Debate here if you doubt Jesus is the Creator of the universe born in flesh

[jimboston]

YES, All is well with me. THANKS..!

And what do you use? At least I use facts, prove it, and do not make assumptions.

And I have travelled, outside of my state. Have you?

I do things to help others. Do you?

Ahhh….helping others by cutting & pasting Wiki and AI quotes. Got it.

[Apatheist]

YES, All is well with me. THANKS..!

And what do you use? At least I use facts, prove it, and do not make assumptions.

And I have travelled, outside of my state. Have you?

I do things to help others. Do you?

Ahhh….helping others by cutting & pasting Wiki and AI quotes. Got it.

You seem to misunderstand the AI quotes thing.
All the Google AI is doing is organising the search results. Follow the links and you'll see the paragraph that it has copied - it's exactly the same result as googling it for yourself, it's just a step shorter. It's not the same as asking AI questions that it can get wrong (and often does, particularly the freebie versions).
If you wish to refute any such quotes, do your own search and see what comes back - if it's a different answer from a reliable source, post it.
You've lost some credibility points with your assumption about me being a former banned poster (which I'm not), so you need to take some steps down from the moral high ground.

[jimboston]

YES, All is well with me. THANKS..!

And what do you use? At least I use facts, prove it, and do not make assumptions.

And I have travelled, outside of my state. Have you?

I do things to help others. Do you?

Ahhh….helping others by cutting & pasting Wiki and AI quotes. Got it.

You seem to misunderstand the AI quotes thing.
All the Google AI is doing is organising the search results. Follow the links and you'll see the paragraph that it has copied - it's exactly the same result as googling it for yourself, it's just a step shorter. It's not the same as asking AI questions that it can get wrong (and often does, particularly the freebie versions).
If you wish to refute any such quotes, do your own search and see what comes back - if it's a different answer from a reliable source, post it.
You've lost some credibility points with your assumption about me being a former banned poster (which I'm not), so you need to take some steps down from the moral high ground.

I fully understand how Google AI summary works. I find it to be generally reliable, though not 100%.

I’m not refuting any of the info or data the idiot cuts & pastes… the point is that his sole form of argument/communication is searching on AI or Wiki. He rarely adds anything of value. If I wanted to research a topic I’d just go do that on my own, I don’t need to come to a web forum to read what someone has cut&pasted from Wiki. I like to chat and discuss topics with people who form their own thoughts. Sometimes these comments can be supported by links or sources but when 95% of what someone posts is cut&paste from Google or Wiki I’ll take a hard pass.

Regarding your whole “credibility points”… I’m still not convinced you aren’t mrswdk or some former forum troll. So maybe you need the credibility points not me. My post that was in reference to was pretty obviously sarcasm… I don’t think all sarcastic comments should be followed by a ‘wink’… kinda ruins the joke IMHO.

[jusplay4fun]

YES, All is well with me. THANKS..!

And what do you use? At least I use facts, prove it, and do not make assumptions.

And I have travelled, outside of my state. Have you?

I do things to help others. Do you?

Ahhh….helping others by cutting & pasting Wiki and AI quotes. Got it.

You seem to misunderstand the AI quotes thing.
All the Google AI is doing is organising the search results. Follow the links and you'll see the paragraph that it has copied - it's exactly the same result as googling it for yourself, it's just a step shorter. It's not the same as asking AI questions that it can get wrong (and often does, particularly the freebie versions).
If you wish to refute any such quotes, do your own search and see what comes back - if it's a different answer from a reliable source, post it.
You've lost some credibility points with your assumption about me being a former banned poster (which I'm not), so you need to take some steps down from the moral high ground.

I fully understand how Google AI summary works. I find it to be generally reliable, though not 100%.

I’m not refuting any of the info or data the idiot cuts & pastes… the point is that his sole form of argument/communication is searching on AI or Wiki. He rarely adds anything of value. If I wanted to research a topic I’d just go do that on my own, I don’t need to come to a web forum to read what someone has cut&pasted from Wiki. I like to chat and discuss topics with people who form their own thoughts. Sometimes these comments can be supported by links or sources but when 95% of what someone posts is cut&paste from Google or Wiki I’ll take a hard pass.

Regarding your whole “credibility points”… I’m still not convinced you aren’t mrswdk or some former forum troll. So maybe you need the credibility points not me. My post that was in reference to was pretty obviously sarcasm… I don’t think all sarcastic comments should be followed by a ‘wink’… kinda ruins the joke IMHO.

As usual, JimB totally misses my points.

By helping others, I do not mean merely enlightening others. As I mentioned before, I help poor, needy, and/or hungry people eat with my Volunteer "work" at the local food bank/pantry and feeding people an evening meal with my church. I am only a small part of both ministries (volunteer activities); I know that I do not do either of those alone. Many other equally committed altruistic folks (including many Christians) help the less fortunate.

My point of many of my "cut and pastes" is NOT only to enlighten others, but to BOLSTER and SUPPORT my arguments and point. I am not an expert in many fields and so the evidence I cite is to offer the evaluation of others who are more knowledgeable than I. JimB uses my citation of experts as a lack of thinking on my part. THAT is simply FALSE, a LIE.

I do offer much of my own analysis and my ideas, but JimB refuses to engage in that, choosing instead to offer insults and derogatory comments. He cannot even acknowledge when we agree. He certainly has not acknowledge any mistakes he makes, to the best of my knowledge, attempting instead to call such mistakes as an ATTEMPT at humor. On most of his attempts at HUMOR or jokes, JimB is a failure.

It is obvious to me that JimB lacks credibility.

With regards to Apatheist, he has said that he is NEW and NOT the new account of an "old" former poster. JimB cannot let that idea go, cannot believe that CC may attract a new voice, since that is outside his realm of reality. I undertand LOTS, JimB. Sorry, JimB, you do suffer from Main Character Syndrome. Why can you NOT accept Apatheist at his word? Why do you insist that you are (always) correct and that he is wrong? I think this is the MAIN point of my analysis of JimBoston.

[Apatheist]

What I find most bizarre is the fact that jimb suggested that NOT knowing his sarcastic posting style was somehow evidence of being here before. I still can't wrap my head around that.
Perhaps this is where his insistence on "adding value" or "forming your own thoughts" falls down: you're taking an expert's analysis and trying to add your own, inexpertly based conclusions, which essentially involves making up stuff from your own agenda. Someone who copies from wiki, or wherever, does so because that's what supports their argument; adding one's own thoughts can in some cases undermine it. If it expresses accurately and succinctly what you want to say, why pretend it's your own original thought?