Scientology... with your host, Tom Cruise

[quote name='zionoverfire']:rofl: Please I bitchslapped your Princess' Bride topic first.[/QUOTE]

And you didn't stop me, did you? That was one weak-ass bitchslap. You can't even do that like a man!
 
[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']And you didn't stop me, did you? That was one weak-ass bitchslap. You can't even do that like a man![/QUOTE]

My intent was never to stop you, more to redicule you but I guess you aren't even worthy of that anymore. My god you make Kayden look like he's on top of it.
 
[quote name='zionoverfire']My intent was never to stop you, more to redicule you but I guess you aren't even worthy of that anymore. My god you make Kayden look like he's on top of it.[/QUOTE]

What, on top of you? Jesus man, is that all you can think about? Getting your colon cleaned?
 
[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']What, on top of you? Jesus man, is that all you can think about? Getting your colon cleaned?[/QUOTE]

Some times I think about ponies and other times I think about people who take their avatars from last years most overhyped game.:D
 
[quote name='Kayden']Am I the only one that just rolls right past chunk's posts?[/QUOTE]

He ceased to be relevant int his thread quite some time ago :lol:
 
[quote name='Kayden']Am I the only one that just rolls right past chunk's posts?[/QUOTE]

I have him on my ignore list so I can see what everyone else has to say without having to scoll through a huge post. I do read them (or at least skim them) if they aren't too long though.
 
[quote name='Kayden']Am I the only one that just rolls right past chunk's posts?[/QUOTE]

Probably, Sbyml has had him on ignore for weeks and I put him on ohhh a couple of hours ago.:lol:
 
[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']He ceased to be relevant int his thread quite some time ago :lol:[/QUOTE]

Let me guess he was still trying to guide the conversation like he's some sort of judge and we are all guilty defendants?
 
[quote name='zionoverfire']Let me guess he was still trying to guide the conversation like he's some sort of judge and we are all guilty defendants?[/QUOTE]

You know, I can't remember the last thing he said, and it's not worth the effort of looking back :)
 
I dont ignore people for the same reason we buy special editions. We know we're never going to make use of it... but its nice to know you could if you wanted to.
 
[quote name='Kayden']I dont ignore people for the same reason we buy special editions. We know we're never going to make use of it... but its nice to know you could if you wanted to.[/QUOTE]

But his posts are often really big and pretty much the same thing again and again. Also if you were really curious you can still read their posts anyhow.
 
[quote name='zionoverfire']But his posts are often really big and pretty much the same thing again and again. Also if you were really curious you can still read their posts anyhow.[/QUOTE]

Exactly like special editions. :lol:
 
[quote name='Kayden']Exactly like special editions. :lol:[/QUOTE]

Yes but like a special edition you can always leave the extras in the box in case you are ever curious about them, just like ignored users.;)
 
[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']He ceased to be relevant int his thread quite some time ago :lol:[/QUOTE]

Ha. Unbelievable. You and zion have been spamming the thread for the last page and a half and you call my posts irrelevant?!

[quote name='zionoverfire']Let me guess he was still trying to guide the conversation like he's some sort of judge and we are all guilty defendants?[/QUOTE]

What are you talking about? Everyone agreed that the thread was getting off topic, but it seems I'm the only one that wants to discuss cults or scientology.

[quote name='zionoverfire']But his posts are often really big and pretty much the same thing again and again. Also if you were really curious you can still read their posts anyhow.[/QUOTE]

My posts say pretty much the same thing over and over again because I am constantly bombarded with responses like "uhhhh, spirituality is dumb because I say so", even when I'm not talking about spirituality! It's not my fault. I'm not the one that keeps bringing the same things up. I keep getting the same nonsense replies, so I keep responding to them the same way.

Now if you think my arguments are false then why don't you refute them rather than ignore them?!

[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I have him on my ignore list so I can see what everyone else has to say without having to scoll through a huge post. I do read them (or at least skim them) if they aren't too long though.[/QUOTE]
[quote name='Kayden']Am I the only one that just rolls right past chunk's posts[/QUOTE]
[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']You know, I can't remember the last thing he said, and it's not worth the effort of looking back :)[/QUOTE]

You guys are unbelievably insulting. You could at least have the courtesy to let me know that you have the attention spans of a couple of hampsters so I could save my thoughts for those who might actually provide some insightful responses.

You can ignore me all you like, but sticking your head in the sand doesn't change reality. Before you write me off perhaps you should consider which is a better way to arrive at a rational understanding: ignoring arguments which are too long winded or which confront the worldview you've established for yourself, or considering carefully everything that you read (as I try to do).

Perhaps if you actually thought about the questions I pose you might learn something new, either how to refute a fallacious argument (if I am wrong) or some insight into the truth (if I am right). Instead, you laugh at how you enforce your own ignorance by not even reading what I have to say.

Just be aware that you are part of the 51% of simplistic dogmatic thinkers that camoor mentioned. I'm sure he was talking about religious rednecks, but you guys are the corresponding ignoramuses on the other side of the fence.

Camoor is the only respectable one out of the bunch. The rest of you are, sadly, like a bunch of god damn sheep.
 
[quote name='chunk']

Camoor is the only respectable one out of the bunch. The rest of you are, sadly, like a bunch of god damn sheep.[/QUOTE]

First of all, get a sense of humor, man. We were just having fun. Second, you just should have let this die.

Most importantly, I have studied religion, as a hobby, since I was 12. I've been in just about every Christian denomination for at least a brief period over the course of my life. I know all the arguments, and I've heard all the questions. I assure you that my positions are the result of years of studying and thinking. You are just as guilty of making unsubstantiated assumptions as anyone else.
 
[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']First of all, get a sense of humor, man. We were just having fun. Second, you just should have let this die.[/quote]

No. There is a difference between having fun and having fun at my expense. Also, ignoring my questions to you about the differences between the social constructs of religions/cults/etc. and those of public schools is just plain rude.

[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']Most importantly, I have studied religion, as a hobby, since I was 12. I've been in just about every Christian denomination for at least a brief period over the course of my life. I know all the arguments, and I've heard all the questions. I assure you that my positions are the result of years of studying and thinking. You are just as guilty of making unsubstantiated assumptions as anyone else.[/QUOTE]

Well despite your years of studying and thinking, you obviously didn't think very much about anything I had to say since you "can't remember the last thing" I said. I'm not saying I don't have assumptions that wouldn't be considered unsubstantiated by some, but I take your posts seriously, read what you have to say, and think about it.

Anyway, not all of that criticism was directed at you (since this thread is the first time we've met). Also, sorry for being so harsh, but it really makes me mad when people are rude.
 
[quote name='chunk']No. There is a difference between having fun and having fun at my expense. Also, ignoring my questions to you about the differences between the social constructs of religions/cults/etc. and those of public schools is just plain rude.



Well despite your years of studying and thinking, you obviously didn't think very much about anything I had to say since you "can't remember the last thing" I said. I'm not saying I don't have assumptions that wouldn't be considered unsubstantiated by some, but I take your posts seriously, read what you have to say, and think about it.

Anyway, not all of that criticism was directed at you (since this thread is the first time we've met). Also, sorry for being so harsh, but it really makes me mad when people are rude.[/QUOTE]

I thought I had answered everything. Apparently I missed some points. Either that or you missed one of my posts. Don't know which way it is, but it doesn't really matter. If things got off topic, well I tend to get tired in these arguments because your position will not change, and mine won't either. We could reiterate the same tired arguments over and over and we wouldn't get anywhere. Eventually we'd get to Heidegger and Nietzsche, but we've heard it all before. I know that I (and probably the others, as zion's a good guy) was not trying to have fun at your expense. My comment about your irrelevancy was only meant to say that you had stopped posting and things had gotten off topic. Sorry if you took that the wrong way.
 
[quote name='chunk']You guys are unbelievably insulting. You could at least have the courtesy to let me know that you have the attention spans of a couple of hampsters so I could save my thoughts for those who might actually provide some insightful responses.[/QUOTE]

I do skim your posts searching for something new, but often times you just repeat yourself. You being on my ignore list is not supposed to be meant as an insult, but take it how you see fit.
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I do skim your posts searching for something new, but often times you just repeat yourself. You being on my ignore list is not supposed to be meant as an insult, but take it how you see fit.[/QUOTE]

Isn't it odd how good he is at clumping us all together?:lol:

Just because Kayden and I can't stand reading the same 2 thoughts again and again in a holier than thou tone doesn't mean your self loathing ass doesn't enjoy it.:lol:
 
[quote name='zionoverfire']Isn't it odd how good he is at clumping us all together?:lol:

Just because Kayden and I can't stand reading the same 2 thoughts again and again in a holier than thou tone doesn't mean your self loathing ass doesn't enjoy it.:lol:[/QUOTE]

Maybe I'm a masochist. :lol:

In any case, I don't completely disregard chunk just because I don't agree with anything he says, or the way he says it. :lol:
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']Maybe I'm a masochist. :lol:

In any case, I don't completely disregard chunk just because I don't agree with anything he says, or the way he says it. :lol:[/QUOTE]

I disregard chunk because broken records are only enjoyable when the long is good.;)

We all already know what Chunk has to say about evolution and if he couldn't say it in the last 100 posts I don't think an extra 10 will get us anywhere.
 
[quote name='BigSpoonyBard']I thought I had answered everything. Apparently I missed some points. Either that or you missed one of my posts. Don't know which way it is, but it doesn't really matter. If things got off topic, well I tend to get tired in these arguments because your position will not change, and mine won't either. We could reiterate the same tired arguments over and over and we wouldn't get anywhere. Eventually we'd get to Heidegger and Nietzsche, but we've heard it all before. I know that I (and probably the others, as zion's a good guy) was not trying to have fun at your expense. My comment about your irrelevancy was only meant to say that you had stopped posting and things had gotten off topic. Sorry if you took that the wrong way.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, ok. I misunderstood you. Sorry.

[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I do skim your posts searching for something new, but often times you just repeat yourself. You being on my ignore list is not supposed to be meant as an insult, but take it how you see fit.[/QUOTE]

I repeat myself because you repeat yourself.

For example, how many times are you going to call religion or spirituality completely devoid of truth?

Every time you say it I express my disagreement and refer to my previous arguments and you never respond. Then you say it again and I repeat myself again, but still you don't provide a counter argument. For me it feels like someone keeps ringing my phone and I keep answering it with "hello", but you don't respond. Then you complain that I keep repeating "hello".

Why do you keep saying it over and over if you don't intend on backing it up with an argument?

[quote name='zionoverfire']Isn't it odd how good he is at clumping us all together?:lol:

Just because Kayden and I can't stand reading the same 2 thoughts again and again in a holier than thou tone doesn't mean your self loathing ass doesn't enjoy it.:lol:[/QUOTE]

You all said you were ignoring me, so it seems natural to clump you all together in that respect.

Anyway, I'm sorry about my tone, but I like to get to the bottom of things. I see "vs mode" as a forum for argument and when I argue I expect either: We come to an agreement, or we find that we have different assumptions, or you prove me wrong.

Anything else is not a complete argument. With some of you I feel like you want to continue to say that I'm wrong, but you're not willing to complete the argument. In an attempt to spur you on to completing it I take a more and more confrontational tone. Perhaps I shouldn't do this, but it is my reaction.

Regarding the same thoughts being repeated. In some instances the various disagreements all seem to boil down to the same terms, so I lay them out on the table and (assuming I already gave my full argument elsewhere) I expect the other person to either agree with them, prove them wrong, or pick out the differing assumptions. Again, if the other person does not do this then the argument cannot progress and, in my opinion, some of you refuse to confront the issues directly. I keep bringing them up in hopes that you will confront them directly so that we can get to the bottom of it.

In other instances I don't think it is me that is repeating myself, but I am merely reciprocating when others keep restarting the same argument without ever finishing it (see response to sblymnlcrymnl above).
 
Honestly I haven't seen you post anything in a while that warranted my specific attention. Others have been here to defend my side of things with far more effort than I would be willing to expend anyhow.

And just as I continue to deny that the spiritual can be regarded as fact, you continue to attack the integrity of the entire scientific community only because their findings (based completely on facts, something you seem to abhor to no end) hurt your cause.

There is no possible way for you to back up what you say (which is obvious from the very beginning given their content) however if you had more to offer it might actually be an interesting discussion. As it is the whole process satisfies no one and it is obvious you will not yield in your ridiculous arguments. This is why I have ceased to join in.
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']Honestly I haven't seen you post anything in a while that warranted my specific attention. Others have been here to defend my side of things with far more effort than I would be willing to expend anyhow.

And just as I continue to deny that the spiritual can be regarded as fact, you continue to attack the integrity of the entire scientific community only because their findings (based completely on facts, something you seem to abhor to no end) hurt your cause.

There is no possible way for you to back up what you say (which is obvious from the very beginning given their content) however if you had more to offer it might actually be an interesting discussion. As it is the whole process satisfies no one and it is obvious you will not yield in your ridiculous arguments. This is why I have ceased to join in.[/QUOTE]

If you don't think any of my posts have warranted your specific attention then why do you keep giving your comments, such as "why do you insist that the spiritual is fact"? If you didn't think that my post warranted your attention then you wouldn't reply to them, but you do. That said, I'd appreciate if you either back up your criticisms or don't reply to my posts.

From my perspective it seems that the only one that has given any kind of defense to a side of things other than my own is Camoor. However, it seems that Camoor sees things very differently from anyone else posting here.

I never attacked the integrity of the entire scientific community. How could I? I am part of it. I have only attacked the integrity of the biological community.

I have no idea how you could possibly say that I abhor facts. I have said very little regarding specific facts, perhaps even nothing at all (I can't remember exactly). The vast majority of my comments have dealt with classifying various things (such as whether or not evolutionary theory could be classified as science, and if so then how strongly does it meet that classification).

Just because I disagree with you that doesn't mean I abhor facts and I find it extremely insulting that you would suggest such. Now maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I do abhor facts and I just can't see it. If that is how you feel then I would appreciate it if you point out exactly which facts I am abhoring, because I like to think of myself as a champion of the facts and I would certainly be willing to change my mind about anything in order to fall in line with the facts.

The thing I don't understand here is how you could possibly say that I am trying to promote my cause when none of my arguments have started with my conclusions and worked backwards. Therefore, my denial of your ideas can not be interpreted as being motivated by my cause. On the other hand, you are working backwards from your preconceived conclusion. Instead of independently evaluating the arguments I have given to backup my claims you say, "There is no possible way for you to back up what you say (which is obvious from the very beginning given their content)." If you would stop assuming that my conclusions must be wrong then perhaps you would see that I AM backing up my arguments and perhaps you could successfully refute them.

If you don't want to argue about things then that is fine with me. However, don't say that you cease to join. That isn't true. You make dismissive remarks which incite me to try to backup my claims, but you refuse to backup any of yours.

Please stop pussyfooting around. If you disagree with me then either keep it to yourself or back yourself up, but don't make pithy remarks and then runaway.
 
[quote name='chunk']If you don't think any of my posts have warranted your specific attention then why do you keep giving your comments, such as "why do you insist that the spiritual is fact"? If you didn't think that my post warranted your attention then you wouldn't reply to them, but you do. That said, I'd appreciate if you either back up your criticisms or don't reply to my posts.[/QUOTE]

I had stopped responding for a bit, but I like to have a little fun once in a while. You know, poke the dead horse with a stick and what not.

[quote name='chunk']From my perspective it seems that the only one that has given any kind of defense to a side of things other than my own is Camoor. However, it seems that Camoor sees things very differently from anyone else posting here.[/QUOTE]

At least you still acknowledge one person. Apparently everyone else has given up on you as a worthy debate partner.


[quote name='chunk']I never attacked the integrity of the entire scientific community. How could I? I am part of it. I have only attacked the integrity of the biological community.[/QUOTE]

You have repeatedly attacked the scientific method (which obviously is not solely reserved for biologists) and the integrity of the scientific community in general. Perhaps not in this very thread, but I could find some examples if you truly wished.

[quote name='chunk']I have no idea how you could possibly say that I abhor facts. I have said very little regarding specific facts, perhaps even nothing at all (I can't remember exactly). The vast majority of my comments have dealt with classifying various things (such as whether or not evolutionary theory could be classified as science, and if so then how strongly does it meet that classification).[/QUOTE]

Yes you ask what support there is for evolution and when science's reliance on facts is brought up you attack the scientific community.

[quote name='chunk']Just because I disagree with you that doesn't mean I abhor facts and I find it extremely insulting that you would suggest such. Now maybe I'm wrong. Maybe I do abhor facts and I just can't see it. If that is how you feel then I would appreciate it if you point out exactly which facts I am abhoring, because I like to think of myself as a champion of the facts and I would certainly be willing to change my mind about anything in order to fall in line with the facts.[/QUOTE]

So you've decided to accept evolution?


[quote name='chunk']The thing I don't understand here is how you could possibly say that I am trying to promote my cause when none of my arguments have started with my conclusions and worked backwards. Therefore, my denial of your ideas can not be interpreted as being motivated by my cause. On the other hand, you are working backwards from your preconceived conclusion. Instead of independently evaluating the arguments I have given to backup my claims you say, "There is no possible way for you to back up what you say (which is obvious from the very beginning given their content)." If you would stop assuming that my conclusions must be wrong then perhaps you would see that I AM backing up my arguments and perhaps you could successfully refute them.[/QUOTE]

All I meant by "There is no possible way for you to back up what you say ... " is exactly what it says. It wasn't intended as an attack, just a statement of the obvious. There is no was to prove any of your spiritual beliefs, which is why faith is so important in the religious communities. And so unimportant to those with concrete evidence.

[quote name='chunk']If you don't want to argue about things then that is fine with me. However, don't say that you cease to join. That isn't true. You make dismissive remarks which incite me to try to backup my claims, but you refuse to backup any of yours.[/QUOTE]

I will try not to say anything if I don't have anything nice to say (or constructive to add). Is that satisfactory?

[quote name='chunk']Please stop pussyfooting around. If you disagree with me then either keep it to yourself or back yourself up, but don't make pithy remarks and then runaway.[/QUOTE]

Oh yes sir, right away sir. :roll:
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']At least you still acknowledge one person. Apparently everyone else has given up on you as a worthy debate partner.
[/quote]

Maybe, but I take it that they are too lazy to think about the hard questions.

[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']You have repeatedly attacked the scientific method (which obviously is not solely reserved for biologists) and the integrity of the scientific community in general. Perhaps not in this very thread, but I could find some examples if you truly wished.[/quote]

Sorry, but I disagree wholeheartedly. It seems to me that my arguments rely on the scientific method while yours ignore it. Please point out what makes you think I am attacking the scientific method.

[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']Yes you ask what support there is for evolution and when science's reliance on facts is brought up you attack the scientific community.[/quote]

Just because you think evolution is well supported by the facts and I disagree that doesn't mean I abhor the facts. How can you be so unreasonable to think that I abhor the facts? Even I can recognize that our disagreement isn't over whether facts are useful, but rather what constitutes good facts.

[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']So you've decided to accept evolution?
[/quote]

When it meets the standards of the scientific method I will accept it as a scientific fact. Simple as that.

[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']All I meant by "There is no possible way for you to back up what you say ... " is exactly what it says. It wasn't intended as an attack, just a statement of the obvious. There is no was to prove any of your spiritual beliefs, which is why faith is so important in the religious communities. And so unimportant to those with concrete evidence.
[/quote]

There is a saying in mathematics that "Everything is obvious until you try to prove it. Then you find that what was 'obviously true' turns out to be wrong."

I have discussed at length how concrete evidence supports my spiritual beliefs. I think it constitutes a reasonably good proof and I think that the fact that the only way Camoor could refute it was by saying that logic may not be true is a testament to that. It seems to me that I already have proved at least some of my spiritual beliefs. Ironically, you are the one who keeps asserting your beliefs on faith alone. Where is your concrete evidence that all of my spiritual beliefs cannot be proven? I've already presented mine.

[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I will try not to say anything if I don't have anything nice to say (or constructive to add). Is that satisfactory?[/quote]

Ok, we have an agreement.
 
[quote name='chunk']Sorry, but I disagree wholeheartedly. It seems to me that my arguments rely on the scientific method while yours ignore it. Please point out what makes you think I am attacking the scientific method.[/QUOTE]

If you truly believe that it seems you don't quite have a firm grasp on the scientific method.

[quote name='chunk']When it meets the standards of the scientific method I will accept it as a scientific fact. Simple as that.[/QUOTE]

So time travel is going to be involved? That's great, you can go back and accept it and we wouldn't have had these conversations. It's win-win!
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']If you truly believe that it seems you don't quite have a firm grasp on the scientific method.

So time travel is going to be involved? That's great, you can go back and accept it and we wouldn't have had these conversations. It's win-win![/QUOTE]

I thought we had an agreement that you would only reply with constructive conversation? Yet you keep stating on blind faith that you believe evolution follows the scientific method without actually backing it up.

I already outlined the scientific method in great detail along with a detailed description as to why much of evolutionary theory doesn't satisfy it.

If you think there is something wrong with my understanding of the scientific method then why don't you refute it? Simply saying that it is wrong 500 times isn't constructive.
 
[quote name='chunk']I thought we had an agreement that you would only reply with constructive conversation? Yet you keep stating on blind faith that you believe evolution follows the scientific method without actually backing it up.

I already outlined the scientific method in great detail along with a detailed description as to why much of evolutionary theory doesn't satisfy it.

If you think there is something wrong with my understanding of the scientific method then why don't you refute it? Simply saying that it is wrong 500 times isn't constructive.[/QUOTE]

Not blind faith, the scientific community. You can outline all you want, but you do not speak for science and your opinion on the matter carries no value. You have been refuted many times, each time only proving further to be an exercise in futility.

I will attempt to be constructive if you do the same, but sometimes my hatred of ignorance and irrationality gets the best of me.




And now I really must be sleeping.
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']Not blind faith, the scientific community. You can outline all you want, but you do not speak for science and your opinion on the matter carries no value. You have been refuted many times, each time only proving further to be an exercise in futility.

I will attempt to be constructive if you do the same, but sometimes my hatred of ignorance and irrationality gets the best of me.
[/QUOTE]

Why are blind faith and the scientific community mutually exclusive? It seems to me that you have blind faith in the scientific community.

My opinion matters as much as anyone else's and if you think that only certain people can speak for science then you have no concept of what science is. The scientific method speaks for itself and it agrees with me, not you.

I am attempting to be constructive, but you refuse to work with me. You are all talk. You haven't backed up a single thing that you have said and every time I call you on it you ignore it.

For example:
You said "You have repeatedly attacked the scientific method (which obviously is not solely reserved for biologists) and the integrity of the scientific community in general. Perhaps not in this very thread, but I could find some examples if you truly wished."

I asked you to point out examples. You ignored it because there aren't any.

Then you have the balls to say that I "have been refuted" and that I "can't possibly prove what I have to say" when I have proved you wrong over and over again. The only thing you do is repeat your mindless mantras over and over and over again. You are exactly like those ignorant religious folks which you hate so much and the worst part is that you can't even see it.

You have proved to me that you are incapable of constructive conversation. I keep trying to have a reasonable argument with you, but you refuse to back up any of your claims. I can't deal with your mindless bullshit anymore and I won't reply to any more of your posts unless you either:
1. Back up your statements with an argument or reference to an argument.
2. Explicitly ask me to prove one of my specific claims.

You really need to snap out of it. I don't know what makes you think you know what your talking about, but take it from me, a practicing scientist, you don't know a damn thing about science.
 
[quote name='chunk']me, a practicing scientist[/QUOTE]

I find that very hard to believe, given your inability to grasp even the most basic concepts. You do know that handling various chemicals due to your janitorial position does not make you a "scientist", right?
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I find that very hard to believe, given your inability to grasp even the most basic concepts. You do know that handling various chemicals due to your janitorial position does not make you a "scientist", right?[/QUOTE]

Emphasis on practicing?

I could practice the guitar and still suck horribly. :lol:
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']You do know that handling various chemicals due to your janitorial position does not make you a "scientist", right?[/QUOTE]

True, but running a meth lab in your parents basement does.;)
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I find that very hard to believe, given your inability to grasp even the most basic concepts. You do know that handling various chemicals due to your janitorial position does not make you a "scientist", right?[/QUOTE]

[quote name='chunk']I won't reply to any more of your posts unless you either:
1. Back up your statements with an argument or reference to an argument.
2. Explicitly ask me to prove one of my specific claims.[/quote].
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']I find that very hard to believe, given your inability to grasp even the most basic concepts. You do know that handling various chemicals due to your janitorial position does not make you a "scientist", right?[/QUOTE]


Looks like we were wrong:

[quote name='chunk']
I go to Polytechnic University in Brooklyn. Major: Computer Engineering and Electrical Engineering[/QUOTE]

:roll:
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']:rofl: That explains things somewhat. But what of his dearth of logical abilities? I'd think such a thing would be essential in the CE/EE world.[/QUOTE]

Well perhaps he's fluent in binary, making english his second language.;)
 
[quote name='sblymnlcrymnl']:rofl: That explains things somewhat. But what of his dearth of logical abilities? I'd think such a thing would be essential in the CE/EE world.[/QUOTE]

Care to back up your claims that I am the one with the dearth of logical abilities and not you? As you mentioned, logic is essential in the CE/EE world and my livelihood attests to my ability in that area. What attests to yours? Your bloated ego?

By all means, don't take my word for it. If I'm really the one with a dearth of logical abilities then you should be able to prove it. Why don't you put your money where your mouth is and prove it already? Is it because your afraid that I might actually be right? How can you be sure that I am as wrong as you think I am if you don't put your arguments to the test?

I'm certainly not afraid put myself to the test. I wouldn't keep posting here, page after page and day after day if I was, now would I? Why are you afraid?

[quote name='zionoverfire']Well perhaps he's fluent in binary, making english his second language.;)[/QUOTE]

I don't think I have any problems communicating in english. Honestly, you guys are the most stubborn asses I've ever come across. Reviewers of academic journals don't seem to have any problem following me, why do you guys?

BTW, I like your sig. It really shows how you like to twist the truth around by taking things about of context. Don't you think it has some meaning that I consistently try to seek out the truth while you try to fabricate lies? Don't you think it lends credence to my arguments and demerit to yours? Don't you have any respect for the truth? How many lies are you willing to spreed just to save face? More importantly, are you only fooling the people around you, including the people of this forum, with your lies or are you also fooling yourself? If I were you I would be asking myself these questions.
 
[quote name='zionoverfire']Looks like the fraud has poped in for another round.[/QUOTE]

How in the world do you have the balls to call me a fraud? Care to explain the meaning of your sig?
 
[quote name='chunk']How in the world do you have the balls to call me a fraud? Care to explain the meaning of your sig?[/QUOTE]


fraud: A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.

You are not a practicing scientist you are a practicing electrical engineer. The difference being you are an APPLIED scientist, the same field as military science and nurses. You deliberately attempted to deceive everyone in this topic about this, knowing that it would make your points appear more valid.



It's sad that someone who believes so wholeheartedly in what the "average computer user's" definition of concepts over "academic authorities" would try to trick them with such sleight of hand. You know very well that to the general populous scientists are biologists, chemists, physics etc. and that you fall under the class of engineer. Oh technically by literature definitions you fall under the outer reaches of the hand of science but I think it's fairly obvious to anyone who cares to look the amount of BS you tried to pull, fraud.
 
[quote name='zionoverfire']fraud: A deception deliberately practiced in order to secure unfair or unlawful gain.

You are not a practicing scientist you are a practicing electrical engineer. The difference being you are an APPLIED scientist, the same field as military science and nurses. You deliberately attempted to deceive everyone in this topic about this, knowing that it would make your points appear more valid.



It's sad that someone who believes so wholeheartedly in what the "average computer user's" definition of concepts over "academic authorities" would try to trick them with such sleight of hand. You know very well that to the general populous scientists are biologists, chemists, physics etc. and that you fall under the class of engineer. Oh technically by literature definitions you fall under the outer reaches of the hand of science but I think it's fairly obvious to anyone who cares to look the amount of BS you tried to pull, fraud.[/QUOTE]

Please. Engineers are as much scientists as anyone else, especially research engineers. I'm sorry you don't think applied scientists are real scientists. I think they are more scientists than those involved in theoretical bullshit and they certainly qualify as scientists more than someone like yourself.

We were talking about science, not engineering, so I cited my experience as a scientist. If you want to know my opinion on engineering I can give you that too, but I assure you that at the research level the distinction between a "natural scientist" and an "applied scientist" is negligible.

I fail to see how this is deception. I wholeheartedly consider myself a scientist and every natural scientist I've ever met considered both natural and applied scientists as well as engineers to be scientists. Furthermore, I think the general populace certainly considers engineers scientists because they think of things like space ships and computers as being created by scientists. Perhaps you disagree, but a disagreement does not constitute deception.

No, deception is deliberate and malicious, like the way you deliberately misquote my satirical statements out of context in order to mar my reputation in this forum.

I'm sick of you making personal attacks because you can't defend your point of view. I come to this forum to argue the facts, not to trade personal insults. If this stuff continues then I don't think I'll be coming back to this subforum (and, unless you're a scumbag, that was not an invitation to malign me further).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top