Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Riddle(WARNING:invovles logic).
J @ M @ L:
--- Quote from: I TO DA GEEZY on January 04, 2006, 10:12:02 AM ---
--- Quote from: Chief on January 04, 2006, 07:10:03 AM ---if we're going by how the stupid riddle was written, then the coins were scattered, so the question is flawed.
--- End quote ---
Exactly my point, lol@people playing themselves.
--- End quote ---
You're a fucking idiot, man... LOLLLL
I TO DA GEEZY:
:) Again it is amusing to see how a person who has nothing grounded to say is resorting to personal remarks.
1. Ashkenazi Jews being primarily descendants of Khazars is a recent- highly disputed and subsequently disproved- theory. Trying to present this as some sort of a conjectural broad consensus among scientists prior to the research again showes how you like to generalize and how easy it is for you to contradict yourself.
--- Quote from: JML - no vowels, disembowel your Colin Powell, throw in the towel on January 04, 2006, 01:26:21 PM --- up until they had done this research, it was believed that Ashkenazi Jews were PRIMARILY descendants of this ONE TRIBE (Khazar).
--- End quote ---
--- Quote from: JML - no vowels, disembowel your Colin Powell, throw in the towel on December 20, 2005, 02:33:55 PM ---The only thing that's debated is if Ashkenazi Jews are PRIMARILY descendant of the Khazars
--- End quote ---
See the diff between consensus and debate?- But you're going to say "believed" is in no way different from "debated", and that I am making assumptions , right?
Only that when you say "it was believed Jews were primarily descended from Khazars" without mentioning that "it was [also] believed they weren't" you are saying it was a consensus among researchers. :)
2.No it doesn't imply that descendants of those who converted don't exist anymore. It simply means a percentage of those Khazars who converted intermixed with semite Jews and that those who didn't intermix wouldn't have any semite trace in them, hence, they wouldn't be defined as "semites"\"descendants of exiled Jews" . Thing is there is no certain Khazar specimen nowdays to compare with, while there is a Semite-Israelite-Jewish one.
3.How in hell would it mean descendants of exiled Jews have become extinct when we're talking about semite-"exiled Jews"-genes among Ashkenazi Jews?- Man you seem to have lost your last remainders of rationality.
coola:
what the fuck are you guys talking about ? makin me feel like chubacca...
I TO DA GEEZY:
lol...Sorry man, this "so called" riddle was an analogy targeted at Jamal. Something to help him get along with reality.Something to point out what happens when you generalize when your generalization entails the contradiction of known/given facts.
J @ M @ L:
--- Quote from: I TO DA GEEZY on January 05, 2006, 01:55:43 AM ---1. Ashkenazi Jews being primarily descendants of Khazars is a recent- highly disputed and subsequently disproved- theory.
Are you really this dumb? Go back and read the posts to see how often I emphasized the word primarily... the fact that a certain proportion of Ashkenazi Jews must be descendants of Khazars is NOT disputed... the fact that they're primarily descendants is disputed... which is exactly what I said from the beginning. If you agree to this, then you're an idiot for arguing it in the first place, and you finally admit that you're wrong.
2.No it doesn't imply that descendants of those who converted don't exist anymore. It simply means a percentage of those Khazars who converted intermixed with semite Jews and that those who didn't intermix wouldn't have any semite trace in them
Thank You. Explanation in point #1. I'm right, you're wrong.
3.How in hell would it mean descendants of exiled Jews have become extinct when we're talking about semite-"exiled Jews"-genes among Ashkenazi Jews?- Man you seem to have lost your last remainders of rationality.
Maybe this one went way over your head... as everything else usually does... but I wasn't even implying it... I was just pointing out that your statements made the implication, and I could've have used your train of thought (rather... lack of one) to state how this would also justify somebody saying that the exiled Jews are extinct. Both statements are stupendous... and you're the idiot who made one such implication.
Read my sig. :)
--- End quote ---
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version