105.3 The Fan Michael Irvin. Run to the Playoffs

[tyke1doe]

What on earth does these stats have anything at all to do with your moronic question I responded to.

How bizarre to respond to my post and pretend whatever you just pulled from your arse has anything at all to do with what your OP was...

I enjoy a good debate. But you just got weird on me.

do you even know what I replied to?

Who put gunpower in your Cheerios?

Second, you mentioned "facts"? The only substantive facts I mentioned were the rankings and record of the top three rushing teams. Interesting that you bypassed those facts to rant about my questions.

Third, I was engaging in HYPERBOLE when I said Zeke takes himself out every other play. Even an elementary school student - well, maybe not - understands what I said was HYPERBOLE (an over-exaggeration of an idea to make a point).

Fourth, if you were concerned about me understanding your point, maybe you should have authored a relevant response and clarified what you took issue with in my statement instead of being full of piss and vinegar.

Fifth, I enjoy a good debate too. But something tells me if you bypass actual facts to focus on rhetorical questions and think an appeal to relevant facts is "weird," you really don't understand what a "good debate" is.

Go back to arguing with kindergarteners. You don't want none of this.

 

[superonyx]

Who put gunpower in your Cheerios?

Second, you mentioned "facts"? The only substantive facts I mentioned were the rankings and record of the top three rushing teams. Interesting that you bypassed those facts to rant about my questions.

Third, I was engaging in HYPERBOLE when I said Zeke takes himself out every other play. Even an elementary school student - well, maybe not - understands what I said was HYPERBOLE (an over-exaggeration of an idea to make a point).

Fourth, if you were concerned about me understanding your point, maybe you should have authored a relevant response and clarified what you took issue with in my statement instead of being full of piss and vinegar.

Fifth, I enjoy a good debate too. But something tells me if you bypass actual facts to focus on rhetorical questions and think an appeal to relevant facts is "weird," you really don't understand what a "good debate" is.

Go back to arguing with kindergarteners. You don't want none of this.

Interesting comeback from the guy who originally posted something that is now claiming to be HYPERBOLE. You want to them throw some "facts" that have absolutely nothing to do with your post I was responding to. You seriously wonder why I ignored some fact you added later that I never disputed. So yes this is weird. Who does that?

If this is the best your are capable of then you are right. I don't want any of that. I prefer to debate grown ups.

Its a weak debate tactic to try to throw some new fact out of nowhere and then pretend this is what the debate is about. I guess you felt more comfortable debating something else.

 

[tyke1doe]

Interesting comeback from the guy who originally posted something that is now claiming to be HYPERBOLE. You want to them throw some "facts" that have absolutely nothing to do with your post I was responding to. You seriously wonder why I ignored some fact you added later that I never disputed. So yes this is weird. Who does that?

Huh?
Sorry, son. You can't match words with me. You just end up confusing yourself and others.

If this is the best your are capable of then you are right. I don't want any of that. I prefer to debate grown ups.

Using my material. I'm flattered.

Its a weak debate tactic to try to throw some new fact out of nowhere and then pretend this is what the debate is about. I guess you felt more comfortable debating something else.

Huh?
First, it's It's not Its.
Second, I was responding to GMO. I don't know why you got upset.
Third, the relevant fact I offered was about the top three rushing teams. You couldn't debate those facts so you shifted to argue a rhetorical question, which is asinine on the surface because the nature of a rhetorical question (which, by the way, you recognized in your retort to my initial post) is that it doesn't require an answer. How do you debate something which involves no debate?

Your ego is wounded so you're just arguing to be arguing.
Again, you don't want none of this.