Inconsistancy's forum posts

Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#1 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts
[QUOTE="HoolaHoopMan"][QUOTE="LOXO7"]Public schools are not in our Constitution.LOXO7
Trolololol

I guess we have different definitions of unconstitutional.

Public schools are not protected, nor prohibited, in the constitution. That means you may create law on them, so long as it doesn't violate the constitution.
Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#2 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts

[QUOTE="WickedChainy"][QUOTE="lostrib"]

Seems quite a few people in OT don't understand science

lostrib

Yep... You being one of them. I never said a theory was a fact, but to try and discredit a theory by saying it's just a theory is dumb.

wow...okay, I guess I'll roll with it

Theories aren't 100%, that's why they're called theories.  or else they would be upgraded to scientific laws.

You don't get "upgraded" to a law. The law is a simple observation of a fairly broad empirical fact (and may be wrong in certain situations*). The theory is the well substantiated description of an empirically observed fact, as the result of all of the testing and invalidation, and refinement, of your previous hypotheses.

ie, law: Unless acted upon, an object in motion tends to stay in motion, and an object at rest tends to stay at rest. This doesn't tell you why this is true, it's just the observation.
and a theory: Theory of Relativity, it describes why you see those observations of physics. The bending of light around a sufficiently massive object(s) is described here, not just observed.

*Newton's law of universal gravitation only applies in weak gravitational fields

Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts
[QUOTE="killzowned24"]

Forza just had a massive upgrade!

irz5XL8gj7UVv.png

 

 

oh wait ,thats forza 4 :lol:

o0squishy0o
Can't really make a judgement on which is which... is this a joke post? or are they actually two different games (if you ignore the GUI) they look near identical. Top one looks to have the better environment, but the bottom car looks to be slightly crisper. I'll guess that top one is forza 5? Just going by the fact the top curb looks more detailed.

Look at the resolution, and the curb isn't more detailed on top, that's motion blur in the bottom picture.
Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#4 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts

People complain because they have little to no real hardship and as a result whine about their first world problems. America isn't perfect but it could be a lot worse. Especially when you have people in Pakistan being sentenced to death for blasphemy, something people can freely do in the US.

ad1x2

5% of the world's population, 25% of the world's prisoners, and a 65%+ recidivism rate*. We're pretty bad about justice towards the rich, famous, and powerful. We "don't look to the past (referencing war crimes)" when it comes to politicians. I might be crazy, but I kind of think that's a pretty serious issue.

I really don't like the mentality of: "first world problems, stop whining". Even if they are just "first world problems", doing nothing, and never complaining, isn't useful. I think you should always be critical and search for solutions to problems.

*not easy to find the recidivism rate of other nations, so take it worth a grain of salt... I guess.

Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#5 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts

  Anyways my ultimate feelings when it comes to explaining the origin of life or some crap like that..  THAT IS NOT what schools are supposed to really do, just teach the three Rs or whatever they call it and stfu about everything else.

mahlasor

Evolution is the 'ORIGIN OF SPECIES' by means of natural selection. It is not the origin of life, that is Abiogensis (non-life-beginning).

People like you should have 'no' say in education.

An education system based on the "three R's" (reading, writing, arithmetic... actually it's read, regurgitate, repeat) alone, would be 'horrible'. It would be boring, tedious, monotonous, irksome, redundant, ect (just like this sentence).

A good education system should teach much more than just the basic necessities. It should expose students to as many subjects and ideas as reasonably possible, at the best possible quality. People don't know what they love 'til they experience it, and most people wont fall in love with the "three R's" alone. 

"If you do well in school, you'll make more money."
"You have to get good grades to get to college" 

These are not very good motivators to keep people interested in education. "I love -insert field here-." is.

----

Back to abiogensis, I think it's a shame that it 'isn't' taught in school. Unlike evolution, which you're just backing up a claim that is so well established*, abiogensis is open, it's full of new questions! It's much easier to think of an experiment in a field that is so uncertain, and to actually learn something new from that experiment, that you couldn't have previously looked up. It would be vastly more interesting than disecting a rat.

*This isn't to say that evolutionary biology isn't interesting, it is! 

Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#6 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts

  It does because fallacy = logical error.  Well scientist do have a strong relation with government, like whether they get their budgets or whatever passed.  You just used an either or fallacy in the bolded.  Guess what, there is not a 97 percent consensus.  It is based on a survey, and I do not trust surveys so easily.  Btw, that is not how science is done, it is not by majority vote.  Look in the past, science discoveries have been made by ignoring the majority.  So is it hard to bleieve that maybe all these "scientist" are one day going to be seen as the ones who were wrong and misguided?

mahlasor


Fallacy fallacy x2, building that multiplier?

With respect to the either/or, I'll give you that (that it is not a particuarlly correct line of reasoning, not that your interpretation of it was correct, or your assumptions about my knowledge). And your Fallacy fallacy multiplier grows to 3x. Also my either/or is: is it more likely group 'a' is corrupt, or that the group 'b' is wrong. Not that group 'a' is correct.

"Well scientist do have a strong relation with government, like whether they get their budgets or whatever passed."

This != corruption, it's just some public funding. You seemed so certain, but you don't seem to have much to back up that certainty.

Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#7 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts

An international collaboration of renowned climate scientists isn't considered an 'authority' on climate change?  WHAT?

HoolaHoopMan

No authorities, only experts. All beliefs should be tentative and able to be readily changed upon the introduction of superior evidence.

They are still currently studying it, and there are different reports coming out all the time that contradict each other. Even if most of them agree with one study, I don't think they are at the point yet where they should be teaching it in schools as if there isn't debate about the cause.

Teaching that the climate has been warming over time could be taught, because that is data. That is fact. But to teach that the reason for this is because of humans is premature.

BMD004

It's not being taught as an "absolute fact" or any of that nonsense in the first place, at least not by anyone who'd be qualified to teach it in the first place. The IPCC uses words like "likely" and "90%" all throughout this extremely short effectively "talking point for idiots who we can't trust to actually read anything in the first place" article, they're not claiming 100%. 

It's not correct at all to require a field of science to be at Evolution's level of confidence before you begin teaching it, it's much better to teach the students not to hold their beliefs too sternly, and be willing to change them upon the introduction of superior evidence.

So what you got a an appeal to authority fallacy, for one I already know global warming is a political thing. So it is no surprise Nasa would be in on that.  And now we have the ad hominem. I have noticed that by making a small statement I get irrational people like you jumping to conclusions, and being insulting to say the least. All based on very little knowledge, someone need to go back to school to learn some lessons, in manners.

mahlasor

Fallacy fallacy, just because he appealed to authority doesn't make him wrong.

What motivation would scientists have to just lie? Are they so greedy/lazy and afraid to lose their pretty secure jobs, that they would perpetuate a lie?

Is it more likely that 97% of climate scientists are corrupt, and that the majority of the science community is afraid to criticize them, if not callaborating with the "lie"; or that the 3% are wrong?

(green) of course it is, that's what happens when idiot politicians, who have strong feelings about research they haven't read, or can't comprehend, get inbetween scientific debates. However, it doesn't prove that NASA's corrupt, or that the data's invalid. You seem to be heavily implying that you know for certain that it is. If you're making a claim, you're going to need evidence to back it up. 

Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts

[QUOTE="Inconsistancy"]

'An' is only used infront of words with vowels, as you may (or may not) know 's' and 'h' are 'not vowels'.

jun_aka_pekto

The English language is full of exceptions. A word with a silent h such as in honest is one such exception.

-.- I'm aware of that, it was a simple mistake.
Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts

  Well global warming shouldnt be taught as fact when there is plenty of arguements against it.  Same as Evolution, it really is not an science, it is more of an hypothesis.  

mahlasor

No valid arguments against the theory of evolution have ever been uttered, it's pretty much the most well substantiated field of all of science. A scientific theory is a well substantiated description for an empirically observed fact (a law). It is not a simple idea. And pretty much the same goes for climate change, it's just no where near as well understood.

'An' is only used infront of words with vowels, as you may (or may not) know 's' and 'h' are 'not vowels'.

Avatar image for Inconsistancy
Inconsistancy

8094

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

8

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#10 Inconsistancy
Member since 2004 • 8094 Posts
the sound is terrible....is sounds like your boiling chilli when something is getting cut into and the animations suck so bad.....its like mirrors edge meets dead island......the concept of this game is already burnt out before it begun stereointegrity
Mirror's Edge + anything would be pretty wonderful, it's Brink + Dead Island. TB was singing its praises for its automatic parkour bullshit. I don't understand how people like that sort of thing.