Notices
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 100 of 177

Thread: Why can't liberals here admit they are wrong? Science is not infallible.

  1. #1 Why can't liberals here admit they are wrong? Science is not infallible. 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.


    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:43 AM.
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,276
    Science never claims to be infallible. That's what Religion does.


     

  4. #3  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:43 AM.
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Masters Degree MrMojo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    618
    You should re-read what he posted. The many techniques that science uses to explain the natural universe are encouraged to re-test any given hypothesis by other scientists. As education and the means to examine the natural universe develop, there will always be re-examination. To date the protocols used in science are the best model which produces testable, falsifiable, and predictive value of natural phenomena.

    If you have a better technique, please produce it.
     

  6. #5  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,318
    While in recent years the radical right in the US has disenfranchised many scientist (and become anti-science), there's no inherent associations between being liberal and being a scientist or accepting their work; just check out the emotional-based liberal anti-facts when it comes to risk of nuclear power or healthiness of non-organic foods.

    The possibility of science needing revision is inherent in the process of doing science--only those who don't understand it would say otherwise.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

  7. #6  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:43 AM.
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Masters Degree MrMojo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    618
    I applaud you in being able to paste images on on Web site, from your computer, where the underlying technologies are a product of science.
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:43 AM.
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Masters Degree MrMojo1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    South Florida, USA
    Posts
    618
    I say this sincerely, I have no idea of the point you are trying to make.
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:42 AM.
     

  12. #11  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,046
    Science is about "balance of probabilities". It tells you what is most probably true. It never attempts to tell you what is certainly true.


    What many Theologians have done is commit the "straw man" logical error, by attempting to argue that science has claimed something science never claimed, and then submit arguments showing that the thing science never said is in fact false. Thereby making scientists seem very foolish for having supposedly said this thing which they never said.


    All science suggests is that, if one person owns a Casino, and another person goes to that Casino to gamble for an evening, then by the end of the evening it is more likely true that the owner of the Casino will have become more wealthy, rather than that the gambler will have become more wealthy.

    The reason scientists sometimes scoff at religious people is because religious people frequently play the role of the gambler at the Casino, betting against the odds. Insisting that their dogmatic view is right (will win a test of truth) because there exists a non-zero chance it might be right. Just as a gambler bets money at a game on the basis of a personal conviction that they will win the game, even though they know the odds are against it.


    Scientists always play the role of the Casino owner. Betting with the odds instead of against them. And because they do this they are much more often right than they are wrong. However, just as the Casino owner does sometimes lose their bet, so also the scientist does sometimes lose their bet. But neither scientists, nor casino owners lose nearly so often as do the gamblers who enter the casino.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
     

  13. #12  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,318
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrMojo1 View Post
    I say this sincerely, I have no idea of the point you are trying to make.
    I think you missed my point. Science has disproven science on a number of occasions. butter being one of them, plogiston being another. There are countless instances where science has to abruptly reverse gears on conclusions that they've made when evidence rears its ugly head. It's not that science is complete horsehit, it's that science is not infallible and has had its fair share of rabbit holes.
    Restating the same thing the same way doesn't help explain your point AT ALL.

    Examples? Are they before modern peer-review science? Or from pre-science? Are they really "reverse gears" or included into broader more general hypothesis (almost always the case when someone makes such claims).

    Where do you get the idea that people think science is infallible? Certainly not scientist.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
     

  14. #13  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,488
    It's just another pain in the ass poster (as indicated by the oh so amusing user name )
     

  15. #14  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,753
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    It's just another pain in the ass poster
    And, very possibly, a sock 1.
    Viz.
    I've been saying all along
    Uh, yeah. Where? To whom?

    1 Not to mention inordinately bone-headed.
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
     

  16. #15  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    5,332
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Science has disproven science on a number of occasions.
    It's supposed to work like that. And it's going to keep doing that. You understand what direction that takes us?
    A pong by any other name is still a pong. -williampinn
     

  17. #16  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    8,822
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    I can list a number of times that science has been wrong (phlogiston and butter are examples-- are you saying those things didn't happen?) I've been saying all along that science is not infallible. Science has disproven science on a number of occasions. butter being one of them, plogiston being another. There are countless instances where science has to abruptly reverse gears on conclusions that they've made when evidence rears its ugly head. I think liberals missed my point. It's not that science is complete horsehit, it's that science is not infallible and has had its fair share of rabbit holes.
    What does this have to do with liberals? Science is not liberal or conservative.
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    If you want infallible truth then you want religion.
    If you want to increase your knowlege of how the world works you want science.

    It is wrong to think the religious types are not interested in truth or knowlege because they usually are. The problem is that they want certainty instead of doubt with it. They have a need to believe.

    Science is a skeptical practice which only aims at getting what we do know a bit less wrong, but in the end we will still have a lot of what we know turn out to be wrong. That is OK because if you decide to go with religion not only do you start out knowing stuff that is wrong you also deny yourself any chance to correct your mistakes and get it less wrong.

    I suppose that need for certainty instead of uncertainty is why fundamentalists and conservatives find themselves so drawn to religion.
     

  19. #18  
    Cooking Something Good MacGyver1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,051
    I don't understand how the OP can associate political beliefs with science. Science is worldwide...politics are local. What makes a "liberal" in one country may be different than other countries.

    "Crank-like typing detected" PawSense helps you catproof your computer.
    Fixin' shit that ain't broke.
     

  20. #19  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:42 AM.
     

  21. #20  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    The point is that modern science is doing too much trusting and not enough verifying. If you are interested in why there are so many science skeptics nowadays, check out retractionwatch.com. You will see why modern science is shooting itself in the foot. It's really unfortunate that science is now receiving such a black eye and the effect. on real scientists, who are really above all of the nonsense that is going on, yet get questioned on their conclusions.
    What I am not getting from you is the suggestion that you understand the scientific process. At all.

    I'm also not getting the feeling that you care to change that.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
     

  22. #21  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,488
    The point is that modern science is doing too much trusting and not enough verifying
    So speaks someone entirely ignorant of science and how it works, still after the OP our hopes weren't high
    If you are interested in why there are so many science skeptics nowadays


    It's because most people are scientifically illiterate and prefer woo.
    You will see why modern science is shooting itself in the foot

    I don't think it is, science pays no attention to the opinions of the ignorant and it's feet are well grounded and free of bullet holes.
    It's really unfortunate that science is now receiving such a black eye and the effect. on real scientists, who are really above all of the nonsense that is going on, yet get questioned on their conclusions.

    See my last comment.
     

  23. #22  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Science has disproven science on a number of occasions.
    If you were educated and weren't so ignorant you would know that that is how science works. It responds to new evidence. It is constantly disproving itself, refining itself, discarding some theories, modifying some theories, adding new theories. It's called the Scientific Method -- and it works.

    What this has to do with liberals is beyond me.

    (This poster is definitely a sock puppet, probably of a previously banned/suspended poster.)
     

  24. #23  
    Cooking Something Good MacGyver1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,051
    The OP mentioned butter....I wonder what they were talking about.
    Fixin' shit that ain't broke.
     

  25. #24  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    26
    er... so conservatives hate science? how? most religions accept science. Many of the world's great scientists even pre-current scientific method were theists (like in the Arab world, India, Persia, etc.)

    I find the only theists who hate science are radicals, and even then many of them may justify science via their holy books.
     

  26. #25  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:42 AM.
     

  27. #26  
    Cooking Something Good MacGyver1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,051
    Sooo...what about the butter?
    Fixin' shit that ain't broke.
     

  28. #27  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by MrMojo1 View Post
    I say this sincerely, I have no idea of the point you are trying to make.
    I think you missed my point.
    That is very astute of you, Sherlock.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  29. #28  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by MacGyver1968 View Post
    Sooo...what about the butter?
    I think the OP uses it to treat his emmaroydes.
     

  30. #29  
    Cooking Something Good MacGyver1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,051
    (singing) Trollin'... trollin'.....trollin'.....
    Though they're disapprovin'
    Keep those doggies movin'......Rawhide!


    I was just curious....he mentioned butter and some obscure theoretical element from 1667 that tried to explain fire as examples of science getting it wrong. I'm just wondering what we got wrong about butter.

    ...and I think he's a 15 year old troll.
    Fixin' shit that ain't broke.
     

  31. #30  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by MacGyver1968 View Post
    ...and I think he's a 15 year old troll.
    Well Mac, that would be an excuse of sorts. But I think it's worse than that -- it's an adult. An adult troll with a metaphorical inflamed orifice.
     

  32. #31  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:41 AM.
     

  33. #32  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Ingredients

    2 eggs (medium)
    200g caster sugar
    250ml milk (semi-skimmed or whole)
    125ml vegetable oil
    400g plain flour
    3tsp baking powder
    1 tsp salt
    OR
    400g self raising flour
    You will also need:
    A muffin tray
    Muffin paper cases
    NB: If you want to do chocolate flavoured muffins substitute 100g of flour for cocoa (DO NOT USE DRINKING CHOCOLATE)


    Method

    Preheat oven to Gas Mark 6 or a medium temperature. Line muffin tray with paper muffin cases.
    Beat the eggs in a mixing bowl and then mix in the oil and milk. Add the sugar and whisk until dissolved.
    Sift in the dry ingredients: flour, baking powder and salt and mix until smooth. NB: add any extra ingredients now e.g. chocolate chips/fruit
    Fill muffin cases TWO THIRDS full (this is important for the perfect size muffins) and bake in the middle of the oven for 25 minutes (approx. depending on your oven)
    Leave to cool (or enjoy warm!)
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  34. #33  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,989
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    The point is that modern science is doing too much trusting and not enough verifying.
    And yet you post examples of science not trusting and verifying.
    If you are interested in why there are so many science skeptics nowadays, check out retractionwatch.com. You will see why modern science is shooting itself in the foot. It's really unfortunate that science is now receiving such a black eye and the effect. on real scientists, who are really above all of the nonsense that is going on, yet get questioned on their conclusions.
    ALL scientists get questioned on their conclusions. It's how science works.
     

  35. #34  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by Lynx_Fox View Post
    Where do you get the idea that people think science is infallible? Certainly not scientists.
    That's the logic flaw in this troll's argument. He has created a straw man: That we on this forum have stated that science is infallible. (Of course, no one on this forum has ever said that.) Then the troll rants away about how science can be wrong. It's a senseless argument.

    I think this troll really has an axe to grind about global warming. If the troll had a bit of integrity it would just come out and state its position on global warming, with some data to support the argument.
     

  36. #35  
    Cooking Something Good MacGyver1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,051
    If you think about it....science is wrong most of the time. That's how it works. You come up with idea and test it, if you were wrong... you change your idea and test again...then repeat 1000x until you get it right.
    Fixin' shit that ain't broke.
     

  37. #36  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:41 AM.
     

  38. #37  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,488
    As someone who has spent 15 years as an academic atmospheric chemist, your last post pegs you as just another stupid dumbass Please piss off and troll somewhere else you moron.
     

  39. #38  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,810
    Might as well move this thread to the trash now, and save time later.
    Its the way nature is!
    If you dont like it, go somewhere else....
    To another universe, where the rules are simpler
    Philosophically more pleasing, more psychologically easy
    Prof Richard Feynman (1979) .....

    Das ist nicht nur nicht richtig, es ist nicht einmal falsch!"
     

  40. #39  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    oh? are you challenging me to a debate about the why liberal man-made climate change hoax is wrong and HOW it shows science is wrong?

    bear in mind...I'm non-religious...so let's keep this to so-called 'perfect' science...and, no, I never said science was completely bogus, if you had taken the time to read. Just because science has been wrong before, doesn't mean that it's wrong every time or that I'm an idiot as you are implying because I'm skeptical.

    so, yeah, let's do this...

    ...want to have a little debate about so-called climate change so I can school you about it? scared to take the heat...?
    I never claimed -- not once -- that I supported (or didn't support) the current mainstream climate change theories. I'm not educated enough in meteorology, chemistry, oceanography, or any of the other sciences involved to dispute them though. So, I'll go ahead now (for the first time) and state that I accept the current mainstream global warming theories. Just like I accept SR, GR, Quantum Theory, the Big Bang Theory, etc., etc..

    But go ahead, open a new thread and post your ideas. There are plenty of others here that know much more than I do and they will respond. If your ideas are strong and supported, then you will prevail.

    A bit of advice: lose the chip on your shoulder -- it won't help you in the ensuing discussion.
     

  41. #40  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:41 AM.
     

  42. #41  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,276
    "Liberal", huh?

    It's a well known fact that reality has a liberal bias.

    Why don't you head back to Conservapedia to play with all your little friends and leave the adults in peace?
     

  43. #42  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    "Liberal", huh?

    It's a well known fact that reality has a liberal bias.

    Why don't you head back to Conservapedia to play with all your little friends and leave the adults in peace?
    Close . . . Actually politifake.org. EmmaRoydes's Profile

    The troll already posted an image from that website. Its posts over there are one rant after another -- all against "liberals".
     

  44. #43  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by Chucknorium View Post
    Close . . . Actually politifake.org. EmmaRoydes's Profile
    If you look through the troll's posting history on that website, you will see that all it is doing is copy+pasting comments from that website into this forum.

    From that website:
    "But because science has been wrong before, doesn't mean that it's wrong every time or that I'm an idiot as you are implying because I'm skeptical."
    which matches the post in this thread:
    "Just because science has been wrong before, doesn't mean that it's wrong every time or that I'm an idiot as you are implying because I'm skeptical."

    From that website:
    "I can list a number of times that science has been wrong (phlogiston and b'utter have already been brought up -- are you saying those things didn't happen?"
    which matches the post in this thread:
    "I can list a number of times that science has been wrong (phlogiston and butter are examples-- are you saying those things didn't happen?)"

    From that website:
    "Science has disproven science on a number of occasions. b***er being one of them, plogiston being another. There are countless instances where science has to abruptly reverse gears on conclusions that they've made when evidence rears its ugly head."
    which matches the post in this thread:
    "Science has disproven science on a number of occasions. butter being one of them, plogiston being another. There are countless instances where science has to abruptly reverse gears on conclusions that they've made when evidence rears its ugly head."

    From that website:
    "I think you missed my point. It's not that science is complete horsehit, it's that science is not infallible and has had its fair share of rabbit holes."
    which matches the post in this thread:
    "I think liberals missed my point. It's not that science is complete horsehit, it's that science is not infallible and has had its fair share of rabbit holes."

    And so on...


    So, anyone doubting that it is a troll - or thinking that the troll is putting any thought into it's replies - should probably abandon those ideas.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  45. #44  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,488
    Reply to post #40 yep you're an idiot. My degrees and credentials are on my home page, they are easily verified. I'm wasting no more time on you.
     

  46. #45  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    So, anyone doubting that it is a troll - or thinking that the troll is putting any thought into it's replies - should probably abandon those ideas.
    Funny, I just got done looking at about 20-30 of its posts over there. I was curious if it is really a troll. It's a troll.
     

  47. #46  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,488
    It's a f***Ing idiot, troll is a secondary characteristic. Another window licker for the ignore list...
     

  48. #47  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    It's a f***Ing idiot, troll is a secondary characteristic. Another window licker for the ignore list...
    It is sort of apropos that it calls itself "Hemorrhoids". If an entire human body represents mankind then EmmaRoydes (and his ilk) are definitely that (unwanted) part of the body.
     

  49. #48  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:40 AM.
     

  50. #49  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:40 AM.
     

  51. #50  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    You know, sometimes I get a bit irritated with this forum -- not often -- but sometimes. What makes me truly appreciate this place is visiting a site like politifake.org. Sturgeon's Law is correct: 90% of everything is crap. And that website is in the 90%.
     

  52. #51  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,488
    You are a moron, nothing I say will change this sad state of affairs so I'll leave you to your idiocy...Edit this was a response to the troll not Chuck...
     

  53. #52  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:40 AM.
     

  54. #53  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,488
    Nope, just experienced enough to know arguing with stupid trolls is a waste of my time...*ignore list edited*
     

  55. #54  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:40 AM.
     

  56. #55  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Here, now that I know this is a liberal site, trust me, I plan to stay away.
    If you don't agree with me, you have a closed mind. herpa derpa!
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  57. #56  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    One more thing . . .

    There is no need for the world of science to apologize for Phlogiston Theory. It was the best theory of that time (in the 1660s) to explain combustion. Sure, it was wrong. And it was discarded and replaced. Just like Aristotle's theories of motion were discarded by Galileo/Newton et al. Just like Ptolemy's Almagest. That's how science (and the Scientific Method) work.

    Phlogiston theory - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    From wiki:
    Phlogiston theory permitted chemists to bring clarification of apparently different phenomena into a coherent structure: combustion, metabolism, and configuration of rust. The recognition of the relation between combustion and metabolism was a forerunner of the recognition that the metabolism of living organisms and combustion can be understood in terms of fundamentally related chemical processes.
     

  58. #57  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Most so-called scientists are crybaby liberals who are too scared to engage in a little debate. They resort to insults and belittling me before engaging my points. Notice how I didn't insult anyone here until I was insulted.
    For daring to disagree with scientists, I was attacked.
    You all proved my point rather nicely. I took you all on and proved that science is NOT infallible. It's filled with the same close-minded trolls that the so-called angry right is allegedly filled with.
    Pointing out something is not being upset, it's merely highlighting your inability to present a valid argument instead of name calling or distracting with nonsense like you just did.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  59. #58  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:39 AM.
     

  60. #59  
    Forum Freshman pzkpfw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    79
    This whole thread is basically the biggest strawman argument I've ever seen.


    And what I want to know from the OP is, say your statement is taken at face value, what then? What's really your point? Science is fallible, so, um, guessing is always right? Science is fallible so astrology isn't? Science is fallible so any "theory" made up by any person is of equal status?
     

  61. #60  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Now you really CAN go back to your group therapy and this time, take a deep breath, and for the sake of humankind, please don't forget to take those meds.
    I know your embarrassment hurts in this but the medication will make the pain go away...I PROMISE!
    You too. You can start by explaining how someone who doesn't buy the manmade global warming thing is somehow of the "creationist mindset".
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  62. #61  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:39 AM.
     

  63. #62  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Very funny. You copied and pasted something I said from my website to belittle me. Wonder if anyone can do that?

    Don't worry, crybaby. I didn't mean to embarrass you. Pointing out something is not being upset, it's merely highlighting your inability to present a valid argument instead of name calling or distracting with nonsense like you just did.
    I do, however, think you have some real issues with understanding that not everyone thinks the way you do and that doesn't necessarily make them wrong.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  64. #63  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:39 AM.
     

  65. #64  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    That whinny ass crybaby 'fauxnews' does the same thing on my website. You should see how far it gets him. You two could be siamese twins.

    Science doesn't make one smarter it seems, you are living proof that evolution has little to do with "best"
    When you are done with your immature rants and wish to have a real discussion, you let me know and I'll be happy to accommodation you. Childish behavior doesn't accomplish anything but make you look bad.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  66. #65  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Hey Hemorrhoids, no one is stopping you if you want to debate global warming. You seem to be "chomping at the bit" to get into a debate. Then do so. Start a thread, give some data to support your argument, and see where it goes. If you act like a human being, members here will treat you the same.

    If you don't want to start a thread here then go to this science website and start a thread there:

    Cosmoquest Forum

    That site has a special section called ATM (against the mainstream).
     

  67. #66  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Sorry. Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:39 AM.
     

  68. #67  
    Life-Size Nanoputian Flick Montana's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Flatland
    Posts
    5,438
    It's sad that a progressive mindset where we constantly refine out lifestyle to meet new understandings of the world around us can be turned into a political argument. Science is all about progress and learning. Those are, at least in the US, "liberal" ideologies. Conservatives have been touting the benefits of going back to a past era when things, at least in the hindsight of nostalgia and generational amnesia, seem like better times.

    Your politicizing of the climate change debate (as you seem to think you are instigating) does not demonstrate the fallacies of liberal scientists, but rather your own inability to cope with a world rapidly changing in the face of serious threats to our planet's health. If you best address your own rigidity by decrying the work of scientists, go for it. Just don't expect a friendly welcome from us.
    "Sometimes I think the surest sign that intelligent life exists elsewhere in the universe is that none of it has tried to contact us." -Calvin
     

  69. #68  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Yay! Go you!!

    Now all you need to do is figure out how to fancy yourself a man
    I hope you get your meds adjusted soon so the hallucinations get a little less intense for you.
    Dont forget your meds, skippy.
    Now you can go back to your group therapy and take your meds.
    Now you really CAN go back to your group therapy and this time, take a deep breath, and for the sake of humankind, please don't forget to take those meds.
    I know your embarrassment hurts in this but the medication will make the pain go away...I PROMISE!
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  70. #69  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Hemorrhoids, you are see-thru. You come here on the attack, using flawed logic, and everyone knows why. I've seen it dozens of times -- maybe hundreds -- here and other science forums. Your MO: You (and trolls just like you) come to a forum and immediately attack everyone, then you get attacked back, which you then use as an excuse to not start the debate. You play the victim. Predictable.

    Start a thread. Be nice (if that is possible with you). See where it goes.
     

  71. #70  
    Forum Professor astromark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,014
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    I can list a number of times that science has been wrong (phlogiston and butter are examples-- are you saying those things didn't happen?) I've been saying all along that science is not infallible. Science has disproven science on a number of occasions. butter being one of them, plogiston being another. There are countless instances where science has to abruptly reverse gears on conclusions that they've made when evidence rears its ugly head. I think liberals missed my point. It's not that science is complete horsehit, it's that science is not infallible and has had its fair share of rabbit holes.
    ~ A well reasoned inquiry was made of you regarding this.. Please explain the butter remark ?
    and it seems clear to me that you do NOT understand the ethos of science.. To test, to challenge to inquire and doubt.
    To form from conclusions of scientific revue theory and test them. To be able to make prediction and conclusions of scientific value.
    You seem to think you have scored a hit with 'Science was wrong.." and it just makes you look like a childish fool. SCIENCE can never be shown as wrong.. Science is a method. Not a fact. Science is reasoned to have often made the conclusion; " That's odd, what caused that to happen." and promptly re writes itself..
    As for your argument of the milk fats issue.. The human digestive system is well equipped to safely cope with some fat content in our diet.. and does.. Any excess is unhealthy.. Even water can be fatal. Understanding moderation.. can you concede.. show and tell.
     

  72. #71  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,276
    Why hasn't this bloody pain in the ass been banned yet?
     

  73. #72  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,878
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Why hasn't this bloody pain in the ass been banned yet?
    I have to agree .A permanent ban surely.
     

  74. #73  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    Nope, just experienced enough to know arguing with stupid trolls is a waste of my time...*ignore list edited*
    It is getting a bit boring reading about what you are doing with your ignore list!
     

  75. #74  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Why hasn't this bloody pain in the ass been banned yet?
    I have to agree .A permanent ban surely.
    Are you guys running some sort of democratic lynch mob?
     

  76. #75  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    1,878
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Why hasn't this bloody pain in the ass been banned yet?
    I have to agree .A permanent ban surely.
    Are you guys running some sort of democratic lynch mob?
    Maybe I should have left it to the mods as I didn't report the post but that guy's contribution was really embarrassing and was also very aggressive and unpleasant.

    It also seems he was cutting and pasting from his own site and passing it off as part of the conversation.
     

  77. #76  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by geordief View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Why hasn't this bloody pain in the ass been banned yet?
    I have to agree .A permanent ban surely.
    Are you guys running some sort of democratic lynch mob?
    Maybe I should have left it to the mods as I didn't report the post but that guy's contribution was really embarrassing and was also very aggressive and unpleasant.

    It also seems he was cutting and pasting from his own site and passing it off as part of the conversation.
    He was up against quite a bit of aggression, no wonder he started getting rattled. Well cutting and pasting shouldn't be a crime even if it was from his own website. I have had times where everyone seems to swoop in like a pack of savage dogs and it is very hard to remain organised on your end.

    He seemed to be against science on two points, this phlogiston and butter (which I found out later butter was simply dairy butter). The phlogiston was an idea that was obviously wrong in our eyes but what is wrong with butter?
     

  78. #77  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Chucknorium View Post
    Hemorrhoids, you are see-thru. You come here on the attack, using flawed logic, and everyone knows why. I've seen it dozens of times -- maybe hundreds -- here and other science forums. Your MO: You (and trolls just like you) come to a forum and immediately attack everyone, then you get attacked back, which you then use as an excuse to not start the debate. You play the victim. Predictable.

    Start a thread. Be nice (if that is possible with you). See where it goes.
    Politics section! Look do you think you wouldn't forget the past and continually bring up the past no matter how nice and nice he was?
     

  79. #78  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    He was up against quite a bit of aggression, no wonder he started getting rattled.
    You're obviously not reading the same thread as the rest of us.
    He (she?) started with an attack.

    He seemed to be against science on two points
    Yep.
    You're reading a different one.
    Those two points were particular selections, not the sole (or entire) argument.
    (An argument, by the way, that is predicated on a false view).
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
     

  80. #79  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    940
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    The phlogiston was an idea that was obviously wrong in our eyes . . . .
    I thought you were going to be more scientific? (Yeah, right. )

    Phlogiston Theory was the dominant theory of combustion for over 100 years (from 1660s to 1780s). It wasn't "obviously" wrong to the eyes or minds of scientists of that era. Yes, it was eventually discarded using newer evidence. That is how science works.
     

  81. #80  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Chucknorium View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    The phlogiston was an idea that was obviously wrong in our eyes . . . .
    I thought you were going to be more scientific? (Yeah, right. )

    Phlogiston Theory was the dominant theory of combustion for over 100 years (from 1660s to 1780s). It wasn't "obviously" wrong to the eyes or minds of scientists of that era. Yes, it was eventually discarded using newer evidence. That is how science works.
    And the scientific point being??? As I said it is wrong in our eyes (today as you imply).
    This forum section is on politics so the politics rather than science need to be emphasized here. I hadn't entered the Politics subforum much before as I don't involve myself in politics that often.
    I haven't forgotten about my desire to get scientific, that is the main restraint to my posting: "If I can't say something truly scientific I ought not say it".
     

  82. #81  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Posts
    4,138
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    He was up against quite a bit of aggression, no wonder he started getting rattled.
    You're obviously not reading the same thread as the rest of us.
    He (she?) started with an attack.

    He seemed to be against science on two points
    Yep.
    You're reading a different one.
    Those two points were particular selections, not the sole (or entire) argument.
    (An argument, by the way, that is predicated on a false view).
    So I went back and read the OP, at least, and "science is not infallible"is the premise of the debate and the two particular selections to prove her point were the ones I mentioned.
     

  83. #82  
    Genius Duck Moderator Dywyddyr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Scunthorpe, UK
    Posts
    10,753
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I don't involve myself in politics that often.
    That's self-evident, since the topic (regardless of which sub-forum it's in) isn't politics.
    The closest it got was the spurious (and false) generalisation of scientists as "liberal" 1.

    So I went back and read the OP, at least, and "science is not infallible"is the premise of the debate and the two particular selections to prove her point were the ones I mentioned.
    Oh good. There's a chance you're learning something.


    1 Nazi Germany didn't have scientists who believed in Nazism? Soviet Russia didn't have scientists who openly espoused Communism? There are no right-wing scientists in the USA (or even Britain) today?
    "[Dywyddyr] makes a grumpy bastard like me seem like a happy go lucky scamp" - PhDemon
     

  84. #83  
    Forum Cosmic Wizard
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    2,408
    Quote Originally Posted by MacGyver1968 View Post
    I don't understand how the OP can associate political beliefs with science. Science is worldwide...politics are local. What makes a "liberal" in one country may be different than other countries.

    "Crank-like typing detected" PawSense helps you catproof your computer.

    http://www.bitboost.com/pawsense/pawsense-faq.html

    A: If you carefully measure cat paws, you will find that practically all cat paws are significantly larger than a typical keyboard key. When a cat first places its paw down, the cat's weight plus the momentum of the cat's movement exerts pounds of force on the keyboard, primarily through the cat's paw pads. The cat's paw angles and toe positions also undergo complex changes while the paw lands on the keyboard. This forces keys and often key combinations down in a distinctive style of typing which includes unusual timing patterns. Cats' patterns of overall movement in walking or lying down also help make their typing more recognizable.
    So PawSense detects cat typing by weighing a combination of factors to achieve maximal speed and reliability.
     

  85. #84  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by dan hunter View Post
    If you want infallible truth then you want religion.
    If you want to increase your knowlege of how the world works you want science.

    It is wrong to think the religious types are not interested in truth or knowlege because they usually are. The problem is that they want certainty instead of doubt with it. They have a need to believe.

    Science is a skeptical practice which only aims at getting what we do know a bit less wrong, but in the end we will still have a lot of what we know turn out to be wrong. That is OK because if you decide to go with religion not only do you start out knowing stuff that is wrong you also deny yourself any chance to correct your mistakes and get it less wrong.

    I suppose that need for certainty instead of uncertainty is why fundamentalists and conservatives find themselves so drawn to religion.
    The point is that modern science is doing too much trusting and not enough verifying. If you are interested in why there are so many science skeptics nowadays, check out retractionwatch.com. You will see why modern science is shooting itself in the foot. It's really unfortunate that science is now receiving such a black eye and the effect. on real scientists, who are really above all of the nonsense that is going on, yet get questioned on their conclusions.
    Science should first and foremost be committed to truth and knowledge. It is sometimes necessary to consider public opinion in order to get grants and enable scientific discoveries to be applied in a way that helps people, but politics should always be secondary to the goal of truth. Personally, I don't think scientific skeptics are evidence that science needs to change its MO. There have always been skeptics and anti-scientific claims, and they always prove weaker than truth. It is my, possibly naive, opinion that there is inherent power in what is true. What is true will, ultimately, win out. Eventually anyone of consequence accepted a heliocentric model. Eventually, just about everyone will accept the age of the universe. Etc. etc.

    But the same is true in reverse. Things the scientific method believed in the past that turned out to be false were ultimately outed as fiction because of the scientific method. Not because of anti-scientific skeptics. Phlogiston being discarded happened because it could not stand up to the power of truth. It's a scientific success story, not a failure story. (Just like Three Mile Island is often touted as a warning against nuclear energy but is truly a testament to nuclear fail safes.) Revised or discarded theories display the strength in the scientific method more than the weaknesses.

    Truth can take a long time to win out, people can take two steps forward and one step back, but in the end lies loose. But maybe I'm just naive.
     

  86. #85  
    Cooking Something Good MacGyver1968's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Dallas, Texas
    Posts
    2,051
    Quote Originally Posted by Dywyddyr View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Robittybob1 View Post
    I don't involve myself in politics that often.
    That's self-evident, since the topic (regardless of which sub-forum it's in) isn't politics.
    The closest it got was the spurious (and false) generalisation of scientists as "liberal" 1.

    So I went back and read the OP, at least, and "science is not infallible"is the premise of the debate and the two particular selections to prove her point were the ones I mentioned.
    Oh good. There's a chance you're learning something.


    1 Nazi Germany didn't have scientists who believed in Nazism? Soviet Russia didn't have scientists who openly espoused Communism? There are no right-wing scientists in the USA (or even Britain) today?
    You're quite liberal in your consumption of beer. Me too! I guess that makes us liberal scientists.
    Fixin' shit that ain't broke.
     

  87. #86  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Please delete this thread. Thank you.
    http://www.thescienceforum.com/polit...tml#post585282
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:38 AM.
     

  88. #87  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,488
    Don't feed the troll...
     

  89. #88  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    I was wrong. Sorry.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 02:55 AM.
     

  90. #89  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    1,989
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes;585284Fine then, since the crybabies on this forum can't handle the truth, let me show you what I already know!
    [URL
    http://www.thescienceforum.com/politics/45617-climate-change-liberal-hoax.html#post585282[/URL]
    Working on your next ban already! Good luck.
     

  91. #90  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Never mind. You are right.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 02:43 AM. Reason: sorry
     

  92. #91  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    I just came here to say sorry! Seriously. I shouldn't have come here and acted the way I did.

    With that out of the way, I probably should give you a heads up.

    I am saying this because a troll at the website I normally frequent has threatened to come here and ask for help exposing me as a sock puppet there. He will accuse me of being someone named Arnnatz and StoneTools. Just ignore him. He's a little nuts. It is true that one of them are friends of mine but it appears both were unfairly banned from my website long before I joined. I have nothing to do with them.

    So it's best to just ignore him otherwise he will drag you into his own crazy mentally ill world.

    FYI the moderator there already investigated the accusation and found that my IP was different than the two supposed accounts I was using there. So case closed. But he will probably come here anyways and try to point out meaningless speculation and circumstantial evidence. he's a little nuts. like I said, ignore the troll.

    If I'm to understand right, if someone came here and asked for help trying to get me in trouble there, then that would be the same as trolling? I ask because I was unfairly banned twice for much less outrageous behavior. So I can expect that somebody coming here to exact a personal vendetta against me would be treated the same, amirite?

    He will try to make this about getting "science's" back and he will accuse me of being an anti-science troll who harasses science people there. Yes, it's as ridiculous as it sounds. Make no mistake, he just holding a personal grudge.

    I shouldn't have come here and I hope saying sorry and meaning it will be enough to stop a stupid flame war. I'm being preemptive.

    Incidentally, I know telling you all this opens me up to personal attacks but I'm not stupid. I can always deny that I even came here and say that this account was made by my enemy to make me look bad. The moderator at my forum has my back and there has never been proof of me ever sockpuppetting there (and if anyone from here comes there to attack me he will ban them; in fact, he banned a troll today who was attacking me! probably someone from here)

    If the other troll who has a vendetta against me shows up, you can see for yourself: there is plenty of evidence that this troll is holding a personal grudge. So if he does show up here, it's just more proof.

    Sorry for bothering anyone here. Have a wonderful day

    P.S. Could anyone delete this thread for me? Like I said, I'm sorry for coming here to bother anyone. Would just like to forget this happened.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 02:51 AM.
     

  93. #92  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    Everyone's so-called arguments in favor of global warming amount to nothing more than spewing government directed results research and claiming it's gospel. Man caused the dinosaurs to become extinct; man caused volcanoes to erupt; the sky is falling; etc etc etc ad nauseum. Oh, I'm sorry, did you do the research and come up with the alarmists conclusions? No, kind of makes your arguments irrelevant and invalid according to your "logic".

    But everyone here is right because of their credentials say so, amirite? So I guess my Computer SCIENCE degree makes me an expert on any science topic, right?
    No, it wouldn't. A Comp Sci degree no more qualifies you to talk on climatology than a degree in astrophysics qualifies you to talk about evolution. This isn't to say you need a degree to have opinions, but it isn't the qualifications that make you right. It's the knowledge and experience that typically come with those degrees that make someone right.

    And 'man killed the dinosaurs' and all other such claims. Who said this? Who presented evidence indicating these claims are true? Give me names and dates, please, and then an explanation why it is relevant at all.
     

  94. #93  
    Forum Freshman pzkpfw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    79
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    ... I just don't think they are infallible ...
    Does anybody here think that scientists are infallible?
     

  95. #94  
    Forum Professor astromark's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,014
    Quote Originally Posted by astromark View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    I can list a number of times that science has been wrong (phlogiston and butter are examples-- are you saying those things didn't happen?) I've been saying all along that science is not infallible. Science has disproven science on a number of occasions. butter being one of them, plogiston being another. There are countless instances where science has to abruptly reverse gears on conclusions that they've made when evidence rears its ugly head. I think liberals missed my point. It's not that science is complete horsehit, it's that science is not infallible and has had its fair share of rabbit holes.
    ~ A well reasoned inquiry was made of you regarding this.. Please explain the butter remark ?
    and it seems clear to me that you do NOT understand the ethos of science.. To test, to challenge to inquire and doubt.
    To form from conclusions of scientific revue theory and test them. To be able to make prediction and conclusions of scientific value.
    You seem to think you have scored a hit with 'Science was wrong.." and it just makes you look like a childish fool. SCIENCE can never be shown as wrong.. Science is a method. Not a fact. Science is reasoned to have often made the conclusion; " That's odd, what caused that to happen." and promptly re writes itself..
    As for your argument of the milk fats issue.. The human digestive system is well equipped to safely cope with some fat content in our diet.. and does.. Any excess is unhealthy.. Even water can be fatal. Understanding moderation.. can you concede.. show and tell.
    ~ I re post this because you have not answered me or it.. Please do. Not answering my question makes you seem 'trollish'.
    Show me as wrong..
     

  96. #95  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Can someone help me delete this thread please? Thank you and have a wonderful day.
     

  97. #96  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    I just came here to say sorry! Seriously. I shouldn't have come here and acted the way I did.

    With that out of the way, I probably should give you a heads up.

    I am saying this because a troll at the website I normally frequent has threatened to come here and ask for help exposing me as a sock puppet there. He will accuse me of being someone named Arnnatz and StoneTools. Just ignore him. He's a little nuts. It is true that one of them are friends of mine but it appears both were unfairly banned from my website long before I joined. I have nothing to do with them.

    So it's best to just ignore him otherwise he will drag you into his own crazy mentally ill world.

    FYI the moderator there already investigated the accusation and found that my IP was different than the two supposed accounts I was using there. So case closed. But he will probably come here anyways and try to point out meaningless speculation and circumstantial evidence. he's a little nuts. like I said, ignore the troll.

    If I'm to understand right, if someone came here and asked for help trying to get me in trouble there, then that would be the same as trolling? I ask because I was unfairly banned twice for much less outrageous behavior. So I can expect that somebody coming here to exact a personal vendetta against me would be treated the same, amirite?

    He will try to make this about getting "science's" back and he will accuse me of being an anti-science troll who harasses science people there. Yes, it's as ridiculous as it sounds. Make no mistake, he just holding a personal grudge.

    I shouldn't have come here and I hope saying sorry and meaning it will be enough to stop a stupid flame war. I'm being preemptive.

    Incidentally, I know telling you all this opens me up to personal attacks but I'm not stupid. I can always deny that I even came here and say that this account was made by my enemy to make me look bad. The moderator at my forum has my back and there has never been proof of me ever sockpuppetting there (and if anyone from here comes there to attack me he will ban them; in fact, he banned a troll today who was attacking me! probably someone from here)

    If the other troll who has a vendetta against me shows up, you can see for yourself: there is plenty of evidence that this troll is holding a personal grudge. So if he does show up here, it's just more proof.

    Sorry for bothering anyone here. Have a wonderful day

    P.S. Could anyone delete this thread for me? Like I said, I'm sorry for coming here to bother anyone. Would just like to forget this happened.
    What a disingenuous load of tosh.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  98. #97  
    Forum Masters Degree
    Join Date
    Apr 2014
    Posts
    592
    I can't speak for anyone else, but I can assure you involving myself in the drama of other forum rivalries does not sound like something I'd do, so don't worry about me.
    Last edited by SowZ37; August 22nd, 2014 at 03:48 AM.
     

  99. #98  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    I just came here to say sorry! Seriously. I shouldn't have come here and acted the way I did.

    With that out of the way, I probably should give you a heads up.

    I am saying this because a troll at the website I normally frequent has threatened to come here and ask for help exposing me as a sock puppet there. He will accuse me of being someone named Arnnatz and StoneTools. Just ignore him. He's a little nuts. It is true that one of them are friends of mine but it appears both were unfairly banned from my website long before I joined. I have nothing to do with them.

    So it's best to just ignore him otherwise he will drag you into his own crazy mentally ill world.

    FYI the moderator there already investigated the accusation and found that my IP was different than the two supposed accounts I was using there. So case closed. But he will probably come here anyways and try to point out meaningless speculation and circumstantial evidence. he's a little nuts. like I said, ignore the troll.

    If I'm to understand right, if someone came here and asked for help trying to get me in trouble there, then that would be the same as trolling? I ask because I was unfairly banned twice for much less outrageous behavior. So I can expect that somebody coming here to exact a personal vendetta against me would be treated the same, amirite?

    He will try to make this about getting "science's" back and he will accuse me of being an anti-science troll who harasses science people there. Yes, it's as ridiculous as it sounds. Make no mistake, he just holding a personal grudge.

    I shouldn't have come here and I hope saying sorry and meaning it will be enough to stop a stupid flame war. I'm being preemptive.

    Incidentally, I know telling you all this opens me up to personal attacks but I'm not stupid. I can always deny that I even came here and say that this account was made by my enemy to make me look bad. The moderator at my forum has my back and there has never been proof of me ever sockpuppetting there (and if anyone from here comes there to attack me he will ban them; in fact, he banned a troll today who was attacking me! probably someone from here)

    If the other troll who has a vendetta against me shows up, you can see for yourself: there is plenty of evidence that this troll is holding a personal grudge. So if he does show up here, it's just more proof.

    Sorry for bothering anyone here. Have a wonderful day

    P.S. Could anyone delete this thread for me? Like I said, I'm sorry for coming here to bother anyone. Would just like to forget this happened.
    What a disingenuous load of tosh.
    What is disingenuous about it?

    I said I was sorry. Off your meds again?

    Look.....I said I was sorry. I just don't want any problems there. I don't want any problems. I don't want that douche to come here and disrupt this forum calling me "Arnnatz" or "StoneTool" and frankly I don't want people to call me somebody that I'm not. It's just a big mess for everyone involved, including you people, and I'm trying to do you a favor.

    I even offered to leave forever and offered to have my thread deleted, which is for the good of everyone involved, right?

    So chill.
    Last edited by EmmaRoydes; August 22nd, 2014 at 10:37 AM.
     

  100. #99  
    ▼▼ dn ʎɐʍ sıɥʇ ▼▼ RedPanda's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,737
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    I said I was sorry. Off your meds again?

    Look.....I said I was sorry. I just don't want any problems there. I don't want any problems. I don't want that douche to come here and disrupt this forum calling me "Arnnatz" or "StoneTool" and frankly I don't want people to call me somebody that I'm not. It's just a big mess for everyone involved, including you people, and I'm trying to do you a favor.

    I even offered to leave forever and offered to have my thread deleted, which is for the good of everyone involved, right?

    So chill.
    What a disingenuous load of tosh.
    SayBigWords.com/say/3FC

    "And, behold, I come quickly;" Revelation 22:12

    "Religions are like sausages. When you know how they are made, you no longer want them."
     

  101. #100  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by RedPanda View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by EmmaRoydes View Post
    I said I was sorry. Off your meds again?

    Look.....I said I was sorry. I just don't want any problems there. I don't want any problems. I don't want that douche to come here and disrupt this forum calling me "Arnnatz" or "StoneTool" and frankly I don't want people to call me somebody that I'm not. It's just a big mess for everyone involved, including you people, and I'm trying to do you a favor.

    I even offered to leave forever and offered to have my thread deleted, which is for the good of everyone involved, right?

    So chill.
    What a disingenuous load of tosh.
    whateva... I just want my thread deleted.
     

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Science Gone Wrong...
    By Markus Hanke in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: November 14th, 2013, 10:55 PM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: July 6th, 2013, 10:02 PM
  3. All Science Is Wrong.
    By Vexer in forum General Discussion
    Replies: 160
    Last Post: March 31st, 2012, 12:30 PM
  4. What makes your religion infallible?
    By Nanobrain in forum Scientific Study of Religion
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: May 19th, 2007, 03:14 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •