30 Dec 2011, 3:20 pm
peebo wrote:
how is that in any way possible? [Oh its possible. How do you think you found that "scam" stuff? You see, its no sweat to perform research if its to try and show hgow full of crap something is, isn't it? But when it comes to verifying it, Oh crap, its too much to ask for. lol.
Quote:
he is providing a commentary on a court hearing that i wasn't at, and that can't be made out from the poor quality video.
Were you present at the arrival of any material that you claim to be true? Stop being ridiculous.
Quote:
for anyone to take that video at face value, they'd have to take the narrator's word on faith.
I have just said that no-one is asking you to take anything on faith. I would be disappointed if you DID.
Quote:
no it wasn't. this is a good example of a glaring error on the part of the narrator. the order said 10am on it as this is the time that the hearing would have been calling. in a lower court, however, this is no guarantee that the case will actually be heard at that time, nor does it mean that the document was signed at 10am.
Well as you already said, YOU WEREN'T PRESENT so you can't tell that for sure, can you?
Quote:
generally where people don't consent to paying council tax, they find police an bailiffs coming to the door, or sheriff officers if you are in scotland, and failing this you might end up in prison. try it and see for yourself.
Generally? Don't you think you should be 100% certain about what you're saying?
Quote:
this means nothing. the result of the court hearing was a liability order, the next step is police and bailiffs then the possibility of prison. the video provides no evidence of what happened following the hearing, adam.
Of course, it means nothing at all.
Quote:
stop being so pedantic. ok, forget apparently, it seems quite evident he is a scammer. but fair enough, adam, put your faith in such types if you like. if that's the sort of person you go to for information that's our choice.
Get a sense of humour for heaven's sake I was congratulating you on showing the ability to do research. You should feel grateful I'm actually complimenting you. And are you 100% certain you can trust YOUR source?
Quote:
so, still no evidence of FREEMAN ON THE LAND working. i think we can conclude that it's nonsense, if this is the best you can do.
Oh, I see, because you aren't convinced by me, that means it is automatically nonsense? I see, how logical.
30 Dec 2011, 4:02 pm
Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
peebo wrote:
how is that in any way possible? [Oh its possible. How do you think you found that "scam" stuff? You see, its no sweat to perform research if its to try and show hgow full of crap something is, isn't it? But when it comes to verifying it, Oh crap, its too much to ask for. lol.
sorry adam, doing research will not allow me to find out the truth of what happened at mr barry's court hearing short of seeing court records or speaking to a reliable person who was there. research will tell me nothing.
Quote:
Quote:
he is providing a commentary on a court hearing that i wasn't at, and that can't be made out from the poor quality video.
Were you present at the arrival of any material that you claim to be true? Stop being ridiculous.
i'm being ridiculous? do you actually think about these things you type? what is this response even supposed to mean? the court case in question is an actual event that took place, the only way i could be relatively sure as to the course of events would be if there was an acurate record to which i was privy, which APPARENTLY there is not. stop being stupid.
Quote:
Quote:
for anyone to take that video at face value, they'd have to take the narrator's word on faith.
I have just said that no-one is asking you to take anything on faith. I would be disappointed if you DID.
so you think i should do some research? short of looking at court records, what sort of research would confirm or refute the narrator's assertions?
Quote:
Quote:
no it wasn't. this is a good example of a glaring error on the part of the narrator. the order said 10am on it as this is the time that the hearing would have been calling. in a lower court, however, this is no guarantee that the case will actually be heard at that time, nor does it mean that the document was signed at 10am.
Well as you already said, YOU WEREN'T PRESENT so you can't tell that for sure, can you?
well i can, adam, as teh document itself was shown at the end of the video. unless the narrator himself forged it, which wouldn't make much sense since it would undermine his line of reasoning.
Quote:
Quote:
generally where people don't consent to paying council tax, they find police an bailiffs coming to the door, or sheriff officers if you are in scotland, and failing this you might end up in prison. try it and see for yourself.
Generally? Don't you think you should be 100% certain about what you're saying?
i am 100% certain. and this is generally what happens. there are millions of people who pay council tax and accrue arrears, so unfortunately generalisations are necessary.
Quote:
Quote:
this means nothing. the result of the court hearing was a liability order, the next step is police and bailiffs then the possibility of prison. the video provides no evidence of what happened following the hearing, adam.
Of course, it means nothing at all.
indeed. the video is a nonsense fraught with errors, the person who made it is an idiot, and the "layperson" is a well known scammer and fraudster.
Quote:
Quote:
stop being so pedantic. ok, forget apparently, it seems quite evident he is a scammer. but fair enough, adam, put your faith in such types if you like. if that's the sort of person you go to for information that's our choice.
Get a sense of humour for heaven's sake I was congratulating you on showing the ability to do research. You should feel grateful I'm actually complimenting you. And are you 100% certain you can trust YOUR source?
i'm fairly certain, there are countless pages on the web exposing this fool.
Quote:
Quote:
so, still no evidence of FREEMAN ON THE LAND working. i think we can conclude that it's nonsense, if this is the best you can do.
Oh, I see, because you aren't convinced by me, that means it is automatically nonsense? I see, how logical.
well you aren't exactly very convincing. but i wasn't intending to be convinced by you, rather i judged it to be nonsense on the total lack of evidence to support it and the glaring inconsistencies with reality.
30 Dec 2011, 4:42 pm
peebo wrote:
well you aren't exactly very convincing. but i wasn't intending to be convinced by you, rather i judged it to be nonsense on the total lack of evidence to support it and the glaring inconsistencies with reality.
Maybe one day you will realise that the messenger isn't important in the scenario. Ever heard the phrase "don't shoot the messenger"?
While on the subject, how about you check out 3:18 - 7:56 (yea, check that out, I gave you a time reference for a specific element to make it EXTRA easy for you
) from the following video when you feel the compulsion to hold someone accountable for information:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amIpK9CVtt8[/youtube]
Come on, its only 4 minutes 38 seconds worth of someone "babbling nonsense", SURELY you can manage that, yea?
I appreciate you finally confirmed my long held suspicion that you WEREN'T intending on being convinced whatsoever THUS I think your entire supposition of everything not being "satisfactory" is explained by the fact that you never wanted to consider this to begin with.
I hope this has brought this debacle to an end.
30 Dec 2011, 5:45 pm
Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
peebo wrote:
well you aren't exactly very convincing. but i wasn't intending to be convinced by you, rather i judged it to be nonsense on the total lack of evidence to support it and the glaring inconsistencies with reality.
Maybe one day you will realise that the messenger isn't important in the scenario. Ever heard the phrase "don't shoot the messenger"?
if the message is nonsense it doesn't really matter at all.
Quote:
While on the subject, how about you check out 3:18 - 7:56 (yea, check that out, I gave you a time reference for a specific element to make it EXTRA easy for you ) from the following video when you feel the compulsion to hold someone accountable for information:
Come on, its only 4 minutes 38 seconds worth of someone "babbling nonsense", SURELY you can manage that, yea?
) from the following video when you feel the compulsion to hold someone accountable for information:Come on, its only 4 minutes 38 seconds worth of someone "babbling nonsense", SURELY you can manage that, yea?
i'm not really interested at the minute.
Quote:
I appreciate you finally confirmed my long held suspicion that you WEREN'T intending on being convinced whatsoever THUS I think your entire supposition of everything not being "satisfactory" is explained by the fact that you never wanted to consider this to begin with.
you might get on a bit better with things if you don't go into discussions with the hope that people are intent on being convinced by you.
Quote:
I hope this has brought this debacle to an end.
it was at an end right from the start.
good day.
31 Dec 2011, 12:04 pm
peebo wrote:
Adam-Anti-Um wrote:
peebo wrote:
well you aren't exactly very convincing. but i wasn't intending to be convinced by you, rather i judged it to be nonsense on the total lack of evidence to support it and the glaring inconsistencies with reality.
Maybe one day you will realise that the messenger isn't important in the scenario. Ever heard the phrase "don't shoot the messenger"?
if the message is nonsense it doesn't really matter at all.
Quote:
While on the subject, how about you check out 3:18 - 7:56 (yea, check that out, I gave you a time reference for a specific element to make it EXTRA easy for you ) from the following video when you feel the compulsion to hold someone accountable for information:
Come on, its only 4 minutes 38 seconds worth of someone "babbling nonsense", SURELY you can manage that, yea?
) from the following video when you feel the compulsion to hold someone accountable for information:Come on, its only 4 minutes 38 seconds worth of someone "babbling nonsense", SURELY you can manage that, yea?
i'm not really interested at the minute.
Quote:
I appreciate you finally confirmed my long held suspicion that you WEREN'T intending on being convinced whatsoever THUS I think your entire supposition of everything not being "satisfactory" is explained by the fact that you never wanted to consider this to begin with.
you might get on a bit better with things if you don't go into discussions with the hope that people are intent on being convinced by you.
Quote:
I hope this has brought this debacle to an end.
it was at an end right from the start.
good day.
Dude, that was me ending the conversation. That wasn't me asking for more of your endless bickering. Unlike you I'm not inclined to argue to infinity this issue. You claim that it was at end for the start and just LOOK at all your pointless replies? You have been contradicting yourself right the way through and you have proved me right that you don't even want to consider anything else than what you hold in your head about this. Overall there's no hard feelings though.
I feel we have BOTH said all we will to each other. So if you respond again to this, it proves your will to endlessly troll me as long as I'm fuelling you.
31 Dec 2011, 2:13 pm
