It was a long wait for such a strange reply.
I have the ability to think for myself. So I have no problem of expressing my thoughts, ideas, or opinions. I did not realise I had to be a god to do this.
As far as I am aware Euclid, or any other philosopher, was not a god. So you would have to explain why their views are more valid than mine.
I do not ask you or anyone else to just except what I say, but I would expect any intelligent people to try and understand it. Then if they think it is flawed try to explain why. But to argue I am wrong and must believe I am God, because I disagree with what you have read, is the argument of an imbecile
Because of your ridiculous comparison to mathematics I can only presume you didn't try, or where unable, to understand my point.
As you can't understand my point perhaps you could explain your points. You start the thread with the statement �I wouldn't ban 13 year olds racing but...... on a 250......? They are MIGHTY quick..� this suggests that the size and speed of bike is relevant, and rightly so. You then bring in your heroin 'logic' and this does what?
You would let a 13 year old race a 250 but not take heroin. So in what way did this 'logic' help the original decision?
I know you like reading books and quoting who YOU BELIEVE to be experts, but I would suggest you try thinking for yourself occasionally. This might stop your inconsistent arguments and you may realise what a fool you sound with your pathetic attempts at ridiculing people.
|
|