Prove this is what I appear to be. What of my post makes your claim valid?

I don't need to prove my perception of reality to you.

What you claimed is not of perception or varying by mind, what you have claimed can be demonstrably proven. (Specifically that I am pretending something).

So that which can be demonstrably proven cannot be perception, and vice versa?

Non sequitur. Simply because I am the only one to do something does not automatically conclude I am the only one able to do it.

Everyone would be able to do it. Yet you were the only one to assume the obligation of doing it.

I didn't feel obligated to do it either.

Obviously no one else felt obligated to do it.

You don't act based on what you feel obligated to do?

Prove I am these things you claim.

This is what you appear to be. What makes perception any less valid in terms of reality then truth that is not perceived?

Not my prerogative, that implies it was exclusive to me. Which it's not. I merely noticed his consistent misspelling of the word and was on the site to debate some posts, and decided why not give a little friendly tip.

If it wasn't exclusive to you, why were you the only individual to correct the spelling? Obviously no one else felt obligated to do it.

Unless it's about claim you are going to enforce on a stranger over the internet that directly claims something about that stranger to be true. Then it becomes "yes, that may be generally a rule, but if you're going to assume it of someone, you gotta prove it".

Says you.

I notice the word usually. And I do not believe it was necessary or called for. However it was something I decided to do as a friendly tip. Friendly isn't always necessary or called for.

Stop pretending to be a self-righteous good Samaritan. Your screams of martyrdom have little effect.

That is not always applicable on a browser, so if someone thought they were spelling a word correctly and did not have a built in spell checker, they may believe they've been spelling the word correctly.

So you decided it was your prerogative to correct this hypothetical someone?

And how are you willing to prove this claim?

Generally common sense requires no evidence.

I am not here to rip the throat out of every opponent I have, I can and do be friendly with those I debate with. I do not have a need to be vicious to anyone who opposes my views or simply think they're undeserving of a kinder tip.

You're new so you probably don't know any better, but correcting the spelling of someone usually isn't necessary or called for. If someone cares about their spelling of a word, they would use the given spell check option.

First of all, correct punctuation and capitalization makes reading your arguments much easier. Secondly, there needs to be a legitimate amount of evidence in support of global warming for there to be any changes at all to the United States' infrastructure. The fact is, America is in a horrible place right now. The last thing we need is to be paying way too much for light bulbs and who knows what else. Even if global warming is true, why is it such a huge problem? We as humans are incredible at adapting to different environments. And also, the burden of proof lies with those who claim there is global warming. The ones that think it doesn't exist don't have to prove anything.

As I young child I was forced to read Darwin's Origin of Species and trust me it is one of the reasons I am a creationist now! Full of humorous accounts of fake transformations, but should not be taken as a fact!

The last person someone would go to for a friendly tip is a stranger on an internet debate site. And life is generally something one does or does not maintain.

This is such a horrid generalization. Obviously your world view is not a very educated one. Don't try to sound intelligent when you have no idea what you're talking about.

Since when does someone make an argument only to correct someone's spelling of one word? Honestly, it's people like you that really need to get a life.

That's exactly what I've been telling people for a while.

The Bible was never changed. I'm not sure where you got this idea. You're the one who isn't thinking.

First of all, Israel has an historic right to the land they occupy. Archaeological evidence shows that Israel has occupied this land for 3,000+ years, way more than the Muslims. This terrorism is by no means justified. Terrorism cannot be excused due to 'religious tolerance.'

Kinda catchy :D

Are you sure it was Monica Lewinsky ?

How is this funny at all ?

Part cyborg? Doesn't cyborg mean part robot? If so, how can you only be part cyborg?

Terrorists are little people xD .

Lucy Pinder.......................................kinda sad I actually know her name

What about this acronym:

Oops

Barack

Almost

Maimed

America!

Well, there are and have been quite a few Israeli chess masters. I happen to take chess lessons from an Israeli Grandmaster (highest title in chess).

Yes, I think it is supposed to be chicken eggs. Otherwise, there would be no argument. ;)

Liberals lack logic because they tax rich people a lot more than everyone else, and then they insist that everyone should be treated equally.

Obama is about as Liberal as North Korea is a people' republic. He hasn't enacted any real or authentically liberal policies.

Honestly?! Isn't he the one who passed the universal healthcare bill? The thing that liberal presidents have been trying to do for decades?

This is true. I always have failed to see the logic in liberalism. Whenever I questioned such things, I would always be pounded into the very core of the earth with retorts such as: "Glenn Beck is just a big idiot!" or "Sarah Palin is SO stupid!" or "Everything is Bush's fault!" or "Obama will fix everything!" or "Fox News is not a reliable source!" or "Gays are people too!" or- I digress.........

Yes, liberals always find one way or another to get a shot in at Palin, Bush, etc. Obama is their savior, everyone is equal, yadayadaya. The best is when they start ranting: "You watch Fox News! Glenn Beck is a big idiot! Sarah Palin has no experience! (But, of course, Obama does :D) And everyone is a TEABAGGER!"

So wait...conservatives don't exist? Now you're just being silly.

So because you believe that God doesn't exist, you think all conservatives don't exist? Now you're just being silly.

While not all liberals are atheists, most atheists are liberal. Considering God is against gay marriage, abortion, and false idols (Obama :D), I would tend to agree with joe. God definitely cannot be liberal. So, yes, he is conservative.

Or maybe Obama is the Antichrist! God may end the world in 2012 when Obama is reelected!

This would spoil the fun! Disagreeing is showing that people care about the world and everything in it! Besides, I don't think folks like TERMINATOR and iamdavidh will ever agree on anything, especially something like this. (Ryan '12)!

they might have done something i liked, but not much, since their against a lot of what i believe in.

Precisely why they were good candidates.

every European i have talked despises McCain and palin.

Hmmm... That might be because Europe is incredibly socialist.

hes a good prez

I have a new debate: Would a benevolent "prez" send people to Hell? (He already has)!

Obama passed the largest healthcare overhaul in history - something presidents since Nixon have tried and failed at.

You know why they failed? Because back then, people had larger brains.

There are more jobs now than when Obama took office,

Unless you back this up with some sources, I refuse to believe such nonsense.

Wait..... He fixed the economy? Really? America is in $13 trillion dollars of debt. During Obama's presidency, he has added at least $2 trillion dollars of this.