Totally agree, it's just a troll to get people to think through things and to enrage the pure flamers.

Funny stuff indeed, just not true though, but that's not really the point is it?

heh

Well all trolling isn't done for the exact same reasons now is it?

Tell me what is the difference between flame trolling and sarcastic trolling?

but good point, thinking needs to be stopped....

Wasting your time azrad. Card blindly distrusts sciences, he will never accept reasonable terms like repeatable experiments. He incorrectly assumes that because science, and nothing else for that matter, cannot 100% prove anything that that means it must be distrusted. He also likes to throw around meaningless platitudes about how scientists are too rigid with their belief system because they dont zealously chase down fringe claims from mostly uneducated conspiracy theorists and amateur scientists. Hilarious to anyone who's ever been inside of a college science department and seen the skepticism that most learned scientists act on.

I like to log on to this very thread once a month or so just to see who else falls for Card's trap (having tried to argue with him on multiple occasions with literal zero breakthrough). Sad to say this week you're the poor dote attempting to explain something to one of the most closed minded people there is in this small but interesting subforum. Ironic when he acts under the guise of "opening his mind to new possibilities" or w/e it is he thinks he's doing by blindly chasing every conspiracy theory there is.

Don't take that to mean he's always wrong, even a blind squirrel finds nuts. It is the closeminded attitude and general defensive nature that makes discussion with him fruitless. Even paging through breitbart or clipping your nails is a better use of your time i've found. Its like a game of football inside of a centrifuge, not only the goalposts but the entire pitch itself constantly moving.

This post was edited by thesnipa on Feb 26 2016 09:46am

lol nice description

what lies you tell yourself, it's funny to hear the crazy talk in your head, I don't have a blind distrust of science - If you consider the entirety of science I would say 95+ % is correct - the stuff that is most questionable is the version of history and stuff that is older than 2000 years. This particular experiment that Henry Cavendish invented is highly flawed, he said he had to be 100s of meters away or else he would infect the results - so now you think you can minature it, put it in a tiny plastic box, stand right next to it and repeat the results in 5 minutes and this somehow proves all item have gravity. I really don't understand how you can say that science proves nothing, but in this one failed experiment it proved something? Nice fail logic.

You say I talk about conspiracy theories, can you name any of them? The word "theory" implies an explanation that only might be true, like the Big Bang Theory, the evolution theory, the theory of non existence, the theory of multiple universes, what I've presented in this thread is actual evidence, tangible evidence I believe in, theories are merely debatable. I happen to think most "conspiracy" theories are wrong or just an attempt to troll the weak minded, kinda like the Bigfoot one that you told me you totally believe, and I find pure hilarious. Do you not understand the difference between actual tangible evidence and a hypothetical theory of explanation? But anyway I see your point - that if I question any small part of science, I must be attacking all of science, more failed lies of grade 2 logic. You religtards are funny with all your venomous poison you try to pass off as words and ideas, truly hilarious.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Feb 26 2016 02:06pm

Well as far as conspiracy theories i believe you have some positions on America's stonehenge that i find silly.

Beyond that, my post describes why i would rather not have fully flushed out conversation with you, it seems silly to fully flush out your own views. Especially when you can be disingenuous and move the goal posts at a moments notice.

As to Bigfoot if you find my beliefs ridiculous it's either because you don't know my actual beliefs or are ignorant.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gigantopithecus

It's only a matter of how long Bigfoot existed not if it existed. If it's anywhere near 100k years ago they interacted with humans. It's not ridiculous to think that a population could have lived in remote areas such as the Canadian wilderness and Siberia up to recent times. However I still believe in my heart that bigfoot is extinct today, but i wouldnt be shocked if some still existed in deep wilderness. As i said, its not a matter of IF bigfoot existed, its a matter of if it still exists.

As for America stonehenge - I just believe that some rocks are unexplained. The term "America's Stonehedge" suggests an explanation which is highly debatable - so to be clear - I believe in the evidence, not the explanation. Theories are meant to be questioned, but your saying that if i question any of them that, that I have a blind distrust off all science - cmon man.

I think the thing you have trouble with is that you see belief in religion or science as 100% right or wrong as it must always have the answer or reversely does not have the answer, its either black or white, left or right, conservative or communist, and things are always much more complicated and unexplainable.

This post was edited by card_sultan on Feb 26 2016 02:24pm

I already explained that to you: If you want to measure the gravitational constant to a high accuracy, you need to be very careful. If you just want to see 1 ball attract another ball with gravity, you don't need to be as careful (you prob have the stuff necessary to replicate it yourself in your living room).

Dumb on purpose

nah, im not saying that at all. nor should the term "blind distrust" be taken literally. It should be taken to mean a consistent pattern of questioning things that shouldnt be. Which in my opinion you do quite often.



your attempts to pigeon hole me as an absolutist are way off base. I'm about as lazy of a christian as there is. in fact i'd say im more strictly spiritual as i reject most christian dogma, especially acceptance of Jesus as our lord and savior as a prerequisite for salvation.