Re: Invulnerable logic [Was:Re: How Our Brains Ignore Unpleasant

On 22 Jan, 01:34, Evopeach <keaton1...@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Let's see where you're going wrong.

Nuclear physics is not just radiometric dating butthead, it's one
appllication of the science. It's also about nuclear energy, weaponry,
nuclear medicine, and dating is a trivial application fraught with
many assumptions that in no way can be varified.

Nuclear physics is not the application of science, it is science.
Nuclear energy etc are the application of nuclear physics. Science
applied is technology and you don't need to understand all the aspects
of the science to use it, much like an enginer only needs a passing
knowledge to use something, a few rules of thumb and you're got a
starting point.


I read the Nature article sent to me by private email from one of the
group of posters. I noted the use of de nuevo as expressed in that
paper and you can go square to hell if you doubt my word.

Is that really a valid way to argue? The answer is no by the way. No
one needs to take your word for anything and you should expect them
not to, that's why references etc are useful, people can check out
what you're saying. In your case this is a hinderance I have to admit.


You are a little lying punk and an inconsequential human being. I told
you once to never post to me again and you slimed your way back in by
appearing to be so courteous and all that crap.

First up, enough with the insulting, it doesnt have any effect here.
Secondly you are completely powerless here to dictate what anyone
does. There is only one person with any power in this whole group to
say what gets posted and even he defers his power to a bit of
scripting nearly all of the time. So put your ego away, it's not
pretty and is useless around here.

If there is anyone on this post who cares to continue the thread with
me involved you had best keep this little turd off the thread.

And to follow up no one else has any control over anyone else - if
they want to post, so be it.

Otherwise I have a class starting later this week with a lot of
outside reading and four papers to write on same.

Are you at Uni/College? If so what you should have worked out by now
is it's not about learning knowledge but more about learning how to
learn. I suggest (and I emphasis that you are free to ignore this)
that you stop talking and start listening. I do hope you're not doing
theology - even philosophy is of more use than that as at least some
of what you learn is of value.

I thought you where some old chap, not on your knowledge, just on your
complete inablity to be flexible with new information.

If you want to learn you must first accept that there is a lot you
don't know and not be worried about that. If admiting you don't know
things is a problem then you will not do well in the long run as
you'll not be able to listen to advice from others. Result - bad life
choices - deep frustration - bigoted views and deep deep ignorance
about what lies beyond your own small, small world.

I'd love to get inside your head and see what you think of stuff that
lies outside of your geographic location. We already know you're
clueless about global warming, evolution and the history of the ID
movement. But you don't think you are and no one can tell you
otherwise.


I like the rough and tumble of this post but I have no intention of
putting up with people who call me a liar and display a sick disturbed
mental state capable of the most egregious transgressions against
common decency.

The only thing you can do is ignore folks here - that's it.

I suspect this is farewell, as you have no desire or ability to
control the more base elements of your company.

Goodbye :) I doubt you'll resist replying in most cases.

Stew Dean

.

Loading