Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Done here now.
#1
I'll be lurking in from time to time but no, I will not contribute to this anymore.  Please feel free to PM me, I may or may not respond depending on the tone of your message.

And again stank:  You're so full of shit that your eyes are brown.  You don't understand shit about science and how and why it works.
You can lead 'em to knowledge, but you can't make 'em think.
Reply
#2
Damned shame, mate.

I hope it all goes well for you, and the door's always open.
Love is... that one person whose freshly-warm toilet seat you don't find disgusting.
Reply
#3
You won't even stick around for the laughs Sparky??  

Is it something I said? ...not that I give a shit what people think of my opinions,  but there's curiosity value on it.

I like you Sparky, I feel  like a friend has decided there are greener pastures.  

When you're sitting there, wishing you had a cat, will you feel content that pedantic loyalty to strictly limiting discussion to pure science was more important than indulging in some bantering bullshit and philosopharting?  

Shit we're not that boring are we? Confused Confused Confused
Reply
#4
Fuck.

I am going to miss your Trump euphemisms.
"Who's with me?." - stanky
Reply
#5
gosh.

Did i say something wrong?

Do i even get to know what it was?
Reply
#6
O.K.

I've since figured out what it was.
Same old same old.

Me, exposing a metaphorical criticism of science in general.
I feel qualified to do this, btw.

(I did really well in math and science in school; I always did shit in religion.)

Thing is, my metaphor is proving itself.

Pragmatic and other 2-dimensional skeptics have a hard time getting hip with the new data.
I've always had this problem with the 'critical thinking community"...they have an agenda.

They get touchy when they are challenged.

It's far easier to write off people like me as being woo-mongers.

What a cheap shot.

Step up to the plate.

Consider this:

Suppose a few of us survive the onslaught of the religion of science....and in the future, we had a ban on science...because it was the cool new religion that brought about our extinction.
How wrong would that be?

Over population?
Science.
Trashing of the oceans?
Science.
Endless radioactive pollution?
Science.

How stunning, this arrogance we have regarding science.
It will clearly be our demise.
And the demise of all other species on the way.

Yet, even a hint of what I'm saying is so offensive, that we lose our minds.

Are we so dedicated to this new truth that we are incapable of questioning it?

If so, how does that not qualify as zealotry?

I can almost see the last remaining humans saying, "Well, at least it was sciency as fuck".

How do we get this arrogant?
So touchy?
Like religious fundamentalists?

Science has become sociopathic.

Here's what's really fucked up here:.

Most cutting edge scientists totally agree with me on all of this.

If it makes you feel better, of course, ignore me.
Or accuse me of not understanding science.

Disgraceful of course.

If I'm not the voice of critical thinking and science here, well, who the hell is?

Jesus Christ, people...

I beg of you...

Just catch up with me.
Reply
#7
ignore all that.

Here' the crux of my irritation here:

Is there anyway way can have a test here, to determine which member is the most astute in math? Physics? Chemistry? Biology?

If we could manage that, i believe i would gain massive credibility. As would this site.

I have a thick skin; don't mind sparky's insults regarding my understanding of science.

Having known you all for many years, there is no doubt in my mind that I'm the guy here that understands science more than the rest of you.

I'm happy to put this to a test.

What sort-of pisses me off, is how people are able to diss me, as if i'm the force of anti-science evil.

There's two things here that I understand more than anyone else:

Rock and roll.

and fucking science.

Call my bluff.
Let's see how it unfolds.

Sparky has already admitted, several times in the past, that I'm more tuned into science than he is.
But he tends to forget that; copping to emotional nonsense and chicken-shiitedness instead.

For phux sake, people...I'm the science guy here.

You should rejoice in this fact.
I give credibility to the site.

If that isn't true, i totally welcome the debate.

Anyway, it's disgusting that I can't use a metaphor; however gently, to get you up to speed.

Can you even fathom how much this irks me?

(Probably not)

But, otoh, i'm cool with it.

Because I'm cool.

If sparky insists on leaving, well, I'm leaving too.
I don't mind the insults, or the 2d pragmatic voices here...

If i leave, where doe that leave recodger?

If sparky leaves, so do I.

Any doubt that i'm the voice of creativity here?

Is this the end of recodger?

It could be.

I will miss us, for sure.
Reply
#8
I claim to be the least educated at Recog, no contest.  I don't even know shit about those half-arsed never heard of old bands you find, how dumb is that?!  

I don't care.

Jesus, I thought we women were hair triggered emotional time bombs but we have nothing on the sensitive hides of you blokes.  Christ talk about relationship issues, ya's are like13 year old girls chucking hissy fits sometimes.  HTFU, 

Stand and fight, and enjoy doing it!

...re earlier post...
You know what worries me most Stanky?  That I 'get' what you are talking about Confused ... and it not only doesn't challenge my totally skeptical, if comparatively uneducated, assessment of humans, nature the universe and the whole damned thing,  but I enjoy the hell out of it.   Playing around with concepts that I'm not called upon to defend or attack is like mental skinny dipping.   You know that someone's going to get the vapors over it but do it anyway.
Because it's fun.   bwaaahahha and stuff 'em.

Imagine if you can, a narrow trail through a forest of briars and brambles, and poison ivy, for added interest.

The trail is the proven path which science has helped us to hack through the jungle of the unknown.

Like you it puzzles me what it is about rambles into those briars of the unknown, unthinkable, and just plain contrary that upsets those who insist that we stick only to the beaten trail so much.   What's it to them what we play mental ping pong with? Huh  How is it their problem if we aren't dragging them into the brambles with us?...that's like religion isn't it?  That insistance that others must think the same way or risk being attacked.

It's as though they resent the surrounding barriers that define the trail of scientific proofs being inspected at all.

That somehow even peering into the briars   will lead the curious into hell and damnation.. whoops, ummm, lemme rephrase that ...scientific heresy?... nope that's a bit religiousy too ..  siigh.. into "the dumbth"? superstitious smothering of IQ?   what??   What do they think is in there that will make heads explode?

And why do they take it as a personal affront??  what's that 'tood about?

What are they afraid will happen if they think 'off the designated path'??  .... this is where the "belief" in science parallels religion.

Not in it's worship as such, but in the voluntary acceptance of the imposed limitations of it's stated boundaries and insistence that others also remain within those boundaries, mentally!.   Isn't that how shamans and priests herd the parishioners? Fear of wandering from the herd?  "God knows what you're thinking?"

"Thou shalt not deviate from the path of rightousness/scientific rigour."  .. the funny thing about that is that God smites the religious deviant thinkers, and somehow science nerds seem to think that logical thought and 'faith' in scientific principles is enough to smite the deviant users of science for bad things.  Nobody smites the bomb inventors.

This insistence that everyone keep eyes ahead and not look aside from the track,  is the quasi religious' brick wall that prevents the science obsessed from understanding what drives  those who do believe in the woo and see the pixies in those briars, and "smell" CO2 and see ghosts and claim the psychic powers of prediction and have meaningful relationships and long chats with Jesus.

By staying on the designated path of science the 'believers' in it think others must then be cured of their mental flights of fancy as though if that's "logical" then it will have to happen.  But, if no one goes to look at what they think they 'see' in there how do you convince them that it's bullshit?   No harm in looking at it, only in believing it.

Science is a mentally generated tool to allow us to understand how physics works.  But it only covers physics as they apply to the material universe.    It doesn't dictate the mental pathways we take any more than it controls the laws of physics.  It explains them, it doesn't control them..  

Studying those odd little sidetracks that some wander off on is fascinating.  We don't have to follow those weirdo paths to their ends.    We can wander a ways down some to get a gist of where they're leading those who are not in thrall to the path of science, and when we understand what sends them off we have a better chance of keeping them from wandering too far.

The scientifically enthralled have succumbed to the good old elitist syndrome.  They hold the impression that just because they are right, that they will win.   ...it just doesn't work out that way.  

Chaos theory aided and abetted by human nature fucks them up eventually and a 'mutant' arises, smashing through the briar hedge and stamping out onto the clear pathway and blasts their logic apart.

A glance into the brambles every now and then would serve them better, to get some warning of the mutants  approach.


If there's only one path we can logically be allowed to follow... that being the path that has been cleared by our use of scientific thinking, ... then isn't the curiosity about why those mental briars are there at all, and what lurks in them,  acceptable?

If our comprehension of "42" is limited only to what has so far been permitted to be accepted by 'science' then we may know more and more about 'science' but less and less about ourselves.  ... and about those 'mutants' from the jungle,  who don't fit the logical pathway pattern. Angel

No I'm not on anything, I just write like this when I'm still regaining consciousness and before the coffee kicks in. Blush Big Grin
Reply
#9
that was fabulous, Di.

Here's what wrankles my ass:

One might think that my accusation of science being a religion would be met with "Of course it is. But it i the one and true religion. It is based on logic and reason."

That would be swell. if science could be that generous.
It's the best religion of all time!!!

Why can't science be happy with that?

Because, the fundamentalists behind it are more vehement than any other religion known to man.

Science is so self-obsessed with itself, that is incapable of thinking outside of its box.
I'm allowed to criticize it because i'm a card carrying member..

Scientists will worship their faith to the last drop of life on Earth...because it is too ignorant (and arrogant) to embrace other possible realities.
It has no space for the nature of consciousness, for instance...which it has zero understanding of, after all these years.

What chaps my as the most about this, is that science is opening up to everything i'm suggesting.
QM for instance, is happy to allow parallel universe concepts...and much weirder stuff.

Pedantic atheists are not happy with any of that.
They need to know that what they know is true and final.

And yet, they don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

What is bizarre, to me, is that people are so incensed by my opinions about this shit...even though they reflect all the cutting edge science.

Hence, I see parallels between science and religion.
And the nasty objections to that metaphor only drive the point home.

We aren't very deep.

I wonder how it would have gone better for me (and sparky) if i had proclaimed this, instead:

Science is the greatest religion of all time.

(Which, btw, i believe is true.)

Why isn't that good enough?

It does irk me that i'm happy to admit that water becomes a solid at a certain temperature and pressure?
Despite the fact that some scientist raped a little boy?

Christ, i wish someone understood my point.

I'm science's best friend.
Reply
#10
The more I learn the less I know.
"Who's with me?." - stanky
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)