On Jul 3, 7:03=A0pm, "Mr.Smartypants" <bunghole-jon...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Jul 3, 4:33=A0pm, Rupert <rupertmccal...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jul 2, 11:17=A0pm, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> > > Rupert wrote:
> > > > On Jul 2, 1:04 am, Rudy Canoza <pi...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
wrote:
> > > >> You sure did slink away quietly from the "inefficiency" issue.
=A0=
I showed
> > > >> conclusively that ****witted "vegans" see their bull****
"ineffici=
ency"
> > > >> argument against meat as something entirely separate from an
> > > >> environmental argument, and you just threw in the white towel,
aft=
er
> > > >> waving it weakly for a few minutes.
>
> > > >> What the **** possessed you to argue for so long from such a weak
> > > >> position of ignorance, anyway? =A0I guess it must have been your
u=
sual
> > > >> partisan****p.
>
> > > > Just to comment on this one more time,
>
> > > [snip worthless **** hemorrhage]
>
> > > Your first comment, acknowledging the lame and feckless concession,
w=
as
> > > sufficient.
>
> > Still think "axiomatisable" is not a real word, Ball?
>
> > When you snip and evade this question, will that be just a tiny bit
> > lame?
>
> > You finally got around to adequately arguing your point, and when I
> > saw an adequate argument I agreed with you. Nothing lame there.-
>
> Poor Boobs. He finally gets something half-assed right and you concede
> that point to him and he simply can't handle it. He can't just accept
> it, he has to keep on arguing because he thinks he can replay his
> solitary once-in-a-lifetime victory over and over and over and over.
>
> He's never been right about anything before you know.- Hide quoted text
-
>
> - Show quoted text -
He definitely seems very concerned to prove something or other with
all his babble. Something about me not being a real man, apparently.
|
