|
|
Post by goz on Jan 24, 2019 0:53:16 GMT
Here is a little gem from clusium.. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 25, 2019 21:34:34 GMT
An absolute rip snorter from Heeeeey
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 26, 2019 1:04:12 GMT
More Heeeeey  |
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Jan 26, 2019 1:10:30 GMT
Here is a little gem from clusium .. Without context, this quote seems pretty harmless. |
|
|
|
Post by CoolJGS☺ on Jan 26, 2019 1:15:07 GMT
Dangit, I thought all of these would be about me.  |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 26, 2019 1:52:06 GMT
Here is a little gem from clusium .. Without context, this quote seems pretty harmless. Perhaps it is in the subtlety of English expression, the thought that 'opinions' are necessarily 'wrong', not merely different to one's own. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 26, 2019 3:05:44 GMT
Dangit, I thought all of these would be about me. Never mind. You just saved the day with this pearler! Personally, I think you missed a few steps there butt who know what those rogue robots might get up to when we humans are NOT looking! |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 27, 2019 21:48:06 GMT
A really good quote, for a change.
|
|
|
|
Post by maya55555 on Jan 27, 2019 21:57:42 GMT
gozzy
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 29, 2019 1:57:51 GMT
Who else butt Planet Arlon could have possibly posted this illogical nonsense?
|
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jan 30, 2019 8:39:36 GMT
An absolute rip snorter from Heeeeey Our dear friend Cody is on an absolute rampage and has provided some of the best comic moments in the last few days.
"So it can be off by millions of years but still a “very close approximation”. Okay, if you insist. LOL"
Apparently, Cody doesn't seem to get the difference between different measuring units and the concept of percentage.
So what he is saying is that you if you had to estimate the age of a tortoise which is 116 years and 7 months old and and you estimated its age as 116 years and 5 months then you didn't get a close approximation.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Lost One on Jan 30, 2019 10:49:38 GMT
Without context, this quote seems pretty harmless. Perhaps it is in the subtlety of English expression, the thought that 'opinions' are necessarily 'wrong', not merely different to one's own. Well, someone could have an opinion that the earth was flat but most of us wouldn't hesitate to call that person wrong, no? |
|
|
|
Post by Aj_June on Jan 30, 2019 11:09:24 GMT
Perhaps it is in the subtlety of English expression, the thought that 'opinions' are necessarily 'wrong', not merely different to one's own. Well, someone could have an opinion that the earth was flat but most of us wouldn't hesitate to call that person wrong, no? I have talked about this before too. There is only a certain context in which it is appropriate to claim that opinions cannot be wrong. When logicians say an opinion cannot be wrong they are probably talking in the context of non-fact based things or things for which you make predictions or try to give reasons. They do not talk about things that are grounded in facts such as past events or verified things. It is more like when you are talking in philosophical context or in contexts of everyday life when you believe certain things are possible but you are not 100% aware of the facts. As a matter of fact it is more like beliefs expressed on a topic for which everyone is not 100% aware of the facts. For example, If I say Germany will win 50 gold medals in the 2020 Summer Olympics then my opinion cannot be wrong as long as there are 50 gold medals available to be won. My opinion could be weak or less well formed but it cannot be wrong. So an important element here is that we have to understand that when we use the word 'opinion' we are talking about beliefs expressed for things/situations when all people are in some degree of ignorance. Now we have access to the internet and are willing to disprove others if they make a factually incorrect statement but the opinion that "opinions cannot be wrong" is valid only in contexts when nobody is 100% aware of the facts.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 30, 2019 20:19:42 GMT
Perhaps it is in the subtlety of English expression, the thought that 'opinions' are necessarily 'wrong', not merely different to one's own. Well, someone could have an opinion that the earth was flat but most of us wouldn't hesitate to call that person wrong, no? just read AJ's reply below, and couldn't have put it better EXCEPT to add: ...on a board like this, believe it or not, there are people likely to believe that the earth is flat, there is a devil involved in all our lives that accounts for the bad things because God is perfect, that science is run by scientists who are somehow corrupted by outside forces so you can't trust it, there is no global warming because ot was a REALLY cold day today, there are such things as chemtrails etc etc etc. The point is that we can point out ( and we do) that they are wrong butt somehow it makes no difference once their opinion is fixed...you could also call it a belief. In other words an 'opinion' is only an opinion, butt is nonetheless has great power, especially if it is completely foundationless of facts or even that other great other thing these kinds of people talk about...... 'common sense'.  |
|
|
|
Post by heeeeey on Jan 30, 2019 20:44:33 GMT
Judging from this thread, it seems you have the POV of an ostrich and believe atheists never say anything worthy of pompous ridicule.
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 30, 2019 20:50:31 GMT
Judging from this thread, it seems you have the POV of an ostrich and believe atheists never say anything worthy of pompous ridicule. You are entitled to your 'opinion'. At least most of the atheists on here have some 'knowledge ' and 'intellect' upon which to base their opinions. Some of the theists? Not so much. Yourself, not at all. I prefer emus.   |
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 30, 2019 20:52:56 GMT
Judging from this thread, it seems you have the POV of an ostrich and believe atheists never say anything worthy of pompous ridicule. Well of course atheists can say things worthy of pompous riddicule, have you ever tried reading Ayn Rand literature? |
|
|
|
Post by heeeeey on Jan 30, 2019 21:02:51 GMT
Judging from this thread, it seems you have the POV of an ostrich and believe atheists never say anything worthy of pompous ridicule. You are entitled to your 'opinion'. At least most of the atheists on here have some 'knowledge ' and 'intellect' upon which to base their opinions. Some of the theists? Not so much. Yourself, not at all. I prefer emus. When you base your 'knowledge' on half-assed, incomplete studies, your opinions are equally half-assed. |
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 30, 2019 21:09:36 GMT
An absolute rip snorter from Heeeeey Our dear friend Cody is on an absolute rampage and has provided some of the best comic moments in the last few days.
"So it can be off by millions of years but still a “very close approximation”. Okay, if you insist. LOL"
Apparently, Cody doesn't seem to get the difference between different measuring units and the concept of percentage.
So what he is saying is that you if you had to estimate the age of a tortoise which is 116 years and 7 months old and and you estimated its age as 116 years and 5 months then you didn't get a close approximation.
I wonder if he applies that reasoning to other things:
Doctor: If you don't get the surgery there's a 99% chance you will die.
Cody: But there's still a 1% I won't! So you don't know for absolute sure you fraud!
Doctor: Did you actually listen to what I just said?
|
|
|
|
Post by goz on Jan 30, 2019 21:59:09 GMT
You are entitled to your 'opinion'. At least most of the atheists on here have some 'knowledge ' and 'intellect' upon which to base their opinions. Some of the theists? Not so much. Yourself, not at all. I prefer emus. When you base your 'knowledge' on half-assed, incomplete studies, your opinions are equally half-assed. That again would be you, since you dismiss scientific academia which is run under VERY strict world wide peer reviewed rules where EVERYONE's finding are published, replicated discussed and evaluated. This is how scientific thought and discovery has progressed and we have had the discoveries that we have, that you take for granted. It has been self assessed and monitored WORLDWIDE, completely out of the control of government or most interest groups (I exempt Big Pharma research from this category though they often make great discoveries motivated by profit and often NOT) It is the long established mechanism for adding to the sum of human knowledge and progress and yet you and your likes reject the truths that have been discovered , when it doesn't suit your own half arsed unproven notions. The stuff you proposed has not been subjected to this and/or subjected and failed the rigorous standards. That you are a stupid Dunnig Kuger effect anti-intellectual buffoon you have made very clear in all your postings. |
|
