Anarchists and Science

[Tmaq]

I am not interested in alternate theories. Sorry.

Wow is that an understatement.

Might as well just say "I'm opposed to learning."

-Tom

[grillo]

Happy to see someone's looked into it, Tmaq. As I understand it, the reason one cannot see more than a certain distance/time is after such an amount of time/space light scatters so much as to be 'out of focus', something like the background radiation you always hear about. Also, I'm not aware of any particular claims as to the age of the universe from the plasma folks and, in fact, most claim (accurately I think) that that is unknowable and, therefore, pointless to speculate about.

I am not interested in alternate theories. Sorry.

Wow is that an understatement.

Might as well just say "I'm opposed to learning."

-Tom

EXACTLY!!!!!

[Brad Reddekopp]

[shrug] One has only so much time and only so much energy and it is not possible to pursue every single idea that might possibly be interesting. I think one must learn to prioritize or else be paralyzed by trying to go in too many directions at once. Your mileage may vary.

[Hierophant]

Oh so now I have to be interested in the very topic you guys are in order to be "in favour of learning," otherwise I am "opposed to learning" - ALL LEARNING?

Guess what? GO FUCK YOURSELVES. I am not at your fucking beck and call, assholes. Fuck you and your fucking pet theory.

And tmaq, crawl up a hole and die in it.

[grillo]

Oh so now I have to be interested in the very topic you guys are in order to be "in favour of learning," otherwise I am "opposed to learning" - ALL LEARNING?

Guess what? GO FUCK YOURSELVES. I am not at your fucking beck and call, assholes. Fuck you and your fucking pet theory.

And tmaq, crawl up a hole and die in it.

Wow. What a nice, rational man you are. And me under the impression you were at my beck and call...golly I look silly. Hey, when your ignorance is revealed I guess ad hominem attacks are the only recourse. And by the way, tmaq wasn't agreeing with me but , instead, demonstrating that there were in fact valid critiques or 'our' pet theory. I know, it must be hard to follow, what with all of the words that aren't curses, but there is something called information that is being exchanged, whether or not you have any interest in it.
I agree NoDeity that it's best to prioritize all the possibly interesting things out there, this just happens to be one that interests me. My original point was merely to understand why seemingly intelligent folks rarely seem to question 'science' and 'scientists' and Frank seems to epitomize the type of person I'm talking about with comments like "I am not interested in alternate theories. Sorry."

Hey Tremblay, sit and spin

[Hierophant]

No, I am interested in alternate theories about things. I am just not interested about YOUR pet subject, you pompous arrogant asshole.

AND YOU CALL ME IRRATIONAL, YOU PIECE OF SHIT?

YOU ARE DIRT! I CONSIGN YOU TO THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY.

[grillo]

No, I am interested in alternate theories about things. I am just not interested about YOUR pet subject, you pompous arrogant asshole.

AND YOU CALL ME IRRATIONAL, YOU PIECE OF SHIT?

YOU ARE DIRT! I CONSIGN YOU TO THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY.

I'm sorry, I meant to suggest you were ignorant, not irrational. My bad.

[Tmaq]

Oh so now I have to be interested in the very topic you guys are in order to be "in favour of learning," otherwise I am "opposed to learning" - ALL LEARNING?

Do you really expect us to believe that this was anywhere near the first time you took that attitude?

If you do, then I have a new idea for you.

(BTW, it was you who made the universal statement, rather than being specific about the theory or the subject)

Guess what? GO FUCK YOURSELVES. I am not at your fucking beck and call, assholes. Fuck you and your fucking pet theory.

It's been around for decades, Franc, not even close to a 'pet' theory.

And tmaq, crawl up a hole and die in it.

It's still a compliment when someone so obviously and pathetically stupid rages at me.

I realize that was a new idea back in 2006, 2 or 3 messages after you first met me (and did the exact same things, BTW; raged at a criticism you couldn't refute and refused to consider a new idea, all while proving yourslelf completely dense) but its no longer a new idea. You should try updating at least *once* in a while...unless you WANT to appear stupid.

Next time you are ready to honestly consider a new idea, consider that I've identified the reason you are so stupid, hence given you a solid diagnosis by which to repair your personality flaw. Here is that example; http://www.graveyardofthegods.net/forum ... 58e7d46c23

We already know how you feel about important-for-anarchists issues like censorship. (Yes, it IS a compliment when a self-styled anarchist fucks up his own ethic by censoring fundamental moral criticisms he can't address or refute.)

But just for laughs, tell us why you think anyone gives a shit about your feelings for me?

-Tom

[j-breaks]

No, I am interested in alternate theories about things. I am just not interested about YOUR pet subject, you pompous arrogant asshole.

AND YOU CALL ME IRRATIONAL, YOU PIECE OF SHIT?

YOU ARE DIRT! I CONSIGN YOU TO THE DUSTBIN OF HISTORY.

You could quote this and make it into a signature

[zero]

i have trouble with the label "anarchist", but i will respond as i may meet some of the traits. i question science. They once thought the earth was flat. Man once prayed to rain gods. But you do not have to be a scientific person, to question science as a anarchist. What you question is the system or rule of laws, societal beliefs that have come from science. And the direct influence they may have over your own life and beliefs. I do not believe the earth is flat. But if science brought forth evidence in which to make me believe it, then here is the conflict. If they bring forth evidence in which to attempt to show why i might want to believe it, then they are just giving me something to consider. I don't think you should ever not use reason and logic in considering what is brought forth. However oppression of beliefs or a system derived from others beliefs (even if proven to them) is a concern. However one should always look in self interest to a large degree.
so in your own self interest, let reason and logic be your guide. Dont let anything be fed to you. But rather smell it, touch it, taste it, and look for signs of poison. If it seems acceptable then pick it up and eat it yourself. Only animals and children are "fed". If it contains no substance you like or of nutritional value, do not waste your time pondering it. And if force fed, spit it out.

[Brad Reddekopp]

i have trouble with the label "anarchist", but i will respond as i may meet some of the traits. i question science.

Questioning is what science is all about. That is why the mainstream scientific opinions of today may tomorrow become the quaint notions of yesterday.

Dont let anything be fed to you. But rather smell it, touch it, taste it, and look for signs of poison. If it seems acceptable then pick it up and eat it yourself. Only animals and children are "fed". If it contains no substance you like or of nutritional value, do not waste your time pondering it. And if force fed, spit it out.

In other words, test it; investigate it. Science is not an institution, it's not a body of knowledge. In its purest form, science is simply a method of investigation -- the most successful method so far devised by humans.