paul's got wright Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 1 hour ago, dilligaf said: Do you go to the seances often then ? No I'm not really into scientism x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, paul's got wright said: No I'm not really into scientism x I think you got that a bit wrong. Look it up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Neil Down Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, paul's got wright said: No I'm not really into scientism x More into hallucinatory drugs... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 9 minutes ago, Chinahand said: As has been explained multiple times - you are being presented with ways to collect evidence. Knowledge based on evidence is the opposite of religious belief. If you disagree with Professors Babović and Mekić then engage with what they have done - critique their methodology. They have attempted to explain as clearly as possible how to collect the data they have collected and the way they have analysed it to be able them to predict to within 1.5% the rotation of the earth. Your inability to distinguish evidence based science from religious beliefs is rather problematic. https://en.oxforddictionaries.com/definition/natural Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 3 minutes ago, dilligaf said: I think you got that a bit wrong. Look it up Provide the link Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 4 minutes ago, Neil Down said: More into hallucinatory drugs... Had a bit of a struggle there with the arl origami hey nelly! On the brown were ye? Doin selfies? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 2 minutes ago, paul's got wright said: Provide the link look it up you lazy twat. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 you made the claim. back it up. not emotionally, rationally of course. if you are able to keep your cool that is x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dilligaf Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 5 minutes ago, paul's got wright said: you made the claim. back it up. not emotionally, rationally of course. if you are able to keep your cool that is x No can do soz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/08/11/flat-earth-really/#.W7U99WhKjIU been goin on quite a while this "flat earth" debate hasn it! x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted October 3, 2018 Share Posted October 3, 2018 9 minutes ago, dilligaf said: No can do soz clearly x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
manxman1980 Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 6 hours ago, paul's got wright said: http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/badastronomy/2008/08/11/flat-earth-really/#.W7U99WhKjIU been goin on quite a while this "flat earth" debate hasn it! x Paul's got it wrong, what do you get out of this? You have no horse in the alleged race but you claim an interest in science. When presented with scientific experiments and science you dismiss it as a "religious belief". Even Gerry, who started the thread and whom you regularly cite, has conceded that Flat Earth models cannot explain a lot of what we see around us. I, like Chinahand, have enjoyed learning of different experiments and frankly I was surprised about how far back it was in human history that we started to understand the size and shape of the Earth. Like most people I had thought it was the explorers like Magellan that had changed the view of the world when the nature of the planet was widely understood before then. The psychology of those who deny all scientific evidence intrigues me which is why I return to this thread. You seem different to most in that you dispute the very nature of science. You don't seem to care if the world is flat or a globe. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 1 hour ago, manxman1980 said: Paul's got it wrong, what do you get out of this? You have no horse in the alleged race but you claim an interest in science. When presented with scientific experiments and science you dismiss it as a "religious belief". Even Gerry, who started the thread and whom you regularly cite, has conceded that Flat Earth models cannot explain a lot of what we see around us. I, like Chinahand, have enjoyed learning of different experiments and frankly I was surprised about how far back it was in human history that we started to understand the size and shape of the Earth. Like most people I had thought it was the explorers like Magellan that had changed the view of the world when the nature of the planet was widely understood before then. The psychology of those who deny all scientific evidence intrigues me which is why I return to this thread. You seem different to most in that you dispute the very nature of science. You don't seem to care if the world is flat or a globe Oh eminem, you really are a poor researcher! What exactly have i gotten wrong? What alleged race are you on about? Do you think the study of the natural world is a race! Deary me, you have got yourself in a tangle this fine morning hey? I'ts called objective reality, and the defintion of science has been posted here many times. Did you miss it? So does gerry believe in the spinning globe now? Don't remember him mentioning that he did. The spinning globe is under scientific scrutiny, as you well know. I have posted the definition of science on numerous occasions, so clearly demonstrating my understanding of it's meaning. I even posted the scientific method, which china agreed with. So take your silly claim back and try reading the thread before making anymore false accusations. Or can you provide an example, where I "dispute the very nature of science" please? Ta x Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul's got wright Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 "Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts " Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chinahand Posted October 4, 2018 Share Posted October 4, 2018 Quotes the expert on what is religious faith and what is natural science. Do you think you should contact Cambridge to tell them they are doing it all wrong? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.