And here we go again ...

[Loren Pechtel]

You'll see.

When you watch it, that is.

You've already shown you thought the witnesses were telling the truth when many were proven to be lying. (Because they said things majorly incompatible with the physical evidence.)

We can discuss what the witnesses said if you'd like. Let's start with the statements of the witnesses in the video.

In other words, whether it's true or not doesn't matter.

 

[Arctish]

You'll see.

When you watch it, that is.

You've already shown you thought the witnesses were telling the truth when many were proven to be lying. (Because they said things majorly incompatible with the physical evidence.)

We can discuss what the witnesses said if you'd like. Let's start with the statements of the witnesses in the video.

In other words, whether it's true or not doesn't matter.

In other words, you refuse to watch it.

In other words, you want me to describe it in detail so you can criticize it from afar and not risk damaging your worldview by evaluating it yourself.

In other words, your ignorance is showing and while you don't mind being ignorant, you do mind that other people have noticed it.

We've reached an impasse. No progress is possible because you don't know what you're talking about and refuse to learn. I won't be responding to any more of your clueless posts in this thread. I'll save that for the next discussion about the shooting of Michael Brown. No doubt you'll be just as clueless in that one too.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In other words, whether it's true or not doesn't matter.

In other words, you refuse to watch it.

In other words, you want me to describe it in detail so you can criticize it from afar and not risk damaging your worldview by evaluating it yourself.

In other words, your ignorance is showing and while you don't mind being ignorant, you do mind that other people have noticed it.

We've reached an impasse. No progress is possible because you don't know what you're talking about and refuse to learn. I won't be responding to any more of your clueless posts in this thread. I'll save that for the next discussion about the shooting of Michael Brown. No doubt you'll be just as clueless in that one too.

You still haven't done anything to show that it's the truth.

 

[ZiprHead]

In other words, whether it's true or not doesn't matter.

In other words, you refuse to watch it.

In other words, you want me to describe it in detail so you can criticize it from afar and not risk damaging your worldview by evaluating it yourself.

In other words, your ignorance is showing and while you don't mind being ignorant, you do mind that other people have noticed it.

We've reached an impasse. No progress is possible because you don't know what you're talking about and refuse to learn. I won't be responding to any more of your clueless posts in this thread. I'll save that for the next discussion about the shooting of Michael Brown. No doubt you'll be just as clueless in that one too.

You still haven't done anything to show that it's the truth.

The video speaks for itself. You, however, speak for the ignorant and uninformed.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You still haven't done anything to show that it's the truth.

The video speaks for itself. You, however, speak for the ignorant and uninformed.

The video somehow magically proves it's truth?

Or you believe it because it says what you want to hear. Same thing the trumpets do.

 

[Toni]

You still haven't done anything to show that it's the truth.

The video speaks for itself. You, however, speak for the ignorant and uninformed.

The video somehow magically proves it's truth?

Or you believe it because it says what you want to hear. Same thing the trumpets do.

Refusing to watch the video demonstrates that you don't know what you are talking about and that you don't care that you don't know. You've picked a stance and you will stick with it. No need to confuse you with facts. Or evidence. Or too much reading. Or clicking on links. Or thinking.

Loren, seriously. Your stubborn refusal to view a video while still commenting about what it does or does not show reflects very poorly on you and undercuts rather than supports your POV.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The video somehow magically proves it's truth?

Or you believe it because it says what you want to hear. Same thing the trumpets do.

Refusing to watch the video demonstrates that you don't know what you are talking about and that you don't care that you don't know. You've picked a stance and you will stick with it. No need to confuse you with facts. Or evidence. Or too much reading. Or clicking on links. Or thinking.

Loren, seriously. Your stubborn refusal to view a video while still commenting about what it does or does not show reflects very poorly on you and undercuts rather than supports your POV.

Once again, you show you don't understand. I'm refusing to watch a video that is in all likelyhood false. I'm not addressing it's contents, but it's credibility.

 

[ZiprHead]

Believe me. It's not false. View the video or remain in ignorance.

 

[Toni]

The video somehow magically proves it's truth?

Or you believe it because it says what you want to hear. Same thing the trumpets do.

Refusing to watch the video demonstrates that you don't know what you are talking about and that you don't care that you don't know. You've picked a stance and you will stick with it. No need to confuse you with facts. Or evidence. Or too much reading. Or clicking on links. Or thinking.

Loren, seriously. Your stubborn refusal to view a video while still commenting about what it does or does not show reflects very poorly on you and undercuts rather than supports your POV.

Once again, you show you don't understand. I'm refusing to watch a video that is in all likelyhood false. I'm not addressing it's contents, but it's credibility.

On what are you basing your assessment that it is likely false?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Once again, you show you don't understand. I'm refusing to watch a video that is in all likelyhood false. I'm not addressing it's contents, but it's credibility.

On what are you basing your assessment that it is likely false?

The witnesses that blamed Wilson rather than Brown were mostly shown to have not been able to see what they said, or else said things that didn't match the evidence.

 

[ZiprHead]

Once again, you show you don't understand. I'm refusing to watch a video that is in all likelyhood false. I'm not addressing it's contents, but it's credibility.

On what are you basing your assessment that it is likely false?

The witnesses that blamed Wilson rather than Brown were mostly shown to have not been able to see what they said, or else said things that didn't match the evidence.

We know. You'repeated this several times. The witnesses in the video aren't those people.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The witnesses that blamed Wilson rather than Brown were mostly shown to have not been able to see what they said, or else said things that didn't match the evidence.

We know. You'repeated this several times. The witnesses in the video aren't those people.

Got some indication of that?

 

[ZiprHead]

The witnesses that blamed Wilson rather than Brown were mostly shown to have not been able to see what they said, or else said things that didn't match the evidence.

We know. You'repeated this several times. The witnesses in the video aren't those people.

Got some indication of that?

You'll get your indication when you watch the video.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Got some indication of that?

You'll get your indication when you watch the video.

In other words, there's no reason to believe other than the persuasiveness of the speaker. Just like with His Flatulence.

 

[ZiprHead]

Got some indication of that?

You'll get your indication when you watch the video.

In other YOUR words, there's no reason to believe other than the persuasiveness of the speaker. Just like with His Flatulence.

FTFY

 

[Toni]

Got some indication of that?

You'll get your indication when you watch the video.

In other words, there's no reason to believe other than the persuasiveness of the speaker. Just like with His Flatulence.

Just like the accounts that YOU believe.

It’s seeming more and more as though you don’t actually think the version of events that you have decided to believe can withstand considering watching other eyewitness accounts.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In other words, there's no reason to believe other than the persuasiveness of the speaker. Just like with His Flatulence.

Just like the accounts that YOU believe.

It’s seeming more and more as though you don’t actually think the version of events that you have decided to believe can withstand considering watching other eyewitness accounts.

The point is the accounts you are referring to are from witnesses who have been shown to either not be able to see what happened or who made statements incompatible with the physical evidence. You just want Michael Brown to have been the victim rather than the perpetrator.

 

[Toni]

In other words, there's no reason to believe other than the persuasiveness of the speaker. Just like with His Flatulence.

Just like the accounts that YOU believe.

It’s seeming more and more as though you don’t actually think the version of events that you have decided to believe can withstand considering watching other eyewitness accounts.

The point is the accounts you are referring to are from witnesses who have been shown to either not be able to see what happened or who made statements incompatible with the physical evidence. You just want Michael Brown to have been the victim rather than the perpetrator.

It’s been pointed out to you repeatedly that you are mistaken about the witnesses in the video. Honestly, what do you have to lose by simply clicking the link. It won’t infect your computer.

 

[laughing dog]

The point is the accounts you are referring to are from witnesses who have been shown to either not be able to see what happened or who made statements incompatible with the physical evidence. You just want Michael Brown to have been the victim rather than the perpetrator.

It’s been pointed out to you repeatedly that you are mistaken about the witnesses in the video. Honestly, what do you have to lose by simply clicking the link. It won’t infect your computer.

He may lose his religion of when it comes to "thugs" killed by police, the police never make a mistake and are always in the right. Really, it is as if the police are like a god.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

The point is the accounts you are referring to are from witnesses who have been shown to either not be able to see what happened or who made statements incompatible with the physical evidence. You just want Michael Brown to have been the victim rather than the perpetrator.

It’s been pointed out to you repeatedly that you are mistaken about the witnesses in the video. Honestly, what do you have to lose by simply clicking the link. It won’t infect your computer.

Claiming that doesn't make it so. The only evidence that's been presented for his telling the truth is the video itself. That's circular reasoning.