Making stupid and childish assertions also seems to happen to the best of you.
That’s because Guinistasia’s cite was focused on the myth that there was a belief in a Flat Earth in the Middle Ages. You know, the whole “when Columbus sailed” thing. Nobody refers to a belief in a Flat Earth when talking about prehistoric societies. Well, maybe you.
Well, troglodytes have to come from somewhere.
Doesn’t matter, Frank. All I said was that at one point most people believed the world was flat. I never assigned a time to it. But you people, in your eagerness to try to prove me wrong every time I make a post, arbitrarily began to assign different times and/or stages of human progress and scientific calculations that would have been lost on most of the world’s population in a desperate attempt to redefine the question so that it resolved in you favor…or more importantly, against mine. It’s pretty funny, really, warching the ridiculous lengths you people will go to in order to try to find some way to prove me wrong. 
In the society which you wish return to, that of the 1950s, a reference to a belief in a Flat Earth meant only when Columbus sailed.
“When I use a phrase,” Starving Artist said, in rather a scornful tone, “it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less.”
This whole “round earth” thing, its still just a theory, you know.
[QUOTE=Originally Posted by Starving Artist]
. . .dick . . .dick. . .dickish. . .dick. . .dicks.
Seriously. . . dicks. . .dick. . .dickish.
[/QUOTE]
He does appear to be obsessed with dicks 
I’m still waiting on the “point by point refutation of lies” I was promised. Since he’s told at least one more against me in the interim, I’ll need that to be on the list.
Almost as funny as the lengths you go to to avoid proving you’re right.
I’m still waiting for proof that there was a time when most people believed the Earth was flat. I don’t see any data that they necessarily thought tht in prehistoric times.
That is correct. Earth is actually shaped like a giant burrito.
I thought it was a doughnut, and the mind-control aliens were in the center.
No, we walk among you, disguised as Texans.
See? Now this right here - it’s either a lie or a misrepresentation. I never said I’d post refutation of your lies. I merely said I’d point them out. Along with your misrepresentations. Along with your miscomprehensions. And trust, they are many in just the last few days alone. To refute them would require far, far too much reposting of what I’ve already said. You’ll certainly be welcome to try to prove what you claim I said though. I have concerns in that regard whatsoever.
How do you expect to show that they are lies, misrepresentations, and miscomprehensions if you do not attempt to refute them? You think we’re going to just take your word for it?
The theme, tropes (phycical impossibility of 6+ foot tall man rapng a small boy without lifting him off the ground, McQueary’s story is inconsistent, Paterno and Sandusky are the victims of a witch hunt, i-hate-to-discuss-this-but [loving description of mechanics of anal rape of a boy]" are near-identical and, shall we say, distintive to unique. So, a comparison strongly suggests common authorship.
Much more to the point – what is so fucking hard about typing yes or no vs the verbose evasive verbal diarrhea, multiple paragraphs of it, that you’ve proffered in evasive preference to a straight yes or no question? You look like a total fool but then you are a fool.
Hah!
So, Guin having failed in trying to apply my observation to the Middle Ages, and you having failed to apply it to a specific point in antiquity, you have now chosen to try to apply it, quite without the slightest reference from me, to the fifties.
BWAHAHAHA! I scoff at your feebularity! (And at your pinballish application of history as well.")
You’ve spent all the years you’ve been on the SDMB demonstrating how much you love the 1950s–how that was the sweet spot in American history. I do not believe that it is a stretch on my part to interpret your cultural references as if they were from that time.
But, OK, what the hell.
On what do you base your belief that prehistoric people believed in a Flat Earth?
You haven’t “pointed them out.”
It’s undisputed (from my catalog of your lies) that you claimed there was no basis for asserting that naked man boy showering with touching was illegal, or that before that I had posted the indecent exposure and sexual assault statutes.
It’s undisputed that you claimed naked man boy “fondling” would be taken by reasonable people to mean a non-sexual caress, nor that I utterly owned you with the IMHO poll that destroyed your humiliatingly-stupid pretense.
It’s undisputed that you fabricated a “fact” that there was evidence of “no distress on the child’s face” to defend your rapist Sandusky.
It is undisputed that you defended your rapist assshole buddy as it were by claiming he couldn’t have been raping Victim No. 2 because the lights were off when McQueary entered the locker room – a blatant lie.
You’re a liar, you lie. Water is wet, sky blue.
Point out a single lie of mine (other than my (possible???) Hyperbole about your meager academic attainments, in view of your comical/nauseous claims to expertise in biomechanics, law, forensics, etc.).
Go on, do it little bitch. You promised you could. Put up or shut up. You know, like a non-ass-raping shemale.
Which you are not, we understand.
Why not? I’ve not been dishonest in this thread! I happily challenge you or anyone else to point to one single lie I’ve told in this thread. Huerta’s, on the other hand, number in the hundreds if not thousands.
Plus I’m constrained to having to post with only mi iPod touch right now, and cutting, pasting and searching are far too difficult and time consuming to waste in contending with Huerta’s catalog of deceit. Besides, it should be Huerta’s responsibility to back up his lies and deceits with proof, yes,no? Or do you prefer the 'guilty ‘til proven innocent’ approach to debate?