Official Barry Bonds Countdown Thread

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
Wow, DrewDevil comes off as the biggest idiot.

[/ QUOTE ]

I always wanted to be the best at something.

[ QUOTE ]
Here are a few classics:

1."Prove that steroids help pitchers."
2."Prove that Barry is clean." (Ah yes, prove a negative! Logic 101 FTL.)
3."Barry took steroids beyond a reasonable doubt." Where is your hatred for Ryan Franklin, Juan Rincon, Rafael Betancourt? Why do you not campaign for them to be removed and their strikeouts negated?

You can't prove [censored].

[/ QUOTE ]

I have never asked for proof of anything, only evidence. Does everyone just think these two are the same thing?

I never said anything remotely like #1, but since there is overwhelming evidence that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs, I asked for some evidence that they don't actually help. No one has responded to that request.

I never asked for PROOF that Barry was clean, but I have never heard Redbean say that Barry is clean or that he didn't take steroids. All he does is nitpick all the large body of evidence that Barry did take roids. So I asked Redbean to actually state that he thinks Barry is clean, or provide some evidence to that effect. The only "evidence" anyone is offered is that Barry hasn't flunked a MLB test since the testing went into effect. Whee.

It's now obvious to me that Redbean knows Bonds is a roid monster, but just doesn't want to believe anyone will ever be able to prove it and won't accept any of the current evidence as remotely credible. That's fine if he wants to believe that way, I'm just surprised that he's convinced anyone else.

As for #3, I think there is a mountain of substantial credible evidence that Bonds used steroids and I am pretty sure I could prove it beyond a reasonable doubt in a court of law. Obviously this is speculation on my part, but the fact that the feds have not YET indicted Bonds does not really mean anything conclusive either way.

Also, as I keep repeating, I think Barry is the record holder and I don't agree that there should be an asterisk. ALL I'VE EVER SAID IS THAT HE DOESN'T BELONG IN THE HALL OF FAME. The response to that opinion has been: "Oh yeah, well of course Barry took roids, but go ahead and prove it beyond the shadow of a doubt, or else shut up you idiot retard/ban/whatever." I'm not sure why I have to prove beyond all doubt that Bonds did roids before I can offer the opinion that he doesn't belong in Cooperstown.

I also do not think Ryan Franklin, Juan Rincon, Rafael Betancourt or anyone else who's cheated belongs in the Hall of Fame. Barry gets more attention from me and everyone else because he used roids to help him become the all time HR king.

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
redbean makes great points, but it seems like some of you would defend hitler, as long as you went against public opinion

[/ QUOTE ]

Make no mistake, I'm not playing devil's advocate here.

I actually believe the stuff I am writing, with a passion that you cannot even begin to imagine.

[/ QUOTE ]

so if he admits to the clear in the GJ testimony? then your agrument is shot to hell? or no?

[/ QUOTE ]

I know you weren't talking to me, but my answer is "no." If Barry comes out tomorrow and says, "I cheated. Steroids helped me hit home runs." I would not think any differently of his record because people have cheated/had unfair advantages throughout the over 100-year history of baseball. Why treat Barry any differently? Maybe he had advantages. So did Ruth and Aaron and everybody else. So what?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm still waiting for you to explain the 100-year history of cheating by all but four people in the Hall of Fame.

[jesusarenque]

[ QUOTE ]

I never said anything remotely like #1, but since there is overwhelming evidence that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs,

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you provide any proof and/or evidence that this is true?

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I never said anything remotely like #1, but since there is overwhelming evidence that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs,

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you provide any proof and/or evidence that this is true?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you disagree with my assertion that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs?

If you say you actually disagree, then I will (a) marvel at how any person could hold such a ridiculous opinion and then (b) provide the overwhelming evidence. Otherwise, you're just trying to bait me into another semantical/burden of proof argument, and I decline to engage.

I think it's beyond obvious to any sensible person that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs.

[jesusarenque]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I never said anything remotely like #1, but since there is overwhelming evidence that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs,

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you provide any proof and/or evidence that this is true?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you disagree with my assertion that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs?

If you say you actually disagree, then I will (a) marvel at how any person could hold such a ridiculous opinion and then (b) provide the overwhelming evidence. Otherwise, you're just trying to bait me into another semantical/burden of proof argument, and I decline to engage.

I think it's beyond obvious to any sensible person that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, where is the "overwhelming evidence"?

[DrewDevil]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I never said anything remotely like #1, but since there is overwhelming evidence that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs,

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you provide any proof and/or evidence that this is true?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you disagree with my assertion that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs?

If you say you actually disagree, then I will (a) marvel at how any person could hold such a ridiculous opinion and then (b) provide the overwhelming evidence. Otherwise, you're just trying to bait me into another semantical/burden of proof argument, and I decline to engage.

I think it's beyond obvious to any sensible person that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, where is the "overwhelming evidence"?

[/ QUOTE ]

That's what I thought.

[DrewDevil]

To everyone who thinks that Redbean and the other Bonds supporters have made "great points," I would like to point out just one of the massive flaws in Redbean's reasoning.

There are a number of people who have said, or testified, that they saw Bonds using steroids, or heard him admit he used steroids. Redbean's default position for all of these witnesses is that they are not credible, even if they have testified under oath. Furthermore, the two SF reporters wrote a meticulously researched and sourced book setting forth all of the evidence that Bonds took steroids. Redbean denounced this book as not credible because it was, he says, "for-profit." Since almost everything that is written these days is written at least partially for profit, I can only suppose that means he only trusts things that are written for free, like message board posts, or perhaps things he sees with his own eyes.

The contradiction is that Redbean then turns around and accepts everything Bonds has said as the absolute gospel, assigning Bonds absolute credibility. When Bonds said he didn't know that he was using the clear, and that he thought it was flaxseed oil, Redbean accepts this without equivocation. This acceptance, of course, is made despite the fact that the statement itself is not particularly credible (that Bonds would take some treatment without knowing what it is), and that Bonds himself does not have much credibility as a truthful person, given his admission of lying to reporters, cheating on his wife, etc.

Yet to Redbean, Bonds' words are accepted without reservation and all others are summarily dismissed without investigation.

Usually, people see right through this sort of biased argumentation and realize what's going on, but apparently not here. As for me, I can't decide if Redbean is just being blinded by his fan worship of Bonds, or if he's being willfully intellectually dishonest.

Either way, I'm fairly amazed that he's convinced anyone that his points are any good.

[Vyse]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

I never said anything remotely like #1, but since there is overwhelming evidence that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs,

[/ QUOTE ]

Did you provide any proof and/or evidence that this is true?

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you disagree with my assertion that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs?

If you say you actually disagree, then I will (a) marvel at how any person could hold such a ridiculous opinion and then (b) provide the overwhelming evidence. Otherwise, you're just trying to bait me into another semantical/burden of proof argument, and I decline to engage.

I think it's beyond obvious to any sensible person that steroids help home run hitters hit more home runs.

[/ QUOTE ]

Actually it's not. Just because you think it seems intuitive that it would be doesn't make it so. There are many counterintuitive things that happen to be facts. What evidence is there suggesting that "home run hitters," whatever the hell that means, benefit more from steroids? Why wouldn't line drive hitters? Or fringe fourth outfielders? Or catchers recovering from the daily grind?

[Needle77]

NEW RECORD!!!

[Clarkmeister]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
LMAO at your take on Barry compared to all other players throughout baseball history

[/ QUOTE ]

And what is my take on Barry?

[/ QUOTE ]