Conversation Between Richard Lynch and Fox♠
1 to 15 of 16
  1. Richard Lynch
    May 28th, 2010 10:23 AM
    Richard Lynch
    Aaaaaaand... I rest my case.

    Pip pip, cheerio, mate.
  2. Richard Lynch
    May 28th, 2010 7:23 AM
    Richard Lynch
    See, now you've turned from someone to be dealt with rationally to an entertaining sop. And I already made your game; last word freak. I'm a bit of one myself, I admit. How awful it must be to fail intellectually and be reduced to petty insults, though! But I'll be a hypocrite for a moment, and say that I personally hold very little respect for a 19 year old [man?] who posts pictures of himself drinking white wine (or was that just sparkling apple cider? A true man's drink!) and girls rubbing his nipples on a Pokemon forum. And I won't go into your little commentary on it. (By the way, how the hell are you holding that wine glass? Haven't you ever read anything on wine etiquette?)

    And if you'd actually take the time to read and comprehend (something that seems you have a lot of trouble with), you'd see that Yellow and I are discussing purely academics, again, something I would also think you have trouble with. I don't often flame, but I felt you were worthy of it. Someone with no redeemable qualities is like an ant sitting in the baking sun with a magnifying glass next to it; if a higher life form comes along, you WILL get burned. This will be the last time I flame with the likes of you, or even attempt a rational debate like I originally did.

    Do us all a favor and grow up or get out.
  3. Richard Lynch
    May 27th, 2010 4:47 PM
    Richard Lynch
    *Sigh*. Some toasters are beyond repair.

    If I may refer to some phonetic Russian, I feel it's appropriate to say,
    "Ya idoo kuda sam czar idyot peshkom."
  4. Richard Lynch
    May 27th, 2010 4:32 PM
    Richard Lynch
    No, you didn't say that. But you turned to derogatory remarks. For example, you expressed superior knowledge of physics and the human body. I very easily could have said, "Well, here I am, and I have the credentials to prove that I have superior knowledge in physics and the human body than you", but I didn't, because I don't think that matters. In a debate, you're not out to prove your credentials, you're out to prove your point using your credentials. So thus, I could also say that I have superior knowledge in debate than you (another point you made to Yellow).

    Look, all I'm saying is, play nice. Rudeness is unspeakably ugly, I'm sure we all can agree. If you keep debating like that, you'll eventually come across someone who knows more than you in the overall subject, as I think has been made moderately clear. But someone perhaps less restrained than I am (or who knows even more than I) wouldn't hesitate in making a complete fool out of you. Okay? Friends again?
  5. Fox♠
    May 27th, 2010 4:17 PM
    Fox♠
    I didn't call anyone stupid, please refrain from putting words into my mouth. I said she was out of her league, and she was. She had next to zero knowledge on the subject and when I tried explaining things she ignored them. I hardly think my actions were unfair;
  6. Richard Lynch
    May 27th, 2010 4:04 PM
    Richard Lynch
    It is the internet, but that doesn't mean rudeness and disrespect is permissible. It's not like you're talking to emotionless simulators here. :-P

    And I feel everyone has a right to voice their opinion, no? That's how knowledge builds, by discussion. Not everything has to be a debate; if you started spouting things about the Schrodinger and Dirac Equations, some things might be correct, but most would probably be wrong... doesn't mean I'd come out and label you stupid and unworthy of (otherwise, "plaguing") quantum mechanics.
  7. Fox♠
    May 27th, 2010 3:52 PM
    Fox♠
    Sorry, I thought i had replied :S

    Look, I don't really care enough about lowering myself or whatever, it's just the internet. She's being plaguing Other Chat with loads of these attempts to look in the know, then running when she;s proven wrong. Surely it's her you should be lecturing.
  8. Richard Lynch
    May 27th, 2010 3:44 PM
    Richard Lynch
    You're right about that. Point blank can be notoriously fatal, but I think in the heat of passion, many people won't think things out as to "where is the perfect place to aim this...", moving the gun around until they find the perfect spot. I'm inclined to believe that most suicides will just up and shoot, lowering the probability of sure-fire (excuse the pun) fatality. Sure, it's more likely to kill than a shot to the head from far away, but still, the biological factors are still there, and can't be ignored. If you were ever shot point blank in the head, would you want the people around to say, "Oop, point blank to head, no point in trying to help"? Because a shot to the brain is not like death on impact; you usually just bleed to death. The reaction (like unconsciousness) comes from shock, or where in the brain you're hit.

    And if that's how you felt, why did you allow yourself to bring yourself down to the same level? I read through the debate, and I personally disagree with what you think (it's all relative, afterall), but your attitude towards, and reaction to, it didn't make you any better, just for future reference.
  9. Fox♠
    May 27th, 2010 3:30 PM
    Fox♠
    I'm not being funny, but when I'm dealing with a silly child who first tried patronising me, then twisted my words, then made ludicrious claims with zero backing, I'm not gonna be open to listening to their further fruitless rebutes. I'm fully aware there are circumstances where survival is possible, however these circumstances aren't generally or even rarely present with these suicides.
  10. Richard Lynch
    May 27th, 2010 3:26 PM
    Richard Lynch
    Fair enough, .45. I'm just trying to point out that you can't generalize in a debate like this, with so many variables. And you STILL are missing my point. I agree with you, man!, it IS a likely kill in most cases. What I'm trying to show you is that you're choosing to ignore biological variables that can lead to survival. I'm trying to show you that this is not as exact as you claim, it is NOT 100%. You're repeating the same thing over and over, no matter what counter argument is being made that aids to widdle down your assumptions... it's slightly tedious.

    And your last sentence genuinely made me laugh. Never heard that one before *jots down for future joke use*. I'm not trying to flame you, I'm just saying I highly dislike your method of debate, which is far FAR below what I consider respectable.
  11. Fox♠
    May 27th, 2010 3:14 PM
    Fox♠
    Now who's resorting to petty personal insults? Assuming we're talking a 9mm/.45 from a semi auto handgun then it'd still kill. I was refering to a .45 in my last response however forgot to mention it, only mentioning the fps range that applies to most semi auto hand guns. If we're talking a sawn off shotgun then I'd be surprised if theres a head left at all.

    I've gotta ask though, what business is a personal arguement of yours ayway? You hoping to get some e-puntang or something brother?!
  12. Richard Lynch
    May 27th, 2010 2:19 PM
    Richard Lynch
    I know people like you; always have to seem cool and right. You call names to belittle others and make yourself appear higher. Build yourself up, don't raze others, otherwise you just look like a noob.

    And yet again you overlook a variable; the type of bullet and type of gun. Are we talking about a .45, or a sawed off shotgun? Obviously, they will give different results.

    If you would actually read an argument instead of just saying "I'm right, you're wrong - you misinterpreted what I said, deal with it", you'd see that I agree with you, for the most part. My discontent comes from your argument, which holds no recognizable merit whatsoever. An argument is only as good as the mouth and mind it comes out of, and in those terms, yours is downright bad.
  13. Fox♠
    May 27th, 2010 12:53 PM
    Fox♠
    loooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooool.

    Ok batman.

    You actually know of anyone who's offed themselves with a bullet? The force from the combustion in the chamber itself is enough, the back of the head is literally blown out. You don't survive. If you held the gun under your mouth and aimed up, then yes, there's a fair chance of survival, however that's not the point I was putting across. Having a dense lump of lead smash through your skull at around 800 feet per second is gonna kill you.
  14. Richard Lynch
    May 27th, 2010 12:23 PM
    Richard Lynch
    Even that could potentially leave you alive. You might be braindead after, but biologically speaking, you could be alive (and let's not get into metaphysics here). I'm not trying to refute you, I happen to agree that the probability is very high. I'm just trying to point out that it's much more complicated than you're making it out to be, as there are variables and instances you totally overlook (or choose not to incorporate because it puts little cracks in your debate). You say you present "facts", but these "facts" are mere statistics raked on by non-scientific opinion that you curve around the science in an, as you call it, "wicker debate". Again, whether you are unaware of the science or you choose to ignore it is beyond me, and I don't really care which. However, I do feel the framework of your overall opinion is accurate; it's just your logic and argument that are lackluster. And argument/reason is 51% of the debate.

    Do me a favor, and try not to bully people around, unless you're ready for a real debate.

    Deal?
  15. Fox♠
    May 27th, 2010 12:02 PM
    Fox♠
    I meant if you had the barrel in your mouth. The bullet would make its entry at an angle through the roof of your mouth heading to the back of your skull.