Deep See Research Facility

[Omnislash07]

I am tired in EoFF as well

That sounds slightly familiar.

[Ryushikaze]

Come on you can provide it for yourself without my help.

It is not the burden of the defense to do the work of the prosecution.

But dont you always think that your explanation is better than anyone else.

No.

Not until you say sorry to the person you have insulted.
Oh let me guess, they dont deserve it, or because you are too arrogant or too pride to yourself until you cant say sorry.

Red herring. What I have said to others is immaterial to this discussion. This is also an Ad Hominem. Izzat some hypocrisy I smell?
And to be frank, it really gets me that you want me to apologize to the 'person I insulted' when they were the one engaged in flaming me.

Forget it.

Forget what? Seriously, though, since you now know I was not being sarcastic, what do you think I was being?

So you never felt that you are demanding person.

Well now, I can't even decided which fallacies this is. I can be demanding without having been demanding during this exchange. It's not a black/white situation.

Dont get me wrong, i agree with your idea.

Then why the earlier objections to it?

There's still oxygen in the bottom of DSRF.
How can oxygen still remain in the ocean floor for a a long time?

I'm assuming you mean free air, since there is actually a wealth of oxygen at the ocean floor, and in that case, the answer is, there isn't. For any period of time.

UNLESS, of course, the Deep Sea Deposit has been sealed and air pumped in from above.

I thought you can understand it.

Still, mechanistic descriptions are generally extremely literal. Using a metaphor in such a description (though how you use it as such escapes me) is counterproductive.

[Evol]

It is not the burden of the defense to do the work of the prosecution.

You just provide it yourself by saying those words

what do you think I was being?

I dont care.

Red herring. What I have said to others is immaterial to this discussion. This is also an Ad Hominem. Izzat some hypocrisy I smell?
And to be frank, it really gets me that you want me to apologize to the 'person I insulted' when they were the one engaged in flaming me.

You are the first person flaming on others.
See what i mean, you always look at negative sides of people.

I can be demanding without having been demanding during this exchange

oh yeah?

Then why the earlier objections to it?

Like i said i only speak my opinion about your idea.
If you think that as an objection, have it your way

[Ryushikaze]

It is not the burden of the defense to do the work of the prosecution.

You just provide it yourself by saying those words

No, no I have not. The above is in no way evidence of resorting to ad hom's as opposed to arguing a point. It is evidence of me not falling for your attempt to shift the burden of proof of your claim onto me, nothing more.

I dont care.

You don't care what you were accusing me of being? That's odd.

You are the first person flaming on others.

By what definition of flaming is this true?

See what i mean, you always look at negative sides of people.

No. No I do not. But for someone getting on my case for 'looking on the negative sides of people', you are engaged in a lot of it yourself.

oh yeah?

Yes.

Like i said i only speak my opinion about your idea.
If you think that as an objection, have it your way

An opinion is a purely subjective statement of personal preference, IE- "Pie is tasty", or "I hate green".
An objection to something can be related to, or the cause of an opinion, but is not actually one, and is based on the thing being objected to, IE- "The wallpaper looks like pea soup" or "The "Intelligent Design" theory is neither intelligent, nor a design".

Your original statement of "Your idea is inconsistent,it could also mean YYDD or YYYD." Does not read as opinion, but as objection. You do not seem to speak English as a first language, so the error is understandable, but take my word on it that this is not an expression of opinion in English.

[Evol]

No, no I have not. The above is in no way evidence of resorting to ad hom's as opposed to arguing a point. It is evidence of me not falling for your attempt to shift the burden of proof of your claim onto me, nothing more.

The moment when you write "It is not the burden of the defense to do the work of the prosecution." You knew that i was right about you.
So i wont bother to explain something that we both know.

No. No I do not.

Liar

[Ryushikaze]

No, no I have not. The above is in no way evidence of resorting to ad hom's as opposed to arguing a point. It is evidence of me not falling for your attempt to shift the burden of proof of your claim onto me, nothing more.

The moment when you write "It is not the burden of the defense to do the work of the prosecution." You knew that i was right about you.
So i wont bother to explain something that we both know.

No, I'm just not willing to do the work for other people, especially someone who is in the middle of what is rapidly turning out to be nothing more than a long winded ad hominem.

No. No I do not.

Liar

And now who's always looking on the negative side of people? Especially after I find this in my inbox.

What i was being?

Actually i want to say that you are pathetic but i think you are the one that should say that.
I won't visit EoFF again so save your final words for yourself.

Well, good sir, sayonara, and concession accepted.