Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Pete Svarrior

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 316  Next >
1
Flat Earth Projects / Re: Untrustworthy quotation in the wiki
« on: November 29, 2021, 09:07:16 PM »
No.  The posts on this page were about sample size.
Right. So you didn't read the thread.

My only comment about the survey itself was prefaced appropriately by a bold IF
Right. So you are making shit up on the spot, and you didn't read the article.

You are expected to read before you speak. If you can't do that, please do not post here. There are plenty of social media out there where you can just fart out opinions without engaging with conflicting views, or (as is the case here) reality.

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: November 29, 2021, 09:05:04 PM »
Fun fact: if you can't pay enough attention to spell a word you hadn't encountered before (it's omicron, not omnicron, you absolute dolts), you probably hadn't paid enough attention to understand what you're discussing.

3
Flat Earth Projects / Re: Untrustworthy quotation in the wiki
« on: November 29, 2021, 08:55:13 PM »
Sample size is indeed a key aspect of such a survey.  But as or more important is how the sample was constructed. The Mirror is a tabloid.  Their readers obviously are looking for tabloid style stories.  If the sample was drawn even largely let alone entirely from from Mirror subscribers, it would be very wrong to claim it was representative of all UK residents.
Have you considered finding out who performed the study, and whether or not it had anything to do with the Mirror's readership? This is addressed in the article you forgot to read.

Hell, let's take it half a step back. Have you considered that the Mirror might not be the original source of this study, given that in this very thread we discussed which of the many reports covering it we should use in the Wiki? Let me guess, you forgot to read the thread too.

Did you exercise any critical thought at all before just making up an explanation on the spot and proudly announcing it to everyone as something that merits serious consideration?

4
Flat Earth Theory / MOVED: coolest fact you have learned
« on: November 28, 2021, 06:28:45 PM »

5
Flat Earth Projects / Re: Untrustworthy quotation in the wiki
« on: November 28, 2021, 06:22:30 PM »
The sample size was a mere 0.0015 percent of the UK population, which means it's statistically
impossible to extrapolate the figure of 52% to the entire British public.
We only just finished discussing the statistical relevancy of a study of that sample size, and backed it with credible sources. If you'd like to disagree with them, I'd recommend reading them first (skipping that step was your primary mistake!), and then forming a coherent response that addresses their core point.

Unfortunately, "LOL I DON'T BELIEVE THIS XD" is not an appropriate response in the upper fora. Your ignorance of statistics is not relevant here.

6
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Abusive DMs
« on: November 21, 2021, 10:48:12 AM »
Just to keep this up to date - the PM-only block list is an absolute nightmare to implement. I've made decent progress at first, but the last few bugs are taking up a lot of time. So, this will happen, but it might not be soon.

7
The interpretation of the second amendment as some kind of hedge against tyranny is relatively recent.  You can see why.  We really don't want to admit that it's there to put down slave revolts.  So we rebranded its intent.
Yes, the original intent was that every white man would be free to carry a gun. And boy, did they buy guns. And boy, did they use them.

The actual history is indeed much uglier than the Good Doctor portrayed it as - I held back on making crude jokes about how the black kid in his example wouldn't have gotten shot for carrying a gun if only white people carried guns, because I didn't think it would be helpful, because that reasoning was obscured from the actual text of the 2nd Amendment, and it's (prima facie) not present in modern case law. I'm not sure why you thought adding this to the discussion would help tbh - were you just trying to kick Dr. while he's down?

Nonetheless, there was never a period in the 2nd Amendment history when it solely applied to well-regulated groups of any sort, or when it disallowed [white, male] individuals from owning or carrying guns.

8
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Mobile experience is poor
« on: November 21, 2021, 10:22:49 AM »
If you don't like CN (including the theme) but want to carry on posting useless things, there's AR. There's also the Lounge.

Since you're not interested in implementing your own solution and this thread has now turned into yet another ramble about how you don't want to follow rules, it seems safe to lock at this point. If anyone else does want to create or suggest an alternative theme, feel free to PM me.

9
[I] don't care about who's at my level.
You also seemingly don't care about reading comprehension.

The laws can be changed, the current interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is bullshit.
This is entirely irrelevant to what you said so far. You made claims about what the 2nd Amendment does (or doesn't) say. Now you're saying you're simply against the 2nd Amendment. I agree with you on the latter. You're just completely incorrect on the former.

Again, I'm sure your legal arguments will come back to my silliness or my reading comprehension
Guilty as charged!

I supported Republicans for decades
I'm beginning to see a pattern here.

BTW, this isn't about 'truth to power'. When a freak is wandering the streets with a gun, I want him taken out.  I pay taxes so I don't have to be the one to do it.
I have no idea what you're talking about at this point, and I suspect neither do you.

10
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Mobile experience is poor
« on: November 20, 2021, 11:14:58 PM »
Using the overall theme wouldn't solve your problem as you currently describe it. Most threads in CN would break that theme, because they're enormous quote pyramids, the letter "B" in an egregiously large font, or ginormous unscaled images of any old shit.

You don't have to use CN. It is, deliberately and intentionally, a barely usable mess for people to dump complete nonsense into. Maybe that's not your cup of tea, and that's fine. If you do not like CN, do not use CN. In doing so, you also "vote" with your posts.

11
I'm sorry, but I can't see this underage delinquent wandering around with a gun being part of the founding father's vision.
Considering the Founding Father's (just one?) times, he would not be an "underage delinquent". He'd be a "man" by quite some margin. I'm not sure adding a lack of awareness of history to a terrible legal argument really helps your case.

I didn't say the whole legal system is wrong,  you're saying it's completely right.
Don't try to strawman me. It will not work, and you'll just make yourself look sillier in the process. You said the following, word for word:

The 2nd Amendment says nothing about individual gun rights.

This is directly at odds both with the current interpretation of the 2nd Amendment (you know, the thing that's legally binding) and with its literal text ("the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"). Regardless of how much it affects your "snowflake" feelings, and regardless of how much you retcon what you mean by "the 2nd Amendment", you were incorrect.

The other kid with a gun didn't get a chance to discuss the constitution.
This is an interesting, if extremely amateurish, rhetorical device you're using there. "Someone else was subject to a grave injustice, therefore Rittenhouse should also be subjected to it." I'm sure you can see just how unhelpful that sounds. Speak truth to power and demand justice for the guy that got gunned down. Don't try to bring everyone else down to the level you consider unjust.

12
The Supreme Court has fucked up time and time again over the years.
Ah, yes, the entire legal system is wrong, and only you (with your extensive qualifications in law) are correct. Truly a hallmark of good debate.

Read the actual text of the 2nd Amendment.
What does that have to do with anything in a case law/common law system?

Nonetheless:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Which part of "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed" confuses you? Is it "people"? Or are you just hyperfocusing on the prefatory clause of that sentence?

13
And before the conservatard snowflakes start whining about the 2nd Amendment, The 2nd Amendment says nothing about individual gun rights. The citizens have a right to bear arms in the form of a well regulated militia as a balance of power against the Feds. It doesn't mean some punk gets to wander the streets at night with a rifle.
I'm not sure that quite aligns with the actual state of the law. Perhaps you could point towards some precedent of the 2nd Amendment being interpreted this way by US courts?

14
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Mobile experience is poor
« on: November 20, 2021, 09:19:37 PM »
Absolutely. Once you've developed an appropriate theme, please pull request it to our repo as per usual and we'll have a look

15
You are mixing up gravity with gravitation - a rookie error.

Your entire thread here asserts that gravitation exists. FET does not disagree.

You are expected to understand the model you're arguing against before you decry your opposition. Start with the FAQ, work your way up through the wiki, and if you still have questions - ask them.

Don't waste our time by complaining that something we didn't claim makes no sense.

17
OK. Well help me out then.
I am asking you, for the third (I think?) time in this thread, to stop trying to derail it. To be clear: my request is that you drop your line of argumentation in this thread so that it can get back on track; not that you go "b-but I am very right and also reasonable, here is an essay on how righteous I am".

Could you please do that for me? I'd really like to be able to get this sorted with polite requests alone. You give the mods a lot of shit for using more direct methods of tidying things up, but you sure don't respond to the less direct ones. Instead, you make things worse, treating every attempt at setting things right as a personal challenge.

So, c'mon. Show me you can do this.

19
This would also work better as a critique if you weren't discarding several observations I've mentioned in this thread which disprove FET.
You've done no such thing. You're rambling because you don't understand basic FET, and I'm not too interested in defending whatever model you've imagined. Learn what you're arguing against before arguing against it.

Discarded in what way?
In this way:

That's how both FET and RET have it.
You know this isn't true. You're a relatively bright guy, and you're capable of observing geometric shapes. This only leaves dishonesty or delusion as possible explanations. Again, wasting everyone's time.

And as I've said, every map contradicts RET. Because you can't perfectly map the surface of a sphere on to a plane
Please allow me to remind you: "But erth rund" is not upper fora material. It's great that you think the Earth is round, and I'm very happy for you; but your conviction alone is not a meaningful argument, and does not merit repeating over and over. We know you're a RE'er. Do not spam the upper with it.

I guess it's fair to say that my thought that the modern FET works better in the northern hemisphere than the southern one because it was developed in the northern hemisphere is more of an opinion than a fact.
Yes, it's an opinion that contradicts facts. It can pretty much only stand as something adjacent to a religion.

Honestly, I don't know if that's true. But when I looked into your comments about Dic├Žarchus I found two sources which claim he knew the earth was a sphere.
I don't see why evidence for FET produced by RE'ers should be taken any less seriously. If anything, I'd expect you to treat your own camp with some generosity.

I'm going to complain about you trying very hard to think of me as dishonest.
There simply is no other explanation. You can't be corrected on matters of fact and still insist on propagating your untruth, ignoring counter-arguments and refusing to provide any evidence of your own. That's the line between feasibly being mistaken and just being a liar. Stop crossing it. Embrace the liberating feeling of honesty.

20
So, in short:
  • Observations that disprove RET, despite being readily available, will be discarded by you. After all, you neglected to read them, and that might as well mean they weren't there at all. Maybe if we wrote them down for you just one more time, things would change! Yes, this must be it! Just one more explanation, that'll get through to the Man Who Doesn't Read!
  • Maps before the entire Earth was explored will be discarded by you. Damn it if the layout of the continents matches FET and indistinguishably contradicts RET, pattern-recognition can stuff it if it doesn't support your favourite shape of the Earth. After all, they don't show the entire thing, and we couldn't possibly recognise simple facts when they're inconvenient.
  • It is "pretty reasonable" of me to demand that you back up your claims... but you've stopped short of actually backing them up. Gee, I wonder why that might be.
  • Even though you now know that the actual origins of FET are pretty close to the Equator, you still insist on your imagination. Nay! Forsooth! It must have been in the north! Afrer all, the data points must match your bias! There is no other way.

You're trying very hard to make yourself look dishonest. And then you're gonna complain about me noticing it. Stop. Be honest instead.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 316  Next >