William Hung
SENIOR MEMBER
- Joined
- Oct 3, 2013
- Messages
- 2,465
- Reaction score
- 16
1.Yes, I have already explained enough times that linear reasoning cannot be applied to nonlinear paradigms. Your requests are fruitless and logically kaput. I have not evaded anything, I have fully explained it so many times, and yet you simply don't get it.
2. You're still lying, and also confusing yourself. You didn't understand what I posted, so you make claims like I am evading something. I don't think you're very smart.
3. Go look for it yourself. I am not helping you anymore because you have abused my patience too much. You can't even abstract from what I've posted to work out something so basic for yourself. You are disrespectful, yet want me to walk it through it with you, when I have already gone over it a billion times. I think you should just accept that you will never understand the value of what I posted due to how you are wired and how you process information.
You were repetitively claiming that there are “many” past legal cases that supports your larger paradigm so I was just asking you to list them. It was a simple request but you keep evading it. Now you are saying this request is “logically kaput” . Your desperate excuses and dodging are amusing.
Even if you were abstracting in a non-linear way like you have claimed, you would still need to list those supposedly “many” past legal cases here and I’ll see it for myself if they are relevant, no need to walk me through anything (another nice excuse btw). But nope, you didn’t even dared to list them out but just keep evading that request. Your dodging was so obvious . (btw, I already know why you have been dodging it, read post #110, #100)
Now you still have the audacity to call me a liar when I have referenced the exact post numbers. All you could do in respond is to block your ears and say I’m thinking in a linear way, falsely claimed that you have explained the issue but can’t reference your own post number for that, accuse me of being in the wrong and then just immediately bury your head in the sand again . Its like China claiming the rights to the nine dash lines: when another country ask China to clarify that line, China just evade those requests, declare it has indisputable legal rights to it and then just bury its head in the sand . It is easy to see why someone would evade simple requests: because he doesn’t want to admit his fake claims. Just declare that he is right, then immediately bury his head in the sand hoping the whole world would believe it . BTW, do you find it strange that China has never dared to explain and clarify the nine dash lines? Hmm I don’t think you would, because you carry that same behaiviour in this thread .