Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
piss and shit and more
#21
(07-02-2017, 07:42 PM)sparks Wrote:  Stank says:  "Anyway, I'm heartened that he and I can have a legitimate discussion of science wherein I don't need to provide evidence for absolutely non-extraordinary claims."

For the record, I never agreed to those terms.  All claims require evidence.  Extraordinary claims are the ones requiring extraordinary evidence.

Also for the record, I've been asked by a board member (via pm and who shall remain unnamed) to "go easy on the old fella" (stanky), to which I did agree.  

This ultimately means I won't be responding directly to The Stankster with anything stronger than:  "Oh really?" or "How interesting" or "You really believe that" and other generic things of that nature.  But I'd hardly characterize that as 'legitimate discussion'.

Just wanted to set the record straight here.



Carry on.



um,

fuck you?
Reply
#22
I do.  I love finding out stuff, always did.  Except when I was actually at school where I was supposed to be finding out stuff.
Oddly enough I was absorbing much more than the teachers were aware of, I just didn't show it.  Except for maths, I wasn't feigning ignorance over that.  

I had my yearly exam scores audited a few times because they were expecting me to fail and I was turning out 80 and 90 percent passes... I had to be cheating right?    One of life's bigger disappointments is the percentage of teachers who are really not.  Every now and then I'd throw 'em a 'curve ball' question just to piss them off hence my unpopularity.  Bugger them.  
I don't know if it applies all round but I learned plenty about what interested me and ignored what didn't.  They just weren't teaching me what I wanted to know.

So teach away, what I already know just assures me I'm on the right track, what I don't know is the reason that I'm on the learning track at all.

This:

Quote: It is true that students of science tend to specialize. Physicists frequently don't know shit about biology.
And zooologists frequently don't know shit about fractal math.

I'm a generalist.
I know a little about a lot.
Others know a lot about a little.

.. sums up my attitude to education.  I don't feel the need to be an expert at anything, but knowing at least what makes a few things tick gives one a better field of vision when it comes to making sense of what makes the whole thing tick.  

I wanna know a little about what drives things, I don't need to know how to build a telescope to look through one I only need to know which end to look through. Someone else can spend their entire life learning how to build one.
.. I'll send 'em a thankyou note.

I once spent an inordinate amount of time trying to follow the gibber of someone on a forum who was convinced that Egyptians had a civilization, or at least a settlement in OZ thousands of years back.  He was totally obsessed with it and I was fascinated to follow his 'evidence' while remaining totally cynical. 
I learned a lot of stuff about where this bloke got his 'evidence' but that's about all. 
Even seemingly pixie stuff can be illuminating.  Never read a book I didn't learn at least one thing about something from. 

... I think that pixie rang a radio station a few weeks back.  Same patter about proof of Egyptian occupation was put forward and thankfully the host let him rave on.  I intended to check out his latest 'proofs' but forgot about it until now.   Still think it's total bullshit but it's interesting bullshit and that's what matters when it comes to learning.
School is boring, discussion is not.
Reply
#23
(07-03-2017, 09:48 PM)stanky Wrote:  
(07-02-2017, 07:42 PM)sparks Wrote:  Stank says:  "Anyway, I'm heartened that he and I can have a legitimate discussion of science wherein I don't need to provide evidence for absolutely non-extraordinary claims."

For the record, I never agreed to those terms.  All claims require evidence.  Extraordinary claims are the ones requiring extraordinary evidence.

Also for the record, I've been asked by a board member (via pm and who shall remain unnamed) to "go easy on the old fella" (stanky), to which I did agree.  

This ultimately means I won't be responding directly to The Stankster with anything stronger than:  "Oh really?" or "How interesting" or "You really believe that" and other generic things of that nature.  But I'd hardly characterize that as 'legitimate discussion'.

Just wanted to set the record straight here.



Carry on.



um,

fuck you?

No. 
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#24
good.
Reply
#25


"Nobody should pin their hopes on a miracle": Vladimir Putin
Reply
#26
Someone was talking about his Gogomobile ad the other day.

Cuz did that "is Don, is good" thing when Trump got in. [Image: happy0009.gif]
Reply
#27
so,

I wrote a long post yesterday about the nature of bacterial decomposition. It was work.
And 'zap'...gone.

I'll try again in a while. I'm not trying to dodge the subject. It's actually the sort of shit we should know about.
Reply
#28
Stanky, babe, use the preview post 'button' every few paragraphs and then you can usually pick up the thing again by using the back button on top, it will reload whatever was 'previewed' before you lost it. Doesn't always work, I still lose a few too but it helps.
Reply
#29
Write it as a Word doc, then copy and paste that. Maybe?
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)