• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Science marches on

Nova_C said:
What mistakes? I'm genuinely curious because Forked Tung just asked you a question.
Click to expand...

OK, look at the statements he made before the last sentence which was the question. Then look back and the posts prior to that. It should be pretty easy to pick them out.

Now, look back at the first few pages of posts. Read the posts and determine for yourself if people made rude comments to Russell.
 
jazzgeek said:
(Oh, and your point contains a self-evident, if not paradoxical, error. Fix it, and I'll continue with you.)
Click to expand...

sfaoldguy said:
Please tell me that you chose those two words to be funny. If so, that is a clever joke. If not... :dancer:
Click to expand...

They are not mutually exclusive, to wit:

The sentence below this one is true.
The sentence above this one is false.

See? Self-evident. Paradoxical.

Dance, my little puppet. Dance!


Dale
 
jazzgeek said:
They are not mutually exclusive, to wit:

The sentence below this one is true.
The sentence above this one is false.

See? Self-evident. Paradoxical.

Dance, my little puppet. Dance!


Dale
Click to expand...

The dictionary according to Dale. With lessons like that one, I will speek Dale in no time.
 
jazzgeek said:
They are not mutually exclusive, to wit:

The sentence below this one is true.
The sentence above this one is false.

See? Self-evident. Paradoxical.

Dance, my little puppet. Dance!


Dale
Click to expand...

And oh yea... That is not an accurate example of self-evident or paradoxical. Thought I would add that just in case there was any question.
 
sfaoldguy said:
And oh yea... That is not an accurate example of self-evident or paradoxical. Thought I would add that just in case there was any question.
Click to expand...

Then you may want to take it up with Douglas R. Hofstadter, as the example is pretty much lifted (as I recall it) from his book, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, which won the Pulitzer Prize in 1980.

When you were what, all of six years old?

But of course, I'll defer to your intellect when it reaches the level of Hofstadter's; show me your credentials on linguistics and research in artificial intelligence, author half a dozen or so books on the aforementioned subject matter, hold a fellowship at a major university, and then I'll bow to your greatness.

In the meantime, I'm on to your little game of, when your points are refuted, "No, that's not an accurate example of _____ "......without providing a counterpoint.

Ladies and Gents, here's yet another example of someone who argues from the lawyers maxim of "When the facts are against you, argue the law; when the law is against you, argue the facts."

And yet, when all you offer up is your stupidity, and you're called on it, then *I'm* the "prick".

Guess what? Considering the source, I can live with that.

Be gone, sad troll.


Dale
 
alan said:
No sweeping it under the rug by side-stepping. Please address the point made, not the grammar used to write it. Just because I'm curious.
Click to expand...

I was not addressing the grammar used as I have already pointed out.
sfaoldguy said:
I wasn't talking about grammar. I was talking about your points. Your points contain errors.
Click to expand...

The smartass statements made toward Russell are obvious. If you or anyone esle does or does not agree with me, I honestly don't care. I am not going to just sit here while the "open minded scientists" bash another member of this forum or drill him disrespectfully.



Evolution is science's best explanation of where all of the various forms of life came from, but it does not mean that it is correct. One of the pillars of science is that it is not infallible. True scientists look at evolution as the best scientific answer to date but are "open minded" to alternatives. It is this open mindedness that will allow our understanding to evolve and not be retarded by our own feelings toward those of faith.
 
sfaoldguy said:
The dictionary according to Dale. With lessons like that one, I will speek Dale in no time.
Click to expand...

Might I suggest just the standard, garden-variety dictionary so as to learn to "speek" standard, garden-variety English?


Dale

(Rebuttal along the lines of "That's not an accurate example of a garden..." in 5....4....3....2....)
 
jazzgeek said:
Then you may want to take it up with Douglas R. Hofstadter, as the example is pretty much lifted (as I recall it) from his book, Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, which won the Pulitzer Prize in 1980.

When you were what, all of six years old?

But of course, I'll defer to your intellect when it reaches the level of Hofstadter's; show me your credentials on linguistics and research in artificial intelligence, author half a dozen or so books on the aforementioned subject matter, hold a fellowship at a major university, and then I'll bow to your greatness.

In the meantime, I'm on to your little game of, when your points are refuted, "No, that's not an accurate example of _____ "......without providing a counterpoint.

Ladies and Gents, here's yet another example of someone who argues from the lawyers maxim of "When the facts are against you, argue the law; when the law is against you, argue the facts."

And yet, when all you offer up is your stupidity, and you're called on it, then *I'm* the "prick".

Guess what? Considering the source, I can live with that.

Be gone, sad troll.


Dale
Click to expand...

Give an appropriate reference with page number and I will be happy to look at it. If not, I guess we will all have to take it as you recall it. :laugh:
 
jazzgeek said:
Might I suggest just the standard, garden-variety dictionary so as to learn to "speek" standard, garden-variety English?


Dale

(Rebuttal along the lines of "That's not an accurate example of a garden..." in 5....4....3....2....)
Click to expand...

Yep, I mispelled it. Noticed it the moment I hit submit. Maybe I should take responsibility for your ignorant posts since you were distracted by my spelling error. OK, now you can sit down and write an intelligent post. Try saying something smart instead of trying to say something that sounds smart.
 
alan said:
Did it again, didn't you?
I'm not being mean, I'm really curious how you can explain making these two statements.
I must go to bed soon.
Click to expand...

I didn't want to say names to test who would answer. Did you ever steal something as a child and then get home and your mother ask how your day was. As soon as she asked, you got that feeling as though she knew but her question was innocent. The same happens when you don't name names when you make an accusation. Those who know they are guilty are usually the most adamant at debating the comment.
 
jazzgeek said:
Have I ever mentioned to anyone here that I'm a fan of irony?


Dale

(Truly, you're making this way too easy. This is batting practice for me.)
Click to expand...

Ever heard of fighting fire with fire? Boy, if this is the way you perform in batting practice, you are going to stay there and keep my bench warm.
 
sfaoldguy said:
Ever heard of fighting fire with fire? Boy, if this is the way you perform in batting practice, you are going to stay there and keep my bench warm.
Click to expand...

You have no team. You have no game. Right now, you are simply here for my amusement.


Dale


(Oh, and that's not the proper use of the phrase, "fighting fire with fire".)

^^^^
See what I did there? (Again, yawn.)
 
sfaoldguy said:
Give an appropriate reference with page number and I will be happy to look at it. If not, I guess we will all have to take it as you recall it. :laugh:
Click to expand...

It *is* an appropriate reference. What, you need the ISBN number? They don't have libraries near your shack, Mister Kaczynski? I presume you're using a keyboard, so I'm confident you have the motor skills to turn pages.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top