Kite High
Well-Known Member
you do not even know what you write...you deserve no more of my time...may your ego implode upon you in your lonely bubble
Always wondered this;
- Thread starter Beefbisquit
- Start date
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
So it is okay to act like an ass on these forums because you have other places to go? I suppose you act like a prince elsewhere. More likely is that you realize you acted like an ass and rather than admit or defend, you suggest the excuse of not expecting any better of yourself. You thought you had the upper hand because you did not know of the pulsar experiments, and rather than update and improve your knowledge, you double down on ignorance. It seems your principals of conduct wax and wane depending on your knowledge of the subject. When intellect fails, clever insults will suffice. You are willing to settle for less if you can convince yourself that it actually means you are better. The alcohol explains a bit of why you think things are a contest of who's better, and then say things that don't quite make sense. For example, saying that experiments which confirm gravity traveling at C would compromise 'the integrity of our physics'.
It would be difficult to believe you are quite that dunce, so you being drunk does make more sense.
Again with the "i'm better than you" rhetoric. You seem to be the only one of us who cares about who's dick is bigger. Perhaps your motivation to announce your qualifications is because your self education is not self evident.
If my post made absolutely no sense, then how could you even tell what I was saying? You seemed to have grasped the meaning of my characterizations just fine, but lack the aptitude to defend against it with anything other than 'nu uh', and so you pretend I am beneath you.
The basis for my statements are contained within the thread for all to see. They may indeed be wrong, but we wouldn't know that based on how you conduct yourself here. I would hope your behavior is your asinine attempt to satisfy an alcohol fueled need to feel superior rather than a true reflection of you as a person. IOW it would be refreshing to find out that I am wrong, though I suspect you will continue to prove my point rather than exceed it.
You keep dropping hints that you find this amusing. Is this to provide cover for the feeling of our descriptions hitting home? The insults are implied by you and your behavior and only pointed out by me, so I have no need to erase anything. Meanwhile it still remains that telling someone that gravity isn't instant is the best possible and most accurate answer to give, and can only be criticized when seen through your eyes which view the world as having the same superior attitude as you. We have all went back and read post #9 yet do not see the arrogance you do, but perhaps we lack the drunken stupor and self absorbed attitude necessary to see it that way.
fb360
Active Member
My goodness you are dense. Read the thread man. I simply said "prove it", generally, not even singling MH out, yet he chose to take it as an attack and throw the first insults. I then went with it, adding to the intensity each time.
At least you have slowed your hypocrisy, attempting to belittle me through insults because I insulted others who also insulted me. The fact that you still choose to not recognize it is evidence enough that you too act nonsensically. The difference is that you are trying to present yourself in a manner which you seem to think is superior.
I've already mentioned that there are times I say shit to troll, sure. I've also already demonstrated that I comprehend that the speed of gravity is separate from c, even if it is c. Moreover, I'm not timid about joining into online verbal bashing. I've never reported another for attacking me, nor do I take anything on this forum personally.
The irony man.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
As I have made no statements as to my superiority, intellectually or otherwise, it seems it is you who feels I am superior when you read my words. Your insecurities are not something I can control.
I think that if you are willing to occasionally troll people, then you should be willing to occasionally be put in your place. You can't have it both ways.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
I support what you say sunni, and respect you as a mod to let this go. But if you think polite debate is the norm at this level in science and academics, then you have only been exposed to the most formal of discourse. Things do get heated and arguments ensue, although there is no excuse for insulting someones mom for example. As mods we have two choices on these forums to handle disagreement, conversation or censorship. As long as the rules are followed, ie no personal abuse or childish name calling, I prefer the former, even if it means a lengthy argument.
Ultimately I have thick skin and draw the line a little further than you, but this is not my section and what you say goes.
I have ALWAYS been a very good mod in letting things go on a little longer, and so far have edited deleted all the name calling still I will verbally tell people where to draw the line in a pissing contest, like i said debating is great , not everyone holds the same views, name calling is not keep it out of your debate because it makes you look stupid
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
I elaborated on it in later posts.
These are straw men. Generally when discussing scientific ideas, it is cumbersome to preface every comment with something like, "As of today, to the best of our knowledge, the scientific consensus is that...." This type of disclaimer is assumed to be present when discussing ANY theory. We don't say, "to the best of our current understanding, germs causes disease", or " the evidence strongly suggests that we evolved from common ancestors with other species." We already know that every scientific theory is merely a model contingent on current level of understanding and may change or be revised as new data becomes available. We don't have to state that each time we make a comment about what is currently accepted knowledge.
Never once did I say that instantaneous transmission is impossible or "can't be." That's something you read into my statement and then just went with it, assuming I was denigrating the other posters. When you attempt to read between the lines, you run the risk of being wrong, which in this case you are. I'm more than aware and willing to admit our current understanding is subject to revision and the instantaneous hypothesis could end up being right, but experimental and indirect evidence to date gives me no reason to think that it will.
I even made a comment about it in post#25, "There are many problems with the idea that gravitation is instant. This is counter to everything we understand about physics to date. Not saying it couldn't be, but it really doesn't seem to fit into any current models."
But I guess it's easier to ignore things like that because it doesn't coincide with your accusation that I told people it's impossible.
It is your insistence that I or anyone else proves a scientific claim is a red herring. There is not one theory in science that has ever been proven. All theories are still subject to change no matter how much support we have for them. Theories are only models, models are by nature less than ideal, yet some models have so much confirmation behind them they can be accepted de facto truth. Every model has a varying level of confidence. We have more confidence in the standard model of particle physics then we do of string theory. We have more confidence of bacteria and viruses causing disease than we do the elusive prion, yet that doesn't mean I can't say that prions cause disease. The lack of the disclaimer preface is something that you should have learned in grade school science class. I can't help you if you don't understand the difference between a high confidence theory and an opinion. The thing that is really telling is that you haven't even tried to engage in discussion about this topic of opinion vs. theory and instead continue to hurl insults and claim a 'win' because everyone else is too stupid to know what you know. I guess when multiple people tell you that you're wrong, it's easier to berate and belittle them than it is to confront the possibility that everyone else may be right you you're the one that's wrong.
As for accusing me of beginning with the insults, I'm pretty sure you called me delusional and a liar and I consistently tried to defuse the personal attacks by pointing them out and only address your arguments/accusations as being wrong, not you as a person.
fb360
Active Member
Are you being serious right now? You made no attempts degrading or belittling me through your posts, which consequently is a statement to your superior intellect? You even used the statement "not to belittle you"... Furthermore, you tried to tell me how my brain works, and that it thinks at a level that rejects intelligence. All you did was make statements about my intellect, which I adequately refuted by pointing out that you are a blatant hypocrite. Seriously, you just spent multiple posts trying to insult me because I insulted others who also made insults
Try pawn it off all you want, but I actually comprehend your language and it's obvious you were slipping in insults left and right. Just because your word choice is more subtle, doesn't mean you didn't try
At bold:
Thanks for restating what I just said in the prior post. I let anyone say whatever they want to me and I never hate them for it, I never report them for it, and moreover, I never complain about it; the exact opposite of a hypocrite.
I took the statement "Nope, not instantaneous" to define that it could not be instantaneous, and not that it could be. Might just be me, but nope and can't be seem pretty synonymous... "Nope not instantaneous" is pretty clearly defined by the English language bro.
I agree it went way far, for sure.
They are not strawman... And actually, that is EXACTLY how intelligent individuals describe their take on a situation that is highly theoretical... Which is exactly the type of conversation we were having, as I clearly mentioned, due to the fact we know VERY LITTLE about gravity. What you don't do is reply "nope not" to beliefs that contradict yours. What value did that statement add? None. In fact, it devalued the entire thread imo because individuals who don't know that the topic is theoretical might now become confused. Go back and read the post where I told you to "prove it". Immediately after saying that, I backed the statement up with a quote that described that there is no evidence to support either claim, but with that being said, the consensus is that Einstein's take is the more probable.
Remember on page 2 when I said "prove it", and then I also mentioned that you "took it as an attack". I then said you seem to be butthurt all the time, and BOOM, we were on our way. It's all in this thread dude. Go back and read posts 20s and you can see I didn't come in this thread to attack anyone. I did comment on you, and we butted heads and went from there.
e;The posts have already been edited by sunni but it is obvious that the situation esculated between both of us, and that neither of us came in trying to fight. IMO you threw the first insult, but I have a feeling you don't feel the same way.
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
I don't think anyone is under the impression that my posts contain nothing insulting. The difference is my posts are not defamation. I have no need to pretend someone is illiterate or call them a buffoon. When your attitude causes you to attack, and your attacks are dependent on your own shortcomings, it is not inappropriate to point them out.
I dunno, maybe you have a Jekyll and Hyde thing going on. Makes me wonder just how you define a hypocrite.
fb360
Active Member
Someone who insults an individual due to them insulting another. Is that not what you did?
The pretty colors you made only shows that I attempted to decrease the amount of flame that was in this thread. Did I stop replying to the individuals who agreed with MP (cough cough, I'm replying to you right now)? Did I report any of you, or complain about your posts to sunni or even you? Did I ask MP to stop flaming? How about the other individuals who joined in? Hell no. I will continue to have flame wars if you want. I merely recognized that I was going to continue flaming anyone who wanted to join into mine and MPs argument, and more specifically, take his side. You are beginning to make very stretched out points, which is again evidence enough that you are still trying to attack me, one way or another.
Makes me wonder why you being called a hypocrite strikes a nerve. All you needed to do was stop attempting to insult me. And by attempt, I mean because you all take this forum way too seriously. You mentioned Dr Jekyll and Hyde thing going on, and that is essentially the definition of a troll. I use multiple sections on this forum from the growing help sections where I give help without troll, to the politics section which is troll hard. This section falls more middle ground, where I won't come to a thread to troll or flame, but if it happens, it happens. You yourself said you are thick skinned. And after all, isn't this a marijuana forum?
e;
I can make pretty colors too
Heisenberg
Well-Known Member
I suppose if you are a self admitted troll I should just shrug off your post rather than trying to sort it out. I guess I can rank troll mentality in the same category as quantum mechanics as something I will never fully understand. I did however like this part.
Dammit, I had assumed I was the only one who noticed the font could be color coded. I guess that's what I get for making an assumption. I had hoped my use of colors would dazzle you into silence. Guess I underestimated you.
I know sarcasm is a poor way to make a point, but the only point I'm trying to make is that I found it amusing. I genuinely look forward to more gems like that.
Dammit, I had assumed I was the only one who noticed the font could be color coded. I guess that's what I get for making an assumption. I had hoped my use of colors would dazzle you into silence. Guess I underestimated you.
I know sarcasm is a poor way to make a point, but the only point I'm trying to make is that I found it amusing. I genuinely look forward to more gems like that.
NietzscheKeen
Well-Known Member
Just ignore him and he will go away. Or maybe his behaviour is due to his sense of rejection; some people go over the top to give the impression that they don't care they're being rejected when really they do. Like the loser that tries to pick up the decent girl and is turned down, only to call her a bitch and tell her she is ugly anyway.
Indignancy at its best.
Indignancy at its best.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
Here's your first mistake. You took my words and inferred your own interpretation rather than asking for clarification.
I see my wording different. Here's a parallel - let's assume I was responding to another type of post about evolution and said, "Nope, not intelligently designed." This is saying that according to current scientific understanding of biology, organisms evolve naturally and are not intelligently designed. It does not say that intelligent design is impossible or that nothing could be intelligently designed. It only means that there has never been any evidence for design, and that we have good natural explanations. Tomorrow, someone at the Discovery Institute could present findings that give clear evidence of design requiring a complete paradigm shift and re-examination of evolutionary theory. I believe it is very unlikely to occur but I can never say impossible or it could never be. In the same way, someone can show that gravitational information can be transmitted instantaneously. We would have to re-examine our current understanding of physics and come to grips with the fact that information CAN be transmitted faster than light. I think this is unlikely and there is no evidence for instantaneous transmission of gravitational information AFAIK, and there is plenty of indirect and experimental evidence that it travels at light speed, so I don't think I would be in error in stating that a claim that it travels instantaneous is incorrect anymore than I think saying that ID is incorrect.
It's a strawman to attempt to interpret my words more broadly or more narrowly than how it was intended.
You use belief and opinion very loosely. When discussing a factual question, all beliefs are not equal. A belief supported by evidence AND theory is stronger than one that is a mere guess. Newton was guessing. He even says so in his writings. Einstein reasoned and concluded based on indirect evidence. We also have experimental evidence which I linked to. So I have no problem telling someone no to a speculative belief when compared to reasoned, evidenced theory.
People can ask for clarification if they are confused. Just because something is theoretical, doesn't mean we can't have a level of confidence about it's correctness. As I point out, quantum theory is theoretical but your circuits that work as predicted are strong indicators that the model of quantum mechanics is at least mostly right. We KNOW quantum theory is wrong on some level. It doesn't incorporate gravity so it has a big hole. That doesn't mean it isn't mostly right. Our lack of a complete theory on gravity does not mean we don't know many things about it, including the speed which it propagates. If gravitons are massless, they will move at exactly c.
Your quote was wrong. There is evidence to support one claim over the other. This is why I posted a link to experiments and pointed out that it is bad form to provide a quote without a link. I could not examine your quote's source and find out when it was written, what else they may have said about it, judge the reliability of the source, etc.
This is why I said you threw the first 'punch.' The post you quoted IMO demonstrated no level of being hurt and I never claimed that anyone attacked me and suggested you not make this personal. I questioned you about why you think that I thought this and then your very next post called me delusional and a liar.
The way I saw it, you were the only one escalating while I was trying to bring it back down to calm discussion. As far as I can see, I never once made a personal attack against you.
Still, I'm willing to discuss whatever you want as long as you don't make things personal. Attack my argument, my statements, my ideas, my beliefs -- attack them vigorously and without mercy -- but not attack me personally as it does nothing to advance discussion and of course there's no way to defend against insults and ads hominem. I will defend my arguments or change my position if someone can show where I made an error or present a better argument. I still think I said nothing wrong within context of a thought problem that can be answered based on our current model of physics.
fb360
Active Member
You're spot on with everything from me leaving (which you've said countless times now) to my "community college programming" and my "community college mathematics". On the contrary, your continued suggestion to others to stop posting to me seems a lot like a cry to be part of the group. This is indeed the Science and Tech subforum correct? Shouldnt that give you a little hint about others abilities to choose for themselves if they want to respond or not? Especially when they didn't listen the first time.
Dude I own a SEO company dealing with php automation which makes well over $1mill usd/yr... I know programming, that's how I have made a living. My education on the other hand is based in engineering and mathematics. I've already posted pictures and videos of my VTOL UAVS I have designed with colleagues for the DOD. I'm also the proud owner of one of the only "technical" threads in this section, which is about nanoscale ee. This is a damn mj forum dude. If I'm going to spend time talking tech on a mj forum, I'm going to do it my way. If I get banned or hated, then so be it. I'm not here to make friends, nor do any of you know me personally. In fact, I suggest NOT making many friends with individuals on this forum, as anything illegal that can wind you up in prison is not a joking matter.
Just take a look at my troll to post ratio:
Politics 416
Total = 680.
Nearly 62% of my posts are trolling and political personal attacks.
And if sunni hadn't be explicitly clear she doesn't want any attacks, I would most likely attack you just to say I did it.
I wouldn't go as far as to say you didn't make any personal attacks, but I will agree that I did most of the escalation. I also agree that of everyone I personally attacked, you were the one who retaliated the least.
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
I do recall attacking your posts, but I don't remember making any remarks about you personally. I honestly try to avoid the ad hom because it does nothing to promote discussion. I hope this can be a fresh start for all of us.
fb360
Active Member
Then stop posting towards me and use the ignore function which is there for a reason. It is as simple as that lol
You're just mad you didn't know that velocity is the derivative of position with respect to time.
fb360
Active Member
What if I do? lol
The topic is done. The consensus is it moves at c, the other speculated possibility is infinity.
We've seen the simulations, done the math. Theoretical problems like this one (2 main theories, one of which is connected to most of ours current physics)get boring fast
Similar threads
