Killer as hero

[jakee 1,489]

13 hours ago, jaybird18c said:

It’s a lecture at Cambridge. Idiots! Not you. Them! 

It was a lecture in Cambridge. Cambridge the city. Nowhere is it stated or implied that the Discovery Institute event it was part of had any connection with Cambridge University.

Now when you say it's interesting, is it interesting in terms of containing a single new point that hasdn't been debinked, rehashed and debunked again a thousand times already?

[winsor 236]

12 hours ago, kallend said:

So what?

Does lecturing at Cambridge make one infallible?

Are you saying it might not?

[kallend 2,026]

13 minutes ago, winsor said:

Are you saying it might not?

I didn't make a statement.

[kallend 2,026]

28 minutes ago, jakee said:

It was a lecture in Cambridge. Cambridge the city. Nowhere is it stated or implied that the Discovery Institute event it was part of had any connection with Cambridge University.

Now when you say it's interesting, is it interesting in terms of containing a single new point that hasdn't been debinked, rehashed and debunked again a thousand times already?

The Discovery Institute  is an evangelical protestant think tank that promotes the  pseudoscientific concept of intelligent (sic)  design (aka "junk science").   It has nothing whatever to do with Cambridge University.

[winsor 236]

2 hours ago, kallend said:

I didn't make a statement.

Thank goodness!  I was worried there for a moment...

[jaybird18c 22]

2 hours ago, kallend said:

The Discovery Institute  is an evangelical protestant think tank that promotes the  pseudoscientific concept of intelligent (sic)  design (aka "junk science").   It has nothing whatever to do with Cambridge University.

Ok…well Stephen Meyer is a PhD who graduated from Cambridge. The lecture describes a whole lot of other scientists, mostly PhDs from Cambridge and their thought processes regarding God and science. I really don’t think you’re smarter than the fellows he mentions and they questioned it, particularly regarding information theory.

[normiss 798]

1 minute ago, jaybird18c said:

Ok…well Stephen Meyer is a PhD who graduated from Cambridge. The lecture describes a whole lot of other scientists, mostly PhDs from Cambridge and their thought processes regarding God and science. I really don’t think you’re smarter than the fellows he mentions and they questioned it, particularly regarding information theory.

I don't think you understand what you just wrote.

[winsor 236]

1 minute ago, jaybird18c said:

Ok…well Stephen Meyer is a PhD who graduated from Cambridge. The lecture describes a whole lot of other scientists, mostly PhDs from Cambridge and their thought processes regarding God and science. I really don’t think you’re smarter than the fellows he mentions and they questioned it, particularly regarding information theory.

Argumentum ad Vericundiam.

[normiss 798]

1 minute ago, winsor said:

Argumentum ad Vericundiam.

Considering college professors to be "authority figures" is a bit of a stretch.

[wmw999 2,439]

26 minutes ago, normiss said:

Considering college professors to be "authority figures" is a bit of a stretch.

Not if you ask college professors. Daughter of one here.

Wendy P.

[turtlespeed 219]

On 12/29/2024 at 12:55 PM, billvon said:

For the same reason it's not premeditated murder to repeatedly deny a beggar money he needs to survive.  It is no doubt a shitty thing to do, of course.

If you tried to support every beggar in austin you'd go broke.

So, you decide what's shitty.

[jakee 1,489]

1 hour ago, jaybird18c said:

Ok…well Stephen Meyer is a PhD who graduated from Cambridge. The lecture describes a whole lot of other scientists, mostly PhDs from Cambridge and their thought processes regarding God and science. I really don’t think you’re smarter than the fellows he mentions and they questioned it, particularly regarding information theory.

It often does take a smart person to make utter bullshit sound believable, and the information theory argument is certainly bullshit.

But hey, it's nice to know that you're happy to let the ivory tower elite tell you what to think.

Edited December 30, 2024 by jakee

[nigel99 466]

2 hours ago, wmw999 said:

Not if you ask college professors. Daughter of one here.

Wendy P.

I think our resident prof has mellowed over the years. 15-20 years ago he used to be a lot more vocal if memory serves correctly. 

[billvon 2,989]

2 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

So, you decide what's shitty.

The 'shitty thing to do' I was referring to is to algorithmically deny people medical care in health insurance companies.

[kallend 2,026]

3 hours ago, normiss said:

Considering college professors to be "authority figures" is a bit of a stretch.

No argument here.

Even Isaac Newton had an irrational belief in an invisible Jewish zombie.  If there were any actual objective evidence, it wouldn't be called "faith".

[turtlespeed 219]

1 hour ago, billvon said:

The 'shitty thing to do' I was referring to is to algorithmically deny people medical care in health insurance companies.

I could have sworn you said that not giving a beggar the money he needs to survive was shitty.

[billvon 2,989]

1 minute ago, turtlespeed said:

I could have sworn you said that not giving a beggar the money he needs to survive was shitty.

I am sure that you thought so.

[turtlespeed 219]

3 hours ago, turtlespeed said:

For the same reason it's not premeditated murder to repeatedly deny a beggar money he needs to survive.  It is no doubt a shitty thing to do, of course.

Yep, there it is.

[jakee 1,489]

11 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

Yep, there it is.

Looks like you're telling him what he means instead of asking, and assuming you know better than him what he meant because you think you can see inside his mind.

[turtlespeed 219]

11 minutes ago, jakee said:

Looks like you're telling him what he means instead of asking, and assuming you know better than him what he meant because you think you can see inside his mind.

If you can read, you would get it.

this sentence here was referring to the previous one.

 It is no doubt a shitty thing to do, of course.

The previous sentence is this:

For the same reason it's not premeditated murder to repeatedly deny a beggar money he needs to survive.

the logic isn't hard.

I don't disagree that it sucks when you have the means but don't give the beggar what he needs to survive.  Why is that contested?

 

[billvon 2,989]

55 minutes ago, turtlespeed said:

If you can read, you would get it.

Well, no, since that's neither what I said nor what I meant.

But hey, a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.  So feel free to misinterpret it to your heart's content.

[normiss 798]

1 hour ago, jakee said:

Looks like you're telling him what he means instead of asking, and assuming you know better than him what he meant because you think you can see inside his mind.

Seems to be a habit, but only if it matters to HIM.