Why not choose the easy way out and show the address you had that money on, I'm sure he'll remove the trust if you do.
I do not require trust. I am not here to do business. Is that too difficult to understand? As long as that 'trust' stays there, it will open a bigger can of worms for him, and everyone else who goes on about it will be considered as part of his scamming ring. Word it anyway you want, I got his address.. for free, from a public forum, aka, this one |
|
|
|
So Dicksperiment, any proof of those 50btc you own?  Yeah, Decky. Take Vod on his honor, and send him the bitcoins. He'll send 'em back if he loses.  He asked him to sign the address, not send him the coins On topic: no matter how much you guys debate how entropy works, it still doesn't prove there is a god. Seems to be the latest buzzword for trying to disprove evolution, even though scientists have already debunked that idea. http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo.htmlI wasnt discussing entropy, I was puzzling over what he was saying, and beat him with an empty glass full of colouring. |
|
|
|
To be honest mate, the water analogy was interesting, but you are goin on a bit..
Aquarians are away doing sumat else very quickly, at least you held my attention for a bit, but you lost it by goin on about something I actually find boring, for it i useless arguing with someone who cannot accept their own flawed questions lead nowhere..
Demonstrate, beyond a reasonable doubt, that what you assert is more valid than that which I assert, and I will surely concede. Nah, it's now boring. |
|
|
|
Martin Lawrence, 46 Sheridan Dr St. Albert, Alberta Canada http://www.likelyanswers.com/10374212/Vod--Is-Abusing-Trust-System,--Wrong-Fullyaccusing-Users-Without-Proofhttps://bitcointa.lk/threads/scammer-vod-destroying-peoples-accounts-for-fun.342687/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=434266.0https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=747786.40http://bitcoinupdates.net/re-scammer-vod-destroying-peoples-accounts-for-fun-3/https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=704289.80#msg8027897Hahahahaha...... so I was right before I found all this just due to him using 1 word.. escrow.. AVOID escrow!! And if the bitcointalk admins dont do anything, then they are legally responsible, simply by knowing and doing nothing about it.. Who's up for taking them to court? I'm sure there are plenty of bitcoin lawyers out there, lets start with defamation of character, proving bitcointalk.org is allowing said law(s) to be broken, and hence, just as guilty by doing nothing to prevent it, akin to a party to the crimes being commited.. this is not just a security risk to this site, but ALL its members.. Why IS he still here? Notice he's still stalking? But this time I aint un-ignoring him, the police are on their way.. and I quote, 'Dont worry, if he's as bad as you say, we'll get him' |
|
|
|
|
To be honest mate, the water analogy was interesting, but you are goin on a bit..
Aquarians are away doing sumat else very quickly, at least you held my attention for a bit, but you lost it by goin on about something I actually find boring, for it i useless arguing with someone who cannot accept their own flawed questions lead nowhere..
|
|
|
|
Boil glass of water, colouring will stick to sides.
By what means shall you boil such that you do not introduce "new disorder" into yourself (as per the requirements)? Ok, I'll sit it out knowing the water will evaporate, and leave the colouring behind. I promise not to touch it  That introduces new disorder into the environment, the diffusion of the water molecules through the atmosphere. You introduced this disorder, not I, I just sat and fell asleep watching it.. remember your up against someone who will get to the truth of the matter, in that you chose water, knowing it would evaporate of it's own accord, I had no say in this scientific fact, I merely debunked the question, using nothing. Edit: twas a good question, you had me thinking, but it is also an invalid question with regards to your point, due to the fact you forgot water is constantly changing. That "constant change" illustrates (part of) my point: entropy does, indeed, proceed towards a maximum. Only in this particular case, I succesfully removed said colouring without using any external source by simply KNOWING the way. Edit: Sooory dude, if you cant give credit for such a perfect answer, and move on to another question, I'm nippin to pub, I debunked ye there, though it was not my intention.. the correct thing to say here was you put your foot in it Next challenge? |
|
|
|
|
C'mon, admit it, I answered your question, albeit, not being the answer you sought.. see, water, even when perfectly still, will still evaporate. Neither you or I can change this.
In my mind you say to pour colouring into a glass, then remove said colouring without any external interferences..
If there was a bet on this, I won.
|
|
|
|
Boil glass of water, colouring will stick to sides.
By what means shall you boil such that you do not introduce "new disorder" into yourself (as per the requirements)? Ok, I'll sit it out knowing the water will evaporate, and leave the colouring behind. I promise not to touch it That introduces new disorder into the environment, the diffusion of the water molecules through the atmosphere. You introduced this disorder, not I, I just sat and fell asleep watching it.. remember your up against someone who will get to the truth of the matter, in that you chose water, knowing it would evaporate of it's own accord, I had no say in this scientific fact, I merely debunked the question, using nothing. Edit: twas a good question, you had me thinking, but it is also an invalid question with regards to your point, due to the fact you forgot water is constantly changing. |
|
|
|
Boil glass of water, colouring will stick to sides.
Something about a flame:
A flame in itself does not exist, what we see is the colour of the heat. We can see the heat, but cannot touch it, for it exists at the point of non-existance.. which is why it gets so hot. Now since the water has heat, I would not be adding any external source, only increasing that which, by your definition, already exists.
Photons exist as vibrations within a field. Those vibrations are disorder that is extrinsic to the system and new to it's environment. Git back to the water, beat my last answer.. again, based on your lab set up, the water will evaporate of its own accord through time, leaving the colouring behind You know I got ya here huh? |
|
|
|
Boil glass of water, colouring will stick to sides.
By what means shall you boil such that you do not introduce "new disorder" into yourself (as per the requirements)? Ok, I'll sit it out knowing the water will evaporate, and leave the colouring behind. I promise not to touch it |
|
|
|
|
Boil glass of water, colouring will stick to sides.
Something about a flame:
A flame in itself does not exist, what we see is the colour of the heat. We can see the heat, but cannot touch it, for it exists at the point of non-existance.. which is why it gets so hot. Now since the water has heat, I would not be adding any external source, only increasing that which, by your definition, already exists.
|
|
|
|
Water purification tablets supplied by armies in ration packs That is assuming of course, that the surrounding environment is the glass containing said liquid? We could also filter water so many times through a pair of jeans, which will absorb the colour, even more the more you times you do so? It's like imagine being in a field, and you just got hit with a massive cloud of tear ags, most folks would luagh at pissin on a cloth then placing cloth over face.. |
|
|
|
This is the definitive answer to the question, mines not to question where I got that statement, for once known, it is true.
There is NO answer.
Again, your reply is neither scientific nor evidence. My "plagiarized" (these are not academic works, and, therefore, improper citation should not be held to constitute plagiarism) restatement of a fundamental determination within limakasidian entropism was based upon not only science but evidence thereof. Ok, provide proof dude, scientific proof that can be measured, touched, seen, you name it.. all man will ever do is argue about it, this is WHY people question it in the first place, because GOD cannot be scientifically proven, just as we cannot prove what we dream. We know we do, but we cant. 37 = esoteric truth, that which we know, but cannot prove 27 = truth revealed, that which we know and can prove Hence, there is NO answer Barring this: We can go round and round forever debating it using any means necessary to get a point across, but it is NOT the answer, for their is NONE. |
|
|
|
This is the definitive answer to the question, mines not to question where I got that statement, for once known, it is true. There is NO answer. Edit: However, I'd also like to continue.. but that is the answer to the question A hint: Notice no-one contradicts the answer? Arguing the subject was more fun than finding the answer huh? |
|
|
|
|
That there is NO answer, yes.
|
|
|
|
|
Dear YAREMI.. how much do you think I should charge for me to turn on my own faucet/web server?
It's still set to give out 0.5 btc every hour!!
It's got EVERY tool released by hackers since '94..
Right up to date with linux
Your tryin to sell tae yer dad, go back to school.. but if you want, I'll turn on the server for the price you try to sell me your hacker tools for, on one condition.
You donate ALL your btc to bitcointalk.org?
|
|
|
|
|
And where on earth did the origional bitcoins I collected go? They havent been in the block chain for at least 8 years now.. remember the origional faucet, the one with the tap that handed out on a daily basis to the WALLET?
Please tell everyone who I am? I honestly dont mind, it's blatantly obvious?
Oh, and your sums dont add up now do they?
It never occured to you that what you posted says why people should refrain from using faucets?
Your the loser thinking a pair of jeans with money in one pocket, has no cards in the other..
|
|
|
|
|
Look out the window.
That exists.
The rest is un-required, for it does not interest any other living thing, and in fact, is quite useless information.
However..
When you get drunk.
|
|
|
|
Well, I got 25 for free using fake accounts, I'll donate them to someone in this forum when and where I feel like it, cause Bitcoin IS the crypto currency.
If I get any more, I'll be sure to show how, until my GENUINE referals are paid.
Man it's only 5 lat!!!!
You thing you are big hacker? That you are bitcoin address https://blockchain.info/address/1654DECHaU4QyYXom9ooRBvt2zmULR3MfZSo you have Transactions 165 Total Received 0.01969758 BTC Final Balance 0.00845758 BTC And you use Moon Bitcoin CoinAd.com BitChest.me. Big hacker Decksperiment use that? And have Total Received 0.01969758 BTC from 2012-12-31? Total Received 0.01969758 BTC from 2012-12-31 - 02-10-2014. 2 years = 0.01969758 BTC . You loserSo if you want more BTC (10-15$) everyday stable. I can feel sorry for you and sell you a 50% discount hackers private tools and way to earning (10-15$) everyday stable Um.. how many address's do you know I have? You think my current wallet address tells you anything? How many other accounts do I have on these site's? Smart arse.. Please, tell me the first address (still in use in my current wallet) I used on this site, and how many others.. Even I know how to read the blockchain, and know some folks run multiple faucets from same system(s) If ya wanna see them get treated the same way I did latium, feel free to donate to the address you seem very fond of.. When did I last visit any these lame assed site's? Cause thats how good they are, I'd rather just sit and talk shit here, than give them my visits/hits/referals, that, to me, is what they deserve.. But please, my REAL wallet address? Or my Lass's? Or my Lad's? Numpty read blockchain. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
