Religion is Man- Made

[Age]

Is it an assumption? That human beings express truth beliefs ?

'you', "dontaskme", is the one who said anything about human beings expressing, so called, "truth beliefs".

Yes it was, thanks for clearing that up.

I NEVER did. I used the words, and wrote:
human beings just expressing what they BELIEVE is true,

Ok, thanks for clearing that up. Is there anything wrong with having a belief about what feels true?

As I have continually POINTED OUT, 'you', human beings, are ABSOLUTELY FREE to choose to BELIEF absolutely ANY thing you. So, to me, there is NOTHING wrong with HAVING a belief about ANY thing, including about what 'feels true'.

The VERY REASON WHY 'you', human beings, HAVE BELIEFS about what 'feels true' to each of 'you', individually, is so that during the evolving process that 'you' are ALL going through 'you' will come to discover, learn, and understand WHY having and holding BELIEFS in things, which are NOT ACTUALLY TRUE AT ALL, but ONLY 'feel true', is ACTUALLY WRONG, and in fact is to your own detriment.

Are 'you', human beings, in this forum, individually or collectively, expressing what 'you' do NOT BELIEVE is true?

If no, then 'you', human beings, are just expressing what 'you' BELIEVE is true.

I don't really understand what you are asking Age..sorry.

I will make it easier for you by directing this question to you directly "dontaskme".

When you express "yourself", (thoughts), in this forum do you express what you BELIEVE is true, or do you express what you do NOT BELIEVE is true?

If it is the former, then when I wrote; Human beings just expressing what they BELIEVE is true, is ACTUALLY True, and NOT an assumption. Remember you did ask me if 'it' was an assumption?

I was just CLEARING UP what I ACTUALLY WROTE compared to what you expressed I wrote, to which you asked if this was an ASSUMPTION of mine.

I personally do not believe in a creator that is separate from creation.

And the reason you do NOT believe this is BECAUSE it is an ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBILITY to even begin from. And, if ANY one tells you otherwise, then just ask them HOW could this even be a possibility, let alone be an actuality? and WATCH how they can NOT explain HOW.

For me, creation and creator are one and the same reality.

For me also. As can be CLEARLY SEEN and PROVEN throughout my writings here.

I believe observation or the awareness of sensation - is only known because evolution supplied awareness with the capacity to use language using concepts that made it possible to understand that pain is bad and the absence of pain is good.

But pain can be good, and thus absence of pain can be bad. But OBVIOUSLY this all depends on what EXACTLY is being talked about and referred to.

I do believe that awareness of pain, is that it is a bad sensation, and that the absence of pain is good.

But without awareness of pain, then one would NOT KNOW what to avoid.

I believe there is a natural tendency to avoid pain in favor of comfort.

The only time when pain is sought after is when that pains feel good, or feels less painful or better than the other pain one is feeling, and so the awareness of this less or better pain is better sort after (to be aware of) than that other pain or other painful situation.

I believe all sentient life forms are just living out their lives the best they can and seek mostly for comfort simply because they are aware of discomfort, which is not really wanted, at all, and yet is woven into the whole fabric of the universe.

To believe all sentient life forms, like "ones self" are just living out their lives "the best they can" allows, "justifies" or "rationalizes out", that that one now does NOT have to even TRY TO do better.

Life is OBVIOUSLY evolving. So, Life, Itself, could ALWAYS be, and/or becoming, BETTER.

Like Life, Itself, is coming to KNOW Thy Self, Life is also be-coming, TO BE, Its True Self. That is; thy True Self.

Life does this through avoiding pain and suffering, and/or, increasing pleasure and happiness.

Pain exists in feeling, while suffering exists in thinking. Nerve endings cause pain, or allow pain to be felt, in the body. Pain within internal feelings or emotions is caused by emotional abuse, and suffering is just cause through or because of confusion.

I believe that's not the work of a beautiful intelligence. I believe beauty is painful. It's all very crude, pointless and mindless, I believe this to be true.

And as 'I' say, 'you' are ABSOLUTELY FREE to BELIEVE ABSOLUTELY ANY thing you want to. But just remember that what you BELIEVE is true is NOT necessarily true, at all, and that just because you BELIEVE some thing is true this does NOT necessarily MAKE that thing true, at all.

[Age]

Why don't you start with showing the capability of defining what the word 'human being' actually refers to?

To me,

The 'human' word in 'human being' refers to the physical body part, which is visible to the physical eye/s.

The 'being' word in 'human being' refers to the thinking, feeling part, which is invisible to the physical eye/s. This part also goes by and is known by the words 'person', or 'personality'.

For further defining, the word 'person' refers to the thoughts and emotions only, within the body. This is because there is NO person who is more, NOR less, than ANY other 'person'. ALL people are EQUAL in that they are ALL the EXACT SAME thing, that is; just the thoughts and emotions within the body, but ALL people are also DIFFERENT in that they are ALL just made up of different thoughts.

In relation to some religious ideas/beliefs, the word 'soul' refers to this thinking, feeling, and invisible, part of the human being, which lasts forever. In that the whatever thoughts (the person/soul) that were in a physical (human) body leave, or have, an ever-lasting effect on the 'rest'.

And with all due respect, please try to do it without making the definition the length of the book War and Peace.

Thanks for your thoughts. And for clearing things up.

Was that to long, for you?

No, it was just right, thanks. I can only deal with tiny bites of information at once.

The only thing that puzzles me is the part where it is written '' the word 'soul' refers to this thinking, feeling, and invisible, part of the human being, which lasts forever. ''

How can the idea of 'forever' be known?

Through the same way ALL ideas of 'words' are known, and that is through a word evolves, or a human being just makes up a word, provides a definition for that word, and then that now known word and its now known definition is shared among "others".

Do you have ANY idea of what the word 'forever' refers to?

If yes, then HOW you obtained the idea of 'forever', then that is HOW the idea of 'forever' can be KNOWN.

But if no, then I suggest just looking in ANY dictionary, which has the word 'forever' in it, and then look up the definition provided for that word, then you can ascertain AN idea of 'forever'. And, that is another way of HOW the idea of 'forever' can be KNOWN.

Another way one HOW the idea of 'forever' can be known is by just relating it to the idea of 'NEVER ending'. And, HOW the idea of 'NEVER ending' can be known is by relating it to other things, which are are known, et cetera, et cetera.

[Sculptor]

“ A theologian is like a blind man in a dark room searching for a black cat which isn't there - and finding it! “ - unknown



“Since no one really knows anything about God, those who think they do are just troublemakers” Rabia Al-Basri



“Religion is man-made. Even the men who made it cannot agree on what their prophets or redeemers or gurus actually said or did “


“ I don't see any god up here” Yuri Gagarin - first man in space, while in space.

“The invisible and the non- existent look very much alike”


“I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires” Susan B. Anthony

Eskimo:"If I did not know about God and sin, would I go to hell?" Priest: "No, not if you did not know." Eskimo: "Then why did you tell me?"

Here's a good one...

“Having faith is believing in something you just know ain't true.”
Mark Twain.

[Sculptor]

There is no one remembering the events of their early years before they could talk.

Yep. There's me. And I'm sure there are others as well.

Religion types just make it up as they go along.
That's why you can't trust them; they are masters at self delusion.

[Immanuel Can]

There is only your truth when it comes to the subject of a metaphysical idea such as religion. Deny that all you want, makes no difference to the fact.

It also makes absolutely no difference that you say that if the facts are otherwise.

At least we agree on that much.

[Immanuel Can]

...it's consciousness that is primary, not experience.

Yes, but "consciousness" is not a lone property. It's always "consciousness OF something," and that something is some reality that is certainly not merely linguistic.

I originally stated that knowledge is born of language. That's right, not wrong, in my logic.

"In my logic?" It's just wrong in fact.

That you insist it's wrong, is irrelevant to this discussion unless you care to explain in detail why I'm wrong.

I did. Remember? It's experience that comes before language, not the other way around.

I agree that no language is required for experience. Just as no language is required for consciousness.

Good. That's reasonable of you.

The taste of an orange for example is an automatic experience in the sense there is an instant awareness of the experience, the sensation and the awareness of the sensation arise in the exact same instant.

A good example. Now we agree.

...there is no 'conceptual thing' that is experiencing this taste...

"Conceptual things" don't experience. Persons do. A "conceptual thing" is, by definition, just a "concept." So that claim is a bit like saying, "The number 2 , or the thought of warmness, has no experience." It's true, of course, but it's a category error.

...all truth claims are man-made after all,

All truth-claims are only man-made because all "claims" are man-made. The truth, the thing about which the claims are made, however, is not man-made.

In reality, there is no personal knowledge, personal knowledge is just a story.

No, that's not true. A "story" is a narrative. A story has a particular structure. There is knowledge buried IN some stories, but knowledge is not a story.

You can have knowledge of facts, knowledge of concepts (as you have already mentioned), knowledge of experiences...none of which are bound to the narrative structure. And not all stories are themselves fictions.

[Dontaskme]

As I have continually POINTED OUT, 'you', human beings, are ABSOLUTELY FREE to choose to BELIEF absolutely ANY thing you. So, to me, there is NOTHING wrong with HAVING a belief about ANY thing, including about what 'feels true'.

The VERY REASON WHY 'you', human beings, HAVE BELIEFS about what 'feels true' to each of 'you', individually, is so that during the evolving process that 'you' are ALL going through 'you' will come to discover, learn, and understand WHY having and holding BELIEFS in things, which are NOT ACTUALLY TRUE AT ALL, but ONLY 'feel true', is ACTUALLY WRONG, and in fact is to your own detriment.

Ok, if you say so.

But I don't agree that to be free to believe what feels true, is wrong as you imply. For me, the meaning of the word ''feels'' is a synonym likened to know, or sense is true, meaning it's innate to being.

I will make it easier for you by directing this question to you directly "dontaskme".

When you express "yourself", (thoughts), in this forum do you express what you BELIEVE is true, or do you express what you do NOT BELIEVE is true?

Both, sometimes I express what I do not believe is true, and what I do believe is true.

If it is the former, then when I wrote; Human beings just expressing what they BELIEVE is true, is ACTUALLY True, and NOT an assumption. Remember you did ask me if 'it' was an assumption?

I was just CLEARING UP what I ACTUALLY WROTE compared to what you expressed I wrote, to which you asked if this was an ASSUMPTION of mine.

Ok fair enough, that's understandable.

I personally do not believe in a creator that is separate from creation.

And the reason you do NOT believe this is BECAUSE it is an ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBILITY to even begin from. And, if ANY one tells you otherwise, then just ask them HOW could this even be a possibility, let alone be an actuality? and WATCH how they can NOT explain HOW.

What I've suggested is the nondual take on reality, that cannot be comprehended simply because to do so would create the illusion of duality, where there is a divide between knower and the known, or the creator and the created. It's no wonder the idea of nonduality is rejected, that's normal, because the sense of there literally being an 'I' on the inside and another 'I' outside of 'my I ' is very palpable and real.

But pain can be good, and thus absence of pain can be bad. But OBVIOUSLY this all depends on what EXACTLY is being talked about and referred to.

I do not think pain can be good. I think the reality for a sentient feeling creature is either pain, or the absence of pain. There is no pleasure in pain. But nevertheless, pain is unavoidable, even too much pleasure is the sole cause of pain. I do not think the price of living is worth the addmission, it's too messy and expensive. It's a high price to pay just to experience the fleeting moments that are the absence of pain. Including both, mentally emotional, and physical pain. I'm actually in favor of never having existed in the first place. I would choose that over life any day. That's why I have a problem with the Christian belief, that the creator God is good. And I'm like err no, the idea that God is good, is misguided, if there is a God, then God is sadistic and evil. And that's the proof right there, that God is impossible. Rather, the universe and it's life forms are the result of chemical reactions, quite crude and dumb, no inteligence there at all.

I do believe that awareness of pain, is that it is a bad sensation, and that the absence of pain is good.

But without awareness of pain, then one would NOT KNOW what to avoid.

So do you think it's a good idea to live a life where all we are trying to do is avoid pain, in favor of comfort. Is that the lot of sentient life..avoid pain and suffering. It seems like an endurance test not worth the ticket, as if we are being gamed by the game, all just to lose in the end anyway. Better to have never had to play the game in the first place. This is just how I see life that is sentient, I personally think it's dumb and stupid, and not the work of an intelligent all loving creator that the christians believe in.

I believe there is a natural tendency to avoid pain in favor of comfort.

The only time when pain is sought after is when that pains feel good, or feels less painful or better than the other pain one is feeling, and so the awareness of this less or better pain is better sort after (to be aware of) than that other pain or other painful situation.

Hmm, not sure what you mean, but never mind.

I believe all sentient life forms are just living out their lives the best they can and seek mostly for comfort simply because they are aware of discomfort, which is not really wanted, at all, and yet is woven into the whole fabric of the universe.

To believe all sentient life forms, like "ones self" are just living out their lives "the best they can" allows, "justifies" or "rationalizes out", that that one now does NOT have to even TRY TO do better.

I hate this DO BETTER idea. No amount of doing better is ever going to eradicate pain and suffering, it's just only going to delay it until the moment of death anyway. The dying process can be very unpleasant, undignified, long and slow. It is worse for wild animals who sometimes wander the plains with half their guts hanging out from fighting in the pursuit of survival. It's sick.

Life is OBVIOUSLY evolving. So, Life, Itself, could ALWAYS be, and/or becoming, BETTER.

Don't agree.

And as 'I' say, 'you' are ABSOLUTELY FREE to BELIEVE ABSOLUTELY ANY thing you want to. But just remember that what you BELIEVE is true is NOT necessarily true, at all, and that just because you BELIEVE some thing is true this does NOT necessarily MAKE that thing true, at all.

And 'you' are free to to believe that life could be made better when we know thyself. But just remember that what you BELIEVE is true is NOT necessarily true, at all, and that just because you BELIEVE some thing is true this does NOT necessarily MAKE that thing true, at all.

Anyone who advocates for a better life is a moron. Simply because it's just prolonging the agony for another day, year, decade, century.

It's obvious that humans enjoy suffering, so be it. But I think it's dumb.

[Dontaskme]

"Conceptual things" don't experience. Persons do. A "conceptual thing" is, by definition, just a "concept." So that claim is a bit like saying, "The number 2 , or the thought of warmness, has no experience." It's true, of course, but it's a category error.

I can't deal with you anymore, your just too dumb, you and your cousin Walker, just too dumb for words.

A person, all persons are a 'conceptual thing'. . it's not even your fault if you do not understand this, you are constantly being played and tricked by the game of life.

You also accuse others of doing exactly what you do yourself, there is no hope for humanity, they are finished. I'm sure the universe will be glad to see the back of them. They'll get the same treatment as did all the rest of the uninhabited planets in the universe , they will be left to barren existence, exactly what they deserve. The only sanity that exists is non-existence.

Christians and their beliefs are the bane of this world. Delusion no knows bounds with them.

.

[Dontaskme]

Here's a good one...

“Having faith is believing in something you just know ain't true.”
Mark Twain.

Fuckin Mint.

I like Twain.

Never the twain shall meet.

[Immanuel Can]

"Conceptual things" don't experience. Persons do. A "conceptual thing" is, by definition, just a "concept." So that claim is a bit like saying, "The number 2 , or the thought of warmness, has no experience." It's true, of course, but it's a category error.

I can't deal with you anymore, your just too dumb, you and your cousin Walker, just too dumb for words.

Ah, the ad homimen: the sure sign somebody has failed in argument.

I knew it was coming.

Well, that's your choice, I guess. I will not return the insult.

[Dontaskme]

There is no one remembering the events of their early years before they could talk.

Yep. There's me. And I'm sure there are others as well.

Religion types just make it up as they go along.
That's why you can't trust them; they are masters at self delusion.

I agree.

They actually believe their own self-made lies, which makes them dumb and stupid and they have the arrogance to believe they are the superior, and most intelligent of the species. Beliefs about God is like a child chasing a pink balloon, do these people every grow up and face actual reality.

I would like to receive a postcard from IC when he accends to heaven to be by Gods side. It would be nice to hear how his eternal life is doing, i hope it's not too boring for him, hope they have the game of monopoly up there, that should keep him busy. I wonder what mayfair would be changed to up in the land of heaven, I'm hoping he'll send on the information and let us know, it'd be kind of interesting to know something like that. Funny how you never really hear from those who are with God in eternal heaven though, but it's a lovely story anyway, humans love their man-made stories, I mean what are they without their story.

[Dontaskme]

"Conceptual things" don't experience. Persons do. A "conceptual thing" is, by definition, just a "concept." So that claim is a bit like saying, "The number 2 , or the thought of warmness, has no experience." It's true, of course, but it's a category error.

I can't deal with you anymore, your just too dumb, you and your cousin Walker, just too dumb for words.

Ah, the ad homimen: the sure sign somebody has failed in argument.

I knew it was coming.

Well, that's your choice, I guess. I will not return the insult.

You have no solid argument to make, you've time and time again bailed out of a good solid argument, and replaced it with ...sorry, that's wrong. Walker is ''The Right Six man...another bore fest, who only pretends he knows what he is talking about, you guys are a dime a dozen, full of cheap talk, with no real depth to it.

You won't return the insult eh, well you just did, and always do, because your responses are an insult to my intelligence.




.

[Immanuel Can]

I can't deal with you anymore, your just too dumb, you and your cousin Walker, just too dumb for words.

Ah, the ad homimen: the sure sign somebody has failed in argument.

I knew it was coming.

Well, that's your choice, I guess. I will not return the insult.

You have no solid argument to make,...

Apparently it was solid enough to make you resort to the ad homimens.

That'll do. Once you go there, there's not much more to be said.

[Age]

As I have continually POINTED OUT, 'you', human beings, are ABSOLUTELY FREE to choose to BELIEF absolutely ANY thing you. So, to me, there is NOTHING wrong with HAVING a belief about ANY thing, including about what 'feels true'.

The VERY REASON WHY 'you', human beings, HAVE BELIEFS about what 'feels true' to each of 'you', individually, is so that during the evolving process that 'you' are ALL going through 'you' will come to discover, learn, and understand WHY having and holding BELIEFS in things, which are NOT ACTUALLY TRUE AT ALL, but ONLY 'feel true', is ACTUALLY WRONG, and in fact is to your own detriment.

Ok, if you say so.

But I don't agree that to be free to believe what feels true, is wrong as you imply.

WHY would you even begin to think that I "implied" what you wrote here, when I CLEARLY STATED; to me, there is NOTHING wrong with HAVING a belief about ANY thing, including about what 'feels true'. ?

For me, the meaning of the word ''feels'' is a synonym likened to know, or sense is true, meaning it's innate to being.

But how does this work when 'you', human beings, inform each other of what "feels true" to each of 'you' individually but which is DIFFERENT?

Obviously what is, so called, "innate" to each of 'you' individual 'beings' is NOT ACTUALLY innate to thee One and ONLY True 'Being'.

I will make it easier for you by directing this question to you directly "dontaskme".

When you express "yourself", (thoughts), in this forum do you express what you BELIEVE is true, or do you express what you do NOT BELIEVE is true?

Both, sometimes I express what I do not believe is true, and what I do believe is true.

WHY do you express what you do NOT even BELIEVE is true, here in this forum?

If it is the former, then when I wrote; Human beings just expressing what they BELIEVE is true, is ACTUALLY True, and NOT an assumption. Remember you did ask me if 'it' was an assumption?

I was just CLEARING UP what I ACTUALLY WROTE compared to what you expressed I wrote, to which you asked if this was an ASSUMPTION of mine.

Ok fair enough, that's understandable.

I personally do not believe in a creator that is separate from creation.

And the reason you do NOT believe this is BECAUSE it is an ABSOLUTE IMPOSSIBILITY to even begin from. And, if ANY one tells you otherwise, then just ask them HOW could this even be a possibility, let alone be an actuality? and WATCH how they can NOT explain HOW.

What I've suggested is the nondual take on reality, that cannot be comprehended simply because to do so would create the illusion of duality, where there is a divide between knower and the known, or the creator and the created.

If ONE take on Reality, Itself, can NOT be comprehended because to do so would simply create a CONTRADICTION, then that, to me, STRONGLY SHOWS that that ONE take is NOT absolutely True, Right NOR Correct of Reality, Itself.

Also, WHY even use just ONE take of Reality, Itself?

Obviously ONE take, or a MAJORITY of takes, on Reality, Itself, does NOT necessarily mean that ANY of those 'takes' (or tokes) is thee ACTUAL True, Right, and Correct 'take'. There can ONLY be One True, Right, and Correct 'take' on Reality, Itself. Which means ALL of the other 'takes' are 'mis-takes'.

It's no wonder the idea of nonduality is rejected, that's normal, because the sense of there literally being an 'I' on the inside and another 'I' outside of 'my I ' is very palpable and real.

That may be palpable and real to 'you' now, as it was to 'me' previously, but there being ANY thing more than just A One and ONLY 'I', to 'me' NOW, is just PURE ILLOGICAL and NONSENSICAL.

But pain can be good, and thus absence of pain can be bad. But OBVIOUSLY this all depends on what EXACTLY is being talked about and referred to.

I do not think pain can be good.

If the body 'you' are in steps, for example, on a nail, but the foot, of that body, is completely numb and so feels NO pain, then that body could keep walking around with a foot getting further and further infected without you knowing, which would NOT be good. Whereas, if the foot was NOT numb and so pain was felt, then this would BE GOOD for keeping that body and foot healthy AND well.

I think the reality for a sentient feeling creature is either pain, or the absence of pain. There is no pleasure in pain. But nevertheless, pain is unavoidable, even too much pleasure is the sole cause of pain.

If this is what you 'now' want to 'think' instead of 'believe', then that is okay with me.

But OBVIOUSLY you want to STICK with these thoughts, or BELIEFS, and are NOT curious AT ALL in ANY thing else, so then that is okay with me, as well.

I do not think the price of living is worth the addmission, it's too messy and expensive.

WHY do you just keep REPEATING what you think or BELIEVE?

If this is what you think, then this is perfectly fine AND okay with me.

But OBVIOUSLY "others" SEE things DIFFERENTLY than you do here, correct?

It's a high price to pay just to experience the fleeting moments that are the absence of pain. Including both, mentally emotional, and physical pain. I'm actually in favor of never having existed in the first place. I would choose that over life any day. That's why I have a problem with the Christian belief, that the creator God is good. And I'm like err no, the idea that God is good, is misguided, if there is a God, then God is sadistic and evil. And that's the proof right there, that God is impossible.

So, to you, the PROOF you HAVE that God (whatever that is) is IMPOSSIBLE is just because you would choose to never have existed in the first place, because poor little old 'you' has felt some pain while being alive or existing, correct?

Rather, the universe and it's life forms are the result of chemical reactions, quite crude and dumb, no inteligence there at all.

Okay, if this is what you think, then this is what you think.

But, it could now be argued, that with that type of thinking there REALLY IS NO intelligence, AT ALL.

I do believe that awareness of pain, is that it is a bad sensation, and that the absence of pain is good.

But without awareness of pain, then one would NOT KNOW what to avoid.

So do you think it's a good idea to live a life where all we are trying to do is avoid pain, in favor of comfort.

What do you mean, "where all we are trying to do is avoid pain, in favor of comfort"?

If one did NOT feel NOR know pleasure AND pain, comfort AND discomfort, then that one would NOT be a sentient creature. That one would literally be just like a rock, NOT experiencing and/or NOT knowing.

The 'we' in your sentence was referring to sentient beings, correct?

And, if correct, then this MEANS being able to feel or perceive things, in other words, just being able to 'experience' Life, Itself, how It Truly IS. And, obviously one can NOT feel NOR perceive comfort if that one does NOT experience discomfort, and vice-versa.

Is that the lot of sentient life..avoid pain and suffering.

That depends on the 'sentient life', itself.

It seems like an endurance test not worth the ticket, as if we are being gamed by the game, all just to lose in the end anyway. Better to have never had to play the game in the first place. This is just how I see life that is sentient, I personally think it's dumb and stupid, and not the work of an intelligent all loving creator that the christians believe in.

Okay.

If I recall correctly I asked you previously, WHY NOT just kill "yourself" now?

If I did ask you this before, then what was your reply that time?

But if I did NOT ask you this before, then what is your reply this time?

[Dontaskme]

Ah, the ad homimen: the sure sign somebody has failed in argument.

I knew it was coming.

Well, that's your choice, I guess. I will not return the insult.

You have no solid argument to make,...

Apparently it was solid enough to make you resort to the ad homimens.

That'll do. Once you go there, there's not much more to be said.

No, your favorite word, you do not have any solid argument to make, because to do so, would be beneath you.

Sometimes IC, idiots really do deserve the ad homimens. . otherwise, we'd all be kissing your golden arse. Sometimes you just have to say no, I'm not going to kiss your golden arse as if you were some kind of God.

Now, if you've got a solid argument to make, then lets hear it.

Bailing out of a good argument, or debate with the words...that's wrong sorry, is not good enough. Man up, or ship out.