“I keep pointing out that I am NOT trying to prove Hobbes is real but giving reasons why I consider him to be real or at least…“more than a figment of Calvin’s imagination”. If you insist that “more than a figment of Calvin’s imagination” means “real” then I will not argue.”
You don’t try to prove Hobbes is real precisely because you know you have no such proof. Of course you can’t rationally argue against basic logic. Something is either real or unreal. It can’t be something “in between”, your pathetic attempts to claim otherwise notwithstanding.
“You don’t seem to have noticed that I keep explaining that I assumed that Hobbes was part of Calvin’s magnificent imagination until I read my first book collection and saw two strips of Hobbes alive when on his own.”
The fact that I’ve responded to it every time you keep regurgitating it shows that your “you don’t notice it” claim is utter nonsense. It is YOU who keep pretending that I haven’t done so. It is YOU who choose to ignore me repeatedly pointing out that it’s proof of nothing. You admit this when you say:
“We both agree that Calvin MIGHT have been imagining this”
So you repeatedly admit that you have nothing that proves Hobbes is real. In contrast, I’ve shown that the washing machine strips prove that Hobbes cannot be the large living animal YOU claim he is. The logic is indisputable (all your attempts to argue against it were pathetic failures that I easily demolished, and you’ve obviously abandoned any further attempts), but you’re not interested in logic, only belief. Watterson knew that the washing machine strips contradicted the “Hobbes is real” claim when he was forced to say that they were a “blurring” of what Hobbes “is”, a clear admission that Hobbes has no definite reality.
Nope. My sources aren’t Trump at all. Neither are they the GOP. The source of the entire “Russian collusion” hoax was the Clinton campaign. Deal with it.
“There are some rare occasions when we do see Hobbes without Calvin.”
Something Calvin can easily imagine. You have admitted this, therefore it’s proof of nothing.
“I have been told recently that, in the full interview, Watterson says that he considers Hobbes to be “more real than any kid would make up” because he argues with Calvin and that Watterson proved himself wrong in this by showing that Calvin sometimes enjoys his arguments with Hobbes.”
Watterson said that “I really have absolutely no knowledge about imaginary friends. It would seem to me, though, that when you make up a friend for yourself, you would have somebody to agree with you, not to argue with you.” That was the basis for him claiming “ So Hobbes is more real than I suspect any kid would dream up.” Calvin obviously would do something he enjoys, so Watterson disproved his own premise, and therefore his “suspicion”.
“I am NOT trying to prove Hobbes is real. I am saying why I NO LONGER see him as part of Calvin’s imagination.”
As you are wont to do, you attempt to ignore basic logic, in this case the law of the excluded middle, which states that for every proposition, either this proposition or its negation is true. It is one of the three laws of thought, along with the law of noncontradiction and the law of identity.
You know you can’t prove Hobbes is real, even though you’ve claimed he is real (all your attempts to prove your claim have failed). If he’s not real, he must be imaginary. He can’t be something “in between”. Since only Calvin can sense, interact with, or be affected by him, he must be a product of Calvin’s imagination. There is no other possibility. That’s basic logic which you ignore.
“So you acknowledge that Calvin fantasises a great deal.” I have always acknowledged this”
As I said, you claim arbitrarily and without any rational criteria or evidence that Calvin has the magical power to duplicate himself simply by writing the word on a cardboard box. Your claim is ludicrous. You can’t explain why no one else can see Calvin exercise such incredible magical powers, or why he can’t use them to make actual desired changes in his life.
“I read two strips in that book which showed Hobbes as alive – and speaking directly to us – when he was completely alone. I realised that it could still be Calvin’s imagination”
Yeah yeah, you love to regurgitate what you acknowledge is proof of nothing. You love to hear yourself talk.
“one of the strips showed Hobbes playing a trick on Calvin without Calvin knowing Hobbes was there.”
More regurgitation on your part. You can’t show why Calvin can’t pretend “not to know” these things.
“it can be read as meaning that Calvin imagined he had made it snow and then explained the lack of real snow by imagining Hobbes had played a trick on him.”
Yet another “objective reality doesn’t exist, and it’s all about subjective viewpoints” claim from you. The washing machine strips destroy your argument. The machine has no subjective viewpoint. Hobbes must objectively be the size of a doll, which destroys YOUR claim that Hobbes is objectively a real living tiger, but that out of all things in the entire universe, only Calvin can “correctly” perceive the “true” reality (which, of course, is a contradiction on your part). How delusional you are.
The fact is that the Mueller Report did not establish that members of the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with the Russian government in its election interference activities. That was the claim that Democrats had been bellowing for years. Now we know that the entire narrative came from Hillary Clinton. That was the testimony by 2016 Clinton campaign manager Robby Mook in federal court.
“YOU presented conspiracy theories from the GOP Sedition Caucus”
LOL It’s so funny that you claim that the FBI, the Energy Dept, the Wall Street Journal, etc. are all GOP partisans. POT. KETTLE. BLACK.
“the FBI is a very conservative organization with GOP Directors for DECADES.”
I gave you examples of FBI AGENTS who RAN THE ACTUAL INVESTIGATION who were clearly anti Trump partisans, a fact you conveniently ignored.
“NOT my problem that you also ignored the science that said that the Huanan Seafood Wholesale Market ws the most likely place that Covid started from.”
I presented SCIENCE that contradicts you. It’s interesting that you’re eager to state how evil Putin is, but you’re not willing to say the same thing about the Chinese.
″‘You! I’ve just awarded you the prize for the hundred-meter dash. Does it make you happy? […] No dodging, please. You have the prize — here, I’ll write it out: ‘Grand prize for the championship, one hundred-meter sprint.‘” He had actually come back to my seat and pinned it on my chest. ‘There! Are you happy? You value it — or don’t you?’ Mr. Dubois had looked surprised. ‘It doesn’t make you happy?’
‘You know darn well I placed fourth!’
‘Exactly! The prize for first place is worthless to you . . . because you haven’t earned it. But you enjoy a modest satisfaction in placing fourth; you earned it.‘”
“I keep pointing out that I am NOT trying to prove Hobbes is real but giving reasons why I consider him to be real or at least…“more than a figment of Calvin’s imagination”. If you insist that “more than a figment of Calvin’s imagination” means “real” then I will not argue.”
You don’t try to prove Hobbes is real precisely because you know you have no such proof. Of course you can’t rationally argue against basic logic. Something is either real or unreal. It can’t be something “in between”, your pathetic attempts to claim otherwise notwithstanding.
“You don’t seem to have noticed that I keep explaining that I assumed that Hobbes was part of Calvin’s magnificent imagination until I read my first book collection and saw two strips of Hobbes alive when on his own.”
The fact that I’ve responded to it every time you keep regurgitating it shows that your “you don’t notice it” claim is utter nonsense. It is YOU who keep pretending that I haven’t done so. It is YOU who choose to ignore me repeatedly pointing out that it’s proof of nothing. You admit this when you say:
“We both agree that Calvin MIGHT have been imagining this”
So you repeatedly admit that you have nothing that proves Hobbes is real. In contrast, I’ve shown that the washing machine strips prove that Hobbes cannot be the large living animal YOU claim he is. The logic is indisputable (all your attempts to argue against it were pathetic failures that I easily demolished, and you’ve obviously abandoned any further attempts), but you’re not interested in logic, only belief. Watterson knew that the washing machine strips contradicted the “Hobbes is real” claim when he was forced to say that they were a “blurring” of what Hobbes “is”, a clear admission that Hobbes has no definite reality.
THAT’S the difference between you and me.