When people are allowed to say idiotic things unchallenged

[Katy Alexander]

Originally Posted by SR Only

It's not nice to "F" with a mod. I'm going get my green ray gun and decoder ring. Then I am going to put you over my knee and administer punishment to you young lady!

And I have now studied:
http://www.amrescueohio.com/MalvsHusky.html

And please do not beg for mercy (just beg for more).

Best to you and Edward, Becky! I hadn't seen you post for a few days. It had me worried.

Thanks SR, me and Ed were taking a very long nap this week .Please excuse me I must now take the world largest Husky for a long walk..

PS please continue to inform WTF that 2+2 = 5. He likes to be informed of this several times a day.

[WTF]

Originally Posted by Becky

God damn it SR, you ignorant slutEdward is a Malamute not a God damn Husky. I am highly offended by this miscarriage of information.How dare you attempt to speculate the breed of my dog without first earning your Masters in Veterinary Science. Now I demand an apology, and an admission of guilt before all of the poor gullible people of D&T are polluted with this false information, and go around thinking that a 120 pound dog is actually the worlds largest Husky.

Does SR ignorance on the matter put other people/dogs lives at risk?


Let us do an example you might relate to better....... I have no problem with being polite but when people are not versed in science it effects lives. Maybe that is when I become a tad more serious and forceful.

Would you want Ed around a bunch of dogs that had not had their shots? Do you take Ed in for his shots? That is in fact science and when people dismiss how science works then I take exception with that. Would you be as tolerant of dog owners that did not believe in shots coming around Ed? Would you not try and educate them? That was the intent of the thread...to debunk this notion that science is dogmatic (haha). It is not and it is dangerous that people do not understand that it is not. It gives the Jenny McCarthy's of the world to much power.

Whew....off my high horsey now. It is my sincerest hope that I was not rude in making my point. I hope I have made my point but will gladly discuss my point or my (in)politeness or perceived (in)politeness further with anyone who takes exception with either the accuracy of the subject matter or my tone in delivery.

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

+1

Now I know the purpose of the thread. (I don't watch Oprah - or any other talk show.) I just know McCarthy is a super-fine woman I've been lusting after since she debuted on MTV many years back, and that, until recently, I very much envied Jim Carey.

BTW, I almost used this recent revelation (the disproven vaccination-autism connection) as an example of "scientific" dogma (that Jenny is quoting) and how "science fact" can change. LOL

You might like this news:

Study suggests link between birth spacing, autism:
In preliminary findings, children born less than two years after a sibling were at greater risk.
By Carla K. Johnson
Associated Press

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/nation_world/20110110_Study_suggests_link_b etween_birth_spacing__autism.h tml.

Well I didn't say I wouldn't fuck her!

Debunking the study is what science is all about. Science is always looking for the truth. Yes I realize that man can manipulate the science but that is a different subject matter.

[Camille]

Originally Posted by Becky

Thanks SR, me and Ed were taking a very long nap this week .Please excuse me I must now take the world largest Husky for a long walk..

PS please continue to inform WTF that 2+2 = 5. He likes to be informed of this several times a day.

I love a husky Becky (even though we know Ed is not one lol). I had one in England several years ago. I don't think I have ever been as fit or thin as I was when I had him. When I got him, the breeder was insistent that when we went walking that I strapped the dog adjusted backpack to him...because they are working dogs and need treating as such. I felt so mean at first, but he loved it! The only downside was all the shedding...my gosh they can shed hair for fun!!! Great dogs though...as long as you don't leave them alone for too long. Say goodbye to your furniture if you do lol...

C xxx

[discreetgent]

For Ansley: Guppies

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by Becky

. Now I demand an apology, and an admission of guilt before all of the poor gullible people of D&T are polluted with this false information, and go around thinking that a 120 pound dog is actually the worlds largest Husky.

demands of apology are only made because someone PMed me with the "fact" that i should apologize. so? why should i be the only one? do i have more to apologize for than anyone else? so? And at least i tried, when someone else is not even barely recognising arrogant behaviour?

do i need to say more? Or is receiving PMs from a certain provider we all do not want to name after writing offensive posts that I was not the one said provider meant? Then why not correct the opinion on the board?? What is up with that? Its ok to write offensive posts as long as i PM anyone and say "you are the exemption from my rule?".....ha ha... very funny

[Guest083011]

Originally Posted by ninasastri

do i have more to apologize for than anyone else?

Not me!

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by Bebe Le Strange

You know I laughed my ass off when I watched her interview and the stupid, ill informed things she said about the russians, cold war, and sputnik. In case you missed it here is the link to the interview:

.”

See???? So i think too much politeness on non-education can be quite embarrassing on a much higher level. What would have hypothetically happened if Sarah would have been less offended at the "HOW" of an intellectual input and more focussed on the "WHAT CONTENT" an intellectual input has?

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by London Rayne

I really don't know what the thread was intended for nor what individuals you speak of....I was stating an opinion directed only at the freedom of speech movement lol. If this is directed at one person in particular, well I guess I didn't bother to notice. I do however notice that every time anything is said about certain individuals, the white knight posse has to speak for them as if they don't have a mind of their own.

that is true, that is my opinion as well. i still don`t know why i should be a worse person for bashing one person for an opinion than one person is for bashing a whole area of thought plus the people within, and this without stating facts or bringing valid examples ? at least i have the decency to reflect on myself and why i get a certain reaction while some people are so up on their high horse that they think they stand above everything. And apologies and acknowledging facts is just for jerks like me, who don`t even bother with grammar right? Well at least i get the facts right :-)

[ClairJordan]

Originally Posted by discreetgent

If we preferred politeness then a thread like this would not exist. If we preferred truth we would know that a thread like this is unlikely to get us to that either.

"I may disagree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - attributed to Voltaire written by Evelyn Beatrice Hall

[Guest050715-1]

It depends. I let things slide all the time for several reasons. The main one is it may not be a big deal, or more specifically, it may not be a big deal to me. If someone wants to believe in Santa Clause, what do I care? One of the biggest “contests” people have is proving they are more political correct than anyone else. IMHO, PC is a bane on our society so I try to stay out of that mental masturbation. Would I challenge the wisdom of not getting vaccines for deadly or deforming virtues? Yes, I would. In fact, I think the actual behavior to be challenged is Ophra or anyone else to host such dangerous nonsense.

Originally Posted by atlcomedy

I won't mention any names, but it cracks me up when I tell the truth on this forum and get told I'm a jerk or an ass or I lack civility,but the truth is

(in my best Jack voice)

"(Some people) CAN'T HANDLE THE TRUTH!"f[/IMG]

Two things come to mind. One, sometimes it’s in the delivery. And two, just because it’s the truth, definitely doesn’t mean people want to hear it.

Originally Posted by WTF

Yet you challenge one and not the other and don't forget idiotic theories, belief's and narcissism, from which rude behavior is born.

Narcissi do not like to be challenged, they think the very fact that you question them is grounds for rude behavior. They never admit to any wrong doing. So looking at it from another perspective (from those that deal with the narrcist) the rude behavior is actually emulating from the narcissi.

.............................. ....................

Ain’t that just the truth. I used to have a friend that would get mad at me when I would disagree with her or state a truism about the world as it stands that didn’t jive with her delicate sensibilities. It’s not my fault that’s the just way it is.

[NinaBrooke]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Please don't take this personally, but the real problem with that notion is that the so called “facts” and "science" often change.

Many on this board are quick to decry the shortcomings of theistic religion (as opposed to atheistic religion—which is, somehow, much more pure): especially Christianity. Many are quick to label Christian (or Muslim) teachings as superstition and readily point to the fact that the Church (in this instance both the Roman Catholic and Greek Orthodox) once maintained that the earth was at the center of the universe. It was heresy to believe otherwise. I’m sure that notion gives non-believing Humanist a good belly laugh. It’s ridiculous, they say, to believe in such things—“science” has taught us better.

On closer inspection, however, one will realize that the Church did not invent the notion of a geocentric universe: scientists did. The Church’s notions of how the physical universe functioned were adopted from the works of Plato and Aristotle—two of the ancient world’s preeminent philosopher-scientists. Some of their scientific findings were held as scientific gospel for almost two thousand years. But go ahead; blame theistic religion for all of man’s failures and shortcomings. Science is mankind’s only hope and beacon of truth: let Auschwitz and Hiroshima be exhibits “A and B” to this noble experiment. Phrenology and eugenics were also quite popular “sciences” at the turn of the 20th Century; that is up until the end of WWII. What will the world, if it still exists, think of our “science” in two thousand years?

Meanwhile, here are some more “scientific” (hence, purportedly immutable) facts to consider:

According to Aristotle, the heavenly bodies are the most perfect realities, (or "substances"), whose motions are ruled by principles other than those of bodies in the sublunary sphere. The latter are composed of one or all of the four classical elements (earth, water, air, fire) and are perishable; but the matter the heavens are made of is imperishable aether, so they are not subject to generation and corruption. Hence their motions are eternal and perfect, and the perfect motion is the circular one, which, unlike the earthly up-and down-ward locomotions, can last eternally selfsame. As substances, celestial bodies have matter (aether) and a form: it seems that Aristotle did regard them as living beings with a rational soul as their form (see also Metaphysics, bk. XII)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/On_the_Heavens

The Aristotelian explanation of gravity is that all bodies move toward their natural place. For the element earth, that place is the center of the (geocentric) universe, next comes the natural place of water (in a concentric shell around that of earth). The natural place of air is likewise a concentric shell surrounding the place of water. Sea level is between those two. Finally, the natural place of fire is higher than that of air but below the innermost celestial sphere, (the one carrying the Moon). Even at locations well above sea level, such as a mountain top, an object made mostly of the former two elements tends to fall and objects made mostly of the latter two tend to rise. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aristotelian_physics

In astronomy, the geocentric model (also known as "geocentrism", or the Ptolemaic view of the whole universe), is the superseded theory, that the Earth is the center of the universe, and that all other objects orbit around it. This geocentric model served as the predominant cosmological system in many ancient civilizations such as ancient Greece. As such, most Ancient Greek philosophers assumed that the Sun, Moon, stars, and naked eye planets circled the Earth, including the noteworthy systems of Aristotle (see Aristotelian physics) and Ptolemy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geocentric_model

I agree with you on the point you seem to make. However, the fact that things within science change makes it per se not a dogma. In the ages you pointed out science and religion was very intertwined, so basically religion founded science. We remember the outrage when it was found that the earth was not flat and the heliocentric universe was discovered?

I agree with you that people bash religions for similar unfounded reasons that people bash science. If you read my posts carefully you will not find me doing any of the above.

The only thing i tried to proof was that science is in fact not a dogma nor will it ever be and nor was it. Religion always is and always has been and always will be.

I pointed out in my previous long dissertation on the topic of science vs religion that i believe that parts of religion are able to be evaluated scientifically as they lay grounds for all foundings of religious thought. Contemplation and exctasy as states of mind (being one with god) are one of them. But story telling and bible cencoring (by the church that is) is another point.
To point out flaws of science as dogma is simply wrong.

It is true that science changes and that ethical or financial interests make research impossible or rather smaller. We all remember the swine flu and that it was discovered much earlier and how the meat industry tried to cover facts. We also remember that Valium was once proclaimed as mother`s little helper and that cocain was legal until the potential addictive stuff was figured out. But it WAS figured out.
To make scientific shortcomings and ethical questions a dogma is simply wrong. Apples and Oranges.

A dogma is unquestionable. Science may be wrong but it is always questionable. I myself am polyamorous for example, my thesis is on polyamory. Ther has been a lack of research in polyamorous fields, because scientific researcher do not found researches in said fields, since active involvement of the "backlash" area after Reagan in the 8oies have prevented such. Its also about politics. But religious core findings or dogmas are in no way comparable with scientific bias . Science is biased, historically proven so , and for sure me was never stating something else on here.

Plus in an argument you have to bring valid points and not state hearsay. That per se is rather dogmatic. Oh someone told me ( a ressource you have no entry to , so i am per se unquestionable...because i have secret info you don`t have) science is actually pretty open and everyone can refind theories. Plus if your or other people`s take on vaccinations is better then find a source or a better vaccination?

its shortsigthted to bash a whole area of thought rather than to point out flaws. Science is biased. Religions are dogmatic.
Is one better than the other? I don`think so because i never mix apples with oranges. I don`t ask a religious instructor or a priest about what to do when i have a flu. And i don`t ask a doctor on how to expand my consciousness with or without mushrooms. :-) Apples and Oranges.

The only intersection in the secal area between religion and science is the transpersonal science. And i think its a good way to make peace between both areas.

Other than that, on which points would i possible be able to compare science and religion except on cognitive areas (read my post about the sacred in the profane....). I am always fór a consensual solution and neither do i support science bashers nor religion bashers (except when people don`t even know what they are talking about so you can even START having a profound discussion...):mf_laughbounce3 : Is that ok and non offensive as i presented my POV?

PS: talking about AUSCHWITZ? I suggest your post has a little shortcomings on the influence of catholicism and new age on gassing the Jews? The holocaust is the most tragic example of the perfect interlude and intertwined activity of the most desastrous examples of religious ignorant fundamentalism with scientific cruelty (non ethicality).

PPS: i completely agree that atheism is a religious belief as well..;-.)

[Tiffani Jameson]

I'm just going to say this: the truth cannot be argued. If there are challenging theories on a truth, it's only a publicly accepted truth, which still doesn't make it the absolute truth. Since engaging in this forum, I have not seen any group of people attack any one as I've seen in the last week or so. YES, I notice it too. You take the total of what a person says and blow it completely out of proportion. Just to be ugly. Any entity in this WORLD has the room to become exploitative. Even science. The police. Religious leaders. Government. Not even as a whole, just a few within it. That's all it takes. We're not all going to renounce our religious beliefs because a few of you are adamant that religion is for idiots. I will RESPECTFULLY let you have your opinion. You can call our differences two different sets of publicly accepted truths...

I love to debate. The point of debate is to allow for different frames of reference, eliminating one-track minded thinking. You ever look at how debates are won? It's not about the truth, it's about who presents their argument the best. And these talks should not be in search of a truth, but to see differing opinions of various topics. And there should be no winners. I'm pretty sure that there were people who read the threads on religion, but to keep from telling some of you to kiss theirs and God's ass, they didn't respond. This is not the place to look for conversions.

What happened to live and let live? Damn...

[ClairJordan]

Originally Posted by atlcomedy
I won't mention any names, but it cracks me up when I tell the truth on this forum and get told I'm a jerk or an ass or I lack civility,but the truth is


Two things come to mind. One, sometimes it’s in the delivery. And two, just because it’s the truth, definitely doesn’t mean people want to hear it.





I am not going to take the time to read through all 7 pages of this thread, but has the difference between fact and stated opinion been discussed?

[Guest050715-1]

Originally Posted by ClairJordan

Originally Posted by atlcomedy
I won't mention any names, but it cracks me up when I tell the truth on this forum and get told I'm a jerk or an ass or I lack civility,but the truth is


Two things come to mind. One, sometimes it’s in the delivery. And two, just because it’s the truth, definitely doesn’t mean people want to hear it.





I am not going to take the time to read through all 7 pages of this thread, but has the difference between fact and stated opinion been discussed?

I kinda thought I did. Maybe not. To paraphrase, I don’t care what people think or believe, just so long as it’s not dangerous e.g., not getting vaccines and blasting that their opinion on national TV or judgmental / condemning, e.g., PC’ness. And, just because it’s the truth, doesn’t mean people need to be beaten about the head and shoulders with it or want to hear it.

[Katy Alexander]

Originally Posted by WTF

Does SR ignorance on the matter put other people/dogs lives at risk?


Let us do an example you might relate to better....... I have no problem with being polite but when people are not versed in science it effects lives. Maybe that is when I become a tad more serious and forceful.

Anytime something is posted on a message board I take it with a big grain of salt, and prefer to do my own research if it is a subject that interests me further. I do not feel that Lauren's ideas on here are going to affect any lives.Now if she decides to apply for a position at Genentech I might get a little worried, but posting her thoughts on a message board seems pretty harmless in my opinion, and so are disagreeing with them for that matter.It was the personal stabs that bothered me.

Yes, I do meet some dog owners/parents(sorry atl lol) with some pretty odd ideas, and yes my first instinct is to yell, and throw rocks at them especially when their lack of info is harming the dog, but I know from experience that when you sugar coat it you end up with a much greater influence with them than when you just lose your temper, and yell.

On a personal note, I am aware that people using words to hurt others is a huge pet peeve of mine. My friends even tease me that they are afarid to say anything bad to their dogs in font of me without me having a small melt down .I get the same way when I see people do it to their children, or couples to each other .I am not saying that everyone should think the same way, or that I cannot also have a bitchy moment , but I am mainly just attempting to explain why I react the way I do at times.

Originally Posted by Camille

I love a husky Becky (even though we know Ed is not one lol). I had one in England several years ago. I don't think I have ever been as fit or thin as I was when I had him. When I got him, the breeder was insistent that when we went walking that I strapped the dog adjusted backpack to him...because they are working dogs and need treating as such. I felt so mean at first, but he loved it! The only downside was all the shedding...my gosh they can shed hair for fun!!! Great dogs though...as long as you don't leave them alone for too long. Say goodbye to your furniture if you do lol...

C xxx

Ed is pretty good about not destroying things, but you are right these breeds sure do have way too much energy.I swear Ed never sleeps. He justs putters around my room at night , and stares at me until I wake up to take him on his four hour walk.

Originally Posted by ninasastri

why should i apologize

No need, you are not the one who called Edward a Husky lol

Now SR on the other hand is a whole other matter