Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - boydster

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 240
1
Of course we can all do the sticks in the ground experiment. Unfortunately it was done a long long time ago by another dude who had no other option being short of live streams from space, or a seat up to the ISS.

In reality the only place where this is an issue is here or the other place that no one mentions. Most ordinary folk take most scientific knowledge  for granted as they have more important things to think about and do. In reality we put our trust in experts all the time. Those who are parents would have put the lives of their children in the hands of experts when their children were delivered. We do it all the time, trust. For some it appears to be a dirty word. Why? Whats the problem with trusting experts who have an area of knowledge outwith your own?

The other question that really needs to be asked is the one about the acquisition of knowledge along with its ratification.

Are there people here who have absorbed all their knowledge through an appendage or did they like everyone else read about it or were taught it?

I find it incredulous that some people appear to give the impression that they have discovered it!

Are we supposed to take seriously the idea that some people on this site verify ALL the scientific theories the come across OR do we take it on trust that:-
Gravitational waves exist
Photons exist
Exoplanets exist
etc etc......
Another reframe. Classic. Don't you get tired of doing this? At this point you've made it abundantly clear that you don't intend to have an honest conversation with anyone, and you've dropped some serious hints that you are actually incapable of doing so even if you intended to.

2
Average Joe is not going to sail the ocean, put sticks in the ground to measure sun angles across the globe, or measure Earths gravitational constant. Hell he won't even look at the moon and planets thru a telescope. He isn't going to board a flight with Branson or Bezos. He isn't going to interpret satellite telemetry signals, or even view the ISS from the ground. He has to rely on an expert.
You're saying people won't do those things, and yet they do (very few, in the case of riding in an actual rocket, but the rest are more common among amateur enthusiasts). And more importantly: they CAN do those things. And that's really the important thing here that's getting overlooked by you and Tim. It's absolutely possible for someone to discern the shape of the Earth without appealing to an expert - one of the hallmarks of science is how open source it is, in that it is fairly easy to review how others have approached trying to solve and problem and recreate those same steps independently or devise a better way if you can think of one. It's also easier to just ask someone you consider to be an authority on the matter and take their answer at face value. Even more importantly though, it's possible to get an answer from an authority and then, independently, think of ways to test the answer you were given and decide if you feel it is accurate and/or complete, without taking any further advice from that same authority, and arrive at the same conclusion, you've just independently verified something.

I'm not saying you should start construction on your own personal LHC in your back yard to start looking for the Higgs particle or anything like that. But going sailing is a hobby lots of people take up. Looking through telescopes, even more so. The sticks in the ground experiment is laughably easy in today's age where you can Facetime with someone in a completely different geographical region and see instantly how the shadows are different - this might be a great thing to start having kids do in school, frankly. I'm pretty sure Ham radio enthusiasts have bounced signal off the moon before and measured how long it takes the signal to make a round trip - try that with the sun, and you'll discovery pretty quickly that the moon and the sun are not, in fact, the same distance away from the Earth

Where would the folk get the instructions to do the stick in the ground experiment?  In all honesty how did you find out about it? Were you born with the knowledge, did it come in a flash of inspiration or like everyone else did you read about it?
Where did Eratosthenes get the instructions from?
Yuri Gagarin, I guess ???

3
Average Joe is not going to sail the ocean, put sticks in the ground to measure sun angles across the globe, or measure Earths gravitational constant. Hell he won't even look at the moon and planets thru a telescope. He isn't going to board a flight with Branson or Bezos. He isn't going to interpret satellite telemetry signals, or even view the ISS from the ground. He has to rely on an expert.
You're saying people won't do those things, and yet they do (very few, in the case of riding in an actual rocket, but the rest are more common among amateur enthusiasts). And more importantly: they CAN do those things. And that's really the important thing here that's getting overlooked by you and Tim. It's absolutely possible for someone to discern the shape of the Earth without appealing to an expert - one of the hallmarks of science is how open source it is, in that it is fairly easy to review how others have approached trying to solve and problem and recreate those same steps independently or devise a better way if you can think of one. It's also easier to just ask someone you consider to be an authority on the matter and take their answer at face value. Even more importantly though, it's possible to get an answer from an authority and then, independently, think of ways to test the answer you were given and decide if you feel it is accurate and/or complete, without taking any further advice from that same authority, and arrive at the same conclusion, you've just independently verified something.

I'm not saying you should start construction on your own personal LHC in your back yard to start looking for the Higgs particle or anything like that. But going sailing is a hobby lots of people take up. Looking through telescopes, even more so. The sticks in the ground experiment is laughably easy in today's age where you can Facetime with someone in a completely different geographical region and see instantly how the shadows are different - this might be a great thing to start having kids do in school, frankly. I'm pretty sure Ham radio enthusiasts have bounced signal off the moon before and measured how long it takes the signal to make a round trip - try that with the sun, and you'll discovery pretty quickly that the moon and the sun are not, in fact, the same distance away from the Earth

4
And, also you made me be on Boyd's side, I hate that very much.  Not that Boyd is inherently wrong, I just don't want to agree with him if I can help it. 

Still luv ya Boyd, just a joke.

Wrong again. Another D- for you.

I MADE you do nothing, in that it was your own free choice.

If you imagine people you have never met can MAKE you do things then you have a serious problem of personal responsibility.

Your free choice your free problem.
Nothing to do with me. I will not be your scapegoat!
Wow, you have a real problem.  It was a joke, aimed at Boyd.

Well why include me? Some back peddling going on there!

PS. Reading someone mind is not one of my skills.
It's just another shining example of the limits of your comprehension.

5
Better question: why can't you just own being wrong, instead of trying to shift the conversation while avoiding taking any ownership for the awful argument you keep adhering too and also simultaneously attempting to run away from?

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Fetal Age
« on: July 24, 2021, 06:22:38 PM »
Pardon me fellow flat earth society member. I understand the concept of celebrating birthdays. But it seems you have misinterpreted my question. Yes, I agree that a birthday is the anniversary of being born. But why am I not considered nine months at birth but rather zero months.
Lots of babies aren't born exactly 9 months from date of conception. Natural variability means you can't just decide every newborn baby is precisely 9 months old. But every baby has a precise date and time when it was born. And that day is kind of a big deal in many cultures, so it tends to be celebrated regularly.

The time they has transpired since you were born is called your age. That's why you are 0 months old when you are born. It's a super easy reference point that can be applied to every living person that has ever been born.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Fetal Age
« on: July 24, 2021, 02:18:45 PM »
Your birthday is quite literally the anniversary of your date of birth. Birth is when you are born. This is easy stuff.

8
Classic Tim. Telling people on a debate site that they shouldn't debate or discuss something when they can instead just appeal to authority. 

If you don't want to be part of the conversation, you don't have to post. Let the rest of the folks that feel prepared to discuss the topic engage. Maybe you'll learn something.

9
Maybe trying saying the exact same thing with even more words, I bet that'll work. It helps hide the fact that you keep dodging the point, right?

10
I included quotes from the most significant posts...
...
You say I have reframed...where?
You're ignoring the part where you agreed that people can only get knowledge from subject matter experts in the same field. And then you are asking where you reframed the argument, while still trying to reframe the argument. Neat-o, but also, the posts are all here. Your repetition doesn't change anything, and it's pretty boring. The real PL was better at this.

11
You just can't help but to try and reframe this in a way where you don't look amazingly, passionately, devotedly wrong, can you?

12
I see you're still avoiding the whole issue that has been readily apparent for the entire thread, which is that you won't detach yourself from the logical inconsistency embedded in the argument you're defending. So, what exactly do you expect to come from continuing this discussion further?

Also, you keep spelling "lose" wrong. That's probably an easier thing to stop being wrong about than the other thing I mentioned, but you do you ok?

13
You're absolutely right, the entire thread is here for all to see, where everyone can see the initial statement that Brawndo made, which I took issue with, and then you chose to launch this crusade over. It's been illustrated repeatedly. The only person not able to actually follow the conversation is you.

Brawndo asserted the ONLY way to know the shape of the Earth is to ask a subject matter expert.
I pointed out that his assertion leads to a logical inconsistency.
You jumped in to say I was wrong and have refused to back down, instead trying to drift the argument in multiple directions to distract from how gloriously wrong you were.

14
The Lounge / Re: Jamie Out
« on: July 21, 2021, 08:02:16 AM »
JAMIE COME BACK
YOU CAN BLAME IT ALL ON ME!

15
To become an expert on a totally new discipline would require the aid  of other experts and that is an undoubted fact.
A) You're moving the goalposts again
B) You're still creating a scenario where there can never be an expert, because there can never be a first expert.
C) You're stating that this new scenario you've manufactured is "an undoubted fact" even though it's a complete work of fiction.

So... nice work?

16
It's painfully obvious to everyone watching that you are stuck, again, in a loop that you can't find your way out of. And your attempts to punt aren't exactly subtle. So let's just agree to agree, it is certainly possible for someone to become an expert on a subject where there previously was not yet an expert.

17
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 19, 2021, 05:06:55 PM »
I don't think issues that are current political hot buttons should be normalized as targets for the government to make illegal for public discourse. Seems like a bad path to start paving.

18
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 19, 2021, 03:55:32 PM »
Literally the only person I've heard speak about it that is in a position to be "in the know" is Psaki, from the clips I posted before. It's entirely possible she misspoke, but she hasn't said that. It's possible she overstated what is going on, which is just a fancy way of still saying she misspoke I guess. Anyway, she's not exactly MTG, is the point.

I'll put it this way. Even if I think the WH has good intentions with getting involved to provide up to date and accurate messaging to keep Americans safe during a pandemic, we have laws and societal norms to ensure the government isn't repressing speech. When the mouthpiece for POTUS comes out and states directly to the American public that the government is actually trying to encourage influential individuals or private corporations (because they're people too, after all, right?) to repress speech, it's my opinion that part of being a responsible citizen is to call that out so it can be addressed instead of ignoring it under either the assumption or the hope that a message was just poorly worded.

19
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 19, 2021, 02:06:38 PM »
What we nees to ask is: How do we get social media to decrease the spread of fake information?  Because they sure as hell don't want to do it themselves.  Why would they?
I agree with you here. And it's entirely possible there is an answer that involves regulation that needs to be considered to help fix the disinformation issues that are rampant on social media, or maybe there's a different solution that will be better in the long run, I don't pretend to know or have the right answer. I just think it's probably worth taking a moment to consider the potential pitfalls in having the executive branch of the federal government pressuring private industry into suppressing speech they deem unacceptable.

And to SCG's point, it is entirely possible this is getting overblown by media from the right - this is all just based on a handful of statements from Psaki, after all. But her statements about it should be alarming to everyone and definitely shouldn't be ignored, like it has been, by media from the left just because she's part of "their team" or whatever.

20
Yes, it's a coincidence that the sizes and distances work out to produce eclipses like we see, and it's a temporary situation at that. We just got lucky. Sometimes things work out that way.
I think that was the point C&C was making - coincidences aren't that hard to find if you just look. The universe is a big place. If we stumble upon a coincidence, it isn't necessarily indicative that there is anything funny going on.

21
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 18, 2021, 01:43:19 PM »
I don't know why I hope you'll argue in good faith about things, Shifter, but kudos for staying strong in reminding me that you won't. I'm not saying the government can't help with anything. But I am saying the White House shouldn't be involved in attempting to control and limit legal, free speech in the US. And the amount of apathy about it I'm seeing makes me concerned that it's probably something that we will see more of.

I come from an Australian perspective which I respect will be different to an American one given different histories and experiences. I for one, do not have the same level of fear and distrust in 'the government' despite my low opinion of them. I do have a much lower opinion of the American government overall and their overreach into society with secret surveillance and spying on their own citizens (as well as most of the world including its allies if it thinks it can get away with it).
You know what? To that, I raise a glass and say cheers, sir.

22
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 18, 2021, 01:29:20 PM »
I don't know why I hope you'll argue in good faith about things, Shifter, but kudos for staying strong in reminding me that you won't. I'm not saying the government can't help with anything. But I am saying the White House shouldn't be involved in attempting to control and limit legal, free speech in the US. And the amount of apathy about it I'm seeing makes me concerned that it's probably something that we will see more of.

23
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 18, 2021, 01:18:24 PM »
I just read this, thought you would like it  https://taibbi.substack.com/p/meet-the-censored-matt-orfalea
Thanks, I'm reading it and it's interesting for sure. And it definitely can be viewed in the context of this conversation as as warning - do we want the government working directly with YouTube, Facebook, or any of these other social media companies to help shape was is considered "acceptable discourse" in new ways? My vote is a strong no. Governments change, and in the US they change fast and they can swing hard in both directions. They can stay right the fuck out of getting involved in what people can and can't discuss, and that's not something I think we should watch erode away and shrug about.

24
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 17, 2021, 12:22:06 PM »
The Surgeon General is a political appointee. Nominated by the President, confirmed by the Senate. As such, the position is very vulnerable to playing politics with issues. And because of that, the Office of the Surgeon General should also probably not be trying to control what kind of speech is to be scrubbed from social discourse. It's not like they don't have the ability and the platform to distribute information on their own, if they feel the need to combat disinformation.

I'm flabbergasted. We're discussing having the United States government, at very senior levels, working directly with social media giants to control what kind of comments should or should not be allowed. Trust me, Mitch McConnell is taking notes on how this plays out. The new version of "The Biden Rule" won't be about holding up Supreme Court appointments. It will be about repressing wrongthink.

25
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 17, 2021, 06:51:14 AM »
Is "Shifter reports post on Facebook" equal to "The White House is working directly with Facebook to address posts the White House has reported"?

No. The White House has the muscle.
Right, and that's precisely why they aren't supposed to try and suppress protected speech.

Maybe not be so precious about people's right to spread bullshit as fact. Don't worry, no one is taking Tucker Carlson away either.
So we should let the government decide what is or is not bullshit? Sure, seems like a great idea ::)

26
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 16, 2021, 08:37:19 PM »
Is "Shifter reports post on Facebook" equal to "The White House is working directly with Facebook to address posts the White House has reported"?

No. The White House has the muscle.
Right, and that's precisely why they aren't supposed to try and suppress protected speech.

27
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 16, 2021, 08:22:14 PM »
Is "Shifter reports post on Facebook" equal to "The White House is working directly with Facebook to address posts the White House has reported"?

28
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 16, 2021, 04:17:01 PM »
What could go wrong?!

29
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Why do you support Joe Biden?
« on: July 16, 2021, 02:02:20 PM »
Nice dodge. I bet no one will notice.

30
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Loki
« on: July 16, 2021, 01:54:04 PM »
There's also the discussion from one of the writers about why the Loki we have come to know had to be the least successful of the Loki's. For me, at least, that really helps set up context for some of the perceived downfalls I think.

https://wegotthiscovered.com/tv/loki-writer-explains-why-tom-hiddleston-is-the-least-successful-variant/

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 240