It is by far incomplete, since listing all of the great man’s talents and examples of wisdom is a much too challenging task for one person.
8 - nounamacallit
9 - verbaulator
10 - adjectiveajiggy
Iron(bone)man you are still a knobhead can you answer the questions posed to you on the hearts and minds thread particularly , your actual experience of the education system in the middle east and which muslim countries have you visited.
Attempt to draaaaag one thread into another like a Quake grunt.
Failure.
Nah, this is the perfect place to drag it - this thread was set up specifically to collect all your boneheadedness in one place.
And you are in no position to correct ANYONE’s SPG. Glass houses etc.
It is by far incomplete, since listing all of the great man’s talents and examples of wisdom is a much too challenging task for one person.
8 - nounamacallit
9 - verbaulator
10 - adjectiveajiggy[/quote]
I hope you weren’t trying to correct someone on spelling or grammar?
That wouldn’t make much sence (sic).
Another genius post from IRONMAN!
Yes boys and girls, it’s here in black and light brown. IRONMAN has actually claimed that the IRA is mostly funded by the British. Is there no end to his wisdom and insight on an incredibly diverse range of topics?
I suppose it’s just denial that St Patrick’s Day parades all over American contain many a financier of terrorism, organized crime and cold blooded murder.
All i want is for him to answer 1 question of the many, or at least provide some evidence, if he does I will gladly aologise to him.
IRONMAN - You have correctly identified hostility amongst the Forum users, and there is a growing “anti-” Sentiment; That incidentally is directed at you!
Evidence? I provided an article from one of the most respected universities in the world, written by someone with a big fat letter degree in politial theory. You’ve had your evidence. Now let us know when you get YOUR PhD in ploitical theory, so you can post your own article and we’ll have reason to believe anything you say that contradicts the Stanford University one is anywhere near as authoratatice.
Or, you could simply STFU about it, since you know peeny-weeny jack shiot compared to the author of the article you’ve read. Either one is sufficient.
:lol: :lol: :lol:
Firefly - just in case you don’t have access to the various academic journal servers, I’ve taken the liberty of taking a look - and found a lovely little journal article for you (from J. Social and Evolutionary Systems) entitled
“Finding one’s way around the political compass (or why libertarianism is right-wing”
Drop me a PM if you want it emailing to you. If you can access this journal yourself however (unlikely unless you’re in academia) the details are:
Finding one’s way around the political compass (or why libertarianism is right-wing)
Cole PA
JOURNAL OF SOCIAL AND EVOLUTIONARY SYSTEMS
18 (3): 207-211 1995Addresses:
Cole PA, MIDDLESEX UNIV,CTR PRACTICAL PHILOSOPHY,WHITE HART LANE,LONDON N17 8HR,ENGLAND
Publisher:
JAI PRESS INC, GREENWICHIDS Number:
TR276ISSN:
1061-7361
Dudey, that book is written by a physician, not a political theorist. :lol:
He does not have a PhD in political theory, like the Stanford Universtity author. :lol:
His education is not in political theory - it is in medicine. :lol:
Appearently, some liberal doctor wrote a book on a subject in which he is completely unqualified, and the publisher (JOURNAL OF SOCIAL AND EVOLUTIONARY SYSTEMS) liked it because they are liberal too. :lol:
Sorry dudey. He is not qualified in that subject. Again, find me a source which has a PhD in political theory who states that the Stanford University article, written by someone who DOES have a PhD in political theory, is incorrect. You’re blowing smoke. 
I need to write a book about medicine! maybe someone would buy it! :lol:
BTW, when Stanford University wrote:
“Libertarianism is often thought of as “right-wing” doctrine. This, however, is mistaken for at least two reasons.”
…they were refering to people like the doctor and you. People who do not understand political theory but think that they do.
Dudey, that book is written by a physician, not a political theorist. :lol:
He does not have a PhD in political theory, like the Stanford Universtity author. :lol:
His education is not in political theory - it is in medicine. :lol:
[/quote]
Where have you got that from? Where does it say that he is a medical doctor? Where?
YOU ARE STARTING TO FUCKING ANNOY ME!
Dudey, that book is written by a physician, not a political theorist. :lol:
He does not have a PhD in political theory, like the Stanford Universtity author. :lol:
His education is not in political theory - it is in medicine. :lol:
[/quote]
Where have you got that from? Where does it say that he is a medical doctor? Where?
YOU ARE STARTING TO FUCKING ANNOY ME![/quote]
Nice to see that some anglo-saxon words have made it into our vernacular… But look, I may not be General Sandworm, Erwin Schatzer, or FW-190 Pilot, but I still have some reason, and if all you are gonna say is “YOU ARE STARTING TO FUCKING ANNOY ME!” then that is better not said at all.
Nice to see that some anglo-saxon words have made it into our vernacular… But look, I may not be General Sandworm, Erwin Schatzer, or FW-190 Pilot, but I still have some reason, and if all you are gonna say is “YOU ARE STARTING TO FUCKING ANNOY ME!” then that is better not said at all.[/quote]
That isn’t all I said. Note the words at the top of my post, they do ask some serious questions. IRONMAN has once again made a statement of opinion and made it look like fact. I want to know where he has got the idea that the author of the book is a medical doctor from.
BTW, I really wouldn’t get involved in this one.
NEW RULE
No more complains about copying other people’s work in public, if you have any complains in that field, please pm Gen.sandworm or me about it and we will take it seriously
If anyone does this again, he will be ban without any warning
Now Now then children, no need to tell teacher we can all sort this like men, However in the spirit of following the rules of the Forum,
No complaints are to be made in public, all arguments should be directed first to the MOD’s in a PM.
isnt that so…
I suspect people are getting annoyed because in the third thread to be dragged off topic to libertarianism IRONMAN point blank refuses to debate in any way, shape or form. He has one sentence from the summary of a text from Stanford University. It has two possible interpretations, the correct one is determined by the context - i.e. the rest of the summary.
He has decided that his interpretation of the sentence is the only correct one, and that this is indisputable. He even refuses to acknowledge the that arguments made elsewhere in the very same text are valid. No. The only comment of any value, in IRONMAN’s view, is the one sentence he has posted over and over again. Anything else is blather.
You see above that festamus has posted an article from a peer reviewed journal. In terms of academic authority, the only thing that can challenge work published in a peer reviewed journal is another piece of work published in a journal of equal or higher academic standing. IRONMAN dismisses this article as blather from people who don’t know what they are talking about.
You’ll see this elsewhere, where he argues about jet engine terminology with four different Masters of Engineering. Our word, and extracts from referenced and authoritative textbooks, is dismissed out of hand as ‘blather’ and the NASA kid’s guide to Jet Engines is taken as the correct place to learn the technical vocabulary of the jet engine.
Behaviour like this is trolling. It is impossible to develop an argument where one side denies that anything you post can be valid unless it agrees with their own point of view. And when that person posts racist lies, you can’t just ignore it. You see elsewhere all those site members I know are British rally round in defence of the muslim community within days of the London bombing. There was a valid argument to be had, but repeated posting of Klannish lies has prevented it from forming.
He also thinks that the reference to the journal article is a BOOK. Which is strange, since it’s a journal article.
And I also don’t know where the hell the troll gets the idea that the author is a medical doctor from - perhaps he thinks that anyone with Dr in front of their name is a medical doctor, which is not the case (and yes, I can believe that he stoops to such levels of idiocy) - 2 minutes of googling gets me a bio:
http://www.herts.ac.uk/humanities/philosophy/0304semB.html
Dr Phillip Cole is a Reader in Applied Philosophy at Middlesex University where he teaches courses in moral and political philosophy, media ethics, morality and law and the philosophy of international relations. He is president of the Association of Legal and Social Philosophers and is on the executive committee of the Society for Applied Philosophy, organising their London workshop programme. He is currently researching the concept of evil, aiming at a philosophical history of the idea, in order to discover whether it has any constructive role to play in our contemporary world. He also writes on freedom and social justice and is co-editing a special issue of the journal Res Publica on international justice. His most recent book, Philosophies of Exclusion: Liberal Political Theory and Immigration (Edinburgh University Press), was chosen by the North American Society for Social Philosophy’s award for the best book on social philosophy published in 2000. He is also author of The Free, the Unfree and the Excluded: A Treatise on the Conditions of Liberty (Avebury 1998), and has written articles on poverty, biotechnology, and the moral status of non-human animals.
So there you have it. Not a medical doctor, and quite a distinguished man. And his article was from a PEER REVIEWED JOURNAL, not something posted on a uni website (and presumably not peer reviewed).
Please stop your random, inane, and incorrect blather, frionscam.
I have yet to post in this section, but as I was browsing through the fighter plane debate I came upon this. A classic this one is:
The US could not have made the Spitfire without the Brits? LOL Dude, it was an American design manufactured in the US. The US did not need britain, a war ravaged and almost cripple nation, to help them design and built a thing. Could you really be so wacked out?
:lol: :lol: :lol: First time I heard that! The United States of America designed the Spitfire!? Ah, how can he be so dumb, surely he made a mistake? :? At least I hope :? :?