No one can say definitively. Exactly what I've been saying. Lol.
Why does the government hide UFO's?
- Thread starter darksidZz
- Start date
No one can say definitively. Exactly what I've been saying. Lol.
this is circular logic.. it appears that your logic is flawed.
no you have not, again answer the question of:
" ahh-- exactly, so in other words, you cannot say who knows about such things or not then, correct? "
It's not circular logic, it's correct logic. It makes no sense to say the government is hiding evidence, if you have never seen or heard of that evidence, and without evidence showing that. Therefore, to say the government IS hiding it, is unreasonable. Because you can't say definitively. This is factual lol.
Same answer still applies, because it is true.
Lol.
Last edited:
agian, you are asked a simple question, simply cease conveniently avoiding it.
the conversation turned into you telling me that i do not know which led to this question of:
" ahh-- exactly, so in other words, you cannot say who knows about such things or not then, correct? "-- again, it appears that your logic is flawed.
My logic is not flawed in any way. Nor am i doding the question, im directly answering it. It stands to reason that you cannot definitively say the government is hiding something without evidence. Fact.
To suggest it "could" exist is no different than saying "a flying spaghetti monster could exist, and you cannot prove otherwise ". Lol.
To suggest it "could" exist is no different than saying "a flying spaghetti monster could exist, and you cannot prove otherwise ". Lol.
simply, for the umpteenth time, how can you say that i do not know, when you just simply admitted that you do not work for high levels of the government?-- again it is this simple. you are backpedaling with circular logic--again, due to this, it appears that your logic is flawed by your own admissions.
(shrugs)simply, for the umpteenth time, how can you say that i do not know, when you just simply admitted that you do not work for high levels of the government?-- again it is this simple. you are backpedaling with circular logic--again, due to this, it appears that your logic is flawed by your own admissions.
Until you prove otherwise, then I'm still extremely correct. I, nor anyone else can say definitively due to no evidence.
what do you mean prove( now you have just resorted to hand-waving)? again simply, for the umpteenth time, how can you say that i do not know, when you just simply admitted that you do not work for high levels of the government?-- again it is this simple. you are backpedaling with circular logic--again, due to this, it appears that your logic is flawed by your own admissions.
(shrugs)what do you mean prove( now you have just resorted to hand-waving)? again simply, for the umpteenth time, how can you say that i do not know, when you just simply admitted that you do not work for high levels of the government?-- again it is this simple. you are backpedaling with circular logic--again, due to this, it appears that your logic is flawed by your own admissions.
It's actually not. My logic is fine. It's a simple fact that without evidence you cannot say definitively. Lol.
well, i am employed by high level government and i can say definitively that the government does hide things. whether you believe me or not and that i seriously have no inking of care if you do or not, is irrelevant. by logic, you cannot say that I do not know simply because you do not and never have had access to such things, so in logic you had to say that you cannot say that i do not know. therefore by your own admissions, your logic is simply illogical.
(shrugs)well, i am employed by high level government and i can say definitively that the government does hide things. whether you believe me or not and that i seriously have no inking of care if you do or not, is irrelevant. by logic, you cannot say that I do not know simply because you do not and never have had access to such things, so in logic you had to say that you cannot say that i do not know. therefore by your own admissions, your logic is simply illogical.
Wrong, without proof of your claims, I still cannot say definitively. Due to no evidence. Same as everyone else.
Lol. Very simple concept.
to whom would i need to prove to? if it is you then-- please enlighten me-- who the ffuck are you?
(shakes head)-- comical and pathetic.to whom would i need to prove to? if it is you then-- please enlighten me-- who the ffuck are you?
To anyone but yourself I suppose. Does that really need explaining? Lolol.
logically--yes, yes it does need explaining, simply because i have already said that whether you believe me or not is irrelevant. the fact is you cannot say that i do not know. again by your own admissions, your logic is illogical. and also you are now back to the hand-waving circular logic. but i can play that game also. and again, if it is you then-- please enlighten me-- who the ffuck are you?
(shakes head)-- comical and pathetic.
you are now back to the hand-waving circular logic. the conversation is now about me proving to you that i do work for what i said that i do.but there is evidence for that also, you just do not know that i am yourself, correct?-- again,by your own admissions, your logic is illogical. but i can play that game also. and again, if it is you then-- please enlighten me-- who the ffuck are you?
(shakes head)-- comical and pathetic.Again, it's not illogical to say you don't know definitively without evidence. It's very logical lolol.you are now back to the hand-waving circular logic. the conversation is now about me proving to you that i do work for what i said that i do.but there is evidence for that also, you just do not know that i am yourself, correct?-- again,by your own admissions, your logic is illogical. but i can play that game also. and again, if it is you then-- please enlighten me-- who the ffuck are you?
but there is evidence for that also, you just do not know that i am yourself, correct?-- again,by your own admissions, your logic is illogical. but i can play that game also. and again, if it is you then-- please enlighten me-- who the ffuck are you?
(shakes head)-- comical and pathetic. you are now back to the hand-waving circular logic.but there is evidence for that also, you just do not know that i am yourself, correct?-- again,by your own admissions, your logic is illogical. but i can play that game also. and again, if it is you then-- please enlighten me-- who the ffuck are you?
Unless you show it, I nor anyone else can say definitively. Simple concept lol.