-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
For those of you who put your faith in Science.
- Thread starter ToxicAdam
- Start date
- Status
Zelda-Bitch
Member
ToxicAdam said:
I don't read your drivel. I come for the responses(which were pretty amusing). Although seeing you throw a tantrum is pretty amusing as well.
cubicle47b
Member
Futami-esque. Congratulations. I was going to say Leguna-esque earlier but he never pulls off the "I made a stupid thread, look how much better I am than you" attitude like Futami did. You deserve a vacation to Opa-ages.
cubicle47b said:
Oh look .. past forumer references. How edgy and cool!
If remembering other posters, is akin to remembering old schoolmates ... maybe you need to get outside some more.
I still stand by my original statement that some science is sloppy or purposely misleading.
cubicle47b
Member
^ There you go, I pulled out the important part since you missed it.
And I don't think anyone disagreed with you on that.
This is all that needed to be said but you didn't stop there -
OpinionatedCyborg
Member
Sweeping generalizations, name calling, rampant idiocy, and the inability to defend a controversial point: the mark of a genius. Toxic, if you're gonna tell people they're blind followers, it's best not to be one yourself.
OpinionatedCyborg
Member
ToxicAdam said:
This can be said about practically any subject. Some priests are sloppy or purposely misleading (
IN BED. OH SNAP!!! lolz
Okay, Toxic, you have 24 hours to write a trivial 500 word thesis on these conclusions:
Substantiate these claims while citing at least 3 different major non-partisan weblinks, with strict adherence to the notion that something is not science without following its own methodology (e.g. using non-repeatable and sensationalized Cold Fusion).
Your outcome will be decided through this. Have fun!
Toxic Adam said:
Substantiate these claims while citing at least 3 different major non-partisan weblinks, with strict adherence to the notion that something is not science without following its own methodology (e.g. using non-repeatable and sensationalized Cold Fusion).
Your outcome will be decided through this. Have fun!
As said the paper wasn't peer reviewed and was only accepted because the reviewers weren't able to read it. Although it's fairly easy to make up that excuse in hindsight.
Here's my first paper on "Deconstructing Public-Private Key Pairs"
http://summary-execution.lcs.mit.edu/scicache/797/scimakelatex.52510.LusDekkar.pdf
http://www.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/scigen/
Here's my first paper on "Deconstructing Public-Private Key Pairs"
http://summary-execution.lcs.mit.edu/scicache/797/scimakelatex.52510.LusDekkar.pdf
http://www.pdos.lcs.mit.edu/scigen/
videogamer
Banned
They can always change his tag like they did to ripclaw. :loljett said:
JackFrost2012
Banned
I'm gonna let my man MC Hawking break it down:
What We Need More Of Is Science
Verse 1
I'm a disciple of science
I know the universe is in compliance with natural laws,
but many place reliance on the psuedo-science of quacks and
morons and fools because,
their education's deficient,
they put faith in omniscient,
make-believe beings who control their fate,
but the Hawk aint with it, dig it,
their Holy writ ain't the least bit legit,
its a bunch of bullshit.
They need to read a book that ain't so damn old old,
let reason take hold,
though truth to be told,
they're probably already too far gone,
withdrawn, the conclusion foregone.
But maybe there is still hope for the young,
if they reject the dung being slung from the tongues,
of the ignorant fools who call themselves preachers,
and listen instead to their science teachers.
Chorus
Upon blind faith they place reliance,
what we need more of is science!
Trash Talk
Uh yeah, that's right!
Fundamentalist assholes!
Screw the hole lot of them.
Verse 2
Look, I ain't Thomas Dolby,
science doesn't blind me,
think you're smart? Form a line behind me,
you won't find me, truth to tell,
to be a man who suffers fools very well.
Quite the opposite in fact,
I aint got time to interact,
with crystal wearing freaks in need of a smack.
New age motherfuckers? Don't get me started,
I made more sense than them, last time I farted.
Not to put too fine a point upon it,
but the whole new age movement is full of shit.
Please allow me to elaborate,
explicate, expatiate.
from astral projection to zygomancy it's a,
mish-mash of idiocy.
Instead of the archaic worship of seasons,
they should explore logic and reason.
Chorus
Trash Talk
Fucking new-agers!
Is there any amount of bullshit they won't swallow?
It's two-thousand-aught-three goddammit!
When are these morons gonna join us in the 21st century?
What We Need More Of Is Science
Verse 1
I'm a disciple of science
I know the universe is in compliance with natural laws,
but many place reliance on the psuedo-science of quacks and
morons and fools because,
their education's deficient,
they put faith in omniscient,
make-believe beings who control their fate,
but the Hawk aint with it, dig it,
their Holy writ ain't the least bit legit,
its a bunch of bullshit.
They need to read a book that ain't so damn old old,
let reason take hold,
though truth to be told,
they're probably already too far gone,
withdrawn, the conclusion foregone.
But maybe there is still hope for the young,
if they reject the dung being slung from the tongues,
of the ignorant fools who call themselves preachers,
and listen instead to their science teachers.
Chorus
Upon blind faith they place reliance,
what we need more of is science!
Trash Talk
Uh yeah, that's right!
Fundamentalist assholes!
Screw the hole lot of them.
Verse 2
Look, I ain't Thomas Dolby,
science doesn't blind me,
think you're smart? Form a line behind me,
you won't find me, truth to tell,
to be a man who suffers fools very well.
Quite the opposite in fact,
I aint got time to interact,
with crystal wearing freaks in need of a smack.
New age motherfuckers? Don't get me started,
I made more sense than them, last time I farted.
Not to put too fine a point upon it,
but the whole new age movement is full of shit.
Please allow me to elaborate,
explicate, expatiate.
from astral projection to zygomancy it's a,
mish-mash of idiocy.
Instead of the archaic worship of seasons,
they should explore logic and reason.
Chorus
Trash Talk
Fucking new-agers!
Is there any amount of bullshit they won't swallow?
It's two-thousand-aught-three goddammit!
When are these morons gonna join us in the 21st century?
Another science based song.
Bill Nye, the Science Guy
"Bill Nye, the Science Guy
Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill
Bill Nye, the Science Guy
"Science rules"
Bill Nye, the Science Guy
"Inertia is a property of matter"
Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill
Bill Nye, the Science Guy
Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill
"T-minus seven seconds"
Bill Nye, the Science Guy.Bill Nye, the Science Guy"
(wipes tear)
Bill Nye, the Science Guy
"Bill Nye, the Science Guy
Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill
Bill Nye, the Science Guy
"Science rules"
Bill Nye, the Science Guy
"Inertia is a property of matter"
Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill
Bill Nye, the Science Guy
Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill, Bill
"T-minus seven seconds"
Bill Nye, the Science Guy.Bill Nye, the Science Guy"
(wipes tear)
Instigator
Banned
ToxicAdam said:
You seem to confuse facts with truth.
Truth is philosophy's and religion's territory, not science's.
Instigator
Banned
Did you even understand what I meant before you hit the reply button, Zappy?
I made the distinction between the pursuit of facts and the pursuit of "the Truth". Look at the definition of both in the dictionary and you will see they do not mean the same thing, especially truth with a capital T. Religion and philosophy, when you stick to the essentials, are all about the true meaning of existence. That is the search for the Truth. Science does not care about this because it is beyond what it can prove. Now you can choose to see it as a fruitless exercise, but that dichotomy exist between both fields and, ironically, I am merely stating a fact separating both fields.
You'd better watch your language the next time you talk to me. Otherwise, just stick to OAS next time.
I made the distinction between the pursuit of facts and the pursuit of "the Truth". Look at the definition of both in the dictionary and you will see they do not mean the same thing, especially truth with a capital T. Religion and philosophy, when you stick to the essentials, are all about the true meaning of existence. That is the search for the Truth. Science does not care about this because it is beyond what it can prove. Now you can choose to see it as a fruitless exercise, but that dichotomy exist between both fields and, ironically, I am merely stating a fact separating both fields.
You'd better watch your language the next time you talk to me. Otherwise, just stick to OAS next time.
F
Folder
Unconfirmed Member
Bingo.olimario said:
Instigator
Banned
Folder said:
The same goes with religion. The belief in the rapture didn't exist 200 years ago. There were no other books of divine inspiration that appeared then and said the rapture would happen. It is something some Christians somehow got out of the good old Bible in the 19th century.
Faith and beliefs also change through time.
Ninjas4Less
Banned
I put faith in my microwave and its ability to create delicious meals/
Instigator said:
What the fuck? Are you threatening me with a ban? And you laid the bait and someone bit with that post. Moreover, your explanation reeks of mile high bullshit semantics. A capital T? You mean like WORDS AT THE BEGINNING OF A NEW SENTENCE? That's somehow a very specious bit of reasoning you have there... that a capitalized truth is supposed to ring of alarm bells about it meaning a pursuit of existence of some such shit.
As for your dictionary fucking definitions...
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Truth
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=Fact
You can see they're pretty fucking similar. The definitions are worded a bit differently, but a modicum of comprehension will have you agreeing that fact and truth are not only similar but intertwined words. In fact, interchangable in english depending on the sentence structure.
OTOH, the idea you express/clarify in your follow up post is not completely disagreeable, but fuck you for chiding me with your self righteous ineptitude.
Instigator
Banned
I'm no mod, but is it too much to ask for a little respect and benefit of the doubt?
Proper definition means proper context. From your links:
The first one applies to what religion-philosophy are trying to answer. The second is what science is trying to explain and demonstrate. The first one is intangible and subjective. The second is objective and tangible.
So once you calm down, you can reply again. Otherwise, forget it.
Proper definition means proper context. From your links:
The first one applies to what religion-philosophy are trying to answer. The second is what science is trying to explain and demonstrate. The first one is intangible and subjective. The second is objective and tangible.
So once you calm down, you can reply again. Otherwise, forget it.
cubicle47b
Member
This is just a semantics debate and it's just for people to save face (well, Zap, although I don't think it was clear was Instigator was saying at first - maybe that's how he got his username...).
Instigator
Banned
I don't think 'you're an idiot' and 'fuck you' was confusing.
cubicle47b
Member
Neither do I but I'm talking about your actual opinions, not the bullshit around them.
Instigator
Banned
My original argument was with ToxicAdam, not Zappy.
Can I call you Insinuator, Cubicle47b?
Can I call you Insinuator, Cubicle47b?
cubicle47b
Member
I know. I was just trying to help. Regain focus, concentrate on how wrong ToxicAdam is.
Go for it.
Instigator said:I'm no mod, but is it too much to ask for a little respect and benefit of the doubt?
Proper definition means proper context. From your links:
The first one applies to what religion-philosophy are trying to answer. The second is what science is trying to explain and demonstrate. The first one is intangible and subjective. The second is objective and tangible.
So once you calm down, you can reply again. Otherwise, forget it.
I won't bother selectively quoting and posting, but if you read through the definitions, you'll find that the pursuit of truth has to do with facts. That's the overwhelming implication of the word truth; that facts are intertwined with it.
And no, you get no respect for posting such a wishy washy initial post that deserved the idiot remark, as well as follow up posts filled with tripe and selective quoting. So fuck you.
Moreover, while I do grant a bare amount of courtesy to any poster when they begin posting, if they post idiot statements then I'll tell them to it like it is. Unless others have already done it...
Instigator
Banned
You get 'selective quoting' because the meaning of those words, especially truth, has some very important nuances. Cubible is right, we're arguing semantics, but my view of things is in no way disengenious. Mandarines and oranges may be similar, but to me, they're not the same. You may choose to disagree with it, that would have been enough for the sake of this topic.
And I could argue that the pursuit of truth doesn't necessarily have to do with facts. Or else how could fundamentalists from various faiths ignore (scientific) facts that disagree with their beliefs. We don't even have to take extremists as an example, someone spiritual may choose to find truths from within, making his quest completely subjective and personal.
In religion and philosophy, truth is important because they assume there is a greater, intrensical meaning and purpose in life and that is the truth they're seeking. In science, there is no such quest. It is not an area of interest and quite frankly, it doesn't even assume that there is a greater truth. It is merely an observation of the known world with experiementation with the end result of cold hard facts. A great endeavour and service to mankind in itself. Those facts may challenge assumptions from the known world from superstitions and different faiths, but I don't think someone can derive anything objective and closer to whatever truth there might or might not be from knowing the Earth circles the sun or the universe is over 15 billions years old. Anyone who claims otherwise must have crossed into the subjective long ago.
As a sidenote, I think the word truth is loaded and imprecise, but one quick Google search shows that you are more likely to find the word truth in any faith-related links and conversely, fact is more likely to be found in real science links.
Another sidenote, if I can dumb down the point I am making, I remember a line from Raiders of The last Ark, a few minutes after the beginning where Doctor Jones says that archeology is about facts and anyone looking for truth should go to mister X's philosophy class down the hall. Or it was something like that.
And I could argue that the pursuit of truth doesn't necessarily have to do with facts. Or else how could fundamentalists from various faiths ignore (scientific) facts that disagree with their beliefs. We don't even have to take extremists as an example, someone spiritual may choose to find truths from within, making his quest completely subjective and personal.
In religion and philosophy, truth is important because they assume there is a greater, intrensical meaning and purpose in life and that is the truth they're seeking. In science, there is no such quest. It is not an area of interest and quite frankly, it doesn't even assume that there is a greater truth. It is merely an observation of the known world with experiementation with the end result of cold hard facts. A great endeavour and service to mankind in itself. Those facts may challenge assumptions from the known world from superstitions and different faiths, but I don't think someone can derive anything objective and closer to whatever truth there might or might not be from knowing the Earth circles the sun or the universe is over 15 billions years old. Anyone who claims otherwise must have crossed into the subjective long ago.
As a sidenote, I think the word truth is loaded and imprecise, but one quick Google search shows that you are more likely to find the word truth in any faith-related links and conversely, fact is more likely to be found in real science links.
Another sidenote, if I can dumb down the point I am making, I remember a line from Raiders of The last Ark, a few minutes after the beginning where Doctor Jones says that archeology is about facts and anyone looking for truth should go to mister X's philosophy class down the hall. Or it was something like that.
- Status