| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
sam
Wrecker
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 7:57 pm Post subject: Reply to marky, re TC |
 |
|
| marky wrote: | | how dare tele change his mind! |
We can all make mistakes and we can all change our minds as we learn. The adult way is to 'fess up and move along.
TC stubbornly refused even to admit to his previous claim, even when it was written in front of him. This is sub-juvenile behaviour.
p.s.the Van Allen belts do exist. To suggest otherwise is madness, which is part of the problem with TC's responses.
_________________
Cryin' won't help you, prayin' won't do you no good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | p.s.the Van Allen belts do exist. To suggest otherwise is madness, which is part of the problem with TC's responses.
|
that may be the case, however have you personnally confirmed this for yourself, or do you rely on somebody elses information to confirm it for you.
i believe there are radiation belts im not denying it, but the only reason i think i know is because ive been told so. i have no way of confirming it for myself. i had better hope they tell the truth or ive been had.
i don't see the problem with what tele said in 07' compared to 08' and i don't understand why your even making it an issue.
just because you want an apology of some sort?
have you never changed your mind? i could understand it if it was a matter of days between changing his stance, but it was'nt. its nothing strange and dos'nt have to answer to you about why he said one thing then changed his mind after ferther consideration.
as far as i was aware this is a discussion forum, not a point scoring forum. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam
Wrecker
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 9:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: | | Quote: | p.s.the Van Allen belts do exist. To suggest otherwise is madness, which is part of the problem with TC's responses.
|
that may be the case, however have you personnally confirmed this for yourself, or do you rely on somebody elses information to confirm it for you.
|
I have never personally confirmed Isaac Newton's laws of gravity, but nevertheless it's reasonable to accept them as true - in the macro world. Nobody in the world of science disputes their truth.
I have never personally confirmed that the moon is roughly spherical. Does this mean the moon's sphericality is up for debate?
To "personally confirm" the existence of the VA belts would require me to launch my own space mission. Surely you can't be so totally dumb as to propose that I need to do this before accepting the VA belt's reality?
Marky - your mind is so open that your brains have fallen out*
(*Carl Sagan, again)
_________________
Cryin' won't help you, prayin' won't do you no good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 06, 2008 10:22 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | I have never personally confirmed Isaac Newton's laws of gravity, but nevertheless it's reasonable to accept them as true - in the macro world. Nobody in the world of science disputes their truth.
|
it can be tested by anyone to see if it is true. poor example.
| Quote: | I have never personally confirmed that the moon is roughly spherical. Does this mean the moon's sphericality is up for debate?
|
it can be seen from earth, anybody can confirm this. poor example.
| Quote: | | To "personally confirm" the existence of the VA belts would require me to launch my own space mission. |
exactly. so we trust what we have been told because we cannot confirm it personnally.
| Quote: | | Surely you can't be so totally dumb as to propose that I need to do this before accepting the VA belt's reality? |
can you find where i propose such a thing? if not your question is answered.
| Quote: | | Marky - your mind is so open that your brains have fallen out* |
thats the second time you've said that simply because i don't deny the obvious.
to believe anything i need evidence. if i do believe something it is because there IS evidence, or i have witnessed it myself etc etc, which has nothing to do with being open minded. it has a lot to do with honesty.
i am not going to deny that i don't know personnally if there are van allen belts. i don't. im told the information and have no reason to believe ive been lied to about it. its very different to knowing personnally, and involves trusting others information.
for the sake of clarity, ill repeat myself again and say again.....i believe there are radiation belts im not denying it, but the only reason i think i know is because ive been told so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam
Wrecker
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 8:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: |
| Quote: | I have never personally confirmed that the moon is roughly spherical. Does this mean the moon's sphericality is up for debate?
|
it can be seen from earth, anybody can confirm this. poor example.
|
Really? All you and I can see from earth is a disc, not a sphere. Evidence for a spherical moon only comes from outside sources, as it's beyond the likes of you and me to verify it personally.
But this illustrates the point. Considering such a basic "fact" as debatable simply because of one's own difficulty in proving it is a road to absurdity.
And before you ask, no I'm not suggesting for one moment that we should blindly accept every "fact" that scientists throw at us. The pharmaceutical industry has quite a track-record for lying through their teeth, for example.
_________________
Cryin' won't help you, prayin' won't do you no good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 12:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | But this illustrates the point. Considering such a basic "fact" as debatable simply because of one's own difficulty in proving it is a road to absurdity.
|
but who is debating simply facts? nobody. you seem to think me saying i cannot confirm something for myself = me debating things i have no reason to believe are false. your putting the words into my mouth, i am not debating simple facts, i am merely pointing out some information i have to trust is true as i have no way of confirming it for myself.
but then you understand what what im getting at dont you.
| Quote: | | And before you ask, no I'm not suggesting for one moment that we should blindly accept every "fact" that scientists throw at us. |
although i'd add the media to that statement to. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sam
Wrecker
Joined: 29 Dec 2007
Posts: 343
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 2:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| marky 54 wrote: |
but who is debating simply facts? nobody. you seem to think me saying i cannot confirm something for myself = me debating things i have no reason to believe are false. your putting the words into my mouth,
|
No, you're misinterpreting what I'm saying as a personal attack (you do this all the time, by the way)
I'm discussing the nature of reasonable debate. I'm not suggesting that you are guilty of unreasonable debate in the case of the Van Allen belts or the shape of the moon. telecasterisation, however, was, and is well worthy of a mickey-take in my sig. He made mutually-contradictory statements and squirmed like a well-oiled snake rather than admit it. Which is where we started this discussion.
_________________
Cryin' won't help you, prayin' won't do you no good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
marky 54
Mega Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 07, 2008 2:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
i disagree, tele simply changed his mind, you've decided to make an issue out of it, and demand he retracts his 2007 statement. which he has already done by changing his mind.
so the only purpose is that you are trying to take the mick, simply because he changed his mind.
you highlight the retraction of his earlier statement in you sig.
why do you think he has to answer to you personnally? he dos'nt.
the fact he chaged his mind is a retraction in itself. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
telecasterisation
Banned
Joined: 10 Sep 2006
Posts: 1873
Location: Upstairs
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 09, 2008 12:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It could have been Hawking, Shakespeare, Churchill, Derek Trotter, but no, my words get quoted at the end of every sammy post! Truly humbling.
Everything in life is based upon perspective and I could easily see my prose pointing to ‘freethinking’ and sam being a keen exponent of that philosophy, eager to push the paradigm. However, having attempted to claw away the clutter, I can only conclude that he cannot comprehend such a view given his entrenched thinking.
To reiterate;
I have not changed my mind with regard to anything to do with the VA belts, I still conclude that the technology that existed nearly forty years ago appears woefully lacking in safely traversing space bathed in areas of radiation. In addition, I also state that I cannot confirm if the VA belts exist nor their lethal or benign qualities – these two views neither conflict nor contradict each other.
Disappointing that sam exits so quickly having got down to the name calling level;
| Quote: | | Marky - your mind is so open that your brains have fallen out. |
All very academic adult stuff, but good to see him getting 'down and dirty', his usual stoic textbook responses and stiff-upper lip being given the old heave ho.
Nonetheless, a wonderful thread, me as the subject and grown men having a wobble over lil’ ol’ me – ultra cool!
_________________
I completely challenge the official version of events - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC -I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC - I AM NOT A 9/11 TRUTH CRITIC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
