No. What you could do is walk me through whatever gymnastics you just did in your head to go from, “science is not 100% certain” to “we can just throw out Kepler and Newton all together, we don’t need that bullshit.” I get lost between those two statements, help me out.
If that is not what you meant, then that is not what you meant.
That is why I wrote the question.
You wrote the
question with either a
circumstantial misunderstanding of what I meant or a
willful misunderstanding of what I meant. I'm trying to figure out which. Did you just not understand what I meant, or were you trying to twist my words in order to straw-man?
Again, I'm trying to give you the benefit of the doubt here, but even if your question doesn't fully explain your intentions, what it
does tell me is that you
don't understand what I'm talking about... and conversely, what
you're talking about.
Once more, with feeling this time. Walk me through how you got from MY words to YOURS. I’m not really seeing the equivalence. Help me see where you’re coming from.
You think you identified "where I am coming from..." ( as if that matters to the OP), as you relate in the following treatise, essentially telling me to "eat shit and die."
Again, please, climb down from the cross. I'm not attacking you personally, I'm telling you you're mistaken because of
what you are saying not because of
who you are as a person.
Remember that piece I put in spoiler text? I was trying to be real with you, dude. I'm not here to disparage or berate you, but I don't know what you want me to do; I'm trying to tell you that
you have no fucking idea what you're talking about. Like Ricky Gervais to Karl Pilkington,
"DON'T TALK SHIT."I don't know how exactly you expect anyone to convey that to you, honestly, in a way that doesn't make you feel like you're being told to "eat shit and die," but maybe you should try and develop some emotional maturity and get over yourself, if that's how you take criticism.
I really don't give a Darwinian monkey's uncle about you or your personal life, I'm really just concerned about the amount of ignorant shit spewing out of your mouth like a blown spigot running out of Shit's Creek. I'm not telling you to eat shit and die, lackey, that would just make a bad situation worse. Rather, I'm trying to help you clean up what's already there. I'm concerned about your mental hygiene.
Stop making this about you and me, and me telling you to "eat shit and die."
OHHHHHHHHHHHHHH that helps.
No, it does not help the OP.
It merely gives you cause to begin your turn in the role of NdGT or Bill Nye as we shall see.
I'm flattered you think I begin to compare to them, but yes, it does help. It helps me and anyone else reading understand where you're coming from, which explains the willingness to ignore sound reasoning, appeal to a lack of contrary evidence, put forward circular arguments, and straw-man your opponent.
You aren't here to teach and be taught, you're here to dig in your heels and fight stubbornly until you retreat from the thread, or we do. At this point, I think I can say conclusively that this is a complete waste of everyone's time.
But still, I'ma humor you, because I don't
want to believe that this is a waste of everyone's time. I
want to believe that you're
not as stubborn and unwilling to see reason as you seem... but even I can't deny what's in front of me, after enough squinting and peering and careful scrutinizing.
See, it’s pretty obvious you have a massive chip on your shoulder when it comes to scientists and how they engage with the public. I will concede to you that they haven’t always done a good job - Hell, I’ll go further, they done fucked up if THIS is the result we find ourselves with - but you clearly don’t understand that science IS agnostic.
No, science is not agnostic in my opinion.
And your statement is just as subjective as mine and your statement or views about science or scientists will always remain as just as subjective as mine.
Yeah, opinions are like assholes. Some are shittier than others.
And you've done everything you can to demonstrate that your opinion of science and scientists is based on more spectacle than substance.
Your confusion regarding the meaning and difference between scientific law and theory, your confusion regarding the difference between "uncertainty" and "LOL THEY DON'T KNOW ANYTHING!!1!11" and just your patent unwillingness to see
how you're wrong
shows your bald-faced ignorance and shit-talking nonsense for what it is.
But hey, we haven't found that darn "textbook" model yet, so there's still something for you to cling to for dear life.
I’m sorry. I know you have a charicature in your head of how scientists are and you make certain assumptions about how they do their work, but you’re just wrong.
And you have your caricature in your head... to which I will leave you at peace.
opinions ≈ assholes
And here, with this statement: "I will concede to you that they haven’t always done a good job...:" you acknowledge my caricature of science and how scientists behave is correct at times.
You
really don't understand what it means to misrepresent, over-simplify, and/or straw-man your opponent's position, do you? I mean, like I said, I wanna believe it's just ignorance, but that's because I can't tell if you're doing this intentionally or not.
Either way, lemme break it down for you:
The "haven't
always" part is what you're glossing over. Just because I acknowledge that scientists
can make mistakes doesn't mean I'm agreeing with
your characterization, which goes
much further than mine.
False equivalency. Stop this squirming around and just have an honest dialog with me, for fuck's sake.
...with at least I explained how and why a few times now, but rather than address my objections, you ignore them, double down on the previous claim, and then show everyone here the underbelly of your victim complex.
Funny...I do not feel victimized.
Funny, you're sure behaving like one.
"Eat shit and die?" Jesus Christ, lackey, did I hurt your feelings? I'm really not trying to. Grow up. Again, I defer to what I said before about sugarcoating it. idk wtf you want me to say or how you want me to say it, but either way, climb down off your fucking cross and try to have a productive conversation for once.
Climb down off the cross and stop straw-manning me and the topic of science.
I will, just as soon as you promise to stop playing Freud, stick to the OP, and stop trying to bury this OP behind a wall of text.
I wouldn't have to "play Freud" if you weren't making such a fucking mess of this discussion with your constant fallacious false equivalencies, straw-men, begging the question, appeals to ignorance, and a HOST of other shit we've already talked about.
I can't have an
honest conversation with you unless you agree to
converse honestly. How the fuck are we supposed to talk about the OP at all when every other reply from you attempts to rephrase and simplify your opponent's words into a shape you can more easily dismiss? You aren't even replying to the same words at that event, so don't talk to me about "sticking to the OP." Stick to some intellectual honesty.
As I said in another thread, if you’re going to criticize scientists for how they do science, the least you could do is try to represent both subjects accurately. Anything less shows either a willingness to straw-man your opponent with incomplete, inaccurate representations of their position, or a complete lack of comprehension, or both. Your responses so far make you a strong candidate for the latter, by my reckoning.
POT MEET KETTLE!
Hi. Please point out where I misrepresented you, and I'll happily retract my words.
Otherwise you're talking shit, again.
Show Posts
