Deception by Science

[Stoniphi]

My, my, my. Are you now talking limits or the RAA argument?

I stand by my original point and suggest that you peruse this thread if you doubt it in the least. At least you are successful in your trolling however, congrats. This despite the use of common trolling devices - especially that "you don't spell write" one - :biglaugh: that and jacking your own thread are well worth the price of admission!

 

[NMSquirrel]

One might think that of all the *scientists* reading this, one - just ONE - might show some backbone and courage and say, "Gee, you make a good point."

see..your looking for affirmation not understanding..

 

[RenaissanceMan]

see..your looking for affirmation not understanding..

Find the article by Professor Ruth Wisse, from the Wall Street Journal.
I believe it is titled "The Herd of Independent Minds."

It describes the repressive left-wing atmosphere at Harvard... and here.

But first learn the difference between "your" and "you're".
It's not that difficult.

 

[RenaissanceMan]

Deception by Pseudoscience would of course include Talking Points that are so common, they should simply be referred to by number.

To assist the godless left, I will assign your Talking Points the following numbers. It should save you considerable time in giggling out your responses:

1. "Strawman"
2. "Red Herring"
3. "Quote mining"
4. "You don't understand science"
5. "You don't understand evolution"
6. "There is no proof of God"
7. "If you don't have an alternative theory, then shut up."
8. "We outnumber you so shut up."
9. "English isn't your strong suit, is it." (A Tippy favorite, when he's not misspelling)
10. "Take a course on reading comprehension."
11. "Creationist"
12. "Evolution is a theory like gravity is a theory. I suggest you go jump off a cliff if you don't think either one is the gospel."
13. "Pot, kettle, kettle, pot."
14. "You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny."
15. "Flat earther."
16. "Fundie."
17. "We're really, really, really smart. You aren't."
18. "If you can't take our condescension, ignorance, rudeness, and name-calling, get the **** out of here."
19. "I follow reason, logic, science, goodness, kindness, oh and apple pie.
You follow an ancient fairy-tale story."
20. "Richard Dawkins makes my metrosexual leg tingle."




How it is that atheists constantly cite "quote mining" to everyone else, but never to their own kind, for example when they quote mine the Holy Bible, defies any rational explanation. But as I have said before, lies and hypocrisy are the two essential sine qua nons of the godless left.

 

[pjdude1219]

Good point.

Destroyer of Liberty

wrong picture there

 

[Hercules Rockefeller]

To assist the godless left, I will assign your Talking Points the following numbers. It should save you considerable time in giggling out your responses:

Banning you will save us even more time, so do please continue....

 

[Trippy]

Cherry picking.
You've taken part of a sentence, presented it out of context, and then made a purile attempt at ridiculing it.

Bravo.
"English isn't your strong suit, is it."

You don't know what my opinion of Green Politics is, because I have yet to discuss it in any depth with you, or anyone else on this board. The only thing you have are assinine caricatured assumptions.

"English isn't your strong suit, is it."

I think you should stick with moderating, *Moderator.*

You can't see past the ridiculous bipartisan glasses you're wearing, and you can't understand anything or anyone that doesn't fit with your ridiculous preconcieved notions.

"English isn't your strong suit, is it."

Oh Bravo...

Three whole typographical errors (they are nothing more) that I managed to miss at 6.30am before I had even had my first coffee for the day.

Wow. Aren't we special.

Would you like a medal? Or a chest to pin it on?

My ego is not the subject. The subject is misleading people with even a simple graph. The subject is science, not me. Stop trying to focus on ME, and discuss science. Discuss it with someone else.

You're the one that insists on avoiding discussing the basic physics of the situation, not me.

You ready to discuss the implications of the Beer Lambert Law, the Graff-Gotch Equation, Simple Harmonic Motion, Le Chatelier's Principle and so on and so forth yet?

Oh, and learn some English, would you, before showing your own condescension and pretending that I cannot write.

Why?

You obviously can't.

You even seem to think that missing a couple of minor errors some how equates with reading comprehension.

Figured out whether or not sic is a contraction yet?

 

[Trippy]

And Trippy pretends that he is not a leftist....

Citation please?

 

[synthesizer-patel]

Deception by Pseudoscience would of course include Talking Points that are so common, they should simply be referred to by number.

To assist the godless left, I will assign your Talking Points the following numbers. It should save you considerable time in giggling out your responses:

1. "Strawman"
2. "Red Herring"
3. "Quote mining"
4. "You don't understand science"
5. "You don't understand evolution"
6. "There is no proof of God"
7. "If you don't have an alternative theory, then shut up."
8. "We outnumber you so shut up."
9. "English isn't your strong suit, is it." (A Tippy favorite, when he's not misspelling)
10. "Take a course on reading comprehension."
11. "Creationist"
12. "Evolution is a theory like gravity is a theory. I suggest you go jump off a cliff if you don't think either one is the gospel."
13. "Pot, kettle, kettle, pot."
14. "You're ugly and your mother dresses you funny."
15. "Flat earther."
16. "Fundie."
17. "We're really, really, really smart. You aren't."
18. "If you can't take our condescension, ignorance, rudeness, and name-calling, get the **** out of here."
19. "I follow reason, logic, science, goodness, kindness, oh and apple pie.
You follow an ancient fairy-tale story."
20. "Richard Dawkins makes my metrosexual leg tingle."




How it is that atheists constantly cite "quote mining" to everyone else, but never to their own kind, for example when they quote mine the Holy Bible, defies any rational explanation. But as I have said before, lies and hypocrisy are the two essential sine qua nons of the godless left.

A few more buckets of milky sweet lulzy goodness milked from the udders of our new resident lolcow.

***addendum**
It is not possible to quote mine the bible.

A quote mine can be defined as follows:

The practice of quoting out of context, sometimes referred to as "contextomy" or "quote mining", is a logical fallacy and a type of false attribution in which a passage is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning

(wiki)

As the extremist christian taliban take a literalist interpretation of the bible, it is not possible to distort the meaning of a passage, as each specific passage means exactly what it says - no context required - no intrepretation required.

 

[scifes]

I'm beginning to wonder what they do teach.

basic grammar?

God, there's so many idiots in the world.

shouldn't that be "God, there're so many idiots in the world"?

sorry, couldn't help jumping on the grammar Nazis bandwagon.
and the only ones allowed to make fun of Americans are Americans

 

[phlogistician]

shouldn't that be "God, there're so many idiots in the world"?

Did you really write that with a straight face?

 

[GeoffP]

basic grammar?

shouldn't that be "God, there're so many idiots in the world"?

sorry, couldn't help jumping on the grammar Nazis bandwagon.
and the only ones allowed to make fun of Americans are Americans

Common usage, boy. No one says "there're".

 

[scifes]

Did you really write that with a straight face?

did you reply to it with a straight face?

Common usage, boy. No one says "there're".

"there are"
and i'm sure it's only "common usage" between americans who don't study evolution in school.

 

[GeoffP]

"there are"

Really? No kidding.

and i'm sure it's only "common usage" between americans who don't study evolution in school.

Apparently not, since I use it also. (We also have a decent go at capitalization and correct grammar, which you might consider trying.) I'm interested this minor point is more important to you than the scientific method.

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

Common usage, boy. No one says "there're".

Note from the Linguistics Moderator: Of course we all say it, at least in America. We just don't normally write it.

It's actually kind of hard to type, isn't it? there're there're there're ow my fingers hurt.

 

[GeoffP]

Eh, I don't bother. There's lots of things I don't bother with.

 

[RenaissanceMan]

//


// I'm interested this minor point is more important to you than the scientific method.

"The scientific method"....

Indeed, did you ever lecture a fellow Christian-hater on "the scientific method" elsewhere? Even once? If so, please provide the link. If not, why the hypocrisy?

One of your friends made reference to "taking a dump" in your faces, when in fact nobody dumps here like your EVIL pal with the black ski mask. And he gets off with a free pass, no matter how inane and hateful his detritus.

When did EVIL practice any scientific methodology? Or you for that matter?

Here is what would seem to you to pass for "the scientific method":

NMSquirrel: i suppose excessive water vapor in the atmosphere would cause more weather, but if there were more vapor in the atmosphere, wouldn't it show in desert countries?

Yes, yes indeed, 100% humidity does "cause more weather." ::: wink, nudge :::: But isn't "more weather" better than "less weather"?

Besides..
Do you want a world with dirty cars and wastefull energy?
anyone who has ever slept under a freeway would appreciate less fumes... – NMSquirrel

I keep my car very clean, and garaged at night. But you'll have to define "wastefull energy". I think if you look up that phrase in the Insanely Green Dictionary, you'll see a picture of Al Gore.

Nobody but people who have slept under a freeway want less fumes.
Everyone else wants more, right Squirreley?

This is the *scientific method* Sciforums style.

 

[synthesizer-patel]

Moooo! Moooo!

 

[GeoffP]

"The scientific method"....

Indeed, did you ever lecture a fellow Christian-hater on "the scientific method" elsewhere? Even once? If so, please provide the link. If not, why the hypocrisy?

I rarely have to lecture my fellows on it. Occasionally I object to their characterization of myself and those of my religion; I understand some of their general outrage, given the past couple thousand years.

One of your friends made reference to "taking a dump" in your faces, when in fact nobody dumps here like your EVIL pal with the black ski mask. And he gets off with a free pass, no matter how inane and hateful his detritus.

Well, I'm sorry that I didn't see that. My bet is that it's nothing to be taken very seriously. Your personal flip-out, you should note, concerns my response to a comment by a conservative religious fucktard on my grammar, of all things, never mind his own shall we say fundamentalist take on religious law and observance. Yet now you are hoisting his spear? Specks and planks, my friend.

When did EVIL practice any scientific methodology? Or you for that matter?

I practice it every day. I can't say about evil, per se. It depends on its level of professionalism.

Here is what would seem to you to pass for "the scientific method":

Is it?

 

[Fraggle Rocker]

When did EVIL practice any scientific methodology?

Um. How about when they invented nuclear weapons? That was not a project that could have been completed with Stone Age technology.