06-28-2017, 05:43 AM
(This post was last modified: 06-28-2017, 05:45 AM by dicappatore.)
(06-28-2017, 04:58 AM)rpmaluki Wrote:(06-28-2017, 04:26 AM)irukandji Wrote:We don't see things the same so let's drop it.(06-27-2017, 09:43 PM)rpmaluki Wrote: fair enough, what I don't understand is why when I said Nick changed Kelly's diaper one of immediate responses was "No he didn't!" and when I point to a deleted scene that showed him doing just that, it's disregarded.
The producers themselves disregarded it. For whatever reason it's now known as a deleted scene. How can you say it actually occurred if it was never aired and they themselves disregarded it?
RP, you are trying to argue with pure idiocy. While you are proving your point and winning the argument iru makes a statement such as “Until their child suddenly sports a dirty diaper”. It's a redirection to get off a loosing point by changing the subjest matter to, I guess trying to prove that Nick won’t be a real father when it’s time to change a diaper.
You bring up a deleted scene showing Nick changing a diaper.
Iru claims since it is a deleted scene it doesn’t prove it happened. This same iru backs up argument with made up scenes, changes sequences, is able to read the mind of a fictional character’s in a single bound, and knows exactly what the writers intent was, not what they wrote..
When you then prove his facts are incorrect, he redirects the argument elsewhere like making a statement such as, “Until their child suddenly sports a dirty diaper”. hence "the circular firing squad"
Yet a scene that’s scripted, acted, shot, printed, then deleted is insignificant. Only one way to settle an argument with someone as such. High Velocity Lead Poison!
New Guy said it best, "I don't expect you to agree with me. I do require you to support your arguments and opinions. Lacking such support, arguments and opinions are vacuous.
You know you are OLD, when you see the Slide Ruler you used in college selling in an ANTIQUE SHOP!!