Science is now cancelled? [USERS NOW BANNED FOR POLITICS]

[Burkey]

Hmm. In any given conversation between two people, it is nearly inevitable that one of them will be better at certain tasks. The evidence has so far not supported the theory that you might be the one with the edge.

That’s not an opinion, that’s an observation.

Sponsored

 

[Burkey]

Patience is a virtue. Just chill....

 

[Super-Genius]

After skimming the last 10 pages of this thread ...

 

[Burkey]

Ok. Let’s start here.
If you go back to my original statement it was specifically about “race” being a social construct. When I made reference to the bible, I wasn’t referencing Adam and Eve and o didn’t claim that Adam and Eve were of any specific race. Do you see how easily you imbue things with meaning that was neither expressed nor implied?

Again I will use venom because you consistently try to use your failures as proof that the ideas aren’t correct.
Here‘s the verbatim version of my comment:

“What? Science tells us that humans are apes. All of us. We are ALL one species.
Race is a social construct.
You are an absolute wanker of the highest possible order and magnitude.

It‘s your god that commanded people to kill each other for their ethnicity, not science.“

I‘ll break it down for you.
It was YOUR god who decided that various tribes/kingdoms/ethnicities needed to die. That wasn’t science. That was your all-knowing, all-loving deity.

Fallacy committed in your ”Adam and Eve” response:

Straw man - attacking a position not held by the other person.

Case dismissed. Next?

 

[Burkey]

Its actually amazing that you think you can possibly understand my inner thoughts and motivations.
Let‘s rephrase your rant into something that is consistent with the reality you could possibly “know”....

You are wrong. You posted that you had the freedom to do what you wanted with your own body (Which I do until until the law prevents me). A ”reason” (amongst many) for why you smoke (one of the reasons being addiction, others include “enjoying it“ and “because I can and it’s still legal”). AKA a “group“ of reasons for being a smoker.

Now, instead of conflating smoking and drinking (because not all smokers are drinkers and not all drinkers are smokers) let‘s tackle the drinking issue...

Whilst I’ll 100% grant you my addiction to cigarettes, I won’t give you ANY ground on alcoholism. I do it for FUN!
Your logic puts the two together, but why stop there? Why not assert that I’m also addicted to driving fast cars?
Using your line of thinking, there’s NOTHING you couldn’t pin on an addict as an “addiction” once you’ve established they have ONE...

Anything else you‘d like explained to you as though you were 12?

 

[Burkey]

This is true. However, to assert that this particular aspect of his understanding was agreed by the majority is kind of misleading.
Plenty of his work was groundbreaking and accepted, this part in particular not so much.
Luckily, the evidence showed him to be wrong.

I was going to take the time to reply to the rest of it but really, there’s no need.
Scientists who follow the method properly don’t use terms like “superior” or “inferior“ in the way you or I might.
There‘s “the evidence” and it is what it is.
it’s neither good nor evil.
Examining differences between genetically diverse groups has merit, but to assert that a gene that makes people skinny (for example) is “superior” is a totally subjective value judgement.
In an environment where food is scarce, the ability to maintain weight would likely offer a survival advantage.

You: Scientist‘s who allowed their own presuppositions and biases to flow into their work were doing it wrong!

The rest of us: Tell us something we don’t already know.
Yawn...

Seriously, your comments are just a waste of resources.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

the two attributes you state could just as well describe a sociopath. Yes, an overt sense of entitlement and a lack of empathy are attributes of narcissism, but in of themselves do not define narcissism.

Wait. Are you arguing that @Burkey isn't a narcissist but rather a sociopath?

 

[HoosierDaddy]

After skimming the last 10 pages of this thread ...

Even just skimming that many pages makes you ineligible to have either Super or Genius in your screen name.

 

[Burkey]

Wait. Are you arguing that @Burkey isn't a narcissist but rather a sociopath?

I only talk-down to idiots. You’ll be fine.

 

[sk47]

The thread was started in good faith.
Unfortunately, one of the respondents is unable to keep himself on-topic. His incessant and logically incoherent rants pervade the thread. Ergo, here we are.




Indeed. You’d also surely have noticed that most of the venom is coming from a clash between one respondent and virtually anyone he interacts with. Is it them or him?
Takes two to tango of course, but nobody who possesses any scientific literacy is going to sit down whilst someone who believes the Earth is 6,000-10,000 years old, attempts to tell them how unreliable science is.
It just won’t happen.

Hello; Thought I would point out the name calling, insults, put downs and the like started before that particular member joined in on this thread. In fact those who so often resort to such petty methods have been doing so in other threads. They have used such forms against me in this and other threads. (see the pet peeves thread for an example. I especially point out the comment about my having "feelings". Best I can recall I do not post feelings in my posts)

I have not made a listing to see if it is a sort of "gang" type group who move from thread to thread making attacks. Not that they are organized necessarily, but the same members show up. I have no proof this sort of attack plan intimidates other members, but can imagine a reluctance to be involved. At least some other than myself are not intimidated which is good.

Since so often the come back is that my comments do not make sense, I will restate my single main point. The bickering, name calling and such is not due to one particular member having stated a religion based comment. That stuff was already going on and has been common. I can personally deal with it so this is not in the nature of a "report".

 

[Bikeman315]

I only talk-down to idiots. You’ll be fine.

Please refer to post 1108. Name calling is beneath you.

 

[CJJon]

Hello; Thought I would point out the name calling, insults, put downs and the like started before that particular member joined in on this thread. In fact those who so often resort to such petty methods have been doing so in other threads. They have used such forms against me in this and other threads. (see the pet peeves thread for an example. I especially point out the comment about my having "feelings". Best I can recall I do not post feelings in my posts)

I have not made a listing to see if it is a sort of "gang" type group who move from thread to thread making attacks. Not that they are organized necessarily, but the same members show up. I have no proof this sort of attack plan intimidates other members, but can imagine a reluctance to be involved. At least some other than myself are not intimidated which is good.

Since it so often the come back that my comments do not make sense, I will restate my single main point. The bickering, name calling and such is not due to one particular member having stated a religion based comment. That stuff was already going on and has been common. I can personally deal with it so this is not in the nature of a "report".

First off, no one is following you around the site to make disparaging comments. No gang is after you. Sheesh!

Second, this is the internet. Some people need to get over themselves and not take things so seriously. Stop being so soft.

Third, your comments often do not make logical sense and are often based on flawed reasoning. I am sorry that hurts your feelings, but that is just the way I see it.

Last, I reviewed the first 40 or so pages of this thread and I stand by what I have said. Religion is the antithesis of science. To believe requires the suspension of logic and reason. The thread really went off the rails when Crazy Horse started his attacks which were weird, creepy, and indeed crazy. He didn't come here to discuss anything really he just wanted to defend his religion. He goes on and on about nothing and enjoys making the personal attacks. He has said over and over he wants to cancel science. I don't have any patience for his ilk. Sorry.

 

[Sivi70980]

I appreciated my science created hot water shower this morning... And my science created ever-enjoyable mustang to get me to work. I'm now typing on something science created...

 

[sk47]

Hello; Thought I would point out the name calling, insults, put downs and the like started before that particular member joined in on this thread. In fact those who so often resort to such petty methods have been doing so in other threads. They have used such forms against me in this and other threads. (see the pet peeves thread for an example. I especially point out the comment about my having "feelings". Best I can recall I do not post feelings in my posts)

I have not made a listing to see if it is a sort of "gang" type group who move from thread to thread making attacks. Not that they are organized necessarily, but the same members show up. I have no proof this sort of attack plan intimidates other members, but can imagine a reluctance to be involved. At least some other than myself are not intimidated which is good.

Since so often the come back is that my comments do not make sense, I will restate my single main point. The bickering, name calling and such is not due to one particular member having stated a religion based comment. That stuff was already going on and has been common. I can personally deal with it so this is not in the nature of a "report".

Hello; Please note that no where in the above thread did I say I was singled out or being stalked. The name calling and other insulting comments are common usage by a few and not just toward me personally. I happen to have been a target on much more than one occasion but I am not the only one to receive such treatment. I do indeed happen to notice when such things are directed at me, but have seen the same sort of thing directed at others. Again I am sure any who have followed some threads will have seen the same sort of thing.

A way to tell might be if you who follow threads in which I do not take part have seen the same pattern of behavior. I, of course, would not know about other threads if I am not following them.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Please refer to post 1108. Name calling is beneath you.

Go easy. I chalk it up to him being upset that @HiTekExec called him a psycho.

Sponsored