Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

FBI Report on "Dancing Israelis" declassified.

Options
12345679»

Comments

  • Options
    #242
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    DAVOXXX ARE YOU REALLY CLAIMING THAT SNIFFER DOGS IN THE FIELD HAVE NEVER EVER MADE A MISTAKE, YES OR NO. AND NO SARCASM PLEASE.
    no
    Di0genes wrote: »
    I will then require further proof or evidence (both words meaning the same thing in this instance) of explosives than a dog's indication.
    see proof is different to evidence.

    Di0genes wrote: »
    You said it was evidence of explosives. I've been patiently explaining to you that it isnt.

    At which point you got confused. Claiming evidence isnt the same as proof.
    i'm saying evidence is not the same a proof.
    Di0genes wrote: »
    A sniffer dog barking is evidence that a dog is

    A) Barking

    B) that a dog suspects there are drugs or explosives there.

    Evidence of nothing else.

    see it is evidence.
    from your own mouth.

    Di0genes wrote: »
    Ah davoxxx didn't call it a theory, he called it evidence.....
    yes it is evidence that the dog raised an alert, not theory that the dog raised an alert.
    Di0genes wrote: »
    A dog indicating is not evidence.
    it's evidence that the dog indicated.

    now i have not said it is proof.

    here is the thing though:

    "Proof" is conclusive evidence. But all "evidence" is not
    necessarily conclusive.

    though at least you finally admit it is evidence.


  • Options
    #243
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    davoxx wrote: »
    no


    see proof is different to evidence.

    Claiming that doesn't mean it's true, and when you claim proof is two different things (both conclusive and possibly incorrect) in the same post, it's really not up to you to assign definitive means to words, when you can't do so in the same post.
    i'm saying evidence is not the same a proof.

    You can say that doesn't mean its true.

    And as you clearly demonstrated in a previous post you think proof can

    A) be conclusive

    B) be wrong.

    Frankly you've contradicted yourself so frequently here it's a wonder you've not had a headache from the cognitive dissoance.

    see it is evidence.
    from your own mouth.


    It's evidence a dog suspects there are explosives its not evidence of explosives as you claimed.
    yes it is evidence that the dog raised an alert, not theory that the dog raised an alert.


    it's evidence that the dog indicated.

    No you stated categorically that it was evidence of explosives. Now you're backtracking, again.
    now i have not said it is proof.

    here is the thing though:

    "Proof" is conclusive evidence. But all "evidence" is not
    necessarily conclusive.

    Really, and tell me, all proof is conclusive even when it's wrong? (your words not mine)
    though at least you finally admit it is evidence.

    You're either incredibly obtuse, or a troll.

    You claimed that the dog barking was evidence of explosives. I've been pointing out it's nothing of the sort.


  • Options
    #244
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    You're lying. Simple.
    yes i made up the fact that evidence and proof are different.
    and i paid the dictionary people to change the definitions.


    Di0genes wrote: »
    I'm sorry what? Proof can be both conclusive and wrong? Are you magically changing your own definition of words again?
    yeah ..
    people claim it as proof (like in maths) and then it is subseqnetly proven or found out to be false, hence it is not longer proof.

    unless you think that this never happens ...

    Di0genes wrote: »
    Your entire presence on this thread for the past two days has been a diversion from this.
    no, i've just been pointing out the facts.
    you've been on your rant that ct is all made up.

    Di0genes wrote: »
    You claimed a sniffer dog barking/indicating is evidence of explosives. Prove it.
    you claimed that there was no explosives in the van, PROVE IT


  • Options
    #245
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    <stuff>
    you've said it was not evidence, now you say it was not evidence of explosives .. changing your story much?

    you know what else is evidence dna tests? (hard evidence .. i'm nearly sure you said though you say a lot of crap it's hard to follow)
    you know dna tests can be wrong.
    so by your own logic you claim that dna tests are not evidence.


  • Options
    #246
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    Sniffer dogs react to chemicals. They're a moving firm, theres no telling what was in the van, that the dog was reacting to.

    the fbi said they were not a legitimate moving firm.
    Di0genes wrote: »
    Heaven forfend brown bomber that you'd actually put up for once and tell us what you really think happened. Heaven forfend that you'd actually nail your colours to the mast and tell us what theory you subscribe to.

    seems like a troll to me, trying to get someone to state their position so that you can make up reasons to debunk it.


    what theory do you subscribe to?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #247
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    davoxx wrote: »
    you've said it was not evidence, now you say it was not evidence of explosives .. changing your story much?

    A dog barking or indicating is evidence of something. Evidence that the dog is hungry, or frightening, or in a trained sniffer dog, evidence that the dog thinks theres explosives.

    It's not evidence of explosives.
    you know what else is evidence dna tests? (hard evidence .. i'm nearly sure you said though you say a lot of crap it's hard to follow)
    you know dna tests can be wrong.
    so by your own logic you claim that dna tests are not evidence.

    No, again that your shoveling works into my mouth.

    Lets go back to you proof that is both conclusive and wrong in the same sentence.
    N


  • Options
    #248
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    davoxx wrote: »
    the fbi said they were not a legitimate moving firm.

    A FBI agent said that he suspected that. Again not proof.
    seems like a troll to me, trying to get someone to state their position so that you can make up reasons to debunk it.

    Since we've established that you don't know the meaning of the words evidence and proof, it's probably best you keep on with these tangents.
    what theory do you subscribe to?

    I started a thread about it last year.


  • Options
    #249
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    A dog barking or indicating is evidence of something. Evidence that the dog is hungry, or frightening, or in a trained sniffer dog, evidence that the dog thinks theres explosives.

    It's not evidence of explosives.
    evidence


  • Options
    #250
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    I started a thread about it last year.

    so what don't you post it here ...


  • Options
    #251
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    davoxx wrote: »
    evidence

    And as mentioned, thats not evidence of explosives (as you claim) merely evidence of a dog's suspicion. And has we have seen and agree these dogs can make mistakes.

    Now please go on tell us more about conclusive proof and wrong proof.

    If you think a dog barking or indicating is evidence, I sincerely hope you stand accused of a serious crime in a court that holds the same standard of evidence as you use.
    so what don't you post it here ..

    There's a search function.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #252
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    There's a search function.
    that is a true fact.
    but i have no idea what to search for as i don't know what theory you subscribe to?


  • Options
    #253
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    davoxx wrote: »
    that is a true fact.
    but i have no idea what to search for as i don't know what theory do you subscribe?

    If you can't use the search function that not my problem.

    Once again you want to wander off trail to avoid the fact that you've been badly schooled here.


  • Options
    #254
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    If you can't use the search function that not my problem.

    Once again you want to wander off trail to avoid the fact that you've been badly schooled here.

    i have been badly skooled here.

    if you are trying to imply i learnt anything from you that is a different story.

    but yet again you avoided ... what was it you said oh yeah

    "Heaven forfend brown bomber that you'd actually put up for once and tell us what you really think happened. Heaven forfend that you'd actually nail your colours to the mast and tell us what theory you subscribe to."

    that's the one.


  • Options
    #255
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    davoxx wrote: »
    i have been badly skooled here.

    if you are trying to imply i learnt anything from you that is a different story.

    but yet again you avoided ... what was it you said oh yeah

    "Heaven forfend brown bomber that you'd actually put up for once and tell us what you really think happened. Heaven forfend that you'd actually nail your colours to the mast and tell us what theory you subscribe to."

    that's the one.

    It's all on the forum. Now do you have anything to more to add about the "dancing Israelis" or your concept of evidence, or how proof can be conclusive and wrong at the same time?


  • Options
    #256
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    It's all on the forum. Now do you have anything to more to add about the "dancing Israelis" or your concept of evidence, or how proof can be conclusive and wrong at the same time?
    you seem to be avoiding it well.
    guess you don't have a theory.
    i've asked (like you did of Brown Bomber) and all you do is dodge the question, but that's grand.
    that's as much as you can bring to the argument.


  • Options
    #257
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    davoxx wrote: »
    you seem to be avoiding it well.
    guess you don't have a theory.
    i've asked (like you did of Brown Bomber) and all you do is dodge the question, but that's grand.
    that's as much as you can bring to the argument.

    My theory is on the forum. I'm not your monkey, and you're not the organ grinder.

    If you're incapable of mastering boards.ie search system, I worry for your ability to deal with complex tasks.


  • Options
    #258
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    My theory is on the forum. I'm not your monkey, and you're not the organ grinder.

    If you're incapable of mastering boards.ie search system, I worry for your ability to deal with complex tasks.
    touchy.
    don't worry about my ability to deal with complex tasks, worry about your lack of ability to even post your own theory.
    Di0genes wrote:
    "Heaven forfend brown bomber that you'd actually put up for once and tell us what you really think happened. Heaven forfend that you'd actually nail your colours to the mast and tell us what theory you subscribe to."

    but in the end there is no theory, right? just say it, it won't be that hypocritical ...

    (considering you've demanded proof of me and others yet can't even state your own theory.)
    Di0genes wrote:
    "Heaven forfend brown bomber that you'd actually put up for once and tell us what you really think happened. Heaven forfend that you'd actually nail your colours to the mast and tell us what theory you subscribe to."

    but i guess the irony is lost on you.

    but thanks for dropping by with no theory (yet again).


  • Options
    #259
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    evidence VS proof

    it's not just me, it's just you.


  • Options
    #260
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    and just to prove i'm not incapable of searching:

    http://www.boards.ie/search/?q=Di0genes+theory

    returns:

    1) first link is this thread
    2) http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74291550&postcount=1145
    3) http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=68761395&postcount=41
    4) http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67924000&postcount=236
    5) http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=67975039&postcount=252
    6) http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=65029322&postcount=58

    "It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt."

    now i understand you a lot better.


    (bet you wish you just said your silly little theory in the first place)


  • Options
    #261
    Di0genes
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,005 ✭✭✭Di0genes


    davoxx wrote: »
    evidence VS proof

    it's not just me, it's just you.

    Wikipedia really? Did you just see that evidence and proof had two different entries and the was just good enough for you?

    From wiki
    Evidence in its broadest sense includes everything that is used to determine or demonstrate the truth of an assertion

    Proof, sufficient evidence or argument for the truth of a proposition.

    I'd stop reloading you're running out feet to shoot yourself in.

    Keep in mind you yourself gave the word proof two different meanings in the same post.
    davoxxx wrote:
    Evidence is evident and proof is conclusive

    See you said proof is conclusive. Conclusive is another word for irrefutable.

    However in the same post you also said
    davoxxx wrote:
    proof can be wrong

    Clearly you don't seem to understand what these words mean if you're infusing the same word with two opposite meanings in the same post

    As to you claim that dogs barking or indicating is "evidence of explosives" you seem to be quietly dropping that one in favour of calling me chicken because I won't use the search function for you.

    Would you like your food pre chewed before the airplane arrives?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #262
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    Di0genes wrote: »
    <stuff>

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74499498&postcount=258
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74499542&postcount=259
    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=74499831&postcount=260

    and still you dig and dig ...

    but no theory coming from you yet ...
    nope i still hear noise, but i hear no theory ...

    i'm sure the next post will have more noise but no theory ...


  • Options
    #263
    davoxx
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,539 ✭✭✭davoxx


    yay!!! i got a pm!!!
    Di0genes wrote:
    Your proof is wrong and conclusive at the same time is another Stundie nominee.

    Good luck!

    oh ... that's not a theory ... maybe he can't use the search function and he wanted me to do it for him, but he was to shy too ask ...

    that's it.

    if you really want me to go and find your own theory, because we know you can't type it again in case you happen to think about it, sure just ask, don't send me a pm, just say on thread.

    it's okay we (the sane people) are all here for you!!


    (got a pm from Di0genes who did not understand who i was referring to by 'we')


  • Options
    #264
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    Right, I should have locked this car crash of a thread earlier, but that's what I get for having faith in people.

    Firstly, and in no order of seriousness: Davoxx, don't post PM's without the consent of the sender. There's a site wide rule forbidding this.

    Di0genes, don't pm people just to make fun of their posts.

    Davoxx & Di0genes, this thread has descended into nonsense thanks to the pair of you. You're both desperately trying to get the last word in while baiting the other. Your attempts to try and outsmart each other are ridiculous. It's an internet forum, for Christs sake. It's not a matter of life or death. Don't get personal and don't take things personally. If someone is annoying you, just ignore them. You're never going to change peoples opinions here, so don't try.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement