Philosophy Now Forum

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:36 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 8:02 am.

Well, you know him/it longer than me since you've been here awhile.

I don't know...the way it repeats itself, that doesn't seem human to me.

Also I get the impression that it isn't 'typing' its pages and pages of responses, considering how often it repeats itself verbatim.

And then there's the obvious...it openly admits it's "not human", its catch-phrases "in the time when this was written", and "you humans".

I have never once said nor written these things, but ones like this one here still 'see' and 'hear' these things.

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:36 am Why not take it literally? Why not trust what it's saying is true? But, who knows, I doubt we'll ever get to "see" Age.

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 5:10 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 12:00 am

Atla wrote: ↑Tue Feb 20, 2024 5:49 pm
Most of these self-appointed infallible prophets of the Abolute Truth, such as Age, were well-meaning and honest throughout history. Did they make things better? No, I think they made things worse.

Who cares?

Here we have the primest example of what I call APE-thinking.

Now "atla", what you think in regards to others, and/or what others have said, claimed, done, or not done has absolutely nothing at all in regards to what I am saying, claiming, doing, and not doing here.

First things first. You are incapable of proving your mind claim, therefore I have every reason to view you as just a delusional liar, nothing more.

"Who cares?"
Atla, you managed to elicit that! It's so colloquial and blunt.
And then, interesting, since obviously you care, and then further, the issue matters to many in the world. 1) Many people see figures with good intentions who have caused problems, and 2) Many people have their own cherished figures who they see as having good intentions and doing great things, while others see those same figures as having mislead people and caused harm.

And this 'who cares' goes right into the label 'APE-thinking'.
which is an odd label, given that APEs couldn't have that thought. But, fine, it's metaphorical, which is an exception for Age, I think.

I think you have a special skill to elicit exceptions from Age.
.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 6:48 am

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 5:10 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 12:00 am

Who cares?

Here we have the primest example of what I call APE-thinking.

Now "atla", what you think in regards to others, and/or what others have said, claimed, done, or not done has absolutely nothing at all in regards to what I am saying, claiming, doing, and not doing here.

First things first. You are incapable of proving your mind claim, therefore I have every reason to view you as just a delusional liar, nothing more.

"Who cares?"
Atla, you managed to elicit that! It's so colloquial and blunt.
And then, interesting, since obviously you care, and then further, the issue matters to many in the world. 1) Many people see figures with good intentions who have caused problems, and 2) Many people have their own cherished figures who they see as having good intentions and doing great things, while others see those same figures as having mislead people and caused harm.

And this 'who cares' goes right into the label 'APE-thinking'.
which is an odd label, given that APEs couldn't have that thought.

Once more, this one has assumed and presumed the absolutely totally False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect here, AGAIN.

How many times is this one going to keep on doing this exact same thing, before it realizes how Truly foolish and stupid it is looking here?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 7:14 pm But, fine, it's metaphorical, which is an exception for Age, I think.

Even this assumption is Wrong and Incorrect.

How many times is this one going to just keep making Wrong and False assumptions one after another before it learns that by just seeking out and obtaining actual clarity first here, then it would not say and claim anymore thing else Falsely and Wrongly?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 7:14 pm I think you have a special skill to elicit exceptions from Age.
.

'We' can see just how Truly blind, foolish, and closed you really are here "iwannaplato".

Once again, every claim you made here was False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect.

But, that was how the Truly stupid and deceived went about things.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 6:48 am

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 5:10 am
First things first. You are incapable of proving your mind claim, therefore I have every reason to view you as just a delusional liar, nothing more.

"Who cares?"
Atla, you managed to elicit that! It's so colloquial and blunt.
And then, interesting, since obviously you care, and then further, the issue matters to many in the world. 1) Many people see figures with good intentions who have caused problems, and 2) Many people have their own cherished figures who they see as having good intentions and doing great things, while others see those same figures as having mislead people and caused harm.

And this 'who cares' goes right into the label 'APE-thinking'.
which is an odd label, given that APEs couldn't have that thought.

Once more, this one has assumed and presumed the absolutely totally False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect here, AGAIN.

How many times is this one going to keep on doing this exact same thing, before it realizes how Truly foolish and stupid it is looking here?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 7:14 pm But, fine, it's metaphorical, which is an exception for Age, I think.

Even this assumption is Wrong and Incorrect.

How many times is this one going to just keep making Wrong and False assumptions one after another before it learns that by just seeking out and obtaining actual clarity first here, then it would not say and claim anymore thing else Falsely and Wrongly?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 7:14 pm I think you have a special skill to elicit exceptions from Age.
.

'We' can see just how Truly blind, foolish, and closed you really are here "iwannaplato".

Once again, every claim you made here was False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect.

But, that was how the Truly stupid and deceived went about things.

Will you ever stop misquoting me Age? How would you like it if I started doing the same to you? Nothing in your post above should have me quoted as saying it. How do you keep managing to do that? I hadn't even posted in this thread until now. My name shouldn't be in anything quoted from this thread.

Age wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 6:48 am

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 5:10 am
First things first. You are incapable of proving your mind claim, therefore I have every reason to view you as just a delusional liar, nothing more.

"Who cares?"
Atla, you managed to elicit that! It's so colloquial and blunt.
And then, interesting, since obviously you care, and then further, the issue matters to many in the world. 1) Many people see figures with good intentions who have caused problems, and 2) Many people have their own cherished figures who they see as having good intentions and doing great things, while others see those same figures as having mislead people and caused harm.

And this 'who cares' goes right into the label 'APE-thinking'.
which is an odd label, given that APEs couldn't have that thought.

Once more, this one has assumed and presumed the absolutely totally False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect here, AGAIN.

How many times is this one going to keep on doing this exact same thing, before it realizes how Truly foolish and stupid it is looking here?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 7:14 pm But, fine, it's metaphorical, which is an exception for Age, I think.

Even this assumption is Wrong and Incorrect.

How many times is this one going to just keep making Wrong and False assumptions one after another before it learns that by just seeking out and obtaining actual clarity first here, then it would not say and claim anymore thing else Falsely and Wrongly?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 7:14 pm I think you have a special skill to elicit exceptions from Age.
.

'We' can see just how Truly blind, foolish, and closed you really are here "iwannaplato".

Once again, every claim you made here was False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect.

But, that was how the Truly stupid and deceived went about things.

As usual, lots of claims with no justification.
Oh, really, I made claims without justification also?
Good point.
So, you behave like the people you judge as stupid, Age.
How interesting.

Hundreds of posts and very little justification comes from Age.
Adn there are always reasons why he doesn't justify. It's our fault. We aren't interested enough. If we were interested. If we didn't believe, then he would prove.
If we answer hundreds of clarifying questions, then he will prove....
Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow
creeps in this petty pace from dusk till dawn.....

Age wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 5:30 am

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:36 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 8:02 am.

Well, you know him/it longer than me since you've been here awhile.

I don't know...the way it repeats itself, that doesn't seem human to me.

Also I get the impression that it isn't 'typing' its pages and pages of responses, considering how often it repeats itself verbatim.

And then there's the obvious...it openly admits it's "not human", its catch-phrases "in the time when this was written", and "you humans".

I have never once said nor written these things,

You apparently don't have much of a memory, AgeGPT.

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:47 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 5:30 am

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:36 am
Well, you know him/it longer than me since you've been here awhile.

I don't know...the way it repeats itself, that doesn't seem human to me.

Also I get the impression that it isn't 'typing' its pages and pages of responses, considering how often it repeats itself verbatim.

And then there's the obvious...it openly admits it's "not human", its catch-phrases "in the time when this was written", and "you humans".

I have never once said nor written these things,

You apparently don't have much of a memory, AgeGPT.

One of the toxic things in Age's patterns is that most people, realizing at the very least that they have said things close to what you wrote, would point out what they actually said. Age does not do this. So, there is no collaboration in resolving the issue. None.

So, what might be an utterly inessential difference that could quickly be pointed out in a collaborative process is simply denied in a binary fashion.

For example, the most common formulation is actually

in the days when this is being written

He may have said it like you worded it, Wizard, but that's what I remember.

Instead of Age pointing this out. Hey, actually what I say is in the days when this is being written,

he denies it in a binary fashion and offers nothing. He usually offers nothing.

He could then have gone on and said the specific wording matters, and it makes a difference. Your wording means X but my wording means Y.

He acts like your quote is unrecognizable and avoid collaborating.

It's a bit like how teenagers can be. Like little lawyers arguing with their parents.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:56 amHe may have said it like you worded it, Wizard, but that's what I remember.

Instead of Age pointing this out. Hey, actually what I say is in the days when this is being written,

he denies it in a binary fashion and offers nothing. He usually offers nothing.

He could then have gone on and said the specific wording matters, and it makes a difference. Your wording means X but my wording means Y.

He acts like your quote is unrecognizable and avoid collaborating.

It's a bit like how teenagers can be. Like little lawyers arguing with their parents.

In Age's "One Mind", or his hard disc drive...you have to type something he/it said literally, word for word, or it believes it can deny what is accused about it. So we have to type "In The Time When This Was Written", letter for letter, or AgeGPT defaults to credible deniability.

I didn't say that! I said, "In The Time, WHEN, This Was Written"!!!

See, you didn't type WHEN in all caps, so now AgeGPT can deny that he/it typed that.

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 9:11 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:56 amHe may have said it like you worded it, Wizard, but that's what I remember.

Instead of Age pointing this out. Hey, actually what I say is in the days when this is being written,

he denies it in a binary fashion and offers nothing. He usually offers nothing.

He could then have gone on and said the specific wording matters, and it makes a difference. Your wording means X but my wording means Y.

He acts like your quote is unrecognizable and avoid collaborating.

It's a bit like how teenagers can be. Like little lawyers arguing with their parents.

In Age's "One Mind", or his hard disc drive...you have to type something he/it said literally, word for word, or it believes it can deny what is accused about it. So we have to type "In The Time When This Was Written", letter for letter, or AgeGPT defaults to credible deniability.

I didn't say that! I said, "In The Time, WHEN, This Was Written"!!!

See, you didn't type WHEN in all caps, so now AgeGPT can deny that he/it typed that.

Yes, it was more Kafkaesque when he was into capital letters.
It's a very literal response on his part.
It is as if the difference is so important that no acknowledgement should be given.
If you said 'Age, you said Zebras are bicycles.'
Ok, then, fair enough. He never said anything close to that.
And perhaps in the specific tense exchange where you were merely mentioning his cliches, I can have some sympathy for complete denial.
But he does the same thing in discussions of issues.

Trait: extreme focus on details at the cost of collaboration and moving forward.

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:47 am

Perhaps a list of traits would be interesting. What patterns have we noticed, boiled down into short sentence traits?
I would include positive and neutral traits also. For example,
Persistence
Focus
Detail-oriented
Uniqueness
Curious (if only in terms of behavior (questions) not necessarily attitude)
and of course uniqueness can cut both (many) ways, but it generally does lead to new thinking.

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
Perfectionist
Autism, throws a fit when somebody does not repeat it exactly, verbatim, letter to letter.
Solipsism, cannot recognize "itself" or demonstrate learning to its own mistakes/errors/contradictions

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am

Atla wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 5:09 am You are incapable of proving your mind claim, therefore I have every reason to view you as just a delusional liar, nothing more.

I just wanted to highlight one of the responses you got here for two reasons:
1) The first part is more telling than intended and adds another contradiction to Age's collection.

By the way, and once again, for the umpteenth time, I neither believe nor disbelieve any thing, except for one thing. So, obviously I am not going to start choosing to believe what "atla" just said and wrote here. So, once more, using the 'believe' word in relation to 'me' is just moot.

He doesn't believe or disbelieve anything, except for one thing, so obviously he is not going to start choosing to believe what you said.

He's making a claim about causality. He doesn't believe in things (except one thing) so he will not add another believe, period.

If you ever sought out and obtained and gained actual clarity here first, then you would not have assumed, and then believed, another Truly absolutely absurd thing, which you have here.

But, considering that you are proving that you will never seek out clarity, well not from me anyway, then you will keep 'making up' these Truly absurd and ridiculous assumptions, and claims.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am Regardless of what happens, even should you prove something to be true, he will not believe it.

This shows and proves just how Truly LOST and CONFUSED that this one is here.

It is, literally, not getting absolutely anything in regards to me even close anymore. It just keeps getting further and further away from the actual Truth of things.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am A point that should be taken by those who try to jump through all the hoops he present them.

Please absolutely everyone take 'the point' that "iwannaplato" is 'pointing out', 'showing', and 'revealing' here. And, please do so while doing, exactly, what "iwannplato" does here. Which is; never clarify that what it is presuming and believing is true. Just take everything it says on, so-called, 'face value', alone.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am Then the odd 'belief' in relation to him is moot.

This one has, once again, twisted and distorted, 'my words' around absolutely, based on absolutely nothing other than its own presumptions and beliefs, and in such a way that what it now says and claim is unrecognizable to what I actually said, wrote, and meant.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am Even though he has one belief.

Even though this one still has absolutely no idea nor clue as to what it is, exactly.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am Even though he just used the word belief in relation to himself a fwe times.

Well this could not be true in absolutely anyway at all considering its choice of words here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am The contradiction comes in the next part.

Also the other words that this one uses here moots what it is trying to say and claim as well, anyway.

Now, and again, after this one explains how it can prove some thing to another while the other is believing the opposite, then I will learn and know how to prove that there is only one Mind while it 'currently' keeps believing that there are 'many minds'.

Until then I have absolutely no idea nor clue how to prove some thing to someone while they are believing the opposite is true.

I am also OPEN to absolutely anyone as well teaching me how they can prove some thing to another while the other is believing the opposite is true.

2) This was a position I guessed Age had. That while someone is believing something one cannot prove to them the opposite is true (note the binary thinking).

Why would you only have 'guessed' this, especially considering what I have been continually saying and stating here?

This one is Truly oblivious to quite a lot of what I actually say and write here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am As I mentioened when I guessed this was his position correctly, the problem with this rather facile model, is it presents the issue as if people who have believes cannot change their beliefs in the face of argument, evidence, etc.

Even though this has said and claimed this before and I informed it before that I have never ever thought, let alone presented this, show and proves just how oblivious this one really and Truly is here.

And, if this one is trying to claim that what I say and write is some sort of so-called 'facile model', then this one is, again, proving just how Wrong its beliefs and presumptions are and just little it really knows here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am They obviously can.

Well considering that absolutely no one in this forum here as even suggested otherwise, well not from what I have seen anyway, this one here is arguing against its own 'made up' stories here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am And further it presents belief in discrete binary terms: either you believe or don't.

This one says and states here, 'And further ...', laughingly as though what it previously stated and presented was even true at all.

As for the rest of this one said and stated here, it is just a follow on from its own 'made up assumptions and beliefs'

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am Whereas we can have a variety of strengths of beliefs with attendant doubts. In fact, one can actually believe contradictory things (consciously and unconsciously, for example).

Will present the contradictory things, which you believe "iwannaplato"?

If no, then why not?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am But Age treats the present of belief as a reason not to try to prove things to people. And also as a serious problem.

This one obviously still does not yet know what the word 'problem' actual means or is referring to, exactly, well in regards to what would make actual sense here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am These are things he calls views, but which function exactly like beliefs in other people.

This is another example of another complete and utter Wrong and False claim here by "iwannaplato", again either done intentionally to try to deceive the readers here, or because it still has no idea of what the actual Truth is here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am He has a very hard time letting go of his views, in precisely the same ways people have trouble, letting go of their beliefs.

This is absolutely joking here. Or, it is just a completely and utter idiot.

Name one view of mine, then I have, supposedly, had a hard time letting go of, which would have to obviously be false, wrong, inaccurate, and/or incorrect for one to have absolutely any reason to let go of?

Obviously you will not because you cannot.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am But people do change beliefs.

Well considering that one has even implied nor suggested otherwise, let alone said otherwise, this seems like a Truly weird and strange thing to say here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am Does Age change views?

Asking others what another does, appears to be seeking 'confirmation bias' in the extreme.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am He ends with

I am also OPEN to absolutely anyone as well teaching me how they can prove some thing to another while the other is believing the opposite is true.

Though he's never going to believe it is possible, because he will never add another belief.

This one, once again, has completely and utterly missed 'the point' entirely.

How many times can one person miss so many things, before they begin to consider that what they are doing is just utterly Wrong and absurd?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am Age is very Platonic here, I think, in the how can you change someone's belief when they believe the opposite.

And, "iwannaplato" is very blind and deaf here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am It's like there are no processes that unfold over time. There is never a gathering of doubt.
There is only this flip from belief to no longer believing in his view.

And, this one, again, obviously cannot still see and comprehend what the actual Truth is here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am And no one can participate in the gradual process where someone changes from a belief to not having it.

Why not "iwannaplato"? Why would you presume or believe such a thing as this here?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am He cannot see that this happens.

And, you are absolutely totally blind and deaf here "iwannaplato"

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am He has no experience of participating in someone else's process where that person moves, perhaps in small steps from a very strongly held belief, to more and more unstable states where doubt is involved, to being convinced X is not true.

And, once again, I will ask, 'Why believe any thing is true, when it might not be, in the first place?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am He has never experienced this or failed to notice it.

Again, this one is totally blind and stupid here.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am Which in the end is rather sad.

Again, the conclusion that this one has arrived, and the way that it went about in getting here, is beyond 'sad'.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am And it functions, in his dialogue with others, as a reason to not demonstrate things he knows are true.

What 'now' does this one believe I have not demonstrated when I have been asked to?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am Because he thinks there is only one way for a mind to change.

Well considering that this could not be more Wrong and False, once again, I will leave this one here on those parting words of it.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:43 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 6:48 am
"Who cares?"
Atla, you managed to elicit that! It's so colloquial and blunt.
And then, interesting, since obviously you care, and then further, the issue matters to many in the world. 1) Many people see figures with good intentions who have caused problems, and 2) Many people have their own cherished figures who they see as having good intentions and doing great things, while others see those same figures as having mislead people and caused harm.

And this 'who cares' goes right into the label 'APE-thinking'.
which is an odd label, given that APEs couldn't have that thought.

Once more, this one has assumed and presumed the absolutely totally False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect here, AGAIN.

How many times is this one going to keep on doing this exact same thing, before it realizes how Truly foolish and stupid it is looking here?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 6:48 am But, fine, it's metaphorical, which is an exception for Age, I think.

Even this assumption is Wrong and Incorrect.

How many times is this one going to just keep making Wrong and False assumptions one after another before it learns that by just seeking out and obtaining actual clarity first here, then it would not say and claim anymore thing else Falsely and Wrongly?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 6:48 am I think you have a special skill to elicit exceptions from Age.
.

'We' can see just how Truly blind, foolish, and closed you really are here "iwannaplato".

Once again, every claim you made here was False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect.

But, that was how the Truly stupid and deceived went about things.

Will you ever stop misquoting me Age?

Hopefully I will.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:43 am How would you like it if I started doing the same to you?

Are you asking this out a scale of anything?

If yes, then what is that scale, exactly?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:43 am Nothing in your post above should have me quoted as saying it.

This is True, and right.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:43 amHow do you keep managing to do that?

Because of the way I copy and paste, and then forget to check things.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:43 amI hadn't even posted in this thread until now.

Okay.

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:43 am My name shouldn't be in anything quoted from this thread.

Okay.

Once again, I apologize, and, once more, profusely.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:15 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 7:07 am

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 6:48 am
"Who cares?"
Atla, you managed to elicit that! It's so colloquial and blunt.
And then, interesting, since obviously you care, and then further, the issue matters to many in the world. 1) Many people see figures with good intentions who have caused problems, and 2) Many people have their own cherished figures who they see as having good intentions and doing great things, while others see those same figures as having mislead people and caused harm.

And this 'who cares' goes right into the label 'APE-thinking'.
which is an odd label, given that APEs couldn't have that thought.

Once more, this one has assumed and presumed the absolutely totally False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect here, AGAIN.

How many times is this one going to keep on doing this exact same thing, before it realizes how Truly foolish and stupid it is looking here?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 7:14 pm But, fine, it's metaphorical, which is an exception for Age, I think.

Even this assumption is Wrong and Incorrect.

How many times is this one going to just keep making Wrong and False assumptions one after another before it learns that by just seeking out and obtaining actual clarity first here, then it would not say and claim anymore thing else Falsely and Wrongly?

Gary Childress wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 7:14 pm I think you have a special skill to elicit exceptions from Age.
.

'We' can see just how Truly blind, foolish, and closed you really are here "iwannaplato".

Once again, every claim you made here was False, Wrong, Inaccurate, and Incorrect.

But, that was how the Truly stupid and deceived went about things.

As usual, lots of claims with no justification.

And again, I will repeat, I do not, necessarily, justify my claims until asked for.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:15 am Oh, really, I made claims without justification also?

Are you talking to and asking "yourself" this question here?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:15 am Good point.
So, you behave like the people you judge as stupid, Age.
How interesting.

Has this one gone completely insane now?

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:15 am Hundreds of posts and very little justification comes from Age.

Once again, for the BLIND, DEAF, and STUPID here. Until asked for, none will be, necessarily, provided.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:15 am Adn there are always reasons why he doesn't justify. It's our fault. We aren't interested enough. If we were interested. If we didn't believe, then he would prove.

This one is really gone insane here, 'now'.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:15 am If we answer hundreds of clarifying questions, then he will prove....

if you say so.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:15 am Tomorrow and tomorrow and tomorrow

Again, if you say and believe so, then this 'must' be so.

Iwannaplato wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:15 am creeps in this petty pace from dusk till dawn.....

Seems like someone is somewhat upset here.

If you want something 'justified', then just ask for what 'it' is, exactly, that you want here.

If you do not, then obviously you do not want anything here.

How much simpler can Life, and living, get here?

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 8:47 am

Age wrote: ↑Thu Feb 22, 2024 5:30 am

Wizard22 wrote: ↑Wed Feb 21, 2024 9:36 am
Well, you know him/it longer than me since you've been here awhile.

I don't know...the way it repeats itself, that doesn't seem human to me.

Also I get the impression that it isn't 'typing' its pages and pages of responses, considering how often it repeats itself verbatim.

And then there's the obvious...it openly admits it's "not human", its catch-phrases "in the time when this was written", and "you humans".

I have never once said nor written these things,

You apparently don't have much of a memory, AgeGPT.

If you believe otherwise, then find absolutely anywhere in this forum where I have said and written this things, and link 'us' to them.

Now, if you do not, then just maybe it is and has been 'your memory' "wizard22" that has been and is failing 'your' tremendously here.

We now wait to see, what happens.