tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post745769864219491488..comments2024-03-28T15:31:02.860-07:00Comments on Metacrock's Blog: Just the Facts? Is Science the Only Form of Knowledge?Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)http://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-72153738235155255992010-01-20T13:41:47.813-08:002010-01-20T13:41:47.813-08:00thanks Dave. That was a good post.I should not hav...thanks Dave. That was a good post.I should not have responded to that guy/gal(?). I am sick, I woke up with the flew so I guess i was cranky last night when I read that. I thought i would make a much better response but when I did it I just said basically "screw you." latter i thought "ill get up early and change it so it wont be so bad." But I woke sick and didn't get of bed.<br /><br />when I did get up all I did was watch Perry Mason and Ironsides.<br /><br />I don't think that person knows much about science but he/she knows one should reverense it and that's about all.<br /><br />There are atheists on my message board who could give a good discussion and who understand scinece deeply. I'm going to put my post up there.Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-24118521547167088232010-01-20T10:24:13.217-08:002010-01-20T10:24:13.217-08:00Your point flew so far over Anonymous' head he...Your point flew so far over Anonymous' head he didn't even see it, let alone recognize it or comprehend it. S/he just said you don't know anything and aren't worth a response. If that's the case why reply at all? <br /><br />Either someone can actually address what you are saying, or, if it isn't worth their time, they can just move on to another site. The only reason to post that reply was to stoke ones ego by making sure you know s/he is dismissing you. <br /><br />It would be nice to have someone reply who is moderately versed in epistemology. I am wondering how many people who post things like that really understand what science is and how it works and how many just have some junior high normative set of steps they learned from an introductory level textbook.tinythinkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17137637122776756669noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-91651437198263079892010-01-19T19:34:16.676-08:002010-01-19T19:34:16.676-08:00You want to know why atheists don't bother to ...You want to know why atheists don't bother to check the studies you cite? Why should I take my very limited time to check studies by someone who displays zero knowledge of the scientific method? You're great for entertainment purposes, but it is impossible to take seriously someone who starts off his essay with obvious dreck.<br /><br /><b>Its' because they are sutpid little thoughts pigs. I know the guy who did the studies is regareded as the tops in his field. (the M scale). you are a fool. you have no concept of science. you don't know what ameks a profession.you would act like a professional to save your life.<br /><br />real professionals in scinece don't' go around saying "you don't know anything." stop being a pussy and open your stupid little mind and learn something you illiterate Jethro.</b>Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-34522680476265677502010-01-19T19:31:55.894-08:002010-01-19T19:31:55.894-08:00So knowledge has to be established to be accepted....So knowledge has to be established to be accepted. But then one wonders how we ever make new discoveries? They would have to start out as established, then they wouldn't be discoveries.<br /><br /><br /><br />Really, Metacrock, do you really lack any imagination at all? For that matter, do you have any grasp of the scientific method whatsoever?<br /><br /><b>Um, that was what the guy I was quoting said? It's what the atheist I argued against said! do you have reading comprehension at all?<br /><br />I was a Ph.D. candidate in history of ideas and I studied the history of scinece. I know more about scinece than you. You are obviously stupid and a loud mouth who get's worked up before he knows the facts.</b><br /><br />Have you ever heard of making hypotheses? Of testing hypotheses? Of peer reviewing what you've come up with? In short, you may imagine solutions to problems, but you can't call it knowledge until it has been thoroughly checked out.<br /><br /><b>you don't know anything about it. you did read what I said, you are too stupid to figure what I'm arguing for and what I'm arguing against. you know nothing. I know far more about scinece than you do.<br /><br />you think I'm insulting your holy excuse for God so that's why you get emotive.<br /><br />you are just a red neck lout you are not worth responding to.</b>Joseph Hinman (Metacrock)https://www.blogger.com/profile/06957529748541493998noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-11516215.post-40641607333685241512010-01-19T18:35:56.397-08:002010-01-19T18:35:56.397-08:00So knowledge has to be established to be accepted....So knowledge has to be established to be accepted. But then one wonders how we ever make new discoveries? They would have to start out as established, then they wouldn't be discoveries.<br /><br /><br />Really, Metacrock, do you really lack any imagination at all? For that matter, do you have any grasp of the scientific method whatsoever?<br /><br />Have you ever heard of making hypotheses? Of testing hypotheses? Of peer reviewing what you've come up with? In short, you may imagine solutions to problems, but you can't call it knowledge until it has been thoroughly checked out.<br /><br />It is utter crock to say that <br />facts "would have to start out as established, then they wouldn't be discoveries." It completely miscomprehends what science does.<br /><br />You want to know why atheists don't bother to check the studies you cite? Why should I take my very limited time to check studies by someone who displays zero knowledge of the scientific method? You're great for entertainment purposes, but it is impossible to take seriously someone who starts off his essay with obvious dreck.<br /><br />And, really, Metacrock, do you think anyone is going to be wowed by such insights as "facts can be misleading"? Well, duh. That's why a certain amount of rigorousness is required in your thinking as well as your judgment about what is knowledge and what is not. And judging by your hilarious opening, that is something you lack.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com