Is there zero connection between String Theory and the paranormal?

Nope. There were plenty of closer places they could escape to.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Only crackpots redefine terms to suit their own purposes. This lands somewhere between begging the question and no true Scotsman.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

See, this is a pattern. What do you hope to accomplish there? How is that challenging or rewarding for you? Haven't you basically said the same things to the same people over and over? Is it just naive optimism?

I know you hate having this pointed out, but I'm seriously curious. I can't fathom that being fun or worth the time.
I guess it makes sense according to the adage that you are the average of the 10 people you spend time with, whether it's here or IRL.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

In my defence you might be kind of surprised what my long term purposes for my participation on Sciforums might be, (hint... the "Politics" subforum has a discussion entitled "Would an intelligently created UBI be dangerous for the environment"..... that will give you an idea of what I am hoping may emerge over the next ten years from Sciforums.

 

That's not a defense. That's boring, trolling bullshit. If you keep showing up on my notifications, you'll just end up on ignore, with all the other trolls and and mental defectives.

 

You do tend to make a sincere effort to be truthful don't you?

 

You're kidding, right? It's been almost a month (perhaps you failed to notice that), and I have long since forgotten about this post. So much so that I was surprised that your reply in this thread was even to me at all. I thought that, certainly, your engagement with Dennis was far more pressing for you and you had simply ignored me, as this post of yours seems to both indicate your desire to do and contradict with it's attention. And to be honest, I'm fairly certain I've already pegged why you prefer engaging with such people. Just thought I'd give you a change to correct my assumptions, and you have quite explicitly refused to. So my assumptions stand. I'm good with that. I didn't bemoan anything, although it's interesting that's how you chose to read it. And I didn't mean to hurt your feelings. To the contrary, I started this line of discussion by paying you a genuine compliment, but you didn't seem interested in that. That's okay too. Um, you do know that you're capable of just ignoring me, right? At least, I don't think I have any kind of leverage that could possibly coerce your attention. So please, if my posts bother you so much, by all means, ignore them. It won't hurt my feelings in the least.
Your complaint "about what I haven't read, including whining about things I addressed in direct response to you, but you missed" was in another thread. If you really want me to, I can show you exactly where, but I doubt you do. Again, you seem to be the one intent on telling me how I should act. I was only asking you why, not telling you to stop. I'm not sure how replying to you a handful of times on the same subject is demanding anything. Do you feel like replies to you take on the character of a command or compulsion? Where did I say I was smarter than you? Just because I can't see how something may be a worthwhile challenge doesn't mean that it isn't. But I didn't mean to bring up any insecurities. Sorry, James.

 

Yet of all the replies I'm sure you've amassed in a month, you only deigned to reply to mine. Seems that fixation is projection.