Noah's Ark Mystery

[Lollerskates]

How can you be a scientist and state producing evidence for your claim is ridiculous? Does this excuse work in your professional life?

Huh?

I begged people to prove me wrong with their self-researched evidence.

Wait, I need to address your questioning of my being a scientist. Give me you fax number, and I will send might sen you my diploma. If you were more delicate in your interaction, you would have received my name, and would have been able to look up me in the Columbia directory. That is not just Columbia University, that is Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science. (SEAS).

 

[selfinflikted]

Dude if you are here for teh lulz then you aren't an intellectual priority - not because you aren't intelligent, but because you are here for teh lulz.

I consider myself a hit-and-run poster these days. Most of the internet is blocked where I post from, so this is about all I can do.

The "you made the claim; you provide the proof" argument is ridiculous to me.

Sorry you feel that way. But the burden of proof is still on you, no matter how "lazy" you *think* we all are for not trying to parse Google results. If you make a claim, back it up. If you can't/won't, then don't expect to be taken too seriously. I know I don't.* It's up to you.

(That is, I know I don't expected to be taken seriously. Not you. Although I don't take you seriously, incidentally.)

 

[selfinflikted]

Also, fax number PM'd.

 

[bhsmte]

Huh?

I begged people to prove me wrong with their self-researched evidence.

Wait, I need to address your questioning of my being a scientist. Give me you fax number, and I will send might sen you my diploma. If you were more delicate in your interaction, you would have received my name, and would have been able to look up me in the Columbia directory. That is not just Columbia University, that is Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science. (SEAS).

Did I touch a nerve? Reread my post and you will see you are being overly defensive, which is a sign of something.

I stated; how can you be a scientist and claim producing evidence to back your claims is ridiculous? I didn't say you were not a scientist, just how you can reconcile thinking it is ridiculous to provide evidence for your claims in a profession that demands it?

 

[Lollerskates]

I consider myself a hit-and-run poster these days. Most of the internet is blocked where I post from, so this is about all I can do.



Sorry you feel that way. But the burden of proof is still on you, no matter how "lazy" you *think* we all are for not trying to parse Google results. If you make a claim, back it up. If you can't/won't, then don't expect to be taken too seriously. I know I don't. It's up to you.

K (CAY.)

I still stand strong that humans in the google age should be able to gather info. It isn't the 1980s; this is the age of google. Typee in what a "fractional integer quantum Hall effect" is, and see if you don't get plenty of info on the FQHE.

 

[bhsmte]

Huh?

I begged people to prove me wrong with their self-researched evidence.

Wait, I need to address your questioning of my being a scientist. Give me you fax number, and I will send might sen you my diploma. If you were more delicate in your interaction, you would have received my name, and would have been able to look up me in the Columbia directory. That is not just Columbia University, that is Columbia University School of Engineering and Applied Science. (SEAS).

Also, how can you challenge someone to prove you wrong with their own evidence, if you haven't provided your own evidence? That is quite a trick!

 

[ThinkForYourself]

Written records are fickle. Petroglyphs, and rock-engraved messages survive as long as the rocks survive. You are the one that is stuck on hyperbolic cataclysms. Noah's "flood" was a cataclysms; it was not the last scene in Melancholia. [At least] Eight people survived the event. You don't believe in God, so of course you cant reconcile how humans can survive such an event. I will leave you at that.



IT DID PERISH. ONLY 8 PEOPLE SURVIVED OUT OF WHO KNOWS HOW MANY MILLIONS. Do you not understand how cataclysmic the Flood was?

It seems to satisfy your thoughts on what was [a flood], all humans would be dead, and the earth would be the new asteroid belt.

Er, that was from a flood, not from continental drift occurring at a ridiculous rate.

The Flood myth is silly. There is no proof for it out side of the bible. It doesn't make sense in terms of past civilizations, and the numbers of people required to build the pyramids, etc.

The logistics required are impossible for Noah and his family to fulfill. Loading all the animals, feeding them and watering them for 7 months, etc. etc.

Finally, why didn't god just snap his fingers, and make everything happen, rather than go through these convolutions with the ark? Clearly this tale is written by people who had very limited knowledge of the world around them, and never expected fact checking to occur.

 

[selfinflikted]

Did I touch a nerve? Reread my post and you will see you are being overly defensive, which is a sign of something.

I stated; how can you be a scientist and claim producing evidence to back your claims is ridiculous? I didn't say you were not a scientist, just how you can reconcile thinking it is ridiculous to provide evidence for your claims in a profession that demands it?

It's probably my fault. Quite a few people claim to have credentials that they simply do not. So, if he's offering proof, I'm open to looking at it. I don't believe he is a scientist. But that's just my opinion. (And I'm not trying to be ugly or anything, it's just that certain things I've seen don't quite gel for me on that score.)

 

[bhsmte]

K (CAY.)

I still stand strong that humans in the google age should be able to gather info. It isn't the 1980s; this is the age of google. Typee in what a "fractional integer quantum Hall effect" is, and see if you don't get plenty of info on the FQHE.

Then why don't you use google and give the direct link to the evidence that backs you claim.

As a scientist, do you tell your peer to "just google it" as evidence to support your work?

 

[Lollerskates]

Did I touch a nerve? Reread my post and you will see you are being overly defensive, which is a sign of something.

I stated; how can you be a scientist and claim producing evidence to back your claims is ridiculous? I didn't say you were not a scientist, just how you can reconcile thinking it is ridiculous to provide evidence for your claims in a profession that demands it?

If you believe I am a physicist, then you should know that not one on these forums can strike a nerve within me - I am a physicist. I have dealt with colleagues that actually know their stuff, that contend with me. I have held my own, and obliterated my colleagues.

I don't care to explain how I could, "believe the impossible," so to speak, because it is a difference of opinion. I told you I am a physicist, and we still argue (as well you should if it is coming from a researched, independent place: I am 100% for that.) IN general it it futile.

 

[Lollerskates]

It's probably my fault. Quite a few people claim to have credentials that they simply do not. So, if he's offering proof, I'm open to looking at it. I don't believe he is a scientist. But that's just my opinion. (And I'm not trying to be ugly or anything, it's just that certain things I've seen don't quite gel for me on that score.)

I see what you did there.

 

[Lollerskates]

Also, how can you challenge someone to prove you wrong with their own evidence, if you haven't provided your own evidence? That is quite a trick!

Are you that easy?


All it takes is a person to be "qualified" in a field, and prove me wrong. It isn't that serious as you claim.

 

[bhsmte]

If you believe I am a physicist, then you should know that not one on these forums can strike a nerve within me - I am a physicist. I have dealt with colleagues that actually know their stuff, that contend with me. I have held my own, and obliterated my colleagues.

I don't care to explain how I could, "believe the impossible," so to speak, because it is a difference of opinion. I told you I am a physicist, and we still argue (as well you should if it is coming from a researched, independent place: I am 100% for that.) IN general it it futile.

Lollerskates,

The fact that you have to gloat about your credentials, refuse to give direct links to evidence to support your claims, state you obliterate your colleagues and then just say; I told you I was a physicist, like this should end all debate, unless of course someone provides researched evidence which you yourself do not provide for your own claims, all gives me serious pause.

 

[Lollerskates]

Then why don't you use google and give the direct link to the evidence that backs you claim.

As a scientist, do you tell your peer to "just google it" as evidence to support your work?

Because you are a human, and you have the ability of research. I wrote a thesis; I don't do work for other people especially that I have to argue with. You are able bodied. Google is your fiend.

Research the data (including the NASA declassified document) yourslef. If you haven't seen the document, don't bother responding to me. I am bore of "expert piggybacking" claptrap. When you decide to stop being lazy and look up the document yourself, then we can talk.

 

[bhsmte]

Are you that easy?


All it takes is a person to be "qualified" in a field, and prove me wrong. It isn't that serious as you claim.

It is easy, first provide the evidence you use for your initial claim.

 

[selfinflikted]

I see what you did there.

What? Other attempt to explain the confusion?

I also haven't received that fax yet.

 

[bhsmte]

Because you are a human, and you have the ability of research. I wrote a thesis; I don't do work for other people especially that I have to argue with. You are able bodied. Google is your fiend.

Research the data (including the NASA declassified document) yourslef. If you haven't seen the document, don't bother responding to me. I am bore of "expert piggybacking" claptrap. When you decide to stop being lazy and look up the document yourself, then we can talk.

Observation of one's behaviors is my friend as well, and yours are quite telling and at this point, quite predictable.

 

[Lollerskates]

Lollerskates,

The fact that you have to gloat about your credentials, refuse to give direct links to evidence to support your claims, state you obliterate your colleagues and then just say; I told you I was a physicist, like this should end all debate, unless of course someone provides researched evidence which you yourself do not provide for your own claims, all gives me serious pause.

You act like an invalid human. Google. MSN. Yahoo. You have plenty power to look up anything on the internet. You can even study a full corseload of physics via MIT. You keep asking peers for answers. That id is your problem. You could always be a physicst and trump me. I beg people to do that - independent thought. No, you would rather accuse me. Stop being lazy. MIT courseworks/ There is no excuse for ignorance.

 

[keith99]

That Lollerskates keeps hounding on credentials rather then evidence is all I need to know he was not educated a Columbia.

 

[bhsmte]

You act like an invalid human. Google. MSN. Yahoo. You have plenty power to look up anything on the internet. You can even study a full corseload of physics via MIT. You keep asking peers for answers. That id is your problem. You could always be a physicst and trump me. I beg people to do that - independent thought. No, you would rather accuse me. Stop being lazy. MIT courseworks/ There is no excuse for ignorance.

Trump what, you haven't provided any evidence?

Act like an invalid human? I won't tell you what your actions tell me about yourself, I will take the higher ground.