LOGO
Reply to Thread New Thread
Old 07-01-2012, 08:23 AM   #21
shashaffff

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
457
Senior Member
Default
What a fruitless discussion...
Im sorry our interests and discussions dont coincide precisely and exactly with the discussions you deem to be fruitful.

Let me guess, literalist ?

6 Billion website pages out their, but you deemed this solitary page fruitless enough to comment upon ?
shashaffff is offline


Old 07-01-2012, 08:26 AM   #22
Patamuta

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
396
Senior Member
Default
Im sorry our interests and discussions dont coincide precisely and exactly with the discussions you deem to be fruitful.

Let me guess, literalist ?

6 Billion website pages out their, but you deemed this solitary page fruitless enough to comment upon ?
You're an extremely argumentative person.

This is a completely fruitless argument and is just a back and forth of rhetoric that is of no benefit to anyone. What does it matter if the astronauts were actually outside the atmosphere or within it? You've completely derailed the purpose of this thread by making a complete non-issue into the focus of this thread.
Patamuta is offline


Old 07-01-2012, 08:38 AM   #23
shashaffff

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
457
Senior Member
Default
You're an extremely argumentative person.

This is a completely fruitless argument and is just a back and forth of rhetoric that is of no benefit to anyone. What does it matter if the astronauts were actually outside the atmosphere or within it? You've completely derailed the purpose of this thread by making a complete non-issue into the focus of this thread.
Its of benefit to me, is that ok YOUR HIGHNESS !

Whats the purpose of the thread. To glorify achievements that never actually happened ??

3 Chinese astronaughts return to Earth PERHAPS you would like to suggest a line of focus !! Be my guest - its a free forum, im not stopping you !
shashaffff is offline


Old 07-01-2012, 10:57 AM   #24
IdomeoreTew

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
562
Senior Member
Default
wow, chill bro's, This wasn't meant to be a debate, just a small scientific discussion.


As for this being a fruitless discussion, I disagree, science is not fruitless. And I never used rhetoric in any of my responses, thank you. But anyway, dont make this into a debate, we got enough of those already.

IdomeoreTew is offline


Old 07-01-2012, 11:01 AM   #25
shashaffff

Join Date
Oct 2005
Posts
457
Senior Member
Default
I didnt use rhetoric neither, except as a tool to ask science based questions.

The guy is just being negative, hence the negative assumptions on the thread, and negative views on our intentions.

I dont want to debate, i want to learn, i didnt think it was futile either.

I dont like people who are pooh-poohing people learning on the basis "its bad for your deen" or "i dont think this worthwhile because it doesn fit in my tiny box perspective". Escpecially when the topics in discussion are perfectly halal.

I wonder if this is a sickness of the heart, having negative views on people ?
shashaffff is offline



Reply to Thread New Thread

« Previous Thread | Next Thread »

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:40 PM.
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
Design & Developed by Amodity.com
Copyright© Amodity