriousdude wrote:

7765656747863 wrote:

No, I was not diagnosed with Aspergers.

You ask this because I write facts? Because I'm not happy when someone changes what I have written to the opposite? When I don't like it to be called a liar when stating facts?

Really strange that someone wants to discuss something without being interested in the facts.

Thank you for a civil answer despite you not agreeing with my content…

I’m not against facts! But I’m not a very knowledgeable guy when it comes to athletics; training, split times, doping, WR attempts, athletics history, and so on. The main reason for my ignorance is that I’m not that interested… (The exception here is that I am very interested in Jakob and Narve G. Nordås. The former seems a little out debated for now, but the latter could be analysed much better -maybe he is the coming Goat, and not Jakob, Who knows..?)

Outside of athletics I find facts of the outmost importance and interest, f.ex the lyrics of Dylan and Cohen, that I dig deep into. So I’m not against facts, and I deeply respect that you maybe wishes to go deep into facts in this forum. But you shouldn’t address me then -you should engage in the posters I have mentioned, and f.ex a guy like rekrunner who can go on and on about facts that is impressive, but where I (eventually) are lost…

We should stop this off topic thing. I think I will wait to there’s more to say about Jakob’s possible Goat ability, or maybe about Nordås as a contender…

7765656747863 wrote:

justanothercuriousdude wrote:

Thank you for a civil answer despite you not agreeing with my content…

I’m not against facts! But I’m not a very knowledgeable guy when it comes to athletics; training, split times, doping, WR attempts, athletics history, and so on. The main reason for my ignorance is that I’m not that interested… (The exception here is that I am very interested in Jakob and Narve G. Nordås. The former seems a little out debated for now, but the latter could be analysed much better -maybe he is the coming Goat, and not Jakob, Who knows..?)

Outside of athletics I find facts of the outmost importance and interest, f.ex the lyrics of Dylan and Cohen, that I dig deep into. So I’m not against facts, and I deeply respect that you maybe wishes to go deep into facts in this forum. But you shouldn’t address me then -you should engage in the posters I have mentioned, and f.ex a guy like rekrunner who can go on and on about facts that is impressive, but where I (eventually) are lost…

We should stop this off topic thing. I think I will wait to there’s more to say about Jakob’s possible Goat ability, or maybe about Nordås as a contender…

I was always civil in this thread.
In this issue here you are not at all interested in the facts but you still think it's a good idea to give advice to others - that's astonishing to me.

I don't look for specific posters where to post but for thread titles I'm interested in. Unfortunally this coincedes often with the threads your new friend is posting.

Maybe you just leave it to me where to post - thanks.

7765656747863 wrote:

Armstronglivs wrote:

So you still harp on about "the facts" (which facts? The facts of life?) when you have conceded judgements on these subjects is largely a matter of opinion.

I haven't CONCEDED this - it's completely obvious and I have said this from the very beginning. You are the one who has given his - completely nonsensical view (to become GOAT distance runner you have to be the best in a single event) - as a fact.

Which facts?

- the facts I gave you about Herb Elliott's career (which just made you completely aggressive, which you denied, for which you called me a liar despite you don't know anything about it)

- the ones about Ingebrigtsen's career from me and others (which you belittled, which you ignored again and again and so on, which you tried to downgrade )

- the fact that you change what others have said over and over again if you don't like what they have said

- the fact that you change your own words when necessary "to survive" without just agreeing that you were wrong

- the fact that you often insult others just for stating facts which you don't like (as if this could change a fact like a record or something)

- the fact that you try to make the differences just a case of different opinion which I and others can't accept - a pure lie

7765656747863 wrote:

When pressurized regarding his constant belittlements of others, Armstrong presents himself as the poor guy who always is called out badly by the others and he just reacts to this.

Just from another thread, from the last few hours:
Armstrong:
- So you prove by your example that not all humans here are modern.
- You didn't point that out. But you will know what it is to be pre-modern.
- So you have just made your skin colour the point. It isn't of course.
It's your intelligence, which is nowhere near what you think it is.

The only "insult" against him before was:
That's "Light skin", if you bother to learn the English language.
This thread is about "white skin".

It's an absolute typical sequence.
Many other posters claim he is wrong with his initial post (I don't know what is true here) but if it's just as in so many other cases, I just can guess the answer...
Just like in countless other threads - around 80 years old, hard to believe.

Armstronglivs wrote:

7765656747863 wrote:

When pressurized regarding his constant belittlements of others, Armstrong presents himself as the poor guy who always is called out badly by the others and he just reacts to this.

Just from another thread, from the last few hours:
Armstrong:
- So you prove by your example that not all humans here are modern.
- You didn't point that out. But you will know what it is to be pre-modern.
- So you have just made your skin colour the point. It isn't of course.
It's your intelligence, which is nowhere near what you think it is.

The only "insult" against him before was:
That's "Light skin", if you bother to learn the English language.
This thread is about "white skin".

It's an absolute typical sequence.
Many other posters claim he is wrong with his initial post (I don't know what is true here) but if it's just as in so many other cases, I just can guess the answer...
Just like in countless other threads - around 80 years old, hard to believe.

Selective argument as usual. You always leave out the jibes and insults that my comments were responding to. You have done nothing on this thread except rail at or about me. Obsessed with being right. You have to be one of the biggest whiners on these boards.

Armstronglivs wrote:

7765656747863 wrote:

When pressurized regarding his constant belittlements of others, Armstrong presents himself as the poor guy who always is called out badly by the others and he just reacts to this.

Just from another thread, from the last few hours:
Armstrong:
- So you prove by your example that not all humans here are modern.
- You didn't point that out. But you will know what it is to be pre-modern.
- So you have just made your skin colour the point. It isn't of course.
It's your intelligence, which is nowhere near what you think it is.

The only "insult" against him before was:
That's "Light skin", if you bother to learn the English language.
This thread is about "white skin".

It's an absolute typical sequence.
Many other posters claim he is wrong with his initial post (I don't know what is true here) but if it's just as in so many other cases, I just can guess the answer...
Just like in countless other threads - around 80 years old, hard to believe.

Selective argument as usual. You always leave out the jibes and insults that my comments were responding to. You have done nothing on this thread except rail at or about me. Obsessed with being right. You have to be one of the biggest whiners on these boards.