Last edited:
Those who have anti-science views, know the least but think they know the most
- Thread starter wegs
- Start date
Is there a reason, Quantum Quack, other than for bloating your post count, that you always seem to post two or three times to the same post by someone else?
Had I wanted to I would have.
That is how these forums tend to work.
2. How do you propose one takes responsibility for what one is ignorant of?
3. Do you mind being openly hypocritical?
I mean, to say that you’ll do something you consider to be correct only when someone else does it, does rather suggest that you are not currently doing what you consider to be correct, while at the same time berating them for not doing what you consider to be correct.
Hypcrocitical, isn’t it?
Not at this time, thanks.
Had I wanted to I would have.
That is how these forums tend to work.
1. I’m not asking you to take responsibility for what you’re ignorant of.
2. How do you propose one takes responsibility for what one is ignorant of?
3. Do you mind being openly hypocritical?
I mean, to say that you’ll do something you consider to be correct only when someone else does it, does rather suggest that you are not currently doing what you consider to be correct, while at the same time berating them for not doing what you consider to be correct.
Hypcrocitical, isn’t it?
Cool! So you'll do it.
The ones that have been removed. The ones that you keep bringing up. The ones that you claim will result in "billions" of deaths. Or did you forget about what you posted already?
OK so you lied and you're not going to do the work on ammonia. I should have expected as much.
At this point do you think that there's a single person here who takes your hyperbolic and unsupported claims seriously?
Thank you for admitting that you are ignorant of this topic. That's pretty clear, but good to see that you understand that.
What do you mean by "quibble"?"Take responsibility for what they are ignorant of"?
There's a quibble...
It's all about acknowledging that your ignorance has consequences and taking responsibility for your ignorance and therefore the consequences of acting in ignorance.
Like a drug pusher saying to a kid at a music festival,
"Here's a pill, it'll make you feel good , take it"
"What's in it?" the kid will ask the stranger.
"I don't know" the drug pusher says.
So the kid pops it and is dead with in 60 minutes.
Ignorance has consequences...If the kid took responsibility for his/her ignorance they'd probably understand the risk they were taking and not take the pill.
If those who promoted CFC's in refrigeration had taken responsibility for what they knew they were ignorant of, then we wouldn't be having this ozone problem today.
It is not a hard concept to grasp...
It is simply asking "What do I not know?' when trying to find out about something and taking responsibility for your own ignorance and actions taken in ignorance.
What don't they know about HFC's?
Last edited:
I thought you said you didn't have any more opinions to add.
At least you are half way there..
Why ask the question?
Are you ignorant of the answer?
or do you think you have the answer already?
By taking responibility for your ignorance you are actually able to learn something when enlightenment comes. Other wise you are just playing a game in your head. A game with your self called the Dunning Kruger syndrome.
if you really want to know then take responsibility for your ignorance...and acknowledge and admit to, the limitations of what you know.
When you take responsibility for you ignorance I may decide that they is value in answering your question or I may not, that is what being self determined is all about...
If you think that you already know then why ask the question in the first place?
Why not just express your hostile opinion for what it is and not guise it as a false question?
btw: This thread started by wegs is currently trending at 2547 views with 326 posts, and that is just here at sciforums.
Last edited:
nah!
I was given an ultimatum I responded as requested, I paid a price...for doing so, and so do you..
any how the truth is there for all to see...why do you need me to help you see it?
You've got the net, go look for yourself... you never know what you might discover..
Last edited:
What do you mean, only at sciforums?
Maybe I'm missing something, but from what I've read so far, are you pro-science, but you feel that some scientists behave recklessly with their discoveries?
For one, see that Face book link down on the left bottom of the page...What do you mean, only at sciforums?
Two, see that Tweet link down the bottom of the page next to the face book link.
Then consider that the web has much potential when it comes to info sharing...
Google the thread title....copy and paste it into the google search box and hit go. Keep in mind that Google (public*) is limited as well...
No you are not missing anything. It is indeed my position. Unfortunately posting that though has incurred the hostility of just about every one here at sciforums and the accusations of anti science abound...especially from those who should know better... ( opinion)
But I would take it a little further.
Sometimes a wise scientists should decide not to discover, especially when he/she doesn't know how to contain the ramifications of that discovery.
Example: CRISPR and how the knowledge of CRISPR gene editing tech is like a virus when it comes to desperate humans looking for health and eugenics solutions and will be impossible to contain in the intermediate and long term..(opinion)
In my opinion, the probability of the mismatching of gene edited children going on to reproductive adulthood leading to catastrophic outcomes is almost 100%. There fore extremely unwise at this stage in humanities emotional evolution. Again just an opinion...
Last edited:
Found a real gem of an article from Berkley
Starts of with a quote from Carl Sagan:
We've arranged a global civilization in which most crucial elements profoundly depend on science and technology. We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster.
— Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World, 1996.
titled:
The Decline of Reason. ( undated, circa 2006)
author: J.H.Lipps
Jere H. Lipps received his Ph.D. in Paleontology at UCLA.
https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/fosrec/Lipps.html
a really good read if interested IMO
One I can agree with almost fully...
Starts of with a quote from Carl Sagan:
We've arranged a global civilization in which most crucial elements profoundly depend on science and technology. We have also arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. This is a prescription for disaster.
— Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World, 1996.
titled:
The Decline of Reason. ( undated, circa 2006)
author: J.H.Lipps
Jere H. Lipps received his Ph.D. in Paleontology at UCLA.
https://ucmp.berkeley.edu/fosrec/Lipps.html
a really good read if interested IMO
One I can agree with almost fully...
You're a retard.
perhaps you could contribute to this thread currently running:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/ad-hominem-why-do-people-do-it.162343/
Perhaps you could make sense.
It's not a an ad hominem, because you're not making a genuine argument.
I feel I have to make a formal and public apology.
I am under no duress to do so.
I am not apologizing to avoid penalty or banning.
I am apologizing because it is the right thing to do whilst I still can.
It has come to my attention with the patient help of Bells in private conversation that I am very mistaken with regards to the interpretation of the figures displayed in the graph I presented on anticipated excess cases of skin cancer.
To wit this particular graph:
I have incorrectly interpreted this graph in a way that over inflates the resultant figures by many orders. Billvon and Bells and others were quite right in stating so...
I failed to comprehend why the key word "excess" was not being properly understood by me. The heat of the debate making it even more difficult.
So I apologize unreservedly to all persons I may have confused, or otherwise aggravated with my stupidity but especially to Bells for any implied or otherwise derogatory comments I may have made during the course of our argument.
And I can only thank you all for your patience.
I am under no duress to do so.
I am not apologizing to avoid penalty or banning.
I am apologizing because it is the right thing to do whilst I still can.
It has come to my attention with the patient help of Bells in private conversation that I am very mistaken with regards to the interpretation of the figures displayed in the graph I presented on anticipated excess cases of skin cancer.
To wit this particular graph:
I have incorrectly interpreted this graph in a way that over inflates the resultant figures by many orders. Billvon and Bells and others were quite right in stating so...
I failed to comprehend why the key word "excess" was not being properly understood by me. The heat of the debate making it even more difficult.
So I apologize unreservedly to all persons I may have confused, or otherwise aggravated with my stupidity but especially to Bells for any implied or otherwise derogatory comments I may have made during the course of our argument.
And I can only thank you all for your patience.
Last edited:
Really, for me, I don't care about the graph.
I'm concerned with what you mean about science and scientists.
I'm concerned with what you mean about science and scientists.
Why?
I didn't makes sense before, so why are you concerned. Do you think i will make sense to you now?
Thank you, for the very odd question.
Thank you for acknowledging that. We all make mistakes - and recognizing mistakes is how we learn.
yes agree... my main motivation in entering this thread was to highlight just this need for the field of science. Little did I know I would provide such a dramatic example with my own behavior.