Being wrong in this forum

[Lacessit]

I am occasionally wrong, I try to minimize by consulting multiple sources on matters of fact. The amount of sheer BS on social media does not help.

[GinBoy2]

Actually the emoji things are a pain in the ass.

 

I'm a big boy and generally will fess up to my mistakes if folks point them out.

 

The emoji thing, well I leave that to the kids

[Skipalongcassidy]

17 hours ago, TimeMachine said:

I'm an advocate of an option you check box tick to that allows you to give negative insulting posts and accept them. After all we are all adults and can give and take abuse without harm.  Some of us can't handle it,  thus the option. 

Or at least a thumbs down emoji... but this is a participation trophy forum

[Lacessit]

55 minutes ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

Or at least a thumbs down emoji... but this is a participation trophy forum

The thumbs-down emoji was removed because it was used by stalkers.

I am not sure I like the feature of being able to identify emoji posters being removed, although I suppose it saves me trouble of asking sad and confused posters why. It also saves them from formulating an incoherent response.

[Skipalongcassidy]

34 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

The thumbs-down emoji was removed because it was used by stalkers.

I am not sure I like the feature of being able to identify emoji posters being removed, although I suppose it saves me trouble of asking sad and confused posters why. It also saves them from formulating an incoherent response.

So mommy is needed to protect us from "stalkers"... we are not smart enough to do it... also, we are not smart enough to deal with confused people... like I stated... it's participation trophyism at its finest.

[pacovl46]

The confused emoticon is used in more ways than just to express confusion. I use it also when I'm reading a post and my thought on the post is what the hell is wrong with that guy or how can someone be that stupid/delusional/effed up in the head etc.

[swm59nj]

Attitude seems to have mostly to do with how miserable the person actually is.  They are also the ones that blame their misfortunes on everything besides themselves. 

[Lacessit]

12 minutes ago, Skipalongcassidy said:

So mommy is needed to protect us from "stalkers"... we are not smart enough to do it... also, we are not smart enough to deal with confused people... like I stated... it's participation trophyism at its finest.

I don't think I am smart enough to deal with the two death threats I have had on this forum, perhaps you do. You have a crystal ball to identify anonymous posters, eh?

I'm smart enough to deal with confused people, but I'd probably get banned for my response.

You don't seem to be doing too badly in the trophy hunt, ratings double your posts.

[save the frogs]

17 minutes ago, Lacessit said:

I don't think I am smart enough to deal with the two death threats I have had on this forum

that's shocking.

why would someone utter a death threat?

for your stance on vaccines? 

[fredwiggy]

7 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

"That's what we  believe".

"We"?  Huh?  Speak for yourself.

We , meaning for your sake, the over 2 billion believers

[Lacessit]

Just now, save the frogs said:

that's shocking.

why would someone utter a death threat?

for your stance on vaccines? 

In one, it was because I suggested to the poster the girlfriend he had acquired in Pattaya had enjoyed sex with multiple men previously. A reasonable conclusion, given the performance attributes he was describing. Not the stuff virgins are made of.

The other one was completely out of the blue, a deranged post with no reason given except perhaps my nationality, and his description of me as mouthy.

[fredwiggy]

6 hours ago, Myran said:

Again, you show your complete lack of knowledge. A scientific theory isn't the same as Barry in the bar going, "I've got a theory 'bout that!". In order to qualify as a theory in science, there needs to be loads and loads of evidence backing it up, which of course is the case for the Big Bang. Gravity is a theory as well, but that doesn't mean we don't know how it works.

 

We don't know what preceded the Big Bang, and that's totally fine. Science doesn't claim to know everything, unlike religion ("God did it!").

 

"How did this Big Bang happen, if it wasn't from God?"

 

From a unicorn sneezing and farting at the same time. Or any other thing you can dream up that has exactly the same amount of evidence as your god (zero). And I don't have to assume what you know, since you won't seize to demonstrate your ignorance.

 

"Some assume there is the possibility of life on planets outside of our solar system. This without seeing the planets or knowing if they have an atmosphere."

 

What on Earth are you on about? We have other planets in our own solar system with atmospheres, and we were able to measure atmospheres on other planets using the Hubble telescope over 20 years ago. And of course we're going to make the assumption that there might be other planets out there that can support life.

 

You're just complete illitarate when it comes to science and the actual world. It's downright laughable ????

Amazing how ignorant you are, again assuming, which is a huge sign of ignorance if you didn't already know. Gravity is a theory and a law, for your sake to maybe learn instead of posting your opinions. You again, are going by what some scientists have said, which is gullible. Having some evidence means they have a clue, having proof means proven. Having a gaseous atmosphere doesn't mean it can support life, and I assume you knew this? You can choose to not to believe in God, although we as believers have faith. His proof is in what we see daily. If you think all of the universe's and world's wonders, the different species, how the earth is exactly the right distance from the sun for life to exist, the human brain and body and the bodies of animals, and how they work, regarding food, air and water, and somehow think this all happened by itself, that's a lack of common sense. There are sadly many like you out there, that can't think for themselves and have to be followers of other humans. You, and the rest of the non believers, that have maybe been hurt by someone in their childhoods, who pushed religion on you in an abusive way, or maybe lost a friend or family member and said no way a God would allow this, will all find out when you pass, and then it might be too late to understand where you went wrong. And by the way it's spelled illiterate. And laughing to yourself doesn't help your cause.

[Walker88]

15 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

 Matter can not come from nothing, period.

And the Earth MUST be flat, otherwise we'd all fall off, period.

 

 

 

 

 

[fredwiggy]

7 hours ago, Liverpool Lou said:

"...that God created everything, which makes more sense than a Big Bang..."

No, that does not "make more sense" pragmatically or as a sweeping generalism, it only makes sense to you and your fellow believers and that there may be billions of them doesn't mean that they are correct.

And it doesn't mean we are wrong either. And if an ordinary person who knew nothing of God or science was asked how all this came to be, common sense would say it was created by someone, meaning an entity that had the ability to create, and didn't just happen, because matter, which comprises everything in the universe, cannot just happen from nothing. Simple terms yes, but always a better explanation. Most people that are non believers have suffered a loss in their lives, and told themselves, if there was a God, he wouldn't let this happen. Or maybe a family member that abused them pushed religion down their throats until they turned against it. Or maybe a Catholic priest molested them, and they said, A God would not allow such things to happen. A few reasons to turn away, and millions of daily wonders to believe. Freedom to choose is what he gives us. I've known quite a few atheists in my lifetime, and all of them had doubts, and most suffered a loss they just knew couldn't happen if there was a God

[Walker88]

3 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

And it doesn't mean we are wrong either. And if an ordinary person who knew nothing of God or science was asked how all this came to be, common sense would say it was created by someone, meaning an entity that had the ability to create, and didn't just happen, because matter, which comprises everything in the universe, cannot just happen from nothing.

Your 'ordinary person's' common sense absolutely KNEW the Earth was flat. Ordinary people are not the ones one should use as the fount of knowledge.

 

Your 'evidence' for a skydaddy creator is that you cannot understand science. That is common (non)sense, just like the Flat Earth.

[bignok]

19 hours ago, fredwiggy said:

There are a lot of people using this forum, and you'll get a lot of opinions, and some good or bad advice. Anyone can make an opinion, and that's all it is, an opinion. It could be right or wrong. Some here are knowledgeable about certain subjects, and they aren't giving their opinion but a reply that is fact based. Some will answer after they have researched, because they want to add their two cents worth, or maybe to help by looking up facts about a subject., and they truly want to be helpful. Many will use emojis to express their opinion without thinking things through. Some use them to insult, then use a smiling emoji to try and counter that insult with a deflection from that insult, although it is still the same. Some are too lazy, or busy to reply, and use an emoji to answer a post because it's a quick answer. Some use a confused emoji because the post actually is confusing to them, or that it's again, an insult, thinking if they say they're confused, it's them thinking you're the one that's wrong. Lastly, some are narcissists, and they always think they're right, and replying with an emoji is a cheap answer saying you're wrong, because of course they are right.

Short posts are best. Under 8 lines.

[fredwiggy]

2 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Your 'ordinary person's' common sense absolutely KNEW the Earth was flat. Ordinary people are not the ones one should use as the fount of knowledge.

 

Your 'evidence' for a skydaddy creator is that you cannot understand science. That is common (non)sense, just like the Flat Earth.

To the contrary, I understand science very well, and always aced on it in school, and am always open to learning new things about space and our planet, but that doesn't mean I'll ever accept a concept that the universe just happened and there wasn't a creator. You, like a couple of others here, are assuming you know what others know by just a few typed words and opinions. You don't. And there are many extremely intelligent "ordinary" people on this earth, and all scientists aren't geniuses., and always right. An hypothesis is a educated guess, an assumption, just like other assumptions, some of which aren't educated.

[nobodysfriend]

12 minutes ago, fredwiggy said:

that doesn't mean I'll ever accept a concept that the universe just happened and there wasn't a creator.

The universe ( imho ) , exists to enable the evolution of species ... ( not only on this planet ) .

The species  who are not able to survive on their own planet , are the losers here ... and will not , ( of course ) , evolve any further . Game over . Looks like the humons will be amongst them ...

Somewhere else in Universe , on another planet far away , the dominant species will avoid extinction by responsibly keeping their planet , and it's biosphere , in good condition that enables their species to further evolve in time ... It is all about the evolution of species ...

 

[sirineou]

5 minutes ago, nobodysfriend said:

The universe ( imho ) , exists to enable the evolution of species ... ( not only on this planet ) .

The species  who are not able to survive on their own planet , are the losers here ... and will not , ( of course ) , evolve any further . Game over . Looks like the humons will be amongst them ...

Somewhere else in Universe , on another planet far away , the dominant species will avoid extinction by responsibly keeping their planet , and it's biosphere , in good condition that enables their species to further evolve in time ... It is all about the evolution of species ...

 

The question , and argument is always presented. If this was not designed for us , the why is it so perfect for our existence? 

It is called the Anthropic principle. 

Humans can be so unreasonable and yet in the face of so many contradicting evidence maintain that they are an intelligent species, ???? 

Of course the universe would be perfect for us , if it was not we would not be here to ask, entertain and react with confused emojis 

  (Notice how I worked emojis  in the conversation to  keep this from going of topic) ????

The Universe was not created for us, We were created for the universe we have.  In another Universe with different physical characteristics, there will be  beings so alien to us that if we were able to observe them we might not even realise that they were beings.  

   

[ignore it]

All emogies count.

But sleeze balls quote without leaving an emogie first.

[nobodysfriend]

34 minutes ago, sirineou said:

The question , and argument is always presented. If this was not designed for us , the why is it so perfect for our existence? 

We , our species , slowly evolved to what were now , by adapting to changes in our environment . This planet , or the Universe , was not made for us . We are just the result of the evolution of a species , that led to our present form ... and ' emojis ' seem to be a way of explaining what the individual feels , kind of a ' shortcut '... ????

Being the dominant species on this planet , we inherit a lot of responsibility by that .????

Assuring our survival by not destroying the planet's biosphere would be the first point .????

Climbing up another step on " the ladder of evolution " by controlling ( eliminating ) our species basic instincts ( fear and greed ) , could prove very helpful for that . ???? ???? ????

But , in a mad world full of wars and environmental destruction , that seems unlikely at best ...

????

[jesimps]

21 hours ago, sirineou said:

I often get the confused emoji at some of my posts. I don't get it! If you are confused about something wouldn't the  most prudent course be to as a question?

or If you think I am wrong about something point it out, and if indeed I am wrong I would say fair enough, or stand corrected (Just dind yesterday) ,

Who among us have never been wrong? and if indeed you have been wrong in the past , as all of us have, why is it not possible that we are wrong now? 

If I still think I was right , state why I think so ,and provide quotes and links 

Are we here to have a conversation or are we here to arbitrarily judge?

I  know a bunch of wise ass guys will post  a bunch of confused emojis to this OP , I know I would if this was someone else post, ????

Unfortunately you are not allowed to post reactions to your own post???? 

It's the nearest thing they have to a "disagree" button. If others are like me, they use it to dislike the post but don't always have the time or inclination to type a reply. 

[Walker88]

1 hour ago, fredwiggy said:

To the contrary, I understand science very well, and always aced on it in school, and am always open to learning new things about space and our planet, but that doesn't mean I'll ever accept a concept that the universe just happened and there wasn't a creator. You, like a couple of others here, are assuming you know what others know by just a few typed words and opinions. You don't. And there are many extremely intelligent "ordinary" people on this earth, and all scientists aren't geniuses., and always right. An hypothesis is a educated guess, an assumption, just like other assumptions, some of which aren't educated.

Explaining particle physics to you, who 'aced' science in school (likely long before CERN, discovery of the Higgs boson, and tons of modern science particle physics, quantum field theory, etc.) is like trying to explain gravity to a blacksmith in Gaul and showing him why the Earth need not be flat.

 

Gravity, as you might remember from when you aced your exams, is a theory. Best not to disbelieve it. It is not yet totally understood, but the laws governing it are so well understood that mankind can fire a rocket and reach exactly where the moon is going to be after a few days, besides initially calculating exactly how much power the rocket needs to reach Earth escape velocity. Science is pretty cool.

 

Because you are incapable of understanding something, it must not be true. You closed your mind to newly discovered realities. How can space and time be warped? How can massless photons not escape a black hole, whose claim to fame is immense gravity? How can a particle be in two places at the same time? How is entanglement possible?

 

Lots has happened since you took your high school science final that you do not know nor understand, despite your 'ace'.

 

Much of what you refuse to accept has undergone peer review and subsequent experimentation, and is now fact. The Higgs boson was only a mathematical construct. CERN subsequently proved its existence. The math worked. Much science actually has come purely from math. James Clerk Maxwell used only paper and quill to determine what makes up the rings of Saturn. He was 100% correct. Amazing.

 

Your 'creator' hasn't been peer reviewed. Not even once. It is merely a hope, or an attempt at 'logic' by those incapable of understanding the reality of existence. The Universe is here, even if you reduce everything to Descartes oft noted quote. There is absolutely zero evidence of Zeus or Yahweh or reincarnation or a soul or Allah or Krishna or God or Bokanon or Moroni or whatever construct of fertile imaginations produced to make themselves feel they have 'meaning'.

[save the frogs]

1 hour ago, Lacessit said:

In one, it was because I suggested to the poster the girlfriend he had acquired in Pattaya had enjoyed sex with multiple men previously. A reasonable conclusion, given the performance attributes he was describing. Not the stuff virgins are made of.

The other one was completely out of the blue, a deranged post with no reason given except perhaps my nationality, and his description of me as mouthy.

some things are best not discussed

[Skeptic7]

The confused emoji face is generally used to mean "DISAGREE", rather actually being confused. Just like the laugh emoji is many times "mocking" rather than mirth. Depends on the post. Gotta read between the emojis❗????

[sirineou]

2 minutes ago, nobodysfriend said:

Being the dominant species on this planet , we inherit a lot of responsibility by that

One that you are failing by not somehow working the word "Emoji" into the conversation , creating a condition where an argument can be made that this train of thought could take this thread off topic.

It is called the Emojidesimal Principle scholars have arguing about since it was first discussed by the ancient Greek philosopher  Eronious .

[nobodysfriend]

10 minutes ago, sirineou said:

One that you are failing by not somehow working the word "Emoji" into the conversation , creating a condition where an argument can be made that this train of thought could take this thread off topic.

I stand corrected ... and connected to the ' emoji ' thing now .

 

[Bangkok Barry]

21 hours ago, worgeordie said:

If you post anything wrong on this forum , Liverpool lou ,will quickly be along

to correct you , maybe multiple times  ???? winking eye......

 

regards Worgeordie

 

Not me. I blocked him long ago.

[nobodysfriend]

38 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Because you are incapable of understanding something, it must not be true. You closed your mind to newly discovered realities. How can space and time be warped? How can massless photons not escape a black hole, whose claim to fame is immense gravity? How can a particle be in two places at the same time? How is entanglement possible?

Science truly made huge steps forwards in ( virtually ) no time at all .  That is something that provides clues to how it all works . Very valuable .

It is a pity that only very few people (  of a planetary population of 8 billion ) seem to be interested in the achievements made .

Science can still save the planet , but only if there is will to radical changes very soon now ...

The first step ( imho ) would be to replace politicians by scientists or , at least , AI .

 

 

Too many problems on this planet , science cannot turn the clock back once the damage is done , but it could help to avoid a complete disaster . Must act now .

???? ????

 

[fredwiggy]

11 minutes ago, Walker88 said:

Explaining particle physics to you, who 'aced' science in school (likely long before CERN, discovery of the Higgs boson, and tons of modern science particle physics, quantum field theory, etc.) is like trying to explain gravity to a blacksmith in Gaul and showing him why the Earth need not be flat.

 

Gravity, as you might remember from when you aced your exams, is a theory. Best not to disbelieve it. It is not yet totally understood, but the laws governing it are so well understood that mankind can fire a rocket and reach exactly where the moon is going to be after a few days, besides initially calculating exactly how much power the rocket needs to reach Earth escape velocity. Science is pretty cool.

 

Because you are incapable of understanding something, it must not be true. You closed your mind to newly discovered realities. How can space and time be warped? How can massless photons not escape a black hole, whose claim to fame is immense gravity? How can a particle be in two places at the same time? How is entanglement possible?

 

Lots has happened since you took your high school science final that you do not know nor understand, despite your 'ace'.

 

Much of what you refuse to accept has undergone peer review and subsequent experimentation, and is now fact. The Higgs boson was only a mathematical construct. CERN subsequently proved its existence. The math worked. Much science actually has come purely from math. James Clerk Maxwell used only paper and quill to determine what makes up the rings of Saturn. He was 100% correct. Amazing.

 

Your 'creator' hasn't been peer reviewed. Not even once. It is merely a hope, or an attempt at 'logic' by those incapable of understanding the reality of existence. The Universe is here, even if you reduce everything to Descartes oft noted quote. There is absolutely zero evidence of Zeus or Yahweh or reincarnation or a soul or Allah or Krishna or God or Bokanon or Moroni or whatever construct of fertile imaginations produced to make themselves feel they have 'meaning'.

There you go again, assuming you know what I know. It makes you look very arrogant, ignorant, and incapable of seeing the truth. You don't know what I know, nor what I research and spend my time on. My mind is always open to finding out the truth about things I am interested in, and until it's proven beyond a reasonable doubt, I'm skeptical. How do you know what I do or don't understand? Are you that ignorant to think you actually know anyone on this forum or what knowledge they have on a particular subject from just a few words, opinions or saying I was good at science in high school? Do you not realize I can google things like you have to learn more about present science? Do you actually think everything some scientists say is factual? Please explain what you are trying to prove. Was the universe not created and just happened, and what proof is there? Theories of expansion are theories. Who is capable of understanding the reality of existence? Where is their proof? What don't I accept that has been proven as fact? You believe what others have said, without any proof. That's being gullible. I believe when something has been proven as factual. Basically, what you are saying is that there is no creator, that the universe was made from an explosion , and that all matter what made out of nothing? Do you know that some scientists believe in God? That one poll of scientists said there was a 67% possibility God existed. Wouldn't that disprove a lot of their theories, at least to some? Most mathematicians believe there is a heaven. Where would this heaven come from if there wasn't a God. Lastly, why do YOU not believe in God. There are reasons like I explained earlier. You can follow others opinions like many do. I go by faith and common sense. You will see when you die who was right. God won't be happy with what you believe in, and he'll tell you so right then and there. Until that time comes, don't assume anymore. makes you look ignorant.