Göbekli Tepe

[vegetariantaxidermy]

Hunter-gatherer cultures are not what is defined as 'civilization'. There is a reason why the Middle East is called the 'Cradle of Civilization' while Australia is not. But no doubt the PCturd establishment has come up with some new, PC 'meaning' for 'civilization'. It's the hypocritical, up-themselves 'school teacher types' (the vain, worthless ones who are only in it for the social engineering aspect) and other morons who need to 'get a life' instead of telling everyone else how to live theirs'.

*Yawn*

True to form. The PC are sociopaths so it's all water off a duck's back to them.

[Atla]

What I mean is exactly what I said; What are they disagreeing about?

For example I completely disagree with your written words, but I also have literally no understanding of what you are saying and meaning with and by those words, because surely some one of your calibre KNOWS that 'humanity' began thousands, if not millions, of years before what you said and wrote.

You said that wanting and EXPECTING "others" to just guess and assume what it is that 'you' are saying and meaning is how normal human communication works. Then you went on to say that the reason 'you', human beings, do disagree is EXACTLY because most of you do understand what the other one is saying.

Now, either I disagree with you because I do understand what it is that you are saying and meaning or I disagree because I do not understand what it is that you are saying and meaning. Because you will NOT clarify then the ONLY thing that I can off is the words that you HAVE, already, written. So, I disagree with you because obviously the "first age of humanity was NOT roughly around 12,000 years ago". This can very easily been proven to be true by the very fact of human made objects prior to that miniscule 12,000 years ago.



Are you sure of this?

How many people believe in God and how many people believe in Allah, and of all of them, how many of these people want to kill each other, just because they understand what the other one is thinking?

Also, what do you propose it is exactly that they thinking, which causes them to want to kill each other?

Do you think that they are aware that the "other" is thinking about the exact same thing?



But I do not believe any such thing. Why did you assume or believe such a thing as this?

Your wanting and expecting me to guess or assume what you are actually saying and meaning really does not work, well with me anyway. Considering the words that you use, and the actual definitions and meanings behind those words, then you ARE often so WRONG, like just now.



What people 'think' is of no real concern to me. What people 'know' however is another matter.

Why would people think or assume some thing like this, especially when it is so obviously wrong?

What would be better and more productive is to KNOW the actual and real Truth is instead.

Also, what exactly do you propose is this so "dangerous and delusional 'shit' ", which you assume that I am making up?



What 'belief' "before me" are you talking about, which usually led to more destruction, but there was never any evidence for anyway? I do NOT have belief so there is NO "belief before me".

If you want to be FULLY understood and accepted, then from the beginning you need to start with the truth, and then move on.

Starting off with your own beliefs and assumptions about what is true and right, but which obviously could be wrong and false, does not help you to be better understood, especially considering some of your beliefs and assumptions are clearly and obviously WRONG.

And then, when what is WRONG in what you write is pointed out you, you think and/or say that you want and expect "others" to just assume and guess what you are saying and meaning really is NEVER going to succeed.



Fair enough. Ignoring things is what completely closed and arrogant people tend to do.

Look, just accept that you will never be able to understand anything anyone with a fully working brain is saying.

Ironically, I fully understand this, and that is the exact reason why I just asked you two very simple and straightforward clarifying questions, which for some unknown reason to that supposedly "fully working brain", it would not or could not clarify.

Also, if I fully understand what you are saying here, and agree with you here now and accept it, then that means that you are, once again, WRONG.

Or, maybe it is 'I' that really will never understand what the words" " 'you' will never be able to understand anything anyone with a fully working brain is saying", is saying?

So, 'I' will never KNOW if I understood correctly, unless of course I can prove it to 'you' ones with those so called "fully working brains" that I do, some times, understand what it is that 'you' are saying.

I wonder; Do those ones who say they have "fully working brains" actually KNOW 'who 'they' are'?

Do 'you' KNOW who 'you' ARE? (Not if you know you are one of those who think they have a fully workinging brain, but know who the 'one' IS, with a, supposedly, "fully working brain"?

For surely 'one' with a supposedly 'fully working brain' would KNOW WHO they ARE exactly, and therefore could also reveal WHO they Truly ARE?

Surely one with a, supposedly, fully working brain could learn a way to communicate so that they could be fully understood by, (just about?), EVERY one?

Skipped mostly
No time, and you didn't understand my last comment.

[Atla]

Or maybe God put all the evidence there to test your faith

All what evidence?

Very good, you pass with distinction

[Age]

Look, just accept that you will never be able to understand anything anyone with a fully working brain is saying.

Ironically, I fully understand this, and that is the exact reason why I just asked you two very simple and straightforward clarifying questions, which for some unknown reason to that supposedly "fully working brain", it would not or could not clarify.

Also, if I fully understand what you are saying here, and agree with you here now and accept it, then that means that you are, once again, WRONG.

Or, maybe it is 'I' that really will never understand what the words" " 'you' will never be able to understand anything anyone with a fully working brain is saying", is saying?

So, 'I' will never KNOW if I understood correctly, unless of course I can prove it to 'you' ones with those so called "fully working brains" that I do, some times, understand what it is that 'you' are saying.

I wonder; Do those ones who say they have "fully working brains" actually KNOW 'who 'they' are'?

Do 'you' KNOW who 'you' ARE? (Not if you know you are one of those who think they have a fully workinging brain, but know who the 'one' IS, with a, supposedly, "fully working brain"?

For surely 'one' with a supposedly 'fully working brain' would KNOW WHO they ARE exactly, and therefore could also reveal WHO they Truly ARE?

Surely one with a, supposedly, fully working brain could learn a way to communicate so that they could be fully understood by, (just about?), EVERY one?

Skipped mostly

Of course, 'you' would.

No time, and you didn't understand my last comment.

Of course I could NOT, to you.

Forever more you could never accept that I have understood any thing that any one says. Yet here you are telling me to accept some thing, which I obviously could not do, to you.

Are you at all aware that if I could understand your last comment, then your comment negates itself, obviously?

[Atla]

Ironically, I fully understand this, and that is the exact reason why I just asked you two very simple and straightforward clarifying questions, which for some unknown reason to that supposedly "fully working brain", it would not or could not clarify.

Also, if I fully understand what you are saying here, and agree with you here now and accept it, then that means that you are, once again, WRONG.

Or, maybe it is 'I' that really will never understand what the words" " 'you' will never be able to understand anything anyone with a fully working brain is saying", is saying?

So, 'I' will never KNOW if I understood correctly, unless of course I can prove it to 'you' ones with those so called "fully working brains" that I do, some times, understand what it is that 'you' are saying.

I wonder; Do those ones who say they have "fully working brains" actually KNOW 'who 'they' are'?

Do 'you' KNOW who 'you' ARE? (Not if you know you are one of those who think they have a fully workinging brain, but know who the 'one' IS, with a, supposedly, "fully working brain"?

For surely 'one' with a supposedly 'fully working brain' would KNOW WHO they ARE exactly, and therefore could also reveal WHO they Truly ARE?

Surely one with a, supposedly, fully working brain could learn a way to communicate so that they could be fully understood by, (just about?), EVERY one?

Skipped mostly

Of course, 'you' would.

No time, and you didn't understand my last comment.

Of course I could NOT, to you.

Forever more you could never accept that I have understood any thing that any one says. Yet here you are telling me to accept some thing, which I obviously could not, to you.

Are you at all aware that if I could understand your last comment, then your comment negates itself, obviously?

You didn't understand my last comment, and you're not understanding this one either.

[Age]

Skipped mostly

Of course, 'you' would.

No time, and you didn't understand my last comment.

Of course I could NOT, to you.

Forever more you could never accept that I have understood any thing that any one says. Yet here you are telling me to accept some thing, which I obviously could not, to you.

Are you at all aware that if I could understand your last comment, then your comment negates itself, obviously?

You didn't understand my last comment, and you're not understanding this one either.

Obviously, this is True. Even I understand what you are saying. I agree with you.

Do you understand that whatever you ASSUME and BELIEVE IS True, then, to you, it MUST BE and HAS TO BE True?

The opposite of what you believe is true, could NOT be true, to true. Unless of course you would believe some thing that was not true.

[Atla]

Of course, 'you' would.



Of course I could NOT, to you.

Forever more you could never accept that I have understood any thing that any one says. Yet here you are telling me to accept some thing, which I obviously could not, to you.

Are you at all aware that if I could understand your last comment, then your comment negates itself, obviously?

You didn't understand my last comment, and you're not understanding this one either.

Obviously, this is True. Even I understand what you are saying. I agree with you.

Do you understand that whatever you ASSUME and BELIEVE IS True, then, to you, it MUST BE and HAS TO BE True?

The opposite of what you believe is true, could NOT be true, to true. Unless of course you would believe some thing that was not true.

You didn't understand my comment.
Maybe you're not even understanding your own.

For example this is utterly wrong to the point that I think you need to be locked away in a mental ward or worse:

Do you understand that whatever you ASSUME and BELIEVE IS True, then, to you, it MUST BE and HAS TO BE True?

[Age]

You didn't understand my last comment, and you're not understanding this one either.

Obviously, this is True. Even I understand what you are saying. I agree with you.

Do you understand that whatever you ASSUME and BELIEVE IS True, then, to you, it MUST BE and HAS TO BE True?

The opposite of what you believe is true, could NOT be true, to true. Unless of course you would believe some thing that was not true.

You didn't understand my comment.
Maybe you're not even understanding your own.

For example this is utterly wrong to the point that I think you need to be locked away in a mental ward or worse:

Do you understand that whatever you ASSUME and BELIEVE IS True, then, to you, it MUST BE and HAS TO BE True?

YES, I understand this COMPLETELY, and that is why I do not like to assume any thing and I NEVER believe any thing.

Now, you claim that this is "utterly wrong", therefore you MUST HAVE some sort of evidence and/or proof for this.

Will you provide that proof and evidence? Or, just once again, is the truthfulness and righteousness of what you say based again sorry on your already held beliefs and assumptions ONLY?

[Atla]

Obviously, this is True. Even I understand what you are saying. I agree with you.

Do you understand that whatever you ASSUME and BELIEVE IS True, then, to you, it MUST BE and HAS TO BE True?

The opposite of what you believe is true, could NOT be true, to true. Unless of course you would believe some thing that was not true.

You didn't understand my comment.
Maybe you're not even understanding your own.

For example this is utterly wrong to the point that I think you need to be locked away in a mental ward or worse:

Do you understand that whatever you ASSUME and BELIEVE IS True, then, to you, it MUST BE and HAS TO BE True?

YES, I understand this COMPLETELY, and that is why I do not like to assume any thing and I NEVER believe any thing.

Now, you claim that this is "utterly wrong", therefore you MUST HAVE some sort of evidence and/or proof for this.

Will you provide that proof and evidence? Or, just once again, is the truthfulness and righteousness of what you say based again sorry on your already held beliefs and assumptions ONLY?

Not even close to understanding what I write.

[Age]

You didn't understand my comment.
Maybe you're not even understanding your own.

For example this is utterly wrong to the point that I think you need to be locked away in a mental ward or worse:

Do you understand that whatever you ASSUME and BELIEVE IS True, then, to you, it MUST BE and HAS TO BE True?

YES, I understand this COMPLETELY, and that is why I do not like to assume any thing and I NEVER believe any thing.

Now, you claim that this is "utterly wrong", therefore you MUST HAVE some sort of evidence and/or proof for this.

Will you provide that proof and evidence? Or, just once again, is the truthfulness and righteousness of what you say based again sorry on your already held beliefs and assumptions ONLY?

Not even close to understanding what I write.

So, I copy the words that you write, and then you say that is not even close to understanding what you write. Okay, Misunderstood.

[Arising_uk]

True to form. The PC are sociopaths so it's all water off a duck's back to them.

Zzzzzzz....

[Arising_uk]

Very good, you pass with distinction

Pass what?

[vegetariantaxidermy]

True to form. The PC are sociopaths so it's all water off a duck's back to them.

Zzzzzzz....

School teacher.

[Arising_uk]

School teacher.

That you appear to think this an insult speaks volumes.

[vegetariantaxidermy]

School teacher.

That you appear to think this an insult speaks volumes.

Yes. It's a crime that what should be a noble profession has been hijacked by self-serving, unimaginative, intellectually stunted wankers who see children as nothing more than political tools.