{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
11/8/2014 8:48:16 PM
1
That's not what I said. I said you can not disprove their existence. Just like you can not disprove Santa.
However, considering that this is a biological factor, it's [i]extremely[/i] unlikely. Like, 99.9999% unlikely.
English
-
Well we'd both confidently say that the Easter bunny doesn't exist and that's what you are comparing what I'm describing too so I don't understand why it's different all of a sudden.
-
Edited by Shpip: 11/8/2014 9:06:23 PMActually, you can't disprove the existence of anything. So, all I'm saying is: the chances of someone existing who would fit those descriptions is very unlikely.
-
Ok, well not being able to prove something either way doesn't really matter in this case. I'm only wanting to point out that many people that use the argument that you are born gay seem like they are speaking for ALL gay people and I think that's wrong. How do you explain people that are gay that weren't born gay. What about the other factors or variables that can lead someone to be gay. By your logic they BASICALLY don't exist? It's THAT unlikely. I disagree.
