Cheat Engine :: View topic - Every Canadian is retarded

Cheat Engine
The Official Site of Cheat Engine

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

Every Canadian is retarded
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Cheat Engine Forum Index -> Random spam

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

br0l0ck
Cheater

Reputation: 63

Joined: 15 Aug 2007
Posts: 38

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:02 pm Post subject:

teeigeryuh wrote:

Antagonist wrote:

dude aren't u like officially mentally deficient y r u pretending like u know anything when u know ur actually retarded. Like ur replies bring 0 value to the discussion. Ur like the one guy in the group that wants to say something even though everyone thinks ur retarded but u say it anyways bcus u want to put on ur big boy pants so u just echo mainstream sound bites thinking there's conversational value to what you just said and I'm the guy that says out loud "shut the fuck up Steve, ur dumb as dirt. ur only hanging out with us bc ur sister is hot as shit and I'm fucking her"

ok?

Quote:

if he could in fact find counter arguments or claims that substantial then he should be getting paid real big $$$ for that shit, ive heard finding holes in logic and speeches makes you bank

the fuck are you talking about, finding the whole isn't what counts but portraying it, a great example would be antagonist's posts, he's not arguing or having a discussion, it's always insults or trying to challenge one using well portrayed fallacies, yet in his mind and maybe other people he is correct and logic was not needed to convince him or others (assuming being convinced was something he wanted or was needed), yet on the other side, one or two people might agree on a point i might make when replying to him

logic isn't necessarily needed in anyone's life to make decisions, we mostly disregard to make decisions that makes us feel better, if you were to show 100% accurate/testable new information to someone, and this information happens to conflict with their principles, they will get angry and avoid you if they don't agree, if you do the same with people who like what they see, they will just feel great and reassured, people never focus on processing the new info and just focus on feeling right, we all do it and cannot function without it, it's part of one's nature

that's what the media focuses on and that's what bothers me from this, so much shit of what you see on tv and agree/disagree with is just a lie, Hilary was corrupt, it's been proven, trump cheated people out of money, it's been proved, when either of them was challenged regarding their faults the simply avoided it, or ignored it, both candidates did contradict themselves numerous times, it's logical that neither candidate is going for presidency because they want to help you country, but because of self interest
gannok has provided multiple youtube videos as well with people pointing out how trump's logic is wrong, yet all of that is being disregarded

tl;dr doubt that you could make money just because you could find a hole if the people who (IMO) seem to be profiting from it are the ones that portray distorted logic, voting because you believe what tv says to you is for stupid people, and all of you believing you are right and did something for your country and all that ego shit, are fucking sheep lol, why would you want to live as a sheep

you can indeed make money finding a hole in logic for speeches/finding contradictory information within the speech. why? because it makes the persons argument invalid, and by recognizing these faults future speakers can avoid those pitfalls. why does it matter? not for the public but for people who are against the speakers. you know those TV ads saying x is a bad person because he did y etc, and are allowed without being considered slander? because they have formulated it in such a way as to be legal. these ads are written by people and make lots of money because its in these companies interests to elect x or y because in the future they will support them.

btw its evident you by how you're describing things that you don't know what 'logic' actually means.

cokefag
Master Cheater

Reputation: 51

Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 488

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:07 pm Post subject:

teeigeryuh wrote:

cokefag wrote:

teeigeryuh wrote:

cokefag wrote:

teeigeryuh wrote:

cokefag wrote:

teeigeryuh wrote:

cokefag wrote:

teeigeryuh wrote:

if you were to show 100% accurate/testable new information to someone, and this information happens to conflict with their principles, they will get angry and avoid you if they don't agree

blanket statement of the century

how is this a blanket statement?

because this doesnt apply to everyone?

omg, so anger does not come from situations where your principles/self is violated? who doesn't this apply to? if there are people weird enough to not get angry, do people like this come in a relevant quantity that could displace the argument, or are you going to nitpick because I made a generalization, you sure as hell avoided the rest of the post

not for mentally healthy individuals no, anger is not the first response

so you're saying mentally healthy people do not get angry as a first choice? so you see an advertisement calling you a complete idiot, what do you feel then? yeah only mentally ill people get angry

being called a complete idiot is not the same thing as being shown 100% accurate/testable information
being called a complete idiot would be being called a complete idiot
if you feel that someone calls you a complete idiot implicitly from being shown 100% accurate/testable information then you are insecure and projecting your insecurities
aka you are not the most mentally healthy person out there

edit: even in that scenario, anger should not be the first response elicited by most people, i'd say that only places with a culture of honour would elicit anger as a first response to being called an idiot, but that's the southern states and you were making a blanket statement

edit2: also, i never read your full post because that would be a waste of time

> also, i never read your full post because that would be a waste of time
nice blanket

>being called an idiot is not the same as proving you're an idiot
nobody said it wasn't

>i'd say that only places with a culture of honour would elicit anger as a first response to being called an idiot
so if you call a random afro american humans just idiots on the street and tell me you don't get beat up

>if you feel that someone calls you a complete idiot implicitly from being shown 100% accurate/testable information then you are insecure and projecting your insecurities

idk how getting hurt = "projecting", I projecting was just transferring your insecurities to others, also, everyone has insecurities, are you saying you don't?

also, what i said earlier does apply to everyone, if someone calls you stupid just like that then getting angry is retarded, if someone calls you stupid in front of your wife or simply violates a principle with facts one can relate to on the spot, then said person will get angry

im just here to philosophize LOL

Quote:

>being called an idiot is not the same as proving you're an idiot
nobody said it wasn't

why are you doing this lol
you first talked about proving someone's incorrect, then later your example was flat-out calling someone an idiot, these are not equivalent things

Quote:

>i'd say that only places with a culture of honour would elicit anger as a first response to being called an idiot
so if you call a random afro american humans just idiots on the street and tell me you don't get beat up

would you say that a person of any race that beats someone up over something so small is a person with adequate mental health

Quote:

>if you feel that someone calls you a complete idiot implicitly from being shown 100% accurate/testable information then you are insecure and projecting your insecurities

idk how getting hurt = "projecting", I projecting was just transferring your insecurities to others, also, everyone has insecurities, are you saying you don't?

again you aren't really making points or reading anything
proving someone is incorrect is not equivalent to flat-out calling someone an idiot
e.g. (showing someone stats of crime rate going down) vs (calling someone an idiot when they think crime rate is going up) are not equivalent testing stimuli for measuring someone's reaction

projecting insecurities would be, for example:
if a person is insecure that they are ignorant and uninformed and then, upon being presented facts contrary to their beliefs without any negative remarks or implicit negative gestures from the presenter, starts to lash out because they perceive the presenter to be insinuating they are ignorant and uninformed

because yet again, presenting facts (neutral stimulus) vs. calling someone an idiot (negative stimulus) are not equal testing conditions

Code:

also, what i said earlier does apply to everyone, if someone calls you stupid just like that then getting angry is retarded, if someone calls you stupid in front of your wife or simply violates a principle with facts one can relate to on the spot, then said person will get angry

im just here to philosophize LOL

no, a rational person does not get angry just because someone calls them stupid for no reason, not even in front of a loved one
again that would be more common in a culture of honour, where reputation is a very big aspect of their social interactions

i dont know where you are getting your baseless information that you generalize by saying "everyone" gets angry

teeigeryuh
Master Cheater

Reputation: 25

Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 261
Location: The netherlands

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 2:47 pm Post subject:

Brolock wrote:

teeigeryuh wrote:

Antagonist wrote:

ok?

Quote:

if he could in fact find counter arguments or claims that substantial then he should be getting paid real big $$$ for that shit, ive heard finding holes in logic and speeches makes you bank

a lot of what you see on tv is illogical yet people still go for it, I never said logic doesn't make money, I said you don't make money just by knowing it's illogical and that knowing how to portray a reality is even more important, it says right there in:

Quote:

tl;dr doubt that you could make money just because you could find a hole if the people who (IMO) seem to be profiting from it are the ones that portray distorted logic

I forgot to add that i'm not good at portraying things, and this is why I don't think I could profit from anything
ima rephrese ffs: the idea that pleases you the most is the one will choose, a pleasing idea isn't the one that agrees with you, but the one you agree might benefit the most, be it abstract or materialistic, an abstract way might one one that pleases your ego/status or a meterialistic one is self explanatory
so if a candidate says something you agree on, you'll use that as a badge to your credibility, im using cef as an example, gannok first went for Bernie but when he was loosing he made a decision to go "pro Hillary" in a way, same for antagonist, he sure as hell avoided a lot of confrontantion with facts and questions because it didn't benefit him then only cited sources that "proved him right", he would've never posted anything that would lower his ego, i'm pointing out the obvious, we're all bias, and i'm trying to discuss why you're all bias and both points are pretty much the same thing

>btw its evident you by how you're describing things that you don't know what 'logic' actually means.
ok? logically exlain why this is, it should take no effort since you already have an evident answer

>no, a rational person does not get angry just because someone calls them stupid for no reason, not even in front of a loved one
again that would be more common in a culture of honour, where reputation is a very big aspect of their social interactions
who said it was for no reason, the "in front of a loved one" was an example where someone could have had his ego hurt, also people are not always rational, are you going to tell me you never gotten in a fight over something stupid? I'm telling you people make choices that are most convenient, humans don't make rational decisions all the time
in your case, an a few examples could be that you have a computer for games, one could argue:
1. it's irrational to buy a computer for games because games don't make you productive and you could spend that time doing something better but you still play games because it feels good/fun
2. it's rational to buy a computer because i can afford it and thats what money is for and life is about having fun, some studies show that playing video games make you smarter
both points are "logical" even tho they state the opposite regarding having a computer, the thing is that nothing is ever really logical and you can't argue one point being better than the other, you can't argue your decision is more logical than the other if you judge using there's an underlying assumption, gannok and antagonist debated over and over and neither changed their minds about their preferences, it wasn't even really a discussion, it was just introverted judging vs extroverted

and to summarize, everything backups my original point

Quote:

there's a lot of reason to be dissapointed, if you don't believe that there isn't a single reason for this then the one who knows shit about everything is you

you're all sheep

Quote:

>again you aren't really making points or reading anything
>proving someone is incorrect is not equivalent to flat-out calling someone an idiot
e.g. (showing someone stats of crime rate going down) vs (calling someone an idiot when they think crime rate is going up) are not equivalent testing stimuli for measuring someone's reaction

projecting insecurities would be, for example:
if a person is insecure that they are ignorant and uninformed and then, upon being presented facts contrary to their beliefs without any negative remarks or implicit negative gestures from the presenter, starts to lash out because they perceive the presenter to be insinuating they are ignorant and uninformed

EASY
1. here's what i said
>if you were to show 100% accurate/testable new information to someone, and this information happens to conflict with their principles, they will get angry and avoid you if they don't agree
do you see where i said "proving someone is incorrect is not equivalent to flat-out calling someone an idiot"? I don't, so the one that didn't read was you
and, getting butthurt is not the same as projecting insecurities, projecting is one of the many ways of dealing with butthurt not just the only one, now since we're talking about projecting, didn't you just project the way you deal with butthurt to anyone getting butthurt? well your examples only seem to show this as the only reason for getting angry, is it because you can't argue for other methods? if so, is your innability to argue because of ignorance or because one is bias'ing on purpose ; )
_________________

ლ(╹◡╹ლ)

Antagonist
Cheater

Reputation: 29

Joined: 24 Nov 2009
Posts: 48
Location: California

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:09 pm Post subject:

The seer has spoken. We are all sheeps
_________________

tough guy talix wrote:

i've had it with your shit. fuck outta here

teeigeryuh
Master Cheater

Reputation: 25

Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 261
Location: The netherlands

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 4:48 pm Post subject:

Antagonist wrote:

The seer has spoken. We are all sheeps

that's a common reaction
_________________

ლ(╹◡╹ლ)

cokefag
Master Cheater

Reputation: 51

Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 488

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 6:33 pm Post subject:

so this is american education at work

Antagonist
Cheater

Reputation: 29

Joined: 24 Nov 2009
Posts: 48
Location: California

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 6:48 pm Post subject:

cokefag wrote:

so this is american education at work

shut it you sheep!
_________________

tough guy talix wrote:

i've had it with your shit. fuck outta here

cokefag
Master Cheater

Reputation: 51

Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 488

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 8:45 pm Post subject:

Antagonist wrote:

cokefag wrote:

so this is american education at work

shut it you sheep!

teeigeryuh
Master Cheater

Reputation: 25

Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 261
Location: The netherlands

Posted: Sun Nov 13, 2016 11:28 pm Post subject:

cokefag wrote:

Antagonist wrote:

cokefag wrote:

so this is american education at work

shut it you sheep!

1. Canadians are retarded
2. Trump is jesus
3. Disagree with this and you're a seer

if this is your bubble, i'd be afraid dealing with reality as well : P
_________________

ლ(╹◡╹ლ)

Antagonist
Cheater

Reputation: 29

Joined: 24 Nov 2009
Posts: 48
Location: California

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 1:13 am Post subject:

teeigeryuh wrote:

cokefag wrote:

Antagonist wrote:

cokefag wrote:

so this is american education at work

shut it you sheep!

1. Canadians are retarded
2. Trump is jesus
3. Disagree with this and you're a seer

if this is your bubble, i'd be afraid dealing with reality as well : P

Tru
_________________

tough guy talix wrote:

i've had it with your shit. fuck outta here

cokefag
Master Cheater

Reputation: 51

Joined: 15 Nov 2007
Posts: 488

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 3:06 am Post subject:

teeigeryuh wrote:

cokefag wrote:

Antagonist wrote:

cokefag wrote:

so this is american education at work

shut it you sheep!

1. Canadians are retarded
2. Trump is jesus
3. Disagree with this and you're a seer

if this is your bubble, i'd be afraid dealing with reality as well : P

all this truth from a man who fell for the lenovo meme

teeigeryuh
Master Cheater

Reputation: 25

Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 261
Location: The netherlands

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 5:58 am Post subject:

anyways _________________ ლ(╹◡╹ლ)

1929394839292057839194958
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme

Reputation: 130

Joined: 22 Dec 2006
Posts: 1509

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 8:28 am Post subject:

Daniel you're embarrassing yourself. You say THERE ARE COUNTER ARGUMENTS ON THE INTERNET SOMEWHERE and you then provide none. Also I'm pretty sure even Kyle said he'd rather Trump than Hillary and never became a supporter in any way of her.

teeigeryuh
Master Cheater

Reputation: 25

Joined: 13 Oct 2008
Posts: 261
Location: The netherlands

Posted: Mon Nov 14, 2016 11:40 pm Post subject:

konr wrote:

Daniel you're embarrassing yourself. You say THERE ARE COUNTER ARGUMENTS ON THE INTERNET SOMEWHERE and you then provide none. Also I'm pretty sure even Kyle said he'd rather Trump than Hillary and never became a supporter in any way of her.

kfine ill give you a response to your post, ill post all the sources/citations/points that show both trump/anti-trump teams are the same and how both candidates are just as bad

brb
_________________

ლ(╹◡╹ლ)

1929394839292057839194958
Grandmaster Cheater Supreme

Reputation: 130

Joined: 22 Dec 2006
Posts: 1509

Posted: Tue Nov 15, 2016 8:55 am Post subject:

teeigeryuh wrote:

konr wrote:

kfine ill give you a response to your post, ill post all the sources/citations/points that show both trump/anti-trump teams are the same and how both candidates are just as bad

brb

The things I linked you weren't even for Trump, they just stated facts in response to nonsense posted by others.

Display posts from previous:

	Cheat Engine Forum Index -> Random spam	All times are GMT - 6 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 3 of 4

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum