• pinkdrunkenelephants@lemmy.cafe
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    The fallacy, among others, they’re committing is called equivocation, by the way. They use a meaning of one word one minute and another the next, when it suits them to win the confrontation.

    This is why debate and talking don’t actually solve problems. People can and will just do stupid shit like this in bad faith to get you to acquiesce to them or stop challenging them.

    People like that need ass-beatings until they’re willing to conform to the dictionary’s definitions of words and the rules of debate.

  • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’ll never get these people. There’s this vast conspiracy… But they they intentionally leave all these fucking hints?

  • edgemaster72@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I’m 2 paragraphs in and I’m tapping out, I’m pretty sure I can feel my brain melting from the inside and I don’t wanna make a mess on my keyboard by reading further.

  • darkpanda@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    Why are they so infatuated with this weirdo naval law thing they have going on? Like asking judges if they adjudicate under banner of a maritime vessel according to the Queen of Roxbury statute because otherwise their conveyance would be considered void by rite of Shaka when the walls fell. They just love maritime law for some reason.

    • Seleni@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      They have this weird theory that the naval courts took over all the other courts a few centuries ago. Under the secret command of the Templars, of course (who secretly control the Red Cross, the Swiss, and the British Royalty—you can tell by the red crosses on their stuff).

      • Lemmygizer@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        I believe there is also a sub-set that believe that because they are not under US law, that only maritime law can apply to them.

        • Seleni@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          I think it’s more like they think that since they’re not a ship, unlike the rest of us sheeple (shiple?) that maritime law doesn’t apply.

    • Mesophar@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 months ago

      Obviously it means dock, as in where a ship moors, and ore, a common product on ships /s

      But unironocally, that’s probably exactly their reasoning…

  • ettyblatant@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    You know how when you’re a teenager, you’re told you should “grow up and get a job”? Ever notice how “job” also refers to biblical texts that say at the end of your inevitable suffering, God will be with you, for he is just? Also worth noting: suffering is very close to surfing, i.e. travel via ocean, which is like a boat. Another big boat was the ark, pointing again! to the Bible. Remember when I said “grow up” earlier? That is probably because it is so close to “group”, which, with the other noted connotations, ties in with biblical stories = Bible Group. Because all of these messages come together when you are a teen, obviously we are talking about children’s Bible study. “Children’s” can be shortened to the word “chirruns”, aka “trains” so Trains Bible Study would be manufacturers instructions for freight trains, which could *also" mean “fraught trains”, because ghosts.