Newgrounds.com — Everything, By Everyone.

At 5/23/12 02:11 AM, Invisible-Empire wrote: Insantuary a bit odd, but he's a good guy. I'll do what I can about it, but try and keep your patience.
If you can, ask "why" a bit more as opposed to making a stand and arguing. You'll eventually understand each another better that way. You haven't gotten anywhere fighting each other, have you? hope I haven't made a negative impression on any of you. I know you guys aren't too fond of Insanctuary, but he's good some bright ideas. He ain't a bad guy.

Narcissism, psychosis... and now multiple personalities?
Perhaps each personality has it's own disorders!

Insanctuary is like a psychologist's wet dream.

At 5/23/12 01:01 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 5/23/12 12:57 AM, Heretic-Anchorite wrote: jumping to conclusions to protect themselves

It represents that you are the personified antithesis of life.

Life; death.

Light; darkness.

God; war

This. Stop doing this.

This is absolutely meaningless to anyone but you. You may as well have said nothing at all, that's how much you have just contributed to the conversation. No one can make heads or tails of this kind of language. You're talking like a Final Fantasy villain, for the love of christ. Please "lower yourself" to the "our level" and talk to us in a way that allows us to at lest be able to understand what you're trying to say.

At 5/23/12 02:12 AM, Insanctuary wrote: That dim-witted rock accused me of things and put me under a fallacious light that other dim-witted rocks - like you - aren't able to acknowledge - without any argument.

That, then, would be an argument ad hominem, not a straw-man. This has been explained to you in the past.

Thus saying; misrepresentation.

Not a misrepresentation of your argument, and therefore not a straw-man. This has been explained to you in the past.

At 5/23/12 02:12 AM, ZombieMonkey wrote: Everybody is ignoring my hippie drawing.

Saved to hard drive as "insanctuaryzombiemonkey.jpg".

"So I'm scremin Fuck Charles Manson ! I'll hit him with a brick, and then start dancing"

-Ice Cube

At 5/23/12 02:09 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:

At 5/23/12 01:55 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 5/23/12 01:47 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote: predictable statements from those who clearly are too dim-witted

What is worse, is that your entire post involved accusations, ad hominems, alot of premature subjectivity - that I already expected - and straw-manning that you can not uphold.

You are just as guilty as I am of all of these things.

Doesn't excuse the accusations and premature subjectivity. I only applied ad hominem to the list as an aggregation.

So far, you've called people all of the following:
Narrow-minded
Fool
Scatterbrained
Literal fucks
inexistant
Dumb as a rock
Stupid
Concaved
Ignorant
Dense

There is alot more I'd wish to share.

I won't even go into how often you've straw-manned yourself, it's not worth the effort.

It won't be; but not because of the reason you make it out to be.

Does this make your arguments wrong? No, not in any way. This does, however damage your image. You come across as a self-involved weirdo when you do that. This may not be the case, but it's certainly not helping you at all. I'm guilty of unwarranted personal attacks as well, I won't deny it. But then again, I'm not the one making incredibly vague and unsubstantial claims and arguments peppered with ridiculous babble that only makes sense to you and you alone.

Damage my image? What image? I'm an influence. I'm an abstract messenger. I speak for the universe. I scout out the paradigms of life and I come back to notify everyone what I've witnessed. I see things; and I do not wish to see aliens like you ignoring said problems for their own fantasy. This world and its problems are far more real than any of our dreams and needs. It is more real than your so called argument and as real as my argument. It is as complex and simple as my ideology. You look away from my ideologies and the world because both of them are too big for you to fathom with your tiny, external brain.

At this point, you're so far away from the topic you originally started out on that this thread has devolved into some bizarre argument about nothing that is going absolutely nowhere. You're not being coherent, and it's not our fault that we don't understand you because you're not giving us enough to work with. Maybe what you're saying is't completely insane, but the way you're communicating it is downright impossible to make heads or tails of.

I was clever. I made the real intention of this thread in the OP and it is relevant to how people like you never understand the most important spectrums of life because you are too dull and do not want to admit to it. Like you are too dull to see that Charles Manson had very strong ideologies mixed in with his insanity that you only see. Your reality is nothing. Your ego is the bane of your entire pseudo existence. You are a slave to your own delusions.

At 5/23/12 02:23 AM, Zullzee wrote: Whoa whoa whoa, bro, I thought you said you took your own advice? Then why are you using ad hominems, accusations, and straw-manning? Don't break your alter-ego, invisible-empire's, heart now. He was repping for you.

Of course, he meant to employ those fallacies as tactics in his overall life-affirming vision of this particular thread on a forum largely comprised of teenagers.

At 5/23/12 02:17 AM, yurgenburgen wrote: salty rock

All of the dim-witted rocks are misrepresenting my ideologies due to their own feasible ethos - including you. The lot of you are completely oblivious to your own inferior complex. They are straw-manning. Why don't you stop twisting the context for once? Is that how you win arguments at these higher levels? You resort to ad hominems and mutilating the main premise? Then you end it with another subjective consensus that has the back bone of a banana slug? Yurg, I'm not the one with the word salads here. It is you; has always been you. This was never about me; it was always about you. Keep on revealing your own problems through what you see in me.

At 5/23/12 02:22 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

Damage my image? What image? I'm an influence. I'm an abstract messenger. I speak for the universe. I scout out the paradigms of life and I come back to notify everyone what I've witnessed.

What use is a messenger that speaks in incomprehensible tongues? What good is a messenger that no one trusts or respects? If you can't take the time to engage your audience and respect them, then your words are the same as any other charlatan or liar.

I was clever. I made the real intention of this thread in the OP and it is relevant to how people like you never understand the most important spectrums of life because you are too dull and do not want to admit to it. Like you are too dull to see that Charles Manson had very strong ideologies mixed in with his insanity that you only see. Your reality is nothing. Your ego is the bane of your entire pseudo existence. You are a slave to your own delusions.

I am just as much of a slave as you are. You delude yourself into thinking that this false awareness you've constructed somehow makes you better. You'll deny that, of course, but it's readily evident in everything you've already said, so don't bother. You think you're in on some grand cosmic understanding, but what could be more arrogant? To think that you know anything is so incredibly arrogant that you cannot be trusted. You speak of abstraction and you basically speak in a garbled whirlwind of syllables, and yet you claim to understand said abstraction, or at least be privy to it.

The only truth to know is that you cannot know anything. Anything more than that is classical human hubris and only hurts you. You were not clever at any point. You have been slinging buzzwords in an attempt to look knowledgeable, and no one fell for it.

Even if people don't understand his quotes which according to you make absolute sense, that doesn't change anything. He's still an evil, insane, manipulative piece of shit.

At 5/23/12 02:32 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:

At 5/23/12 02:22 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

Damage my image? What image? I'm an influence. I'm an abstract messenger. I speak for the universe. I scout out the paradigms of life and I come back to notify everyone what I've witnessed.

What use is a messenger that speaks in incomprehensible tongues? What good is a messenger that no one trusts or respects? If you can't take the time to engage your audience and respect them, then your words are the same as any other charlatan or liar.

The real incomphrensible tongues is yours and every one else that wants to persist living in their pseudo realities. I do not speak; I listen. The universe speaks for me. If you can not understand the universe; then you are the problem.

I was clever. I made the real intention of this thread in the OP and it is relevant to how people like you never understand the most important spectrums of life because you are too dull and do not want to admit to it. Like you are too dull to see that Charles Manson had very strong ideologies mixed in with his insanity that you only see. Your reality is nothing. Your ego is the bane of your entire pseudo existence. You are a slave to your own delusions.

I am just as much of a slave as you are. You delude yourself into thinking that this false awareness you've constructed somehow makes you better. You'll deny that, of course, but it's readily evident in everything you've already said, so don't bother. You think you're in on some grand cosmic understanding, but what could be more arrogant? To think that you know anything is so incredibly arrogant that you cannot be trusted. You speak of abstraction and you basically speak in a garbled whirlwind of syllables, and yet you claim to understand said abstraction, or at least be privy to it.

False awareness is your problem. My awareness is the universe's language. I see through the world's eyes. I feel the universe. I see the individual languages in everything. I am the abstract messenger; we all are. You simply can not speak a language if you do not understand it. Learn it. Do not tell me that what I say is garble just because your mind only represents it as garble. My words are the reflection of life in its broadest of sense.

The only truth to know is that you cannot know anything. Anything more than that is classical human hubris and only hurts you. You were not clever at any point. You have been slinging buzzwords in an attempt to look knowledgeable, and no one fell for it.

This is not about knowing. This is about life. You are the one calling me out along with the ignorant mass. I am not the only one who can speak the language of the universe. I know others who can as well; and they understand me just fine. If they understand me 100%, then there is a major communication problem between you and I. You know why? I'm on a completely different level of awareness than you are.

At 5/23/12 02:41 AM, Insanctuary wrote: I am not the only one who can speak the language of the universe. I know others who can as well; and they understand me just fine. If they understand me 100%, then there is a major communication problem between you and I. You know why? I'm on a completely different level of awareness than you are.

I feel sorry for you.

At 5/23/12 02:30 AM, Insanctuary wrote: All of the dim-witted rocks are misrepresenting my ideologies

No they aren't. Your "ideologies" don't need to be misrepresented by anyone because they are completely fucking stupid to begin with, and you're totally incapable of communicating them in a way that doesn't make you sound like a drooling moron.

Even the one user who was kind-of on your side throughout this thread has basically said the same thing, just more politely.

They are straw-manning.

You don't know what a straw-man fallacy is. Just stop using the term "straw-man" until you've educated yourself as to what a straw-man fallacy is.

Why don't you stop twisting the context for once?

But that's what you do, constantly, to try justify/explain your lunacy. When someone (e.g., myself) points out a blatant flaw/contradiction in what you're saying you resort to words to the effect of "You're not looking at it correctly, you're too narrow-minded, I like to herpa derpa ding dong."

You resort to ad hominems and mutilating the main premise?

But that's exactly what you've done throughout this whole thread, with your random insulting of users and "I MEANT TO DO THAT" bawling.

Yurg, I'm not the one with the word salads here.

Yes you are, and you are proud of it: "I do not use your dull English system. I write in any way I wish to express myself."

Yurg, just give up. He's not worth the frustration. He's a lost cause.

Maybe once he gets through college without getting laid he'll wise up.

At 5/23/12 02:46 AM, yurgenburgen wrote:

At 5/23/12 02:30 AM, Insanctuary wrote: All of the dim-witted rocks are misrepresenting my ideologies

No they aren't. Your "ideologies" don't need to be misrepresented by anyone because they are completely fucking stupid to begin with, and you're totally incapable of communicating them in a way that doesn't make you sound like a drooling moron.

Provide an argument. Until then; you are nothing but a salty rock.

Even the one user who was kind-of on your side throughout this thread has basically said the same thing, just more politely.

They did not say it the way you said it. They actually think my ideologies are real - unlike dim-witted people like you - because he understands me.

They are straw-manning.

You don't know what a straw-man fallacy is. Just stop using the term "straw-man" until you've educated yourself as to what a straw-man fallacy is.

Yes, I do. They misrepresented my ideologies. Telling me that my ideologies aren't existent o be misrepresented is a fallacy.

Why don't you stop twisting the context for once?

But that's what you do, constantly, to try justify/explain your lunacy. When someone (e.g., myself) points out a blatant flaw/contradiction in what you're saying you resort to words to the effect of "You're not looking at it correctly, you're too narrow-minded, I like to herpa derpa ding dong."

Salty fallacious rock, how dense are you?

You resort to ad hominems and mutilating the main premise?

But that's exactly what you've done throughout this whole thread, with your random insulting of users and "I MEANT TO DO THAT" bawling.

No. That is only what your narrow-minded perception allowed you to see. You see, Yurg. People can't see everything. So, they pick the next option. Acknowledging that I'm on a completely different level will validate why they pick the premature options. That I'm either on drugs, a troll or insane. You and others do not have the capacity to fathom my simple brilliance.

Yurg, I'm not the one with the word salads here.

Yes you are, and you are proud of it: "I do not use your dull English system. I write in any way I wish to express myself."

That does not represent word salads. That represents that I use your social symbols in more artistic and expressful way.

The wisest men are those aware of just how little they know.

An arrogant fool will be his own downfall.

At 5/23/12 02:53 AM, Insanctuary wrote: You and others do not have the capacity to fathom my simple brilliance.

Alright, that made my day. You are probably the most unintentionally hilarious person I've ever encountered.

At 5/23/12 02:55 AM, Zullzee wrote: typical rock

That can be applied to all of your - so called - 'arguments'.

At 5/23/12 02:59 AM, yurgenburgen wrote:

At 5/23/12 02:53 AM, Insanctuary wrote: You and others do not have the capacity to fathom my simple brilliance.

Alright, that made my day. You are probably the most unintentionally hilarious person I've ever encountered.

Look at you blaming me for your own problems. You are a hypocrite as well. You are now the one clearly being the kid that hits the wall then laughs it off. You can not handle a serious debate. You can't even handle a simple ideology of life. You have what I like to call 'flat experience'.

By the way, Science is what allowed Religion to fly into buildings. Look at you blaming everything again. Typical salty rock.

At 5/23/12 03:05 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

By the way, Science is what allowed Religion to fly into buildings. Look at you blaming everything again. Typical salty rock.

What is life without breath; Is not the rock entitled to its moss? As the root breaks through stone while time crawls, so too does the ant burrow.

Your depth is as a fogged mirror, turned upon itself.

At 5/23/12 03:08 AM, Zullzee wrote:

At 5/23/12 03:01 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 5/23/12 02:55 AM, Zullzee wrote: typical rock

That can be applied to all of your - so called - 'arguments'.

Your ignorance is very evident.

I'm not the one who resorts to premature mimicking. I'm not the one who resorts to accusations. I'm not the one who thinks they can solve every argument in a single sentence. I provide walls and wall of text that your brain is too dense to fathom.

You blame me for your own problems.

You only blame yourself for your problems through me.
:You can not stop taking everything out of context and adding buckets of salt to it.
I never take everything out of context. I see everything with its naked abstraction - unlike you and other dim-witted rocks who think they can see everything and hypocritically state an argument with their one-dimensional scope.
You only see what you want to see; which isn't going to be very much.

I see all; all in me. You see what you are only prepared to see. Everything up to this point was out of your own weakness; not your strengths; not for the universe. You are a lie.

At 5/23/12 03:12 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 5/23/12 03:08 AM, Zullzee wrote:

At 5/23/12 03:01 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 5/23/12 02:55 AM, Zullzee wrote: typical rock

That can be applied to all of your - so called - 'arguments'.

Your ignorance is very evident.

I'm not the one who resorts to premature mimicking. I'm not the one who resorts to accusations. I'm not the one who thinks they can solve every argument in a single sentence. I provide walls and wall of text that your brain is too dense to fathom.

You blame me for your own problems.

You only blame yourself for your problems through me.

You can not stop taking everything out of context and adding buckets of salt to it.

I never take everything out of context. I see everything with its naked abstraction - unlike you and other dim-witted rocks who think they can see everything and hypocritically state an argument with their one-dimensional scope.
You only see what you want to see; which isn't going to be very much.

I see all; all in me. You see what you are only prepared to see. Everything up to this point was out of your own weakness; not your strengths; not for the universe. You are a lie.

Mad men blame the world for their frustration, as they are ill of comprehension: the poor carpenter blames his tools, and the failing wizard blames the very elements.

Great claims are made as rain falls heavily upon the plain. Only the tall grass shields the ground, and yet the ground perseveres. The rooster screams bloody against the daybreak, yet day still comes, as clockwork.

At 5/23/12 03:10 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:

What is life without breath; Is not the rock entitled to its moss? As the root breaks through stone while time crawls, so too does the ant burrow.

(1) Life will still be life. (2) The rock and the organisms living on it do not correlate with each other. (3) A root can break through rock in due time; but humans can't even do a single thing after several thousand years of ignorance. I guess size doesn't matter. (4) Thus shelter. At the least ants do not destroy their very homes. We destroy the planet as we destroy ourselves. We are exploding and imploding due to the co-existence of damnation between our inner mind and the outer world.

Your depth is as a fogged mirror, turned upon itself.

Your depth wavers like any surface of water that is influenced by an outside force.

At 5/23/12 03:23 AM, Insanctuary wrote: (3) A root can break through rock in due time; but humans can't even do a single thing after several thousand years of ignorance. I guess size doesn't matter.

http://hrca.honda.com/articles/article.aspx?xml=articles/seg ment/segment_article_0220.xml

At 5/23/12 03:18 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:

Mad men blame the world for their frustration, as they are ill of comprehension: the poor carpenter blames his tools, and the failing wizard blames the very elements.

(5) Sounds like you guys blaming me. My ideologies are of the world. (6) Cowering out of their own unableness. It must be hard to accept your own faults. Hard as a rock.

Great claims are made as rain falls heavily upon the plain. Only the tall grass shields the ground, and yet the ground perseveres. The rooster screams bloody against the daybreak, yet day still comes, as clockwork.

(7) These claims will then be soaked and distorted. (8) The skin on your body is alot more flexible than the world's ground. (9) Nature is inevitable.

Is your gf hot Insanctuary

At 5/23/12 03:32 AM, Insanctuary wrote:

At 5/23/12 03:18 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:

Mad men blame the world for their frustration, as they are ill of comprehension: the poor carpenter blames his tools, and the failing wizard blames the very elements.

(5) Sounds like you guys blaming me. My ideologies are of the world. (6) Cowering out of their own unableness. It must be hard to accept your own faults. Hard as a rock.

Great claims are made as rain falls heavily upon the plain. Only the tall grass shields the ground, and yet the ground perseveres. The rooster screams bloody against the daybreak, yet day still comes, as clockwork.

(7) These claims will then be soaked and distorted. (8) The skin on your body is alot more flexible than the world's ground. (9) Nature is inevitable.

Any beast worth its hide will fight when cornered, but what separates these beasts from the horses that carry the hunter? Could it be man alone, or some sense of entitlement? Is it a natural sense of bloodlust, or rather man's inevitable perversion by proxy?

Weeds sprout and wither, and spread seed as any other plant, yet they are singled out as detrimental to the crop. Is the plow the law and hoe the judge? Is nature truly dead, or do we drive it into hiding?

At 5/23/12 03:36 AM, Luxury-Yacht wrote:
Any beast worth its hide will fight when cornered, but what separates these beasts from the horses that carry the hunter? Could it be man alone, or some sense of entitlement? Is it a natural sense of bloodlust, or rather man's inevitable perversion by proxy?

(10) Distribution of pseudo value. (11) It is the value, the thrill and the empowerment. (12) It isn't bloodlust if they don't think it is bloodlust. Like how you think ideologies are not genuine because you think it isn't. Life defines itself; and it begs to differ.

Weeds sprout and wither, and spread seed as any other plant, yet they are singled out as detrimental to the crop. Is the plow the law and hoe the judge? Is nature truly dead, or do we drive it into hiding?

(13) Nature acts independently of what is inside us. (14) The plow and hoe exist. Judges and laws do not. (15) Corruption of nature is evident.

At 5/23/12 03:26 AM, Sensationalism wrote:
http://hrca.honda.com/articles/article.aspx?xml=articles/seg ment/segment_article_0220.xml

The bigger picture. A bunch of artistic buildings have nothing to do with mankind as a whole.