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 - watchayakan

Pages: [1] 2 3 4
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Modern Science = BS
« on: December 15, 2009, 10:46:19 PM »
Wait ...cancers are cured by simple math and a couple of dudes trying stuff a couple of times?  Sweet deals.  Here I thought much of it was based on the science of high-energy physics and electromagnetism.

You'd be quite wrong.
Sweet rebuttal.

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Damn you, Dexter!
« on: December 15, 2009, 10:44:09 PM »
My money is that at the start of next season, they are barely going to cover Arthur's family at all.  They'll probably also not show any suspicion over Rita's death and, if they do, it will be behind Dexter's back.  I have a feeling that Debra is not going to be a problem for Dexter, based on the scene where she told him about his family.

I must say, the ending terribly upset me.  I was just all, 'No!  No!  No!'  However, it was also great at the same time.  I love the cyclical aspect of it.  Dexter and Arthur were both borne out of blood and now so is Harrison.

Based on what the article said, I don't see much of a problem.

Also, comparing this to the Great Firewall of China just does not make sense.  China blocks sites based on political content and restricts reasonable freedom of expression.  I fail to see how child pornography and other such illegal sites are reasonable forms of expression. 

Is there a possibility for abuse?  Yes, just as there is with everything, that does not mean that they should not exist.  There is potential for abuse with legal recognition of marriage, police force, military, healthcare system, federal budgets for state/provincial infrastructure, etc.  As long as it has proper oversight and transparency, it could work out very well.

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Modern Science = BS
« on: December 15, 2009, 07:20:02 PM »
Wait ...cancers are cured by simple math and a couple of dudes trying stuff a couple of times?  Sweet deals.  Here I thought much of it was based on the science of high-energy physics and electromagnetism.

9/11 was a conspiracy!

Perpetrated by Islamic extremists.  It's the half-baked conspiracies that do even deserve attention.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Compulsory Immunizations
« on: December 15, 2009, 07:16:02 PM »
My friend worked at a Burger King and a fellow employee of his put faecal matter in the ice cream or whatever it was machine.  =X

Flat Earth Debate / Re: Airlines
« on: December 15, 2009, 05:26:48 PM »
We think maybe high winds aloft are responsible, tentatively called the Ice Wall Stream.

You think? So what if you think? You have absolutely no evidence of these winds that are moving airplanes faster than the speed of sound.

Yes, you're right.  It's still just an hypothesis.

(Any grammar guru willing to tell me if it's 'a' or 'an' before hypothesis?  I couldn't decide and decided to discard the rule.)
It would be 'a.'  The use of 'a' or 'an' is phonetics.  For instance, you say 'an umbrella' but you say 'a unicorn.'  For hypothesis, I would use a long a.


Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Weird Math
« on: December 15, 2009, 01:49:08 PM »
No, it's just a play on the fact that the equation can be simplified as such:

1 + x^2 + x^4 + x^6 + x^8 ... = (1-x^2)^-1

for 1 > x > -1.

Flat Earth General / Re: satellites
« on: December 15, 2009, 01:36:08 PM »
Tom: evidence that it was faked?

Unless you want to simply say something is true without any evidence.

I've already provided enough evidence that Vandebergh is a shill who works for NASA.

NASA puts up his images on their website, which means that he is associated with them and receiving money at the very least.

Also, Vandebergh says in the OP:

    "According to data from the helmet cam, and calculated from the point of sunset in the video and during the pass, timing and location indicated the spacewalker as Joe Acaba working most earth-faced during these seconds of recordings."

Yeah right. As if an "amateur" had timestamps from the helmet cam. NASA doesn't release any of that to the public.

NASA actually releases very little data from its alleged spacewalks and space missions. The sole and only data they release to the public is the footage here and there which we see on TV.
So you have no evidence that it was faked?  Okay.

Flat Earth General / Re: satellites
« on: December 15, 2009, 02:01:35 AM »
Tom: evidence that it was faked?

Unless you want to simply say something is true without any evidence.

The cern organisation seems to be absorbing vast quantities of money, showing nothing in return.

This all sounds very familiar. Are cern in league with nasa? Are cern the european nasa?
The LHC is a complex machine.  It is understandable that there have been glitches.

One of the workers left a beer can in the accelerator. That one's no joke.

People always think that particle accelerators are some sort of ultimate deus-ex machina, when they're really not.

How "not"?

Well, the first one was made with hoses and spare gardening tools.
Who the frick thinks particle accelerators are some kind of god?

Also, if that were true, I would simply think that to be awesome.  However, I believe electrical components are required. 

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Weird Math
« on: December 15, 2009, 12:47:29 AM »
1 + 2^2 + 2^4 + 2^6 + 2^8 ... = -(1/3)

Euler will back me up on this.

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: How does Insurance work?
« on: December 15, 2009, 12:36:19 AM »
Easy to say, but what happens if you have a car wreck at 18 and dont have anything saved.

So what? A lawsuit can't force you to pay something you don't have.
However, the whole incident could cause your entire credit to be ruined, which is quite a bad way to start adulthood.  I don't know about your world Tom, but in mine credit is slightly important.

If you want the debate notes read the book Earth Not a Globe.
Maybe because we don't want to read 'lol i pwned that n00b'?

Not to mention, depending upon the calibre of one's ability to debate and their opponent's, someone could win any debate over anything.  I could prove to some Joe schmoe with enough training that Obama is actually an alien who came here to enslave us all and drink his victory gin.  That does not mean that I provided any credible facts.

I mean, go and read some works by Plato, such as Republik.  It is a very good read and he can be very persuasive, but that does not mean I think he's right all the time.

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Modern Science = BS
« on: December 15, 2009, 12:26:20 AM »
Nice presentation on why you should be a denialist. The reason why most people build upon scientific assumptions (which go through a lot more rigorous peer review and verification processes than any other major method) rather than perform every test of verification themselves is for the sake of progression.


Progression off of an unproven hypothesis isn't "science". Building one unproven hypothesis off of another, as what Stephen Hawking does, isn't getting us anywhere closer to the truth.

For example; in the Round Earth model stellar systems like galaxies aren't supposed to move as if they were solid disks. Describing the movements of galaxies and super clusters has been a challenge to astronomers. Newtonian mechanics and "Gravity" predicts that the bodies towards the interior of the disk should move at a faster rate around the center than the bodies on the outside of the disk. This is exactly opposite of what is observed.

See this quote from

    "According to theory, a galaxy should rotate faster at the center than at the edges. This is similar to how an ice-skater rotates: when she extends her arms she moves more slowly, when she either extends her arms above her head or keeps them close to the body she starts to rotate more rapidly. Taking into consideration how gravitation connects the stars in the galaxy the predicted result is that average orbital speed of a star at a specified distance away from the center would decrease inversely with the square root of the radius of the orbit (the dashed line, A, in figure below). However observations show that the galaxy rotates as if it is a solid disk as if stars are much more strongly connected to each other (the solid line, B, in the figure below)."

Whenever a brick wall like this comes up astronomers invent a fictitious hypothesis to explain occurrences. In this case they invented "Dark Matter" to explain why the galaxies rotated as they did.

They placed one unproven hypothesis upon the next in an effort to keep the house of cards called Gravity from crashing to the ground. The necessity for truth is denied entirely.
So you use a situation that is only relevant in RE to show that RE is false?  You use something that was made up in RE, then they have trouble explaining that in RE.  QED, FE?

Anyway, dark matter has been proven to exist.  Get with the times.

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: How does Insurance work?
« on: December 13, 2009, 04:42:00 PM »
^Really?  Where I come from the rate stays the same even if you are in an at-fault collision.

That's odd, most insurance companies base your rates off the amount you have claimed and your tickets. An at fault accident adds points to your license which also raises your rates.
Mine and the ones of every single other driver in my province with Saskatchewan plates has insurance from the government, although I believe they can receive private insurance on top of that.  All we do is pay a fee for every accident we are at fault for.

Flat Earth General / Re: Absolute zero everywhere?
« on: December 11, 2009, 04:18:37 PM »
You will never know because the conspiracy won't let you, and/or you can't afford to build a rocket to get to space yourself.
You don't have to go into space to know that space isn't a true vacuum, or that an imperfect vacuum has a temperature above absolute zero.
Yes, you do, otherwise that would be an assumption.  A Zetetic society cannot have that!
Nope. True vacuums contradict any system trying to reach equilibrium and are mathematically impossible anyways due to virtual particles in quantum mechanics.
Absolute zero is a perfect 0 entropy configuration which would require no outside energy to enter the location.
See the second law of thermodynamics to understand why that's not the case.

Since it is impossible to close off a system from the rest of the universe, absolute zero must be impossible and exist strictly theoretically.
I don't have to get up from my chair to deduce this.
Have you observed quantum fluctuations yourself?

Flat Earth General / Re: Proof
« on: December 11, 2009, 04:17:18 PM »
Our skepticism is reasonable.  If the Earth is flat, then the photographs showing an RE must be faked.
So what makes FE reasonable?

Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: How does Insurance work?
« on: December 11, 2009, 04:12:05 PM »
^Really?  Where I come from the rate stays the same even if you are in an at-fault collision.

Flat Earth General / Re: Idea: Start a University
« on: December 11, 2009, 05:49:08 AM »
Yes, but the system is also set up to make sure many people do not just have to fake this one test.

Who is talking about taking just "this one test?"  I'm not.  To accurately assess whether an individual has knowledge and expertise equivalent to what would be acquired from years of attendence at a university is obviously going to take a whole battery of tests probably requiring days or possibly even weeks to complete.  If an individual can successfully pass and survive such a grueling ordeal, that should be an adequate demonstration that he is sufficiently knowledgeable and competent, provided that the tests are competently designed, and that there are adequate safeguards to detect and prevent cheating.  Besides that, there are some people with college degrees who have managed to cheat and fake their way through their entire academic career.  Thus, merely possessing a degree from an accredited university is not necessarily infallible proof that they actually know what they claim to know.
Of course it's not perfect.  I'm sure that with sufficient time your method would become quite corrupted too.  A thing about universities thought is that they are also largely used as research institutes.  By making it so that people with skill do not need to go through them there is less chance that universities will catch them and they will fall into the pit of private companies that need people to market their toys or some shit.

I am not advocating the current model per se, just saying that is how we ended up with out current economic setup.

Flat Earth General / Re: Proof
« on: December 11, 2009, 05:12:41 AM »
Even skepticism is supposed to be reasonable.

'Hi, my name's Frank.'
'No, I do not believe you.  Provide your birth certificate at once or I will consider you basically a liar.'*

*I note that such skepticism could be reasonable in certain circumstances, it is not in everyday encounters.

Flat Earth General / Re: Idea: Start a University
« on: December 11, 2009, 05:10:36 AM »
You know, as much as I hate to say it, I am actually in sympathy with some of what Tom Bishop is saying.  If some kind of testing program can reliably determine that an individual truly understands both how and why to do things and can demonstrate full competence to fullfill the requirements of the job, what difference does it make whether or not they have been formally awarded degrees earned during actual attendance at a university or trade school?

Because Tom isn't interested in rewarding, he's interested in money.

I agree with you about Tom, but I still think there ought to be some workable means of crediting and recognizing people who have managed to attain great knowledge, expertise and competence on their own, without actual attendence at formal institutions of higher learning.  Why should such people be required to spend years and huge sums of money to take formal courses at such institutions covering subject matter that they can demonstrate to an appropriately competent person or testing agency that they already understand thoroughly?  I realize that such individuals are relatively rare, but they do exist and (IMO) are even more admirable and potentially more valuable assets to prospective employers than typical, degree-holding university graduates.
It's just the way the pendulum of the free market has swung.  I don't see why businesses must recognize such individuals.  Could the system be fucked out of some good people?  Yes, but the system is also set up to make sure many people do not just have to fake this one test.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Spanking as discipline
« on: December 11, 2009, 03:02:18 AM »
Perhaps in the classroom, but never in the home. I say this because I would much rather have abusive teachers than abusive parents. Plus, with teachers its less personal and less serious, even though it's illegal...
Because the possibility of being fearful and untrusting of all authority over you that is not family will totally be useful in life.

'Fuck you, man, why do I have to pay rent on the first of the month?!  Back off!'


Scientist gets money.
Results are negative.
Granters go back in time and take back money.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Spanking as discipline
« on: December 10, 2009, 09:00:05 PM »
Once verbal cummincation can be established between parent and child, I don't see why there should be any reason to resort to corporal punishment.

Flat Earth General / Re: Disproving RET - a challenge
« on: December 10, 2009, 07:57:38 PM »
It will always be a source of great amusement to me how blind FE'ers seem to be to the weakness and folly of their own position, no matter how convincing and abundant the contrary evidence.  I still maintain that they, by their tactics and the absurdity of their arguments, actually do at least as much damage to the credibility of FET as the best reasoned arguments of its opponents.  This may even be the deliberate aim of some of the fake FE'ers (who, I am sure, constitute the great majority of the "FE'ers" on this site).  I admit, however, that I am almost as amused and/or dismayed, at times, by the arguments used by some of the less scientifically literate of the RE advocates.  I think, however, that at least some of the latter often learn something useful from some of the discussions at this site, and wind up being better informed on science, in general, than they were before.
Personally this site has made me think much more about skepticism, the line between skepticism and fanaticism, the premises I assume to be true, and the way I view the world.

Flat Earth General / Re: Biggest evidence for flat earth
« on: December 10, 2009, 06:19:24 PM »
^They'll just say, 'Work in progress.'

Flat Earth General / Re: Biggest evidence for flat earth
« on: December 10, 2009, 05:59:41 PM »
Absent an accelerometer and neglecting air resistance, I would say that I accelerated downwards at a rate of 9.8 m/s^2 toward an earth stationary from my view point, but technically could not discern this from other scenarios defined as equivalent.

Nope. When walking off the edge of a chair the only experience is the earth accelerating upwards.

There is no indication that anything is pushing you down.
I flagged this post to the moderators then you edit it.  =/

Anyways, there is no indication that anything is pushing the Earth into me.  Not to mention, who said anything about us being pushed down?

Ray Comfort, one of the biggest proponents of the fight against evolution, doesn't even know what speciation is.
He doesn't know what it is, but he knows that it doesn't happen.
I don't know you well enough to know if that was sarcasm, but Comfort believes that bananas were made by god specifically for us.  I guess he's never seen a wild banana.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Compulsory Immunizations
« on: December 10, 2009, 05:36:53 PM »
Your correct, you did not, I guess I just assumed that because that is an even better idea than that.

You're going to force private companies to stop making medication that will be bought and garner profit?  You're going to stop research that ends up benefiting many areas and gives impetus to give research to fields like stem cell research which is very well under fire?  You're going to tell these people that they must die a horrible death, be forced to forgo treatment, and expect them to have a modicum of respect for those without the infliction?  The families too?  You expect there not to be riots?  You expect at least some small form of anarchy to not break loose?

People with HIV make up .6% of the population.  Imagine how many close friends and relatives they all have.  Imagine what percentage of Americans alone would be absolutely furious?

That kind of plan would probably have the opposite effect.  A lot, albeit probably not nearly all, would just go out and spread it.  I mean, just the other day a man injected his blood into his wife's so that she would then have the virus and would start to sleep with him.

I mean, I realize this sounds slightly out-there, but is it really?  Condemning over 1/2 of 1% of the entire US to die?  Not to mention the US is a big centre for medical research.  Countries the world over wtf at you.

They already are condemned to die. My plan is simply to stop prolonging their life and allowing them to spread it to others. It's much harder to spread a disease in half a year than a decade. As for the guy that injected his wife so she'll sleep with him. This obviously means they aren't such victims after all. They are people that made a mistake got infected and problem will repeat this mistake. Intentionally giving someone AIDS is considered murder in the United States. We could probably change the law to giving someone AIDS no matter what the circumstances is considered murder. This would cut down on the HIV positive population very quickly as we administered death sentences after a few basic blood tests to prove they gave the other person the virus.
I fail to see how you answered my objections whatsoever.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4