But mine isn't from a biased point of view
'But mine isn't from a biased point of view' You're biased towards yourself, so cannot make that judgment!
... and it starts all over again
"The RDBD - the RDBD"
Perfect superior symmetry.
I have no club loyalty in this debate, therefore mine is from an impartial view.
CutMe,
Yours isn't.
FACT.
RDBD
How's the summer break treating you?
comment by Chicken (on a Basketball) ©™ (U1043)
posted 18 minutes ago
I have no club loyalty in this debate, therefore mine is from an impartial view.
------------------------------------------------
Have a look at your history, go back to all the articles and comments you've posted on the Liverpool board. Add up the negative and positive comments. You'll finish with 0 positive and the rest negative because you are most certainly not neutral.
TOOR,
What negative comments do you think are unjust?
So it seems that this discussion has now progressed from Chicken making a statement, and others questioning the validity of that statement, to now people questioning the integrity of the person who made that initial statement.
Isn't that the last resort of the desperate? Simply trying to claim some kind of victory from a discussion that simply should have ended long ago?
Forgive me, but it seems now that the problem doesn't so much lie with what has been said, but rather with who has said it. Which makes it in danger of becoming a witch-hunt.
The bottom line is simple. Chicken expressed an opinion. He gave reasons as to why he held that opinion. From the moment he gave his opinion to the last kick of the season, Liverpool (with the exception of a week or two (when they closed the 5 point gap on 4th to 4 points no less)), Liverpool didn't seriously, genuinely, contend for the top four. Call it a prediction. Call it a 50/50 chance of being right or wrong. Call it what you will. Chicken called it right. And you lot have a major problem with that.
And even if we want to go down the route of dismissing Chicken in order to find value in the idea that AT THE TIME Liverpool were contenders, what's the point? What's the point of being contenders in January or beforehand if, come the end of the season, you end up finishing closer to the relegation places in terms of points than you do in terms of finishing 4th?
The answer is there's no point, other than, that is, trying to justify ridiculing a fellow poster on a site such as this. For that's the only thing those in opposition to Chicken are really doing. I mean, even if we accept that Chicken was wrong, that Liverpool were genuine contenders in January, is that going to make any of you feel better or worse about the season you've just had? Or is it just going to make you feel better about getting "one over" on a fellow poster on this board?
Perspective people. Put it into perspective.
The perception of a "genuine contender" is subjective anyway, until a team is mathematically out of the race it's all a matter of opinion as to the degree of challenge.
There is little burden of proof to be brought forward regarding an opinion held months ago, this whole debate could and probably should've been done in a few posts.
I know there's no football on right now.. but let's try and play nice.. or at least change the subject!
Who's better - Henderson or Livermore?
'I have no club loyalty in this debate, therefore mine is from an impartial view.' You have loyalty to your own opinion, therefore your opinion on your opinion is bias (that's a joke by the way!)
' Liverpool didn't seriously, genuinely, contend for the top four. Call it a prediction. Call it a 50/50 chance of being right or wrong. Call it what you will. Chicken called it right. And you lot have a major problem with that.'
Let me try the analogy on you:
Girl is 2 week pregnant Person A) I think you will have a Girl. Person B) It could be a boy.
Person A predicts a girl, person B's statement is correct. Do you agree? If you do - point made!
She has a girl. Person A was and is correct. But Person B WAS also correct! At the time of the initial statement, person A also says I don't think a boy is a genuine contender - THEY WERE WRONG!!!! A few weeks later a scan reveals a girls (still not guaranteed though) - this in no way, shape of form changes the correctness of the original statement by person B at the time they said it or makes person A's second statement any truer. Years later, the argument still rages, but to new comers, the answer is simple - there is a girl standing before them! But take yourself back to the original statement and put yourself back in that time, removing all knowledge of the present.
'And even if we want to go down the route of dismissing Chicken in order to find value in the idea that AT THE TIME Liverpool were contenders, what's the point? What's the point of being contenders in January or beforehand if, come the end of the season, you end up finishing closer to the relegation places in terms of points than you do in terms of finishing 4th?'
The point was valid at the time this argument started It may seem a little silly now, but it wiles the long days away! There are really two points to this - Chickens opinion on Liverpool being a genuine contender was, in my opinion, wrong. But he is entitled to it and he backed it up with (i think floored) reasoning. HOWEVER, his use of the final outcome to prove his point regarding our contention NOT his prediction, is what I am arguing about more than anything!
'The answer is there's no point, other than, that is, trying to justify ridiculing a fellow poster on a site such as this. For that's the only thing those in opposition to Chicken are really doing. I mean, even if we accept that Chicken was wrong, that Liverpool were genuine contenders in January, is that going to make any of you feel better or worse about the season you've just had? Or is it just going to make you feel better about getting "one over" on a fellow poster on this board?'
I am not trying to ridicule him at all - bar a few sarcastic comments If you read back, it is Chicken's 'I'm right, your wrong - but you can't admit it' goading that I take acception to. In fact ,if you go right back to the beginning, when Chicken declared that he would come back at the end of the season and prove he was right, you will see that I told him then that the outcome was not valid so not to bother! Yet back he came anyway! Anyway - I don't mean any ridicule to Chicken - a bit of gentle ribbing on both parts and I hope he is taking it in the good natured way I am!
"Forgive me, but it seems now that the problem doesn't so much lie with what has been said, but rather with who has said it."
For me that is completely true. This is what happens when you get a reputation for going out of you way, for the sole purpose of annoying one set of fans, so that you can find some sick kind of fun in it. People are then fed up and the person isn't taken seriously, even if he makes a statement, which is fair, he'll be remembered for his former and therefore, the worst will be though of.
"Call it a 50/50 chance of being right or wrong. Call it what you will. Chicken called it right. And you lot have a major problem with that."
Furthermore he called the prediction right. However he was wrong, when he said not genuine contenders. He stated Arsenal were in fact genuine contenders who were four points behind, whilst Liverpool were five. Suddenly Liverpool were two points behind a short time later, so a cut off point doesn't come into, put simply, he was right with his prediction but was on the WUM. If you can't see that, that's fine but you should get your facts straight firstly before you come accusing people.
CutMe,
The funny thing about your comment above, regarding me coming back on at the end of the season, i actually seem to remember one of you coming back on here when the gap reduced slightly, in a desperate attempt to prove that my opinion was wrong. You'd only made up one point at that stage, and you've now got a problem with me confirming my prediction after the gap finished at SEVENTEEN POINTS. A bit hypocritical to be fair.
Its funny how, now i've been proven 100% correct, you've now got a problem with me coming back on to claim "i was right".
It seems you want the best of both worlds. And if you're saying that had Liverpool gained Top 4, or been there or there abouts all season, that not one of you would have come & said "i told you so" to me, then you are either niave or a little fibber.
And you know it.
Ripleys,
Thanks again for putting this across so articulate & clear. Although, it doesnt seem that one of them will either apologise for the needless insults from within the "cyber gang" or even admit that Liverpool werent genuine contenders all along.
Oh & one last point on this post, CutMe; i thought we'd already decided that non-football related scenarios were a bit pointless, so i dont know why you're trying to divert it. Maybe its because you've tried every footballing theory, which has now backfired, you've even tried (amongst you) playing the victims card, now you're desperately trying some other pie in the sky theory about boys & girls. Lets just stick to the facts shall we? You said Liverpool were genuine contenders & they never were. The end table shows it, the middle table shows it, and the historical evidence also shows it was always unlikley.
"How's the summer break treating you?"
Redknapp to be gone at the end of next season (no severance pay <Levy> ) . Pep in after his sabbatical.
' i actually seem to remember one of you coming back on here when the gap reduced slightly, in a desperate attempt to prove that my opinion was wrong.'
You're write, but that was to counter your point that there was a 'cut of point' in regard to points. Not my argument by the way!
'Its funny how, now i've been proven 100% correct, you've now got a problem with me coming back on to claim "i was right".'
But you weren't!!! You go on to say that using none football references is pointless - your above statement completely vindicates my use of analogies!! Just for a laugh, humour me and look at my last post about the baby - see if you argue with any of my statements - then try to see how the theory is similar to what we are discussing! You KEEP saying the outcome proves you were right, but saying a boy is not a genuine contender to a 2 week pregnant woman and then coming back 9 months later and saying you were right PROVES NOTHING. You surely MUST see this? Surely?
'Maybe its because you've tried every footballing theory, which has now backfired, you've even tried (amongst you) playing the victims card, now you're desperately trying some other pie in the sky theory about boys & girls. '
No - nothing has backfired! You have not disproved what i am saying at any point! I am arguing the same point OVER and OVER from different angles in the vain attempt that you will understand, but you are so stuck in your mindset that you won't even open your mind to the possibility that I may have a point! And your above statement proves this even more to me: ' some other pie in the sky theory about boys & girls' - ITS THE SAME THEORY! Not different - the same! I have argued THE SAME theory all along!
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
When was the last time liverpool came outside the top 4 twice in a row? if you want to use history - use IT ALL!!
=====================
Ohhhhhhhh so this was the basis of your argument? Why didnt you say? So, you thought Liverpool were genuine contenders purely on the basis that they hadn't finished outside the Top 4 for "however many years".
So the "cut off point" you mocked me for had nothing to do with it. Liverpool could have been 15 points behind & you would still have had them as genuine contenders on the basis that they "haven't finished outside the Top 4 twice in what, 16 years or so?". Now we're getting somewhere. Although, i would still have disagreed.
As for the other scenario(s), yes i do get them but unless you can give me historical facts, evidence & liklihoods of similar events happening/not happening, then we dont have a basis for debate.
I've not been a fan of the boy/girl baby thing for over 30 years, like i have with football, infact i have no knowledge of how it works, the averages or anything. This is the first time its ever been brought to my attention in this way, so i cannot say whether it works or not on " the Liverpool debate basis", i'll leave that one with you. I just know that i made it clear that liverpool were not genuine contenders in January, they turned out to be non-contenders, Ripleys has confirmed that it would also have been unlikley looking at the outcome of all previous years - but you still think they were based on the opinion that it they hadnt been denied a Top 4 finish twice on the trot, for however long.
I love the way you try to bring another theory into the ring, to see if this one one will stick. None of them do. Its game over, i was proved to be correct. End of.
Redknapp to be gone at the end of next season (no severance pay <Levy> ) . Pep in after his sabbatical.
-----------
Good call
'I love the way you try to bring another theory into the ring, to see if this one one will stick. None of them do. Its game over, i was proved to be correct. End of.'
Not another - the same
'So, you thought Liverpool were genuine contenders purely on the basis that they hadn't finished outside the Top 4 for "however many years"'
Where do I say that? Show me! If you recall, I mention form, teams, squad etc many times! You are the one that is using only one method for your judgment - I am just stating that your method is being used in too much isolation as other historical stats are contrary to your conclusion!
Nice try though
' I've not been a fan of the boy/girl baby thing for over 30 years, like i have with football, infact i have no knowledge of how it works, the averages or anything.'
Nice to see you still don't get the point! You don't need to be a fan or know any stats - it is a very simple analogy to help you understand the difference in concept between a prediction and an opinion at a given point in time and how the two can bear no relation to each other. But you don't seem to even get this very simple example, so I don't think you'll ever get the bigger picture - never mind, we can all move on with our lives in the knowledge t hat we were right
CutMe,
I get the jist of the baby example, but i just dont have an opinion on it. The reason being,i dont consider my knowledge of the subject good enough to compare.
I do rate my knowledge on football quite highly though, which was backed up by my prediction being pretty much spot on.
I accept i wont always be right, or i would be rich from betting on it, but in this instance, in this debate, i was categorically, no mistake about it, proven right.
'I get the jist of the baby example, but i just dont have an opinion on it. The reason being,i dont consider my knowledge of the subject good enough to compare.'
So you get the example that a prediction is different from a point in time statement?:
'I do rate my knowledge on football quite highly though, which was backed up by my prediction being pretty much spot on.'
errrrrr….I guess not then!!
'I accept i wont always be right, or i would be rich from betting on it, but in this instance, in this debate, i was categorically, no mistake about it, proven right.'
errrrrrr…….definitely not then! You see how you've used the word 'prediction' again?! You WERE NOT proven right IN THIS DEBATE! My argument with you FROM THE BEGINNING was not about a prediction - go back to my baby example AGAIN and try and work it out - 'it could be a boy' is the same as 'we are contenders', it will be a girl' is the same as 'liverpool will not finish 4th' You are arguing the second point (STILL) where as I have been discussing the first the whole time!!
So in summary you prediction was right but unfortunately we are not, and have never, been discussing that
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Sign in if you want to comment
Defoe
Page 33 of 34
30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34
posted on 31/5/12
But mine isn't from a biased point of view
posted on 31/5/12
'But mine isn't from a biased point of view' You're biased towards yourself, so cannot make that judgment!
posted on 31/5/12
... and it starts all over again
posted on 31/5/12
"The RDBD - the RDBD"
Perfect superior symmetry.
posted on 31/5/12
I have no club loyalty in this debate, therefore mine is from an impartial view.
CutMe,
Yours isn't.
FACT.
posted on 31/5/12
RDBD
How's the summer break treating you?
posted on 31/5/12
comment by Chicken (on a Basketball) ©™ (U1043)
posted 18 minutes ago
I have no club loyalty in this debate, therefore mine is from an impartial view.
------------------------------------------------
Have a look at your history, go back to all the articles and comments you've posted on the Liverpool board. Add up the negative and positive comments. You'll finish with 0 positive and the rest negative because you are most certainly not neutral.
posted on 31/5/12
TOOR,
What negative comments do you think are unjust?
posted on 1/6/12
So it seems that this discussion has now progressed from Chicken making a statement, and others questioning the validity of that statement, to now people questioning the integrity of the person who made that initial statement.
Isn't that the last resort of the desperate? Simply trying to claim some kind of victory from a discussion that simply should have ended long ago?
Forgive me, but it seems now that the problem doesn't so much lie with what has been said, but rather with who has said it. Which makes it in danger of becoming a witch-hunt.
The bottom line is simple. Chicken expressed an opinion. He gave reasons as to why he held that opinion. From the moment he gave his opinion to the last kick of the season, Liverpool (with the exception of a week or two (when they closed the 5 point gap on 4th to 4 points no less)), Liverpool didn't seriously, genuinely, contend for the top four. Call it a prediction. Call it a 50/50 chance of being right or wrong. Call it what you will. Chicken called it right. And you lot have a major problem with that.
And even if we want to go down the route of dismissing Chicken in order to find value in the idea that AT THE TIME Liverpool were contenders, what's the point? What's the point of being contenders in January or beforehand if, come the end of the season, you end up finishing closer to the relegation places in terms of points than you do in terms of finishing 4th?
The answer is there's no point, other than, that is, trying to justify ridiculing a fellow poster on a site such as this. For that's the only thing those in opposition to Chicken are really doing. I mean, even if we accept that Chicken was wrong, that Liverpool were genuine contenders in January, is that going to make any of you feel better or worse about the season you've just had? Or is it just going to make you feel better about getting "one over" on a fellow poster on this board?
Perspective people. Put it into perspective.
posted on 1/6/12
The perception of a "genuine contender" is subjective anyway, until a team is mathematically out of the race it's all a matter of opinion as to the degree of challenge.
There is little burden of proof to be brought forward regarding an opinion held months ago, this whole debate could and probably should've been done in a few posts.
I know there's no football on right now.. but let's try and play nice.. or at least change the subject!
Who's better - Henderson or Livermore?
posted on 1/6/12
Hendermore?
posted on 1/6/12
'I have no club loyalty in this debate, therefore mine is from an impartial view.' You have loyalty to your own opinion, therefore your opinion on your opinion is bias (that's a joke by the way!)
' Liverpool didn't seriously, genuinely, contend for the top four. Call it a prediction. Call it a 50/50 chance of being right or wrong. Call it what you will. Chicken called it right. And you lot have a major problem with that.'
Let me try the analogy on you:
Girl is 2 week pregnant Person A) I think you will have a Girl. Person B) It could be a boy.
Person A predicts a girl, person B's statement is correct. Do you agree? If you do - point made!
She has a girl. Person A was and is correct. But Person B WAS also correct! At the time of the initial statement, person A also says I don't think a boy is a genuine contender - THEY WERE WRONG!!!! A few weeks later a scan reveals a girls (still not guaranteed though) - this in no way, shape of form changes the correctness of the original statement by person B at the time they said it or makes person A's second statement any truer. Years later, the argument still rages, but to new comers, the answer is simple - there is a girl standing before them! But take yourself back to the original statement and put yourself back in that time, removing all knowledge of the present.
'And even if we want to go down the route of dismissing Chicken in order to find value in the idea that AT THE TIME Liverpool were contenders, what's the point? What's the point of being contenders in January or beforehand if, come the end of the season, you end up finishing closer to the relegation places in terms of points than you do in terms of finishing 4th?'
The point was valid at the time this argument started It may seem a little silly now, but it wiles the long days away! There are really two points to this - Chickens opinion on Liverpool being a genuine contender was, in my opinion, wrong. But he is entitled to it and he backed it up with (i think floored) reasoning. HOWEVER, his use of the final outcome to prove his point regarding our contention NOT his prediction, is what I am arguing about more than anything!
'The answer is there's no point, other than, that is, trying to justify ridiculing a fellow poster on a site such as this. For that's the only thing those in opposition to Chicken are really doing. I mean, even if we accept that Chicken was wrong, that Liverpool were genuine contenders in January, is that going to make any of you feel better or worse about the season you've just had? Or is it just going to make you feel better about getting "one over" on a fellow poster on this board?'
I am not trying to ridicule him at all - bar a few sarcastic comments If you read back, it is Chicken's 'I'm right, your wrong - but you can't admit it' goading that I take acception to. In fact ,if you go right back to the beginning, when Chicken declared that he would come back at the end of the season and prove he was right, you will see that I told him then that the outcome was not valid so not to bother! Yet back he came anyway! Anyway - I don't mean any ridicule to Chicken - a bit of gentle ribbing on both parts and I hope he is taking it in the good natured way I am!
posted on 1/6/12
"Forgive me, but it seems now that the problem doesn't so much lie with what has been said, but rather with who has said it."
For me that is completely true. This is what happens when you get a reputation for going out of you way, for the sole purpose of annoying one set of fans, so that you can find some sick kind of fun in it. People are then fed up and the person isn't taken seriously, even if he makes a statement, which is fair, he'll be remembered for his former and therefore, the worst will be though of.
posted on 1/6/12
"Call it a 50/50 chance of being right or wrong. Call it what you will. Chicken called it right. And you lot have a major problem with that."
Furthermore he called the prediction right. However he was wrong, when he said not genuine contenders. He stated Arsenal were in fact genuine contenders who were four points behind, whilst Liverpool were five. Suddenly Liverpool were two points behind a short time later, so a cut off point doesn't come into, put simply, he was right with his prediction but was on the WUM. If you can't see that, that's fine but you should get your facts straight firstly before you come accusing people.
posted on 1/6/12
CutMe,
The funny thing about your comment above, regarding me coming back on at the end of the season, i actually seem to remember one of you coming back on here when the gap reduced slightly, in a desperate attempt to prove that my opinion was wrong. You'd only made up one point at that stage, and you've now got a problem with me confirming my prediction after the gap finished at SEVENTEEN POINTS. A bit hypocritical to be fair.
Its funny how, now i've been proven 100% correct, you've now got a problem with me coming back on to claim "i was right".
It seems you want the best of both worlds. And if you're saying that had Liverpool gained Top 4, or been there or there abouts all season, that not one of you would have come & said "i told you so" to me, then you are either niave or a little fibber.
And you know it.
Ripleys,
Thanks again for putting this across so articulate & clear. Although, it doesnt seem that one of them will either apologise for the needless insults from within the "cyber gang" or even admit that Liverpool werent genuine contenders all along.
Oh & one last point on this post, CutMe; i thought we'd already decided that non-football related scenarios were a bit pointless, so i dont know why you're trying to divert it. Maybe its because you've tried every footballing theory, which has now backfired, you've even tried (amongst you) playing the victims card, now you're desperately trying some other pie in the sky theory about boys & girls. Lets just stick to the facts shall we? You said Liverpool were genuine contenders & they never were. The end table shows it, the middle table shows it, and the historical evidence also shows it was always unlikley.
posted on 1/6/12
"How's the summer break treating you?"
Redknapp to be gone at the end of next season (no severance pay <Levy> ) . Pep in after his sabbatical.
posted on 1/6/12
' i actually seem to remember one of you coming back on here when the gap reduced slightly, in a desperate attempt to prove that my opinion was wrong.'
You're write, but that was to counter your point that there was a 'cut of point' in regard to points. Not my argument by the way!
'Its funny how, now i've been proven 100% correct, you've now got a problem with me coming back on to claim "i was right".'
But you weren't!!! You go on to say that using none football references is pointless - your above statement completely vindicates my use of analogies!! Just for a laugh, humour me and look at my last post about the baby - see if you argue with any of my statements - then try to see how the theory is similar to what we are discussing! You KEEP saying the outcome proves you were right, but saying a boy is not a genuine contender to a 2 week pregnant woman and then coming back 9 months later and saying you were right PROVES NOTHING. You surely MUST see this? Surely?
'Maybe its because you've tried every footballing theory, which has now backfired, you've even tried (amongst you) playing the victims card, now you're desperately trying some other pie in the sky theory about boys & girls. '
No - nothing has backfired! You have not disproved what i am saying at any point! I am arguing the same point OVER and OVER from different angles in the vain attempt that you will understand, but you are so stuck in your mindset that you won't even open your mind to the possibility that I may have a point! And your above statement proves this even more to me: ' some other pie in the sky theory about boys & girls' - ITS THE SAME THEORY! Not different - the same! I have argued THE SAME theory all along!
posted on 1/6/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/6/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 1/6/12
When was the last time liverpool came outside the top 4 twice in a row? if you want to use history - use IT ALL!!
=====================
Ohhhhhhhh so this was the basis of your argument? Why didnt you say? So, you thought Liverpool were genuine contenders purely on the basis that they hadn't finished outside the Top 4 for "however many years".
So the "cut off point" you mocked me for had nothing to do with it. Liverpool could have been 15 points behind & you would still have had them as genuine contenders on the basis that they "haven't finished outside the Top 4 twice in what, 16 years or so?". Now we're getting somewhere. Although, i would still have disagreed.
As for the other scenario(s), yes i do get them but unless you can give me historical facts, evidence & liklihoods of similar events happening/not happening, then we dont have a basis for debate.
I've not been a fan of the boy/girl baby thing for over 30 years, like i have with football, infact i have no knowledge of how it works, the averages or anything. This is the first time its ever been brought to my attention in this way, so i cannot say whether it works or not on " the Liverpool debate basis", i'll leave that one with you. I just know that i made it clear that liverpool were not genuine contenders in January, they turned out to be non-contenders, Ripleys has confirmed that it would also have been unlikley looking at the outcome of all previous years - but you still think they were based on the opinion that it they hadnt been denied a Top 4 finish twice on the trot, for however long.
I love the way you try to bring another theory into the ring, to see if this one one will stick. None of them do. Its game over, i was proved to be correct. End of.
posted on 1/6/12
Redknapp to be gone at the end of next season (no severance pay <Levy> ) . Pep in after his sabbatical.
-----------
Good call
posted on 11/6/12
'I love the way you try to bring another theory into the ring, to see if this one one will stick. None of them do. Its game over, i was proved to be correct. End of.'
Not another - the same
'So, you thought Liverpool were genuine contenders purely on the basis that they hadn't finished outside the Top 4 for "however many years"'
Where do I say that? Show me! If you recall, I mention form, teams, squad etc many times! You are the one that is using only one method for your judgment - I am just stating that your method is being used in too much isolation as other historical stats are contrary to your conclusion!
Nice try though
' I've not been a fan of the boy/girl baby thing for over 30 years, like i have with football, infact i have no knowledge of how it works, the averages or anything.'
Nice to see you still don't get the point! You don't need to be a fan or know any stats - it is a very simple analogy to help you understand the difference in concept between a prediction and an opinion at a given point in time and how the two can bear no relation to each other. But you don't seem to even get this very simple example, so I don't think you'll ever get the bigger picture - never mind, we can all move on with our lives in the knowledge t hat we were right
posted on 12/6/12
CutMe,
I get the jist of the baby example, but i just dont have an opinion on it. The reason being,i dont consider my knowledge of the subject good enough to compare.
I do rate my knowledge on football quite highly though, which was backed up by my prediction being pretty much spot on.
I accept i wont always be right, or i would be rich from betting on it, but in this instance, in this debate, i was categorically, no mistake about it, proven right.
posted on 12/6/12
'I get the jist of the baby example, but i just dont have an opinion on it. The reason being,i dont consider my knowledge of the subject good enough to compare.'
So you get the example that a prediction is different from a point in time statement?:
'I do rate my knowledge on football quite highly though, which was backed up by my prediction being pretty much spot on.'
errrrrr….I guess not then!!
'I accept i wont always be right, or i would be rich from betting on it, but in this instance, in this debate, i was categorically, no mistake about it, proven right.'
errrrrrr…….definitely not then! You see how you've used the word 'prediction' again?! You WERE NOT proven right IN THIS DEBATE! My argument with you FROM THE BEGINNING was not about a prediction - go back to my baby example AGAIN and try and work it out - 'it could be a boy' is the same as 'we are contenders', it will be a girl' is the same as 'liverpool will not finish 4th' You are arguing the second point (STILL) where as I have been discussing the first the whole time!!
So in summary you prediction was right but unfortunately we are not, and have never, been discussing that
posted on 12/6/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
Page 33 of 34
30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34