When people are allowed to say idiotic things unchallenged

So my question , do we prefer the truth or politeness? Originally Posted by WTF

There is no such thing as either of these. Both are subject to interpretation...

I will always be me, and will only regard my own version of the truth and my own version of politeness, if those versions don't match up with yours, too damn bad...

There is no such thing as either of these. Both are subject to interpretation...

I will always be me, and will only regard my own version of the truth and my own version of politeness, if those versions don't match up with yours, too damn bad... Originally Posted by Wakeuр

So if you think you can jump off a tall building and fly and I disagree respectfully or not, Do you think the truth(ful) Law of Gravity will save you or me?

I'm just going to say this: the truth cannot be argued. If there are challenging theories on a truth, it's only a publicly accepted truth, which still doesn't make it the absolute truth. Since engaging in this forum, I have not seen any group of people attack any one as I've seen in the last week or so. YES, I notice it too. You take the total of what a person says and blow it completely out of proportion. Just to be ugly. Any entity in this WORLD has the room to become exploitative. Even science. The police. Religious leaders. Government. Not even as a whole, just a few within it. That's all it takes. We're not all going to renounce our religious beliefs because a few of you are adamant that religion is for idiots. I will RESPECTFULLY let you have your opinion. You can call our differences two different sets of publicly accepted truths...

I love to debate. The point of debate is to allow for different frames of reference, eliminating one-track minded thinking. You ever look at how debates are won? It's not about the truth, it's about who presents their argument the best. And these talks should not be in search of a truth, but to see differing opinions of various topics. And there should be no winners. I'm pretty sure that there were people who read the threads on religion, but to keep from telling some of you to kiss theirs and God's ass, they didn't respond. This is not the place to look for conversions.

What happened to live and let live? Damn... Originally Posted by Tiffani Jameson

This thread is not about religion. I do not care what your religion is. That is another subject alltogether.

This thread is about science NOT being dogmatic. Period. If you are talking to others fine, forget what I am saying but I am not trying to change anyone's mind about their religion or that one is better than the other.

All I am saying is that science is not dogmatic. I will be happy to discuss this with anyone that has a hard time understanding that fact.

I hope that puts any misunderstanding to rest.

(in my best Jack voice)"(Some people) CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!" Originally Posted by atlcomedy

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qc2hQUGHXP4

So if you think you can jump off a tall building and fly and I disagree respectfully or not, Do you think the truth(ful) Law of Gravity will save you or me?
Originally Posted by WTF

I've jumped off tall buildings and flown before...why couldn't I do it again?

Suppose you're an ant on the ground, and you look up and you see me standing on a 4" tall box. Now I jump off the box and land 4' away. It's certainly going to appear to the ant as if I jumped off a tall building and flew away...

Truth, even scientific truth, is all a matter of perspective, relativity, or point of view. Everything we "know" about science can be turned on its ear tomorrow if our frame of reference changes, that's why Einstein's Theory of Relativity is so powerful in its application, and so little understood in its principles.

There is no universal truth, so your question isn't really relevant. I think the TOPIC of this thread is extremely relevant though, and probably what you meant to ask. Should people be allowed to say idiotic things unchallenged?

To that I say hell no, I make it a point to ridicule stupidity in all it's forms. The great thing about my philosophy is that I alone get to determine what is stupid and when to ridicule it. People either agree or they don't...

P.S.-We are only a few centuries removed from some of the greatest scientists of that time on the planet expressing at the top of their lungs, "The world is flat!". The only reason we don't consider them "scientists" now is because they were proven wrong using techinques that hadn't been invented until later. It's a very sobering thought to realize that what we know now may very well seem like unfounded quackery in another five centuries...

Now SR on the other hand is a whole other matter Originally Posted by Becky

I thought I did my mea culpa complete with footnote. You're a tough one Becky.

I thought I did my mea culpa complete with footnote. You're a tough one Becky. Originally Posted by SR Only

Not even close. I still expect a five thousand word essay exploring the physical, and intellectual differences between the teeny tiny Husky, and the 120 pound Malamutt

Truth is relative, facts are not. Think about an observer on Einstein's famous train. As he looks back from his train moving at the speed of light he sees the hands on the clock tower of the station stand still, never moving, that is the "truth" to him despite the "fact" that the clock's hands keep moving.

Not even close. I still expect a five thousand word essay exploring the physical, and intellectual differences between the teeny tiny Husky, and the 120 pound Malamutt Originally Posted by Becky

I'm officially screwed. I never put out that much in all my education. It'll be a cold day in Dallas..... Oh wait that just happened.

Instead of a 5k dissertation, how about a box o' biscuits for Edward?

P.S.-We are only a few centuries removed from some of the greatest scientists of that time on the planet expressing at the top of their lungs, The world is flat!. The only reason we don't consider them "scientists" now is because they were proven wrong using techniques that hadn't been invented until later. It's a very sobering thought to realize that what we know now may very well seem like unfounded quackery in another five centuries... Originally Posted by Wakeuр

+1 I have already tried to argue this point: facts (and accepted science) do change. There are facts that, for a while, will be accepted as truth, but then, a new theory or fact emerges that undermines the legitimacy of the old theory or fact. At first the majority, scientists etc., will be against the new theory and dogmatically defend the old theory (e.g., Edison's DC versus Tesla's AC). Eventually, the new theory - if justified - will prevail, but not without that struggle to overcome those dogmatically defending the old theory or fact. Hegelian dialectics. Note: It sometimes takes a while. In 2000, Pope John Paul II apologized for persecuting Bruno, Galileo, etc., and the Church has changed it's position - indicating it is not always dogmatic. I doubt any Church official now alive still believes in a geocentric universe.

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - attributed to Voltaire written by Evelyn Beatrice Hall Originally Posted by ClairJordan

Oh, completely agree with that.

Truth is relative, facts are not. Think about an observer on Einstein's famous train. As he looks back from his train moving at the speed of light he sees the hands on the clock tower of the station stand still, never moving, that is the "truth" to him despite the "fact" that the clock's hands keep moving. Originally Posted by Iaintliein

Very appropriate. The only caveat I will add to this is that "facts" are only "facts" at that particular moment in time. Long period of observation and application of the scientific method may bear out certain "facts" to be nothing of the sort.

My hope was to enlighten what I consider to be very bright people in general , on a subject that they are coming up with 5 on the question of 2+2. Originally Posted by WTF

Again, only false from a certain perspective, and true from another perspective.

What happens when you set your display of decimal places to zero? 2.3+2.3=4.6 turns into 2+2=5. If you're a child, or an adult who didn't know how to adjust your display in whatever program you're using to do the calculation, then you could easily believe that 2+2=5.

This same principle can be applied to anything that we think of as scientific truth. There may be no discoverable link between autism and childhood vaccines today, but that in no way rules out the link appearing tomorrow...facts today are not necessarily facts tomorrow...

I'm officially screwed. I never put out that much in all my education. It'll be a cold day in Dallas..... Oh wait that just happened.

Instead of a 5k dissertation, how about a box o' biscuits for Edward? Originally Posted by SR Only

Or perhaps actually managing a date when you are a mere 90 minutes away?

Or perhaps actually managing a date when you are a mere 90 minutes away? Originally Posted by discreetgent

54 minutes. Troublemaker!

What happens when you set your display of decimal places to zero? 2.3+2.3=4.6 turns into 2+2=5. If you're a child, or an adult who didn't know how to adjust your display in whatever program you're using to do the calculation, then you could easily believe that 2+2=5.
Originally Posted by Wakeuр

You see you see WTF I told you that 2+2= 5 .

54 minutes. Troublemaker! Originally Posted by SR Only

54 minutes by hellicopter.120 minutes by Mini cooper, and 83minutes according to google.

PS I just located Edward on google maps. That was pretty exciting