Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Whats so bad about invoking the opinion of people who have studied an issue?
What enduring reputation? Every few years everything they believed was true was falsified.Whats so bad about invoking the opinion of people who have studied an issue?
I think authority carries weight - when that authority is granted by institutions of enduring reputation.
Thats an outrageous expectation: that something so remote in time and space as star formation would just be explained in one sudden burst of knowledge. It ridiculous. In time it will get sorted out - by scientists, not by people griping on the internet.What enduring reputation? Every few years everything they believed was true was falsified.
It’s like astronomy and the belief in Star formation. Every single observation in the past decade has shown their theory to be incorrect, yet they ignore the observations and continue on as if nothing has happened.
Those astronomers and cosmologists that predicted wrong what we would find, their authority was granted by those same institutions that taught them the incorrect theory to begin with.
But that’s what they were taught, and so that is what they will believe, despite the falsifying observations. Instead they will tweak their epicycles and add another circle to the mix, and proclaim all is well in wonderland....
Oh. You mean Ptolemy.He had an elaborate series of mathmatical epicycles built to explain the earth at the center of the solar system, which explained quite well the observations of the other planets from this belief. Although wrong, it was the scientific belief at the time.
Deferent and epicycle - Wikipedia
Thats an outrageous expectation: that something so remote in time and space as star formation would just be explained in one sudden burst of knowledge. It ridiculous. In time it will get sorted out - by scientists, not by people griping on the internet.
Oh brother. How are you an authority on this?It’s already been sorted out. I could show you the theory that already correctly predicted what we would find, but it’s not what you were taught to believe, and so you will reject it, even if both the sciences involved are themselves taught in those institutions of authority you believe in.
The differences being one predicted correctly what we would find, while the other got every single thing wrong. But you will reject those that got it right and only accept preaching from those that didn’t get anything right.
Worked out in time. It was worked out already by those using laboratory experiments with what constitutes 99.9% of the universe. But why listen to the experts, right? Instead you’ll in this case listen to those with no formal training in the subject of the matter that constitutes 99.9% of the universe.
So I don’t really believe you when you claim to honor the appropriate authorities on the subject. You only listen instead to those you want to hear, and their epicycles and Fairie Dust.
So would you agree then that in a universe 99.9% plasma, plasma physicists should be the authority?
Apparently I know more than those who couldn’t get a single prediction correct, since I accept the theory that did predict everything correctly. And apparently more than you since you are getting upset because you followed those that couldn’t get anything right.Oh brother. How are you an authority on this?
No, I'm absolutely not an expert in the field, so I'm not going to be making extravagant claims on my own authority.Apparently I know more than those who couldn’t get a single prediction correct, since I accept the theory that did predict everything correctly. And apparently more than you since you are getting upset because you followed those that couldn’t get anything right.
But you avoided the question.
Wouldn’t the expert in a universe 99.9% plasma be a plasma physicist?
But I am no more an expert than any of you on here are, although from listening to you all, you would think you were one too. But you all never apply your own ad hominem attacks to yourself, just everyone else, right?
Well use your experts authority, we’ll see how their argument from authority stands up to the observations. That’s the point. I’m fixing to prove to you your claimed experts aren’t experts at all.No, I'm absolutely not an expert in the field, so I'm not going to be making extravagant claims on my own authority.
Did you perform these observations? Or are you taking them on authority?Well use your experts authority, we’ll see how their argument from authority stands up to the observations. That’s the point. I’m fixing to prove to you your claimed experts aren’t experts at all.
Anymore than you or I am....
No, he means Potlomy. We've all been spelling his name wrong and justatruthseeker is here to correct usOh. You mean Ptolemy.
Actually the very people who’s theory the observations proved wrong took them, those who’s authority you seem to accept while rejecting the authority of those who predicted correctly what we would find.Did you perform these observations? Or are you taking them on authority?
No, he means Potlomy. We've all been spelling his name wrong and justatruthseeker is here to correct us
At this level in our discussion, its all he said /she said.... essentially argument from authority. Unless you propose to lay out the actual evidence yourself.Actually the very people who’s theory the observations proved wrong took them, those who’s authority you seem to accept while rejecting the authority of those who predicted correctly what we would find.
So are you implying that not only could they not predict things correctly, despite 200+ years of refining theory, but that they also can’t make correct observations as well?
Teenage lobotomy.No, he means Potlomy. We've all been spelling his name wrong and justatruthseeker is here to correct us
Since the authorities have been wrong - Darwin believing the finches were reproductively isolated. 98% of the genome non-functional. Missing common ancestors at every single split, besides claims they would be found. E. coli remaining E. coli, just as every fossil remains the same.
Your authorities aren’t that much of an authority. Yah, they spent years telling us all about the coelacanth too. They spend quite a lot of time telling us things that years later don’t end up being true at all.
Not that you’d ever bother to go back and look at all the claims of fact that ended up being not fact, but fantasy.
“It is well known as a fallacy, though it is used in a cogent form when all sides of a discussion agree on the reliability of the authority in the given context.”
Based upon your experts track record over the years of always being wrong several years later, we don’t agree on the reliability of the authority in the given context.
At this level in our discussion, its all he said /she said.... essentially argument from authority. Unless you propose to lay out the actual evidence yourself.
Thats all I've been saying. You reject argument from authority as a fallacy, yet youre happy to use it. You should use it! Expertise carries weight, imo.
Yea good luck with that dude. I think I reached the point where the entertainment value from conversing with you has been fully depleted so I'm gonna leave you to your ramblings.
Older than you I’d wager.Teenage lobotomy.
It's not my biggest argument. You obviously missed the point of my post. You put yourself forward as the absolute authority on every subject. No matter what anyone else says, if you don't agree then it is the other poster who is wrong. So, if you write Potlomy but another poster writes Ptolemy then, since you're the absolute authority on everything, we must all be wrong and the correct spelling is Potlomy.If spelling is your biggest argument against the observational data then I have no worries at all.
What does that even mean?At least you are all two for two in getting them into the right thread....
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?