Omniscient.

I've been on this forum for a long time, and for many of the years I attempted to engage in open conversation with other members. I learned my lesson. I have realized that I have a much more enjoyable outlook on this forum if my entire goal is to bloviate for a bit and mock people.

A conversation requires equal participation from all members, and honestly a large number of people have neither the reading comprehension nor the math skills required to actually be participants in a conversation.

victor809 wrote:

Using science to lie is truly nothing new – point taken.
However, the fault is not with the science. It is with those who twist it to lie and manipulate.
People do this with religion. But it is not the religion that is evil.
Marketing and spin aside - if they can be separated out – I think science is out best hope for our future.
Ogie?

Brewha wrote:

You seem to value scientists less than politicians. Now why would jpotts hate scientists?

Brewha wrote:

The study of science made our modern life style possible. And the scientific field is more honest and honorable than many others that come to mind. While the body of scientific knowledge is replete with errors, they are found and corrected as time goes on. Science does not create dogma – that is the realm of others.

Brewha wrote:

Omniscient.

I've been on this forum for a long time, and for many of the years I attempted to engage in open conversation with other members. I learned my lesson. I have realized that I have a much more enjoyable outlook on this forum if my entire goal is to bloviate for a bit and mock people.

victor809 wrote:

Hah! That'a a laugh!

Half of that lifestyle was given to you by people who were not scientists by any stretch of the imagination.

That's one of the biggest myths, right up there with how the government created the Internet (along with Al Gore).

jpotts wrote:

I understand that way you feel. But you will change your mind when science finds a cure for senility . . .

Just sayin'

Brewha wrote:

bloviate?????



OK, since when is a prerequisite to know calculus or trigonometry, in order to have a intelligent conversation? I've learned a whole lot listening to my children, and trust me they don't know either one, well at least not yet anyways.

Equal participation? when you already stated that we are wrong and you are right, comes off a bit arrogant to say the least.

You posed this question here in these forums, while I'm a n00b by anyone's standards here I can easily tell that sarcasm, shenanigans, and jackassery is the norm here. If you want a real serious discussion about this I'm pretty sure you can find a more upscale forum discussion group somewhere, that will be better to your liking.

SweetHavok wrote:

Well, the upside to this is the fact that you now realize you can be trained.

Wanna doggie biscut?

jpotts wrote:

^ Here's a prime example of an individual who does not have a full grasp of math, and his arguments have always suffered.

victor809 wrote:

Just admit that ruggie was right, and you'll feel better about yourself almost instantly.

jpotts wrote:

And people wonder why I just jump to the mocking without bothering to hear your response any longer....

victor809 wrote:

Victor what medium did you use to illustrate your Math Superhero comic book?

ZRX1200 wrote:

Ah ruggie... couldn't understand the mathematical concept of "average"... In fact, if I recall, he had no grasp of any statistical methodology...

And you couldn't seem to grasp it either.

And people wonder why I just jump to the mocking without bothering to hear your response any longer....

victor809 wrote:

No Victor, I had a grasp of it.

You just didn't like the fact that populations need to adjusted for size for apples-to-apples comparisons.

Plus, after the last 10 years of mostly working with people who have PhDs and Masters, I've come to conclude that the higher-education system in this country is basically f**ked. Which explains why so many of these "knowledgable" people with credentials make a boatload of really, really dumb decisions.

I and do mean dumb. Really, really...really dumb

However, I digress.

jpotts wrote:

.... yeah, I remember. You had no grasp of the concept that an average was already a normalized (adjusted for population size) number.

That's what I find so hilarious about your arguments... you won't stop talking about how stupid educated people are, yet you fail to grasp the simplest of statistical principles. It's almost like... maybe you couldn't successfully get educated, and now you're really pissed at anyone who did.

Naaah... that couldn't be it.

Your apology is accepted.

victor809 wrote: