Donald Trump's 3 positions on abortion in 3 hours

[Guest042616-1]

Originally Posted by DSK

Gravity is a theory????? Talk to Sir Isaac Newton about that one....

Yes, gravity is a theory. You are probably confusing the "Law of gravity" - a mathematical model which can be used to calculate the force one mass exerts on another mass at a distance - with the "Theory of Gravity," which is an explanation as to how this works, that it will continue to work and why the mathematical describes it. The fact that you will always be pulled towards the earth is a theory, just as much as AGW is a theory.

[DSK]

Originally Posted by eatfibo

Yes, gravity is a theory. You are probably confusing the "Law of gravity" - a mathematical model which can be used to calculate the force one mass exerts on another mass at a distance - with the "Theory of Gravity," which is an explanation as to how this works, that it will continue to work and why the mathematical describes it. The fact that you will always be pulled towards the earth is a theory, just as much as AGW is a theory.

The "fact" that you will always be pulled to earth is a "theory"?

[GTFO]

Originally Posted by DSK

Gravity is a theory????? Talk to Sir Isaac Newton about that one....

Originally Posted by DSK

Fuck you Uncle Han!!!

Originally Posted by eatfibo

Yes, gravity is a theory. You are probably confusing the "Law of gravity" - a mathematical model which can be used to calculate the force one mass exerts on another mass at a distance - with the "Theory of Gravity," which is an explanation as to how this works, that it will continue to work and why the mathematical describes it. The fact that you will always be pulled towards the earth is a theory, just as much as AGW is a theory.

Originally Posted by DSK

The "fact" that you will always be pulled to earth is a "theory"?

with a fan blowing

[i'va biggen]

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by eatfibo

Gravity is "just a theory" too. Do you worry that the next time you stand up you may fly into space? Or do you agree that the evidence is so strong that there is no reason to worry about such things?

While I wouldn't argue that the evidence supporting AGW is anywhere near the evidence supporting the action of gravity, the idea that, scientifically speaking, if something is "just a theory" it isn't well-supported shows that you don't understand what a scientific theory is. You are probably, like most people who make the mistake, confusing "hypothesis" with "theory" (again, speaking scientifically). A hypothesis is something you are throwing out to test. A theory is when the evidence so strongly supports a hypothesis that it is now considered the current explanation for something, or at least one of the major ones. This is not to say it can't be wrong. That's the beauty of science, it is open to the fact that any previous theory may be wrong. This is why we don't call them facts. So everything in science is "just" a theory.


Yes, due to doctors following the scientific method and applying the scientific theories developed by the experts in their field on how to help these younger and younger newborns survive.

The equivalent position of your denial of climate change would be a doctor refusing to use what the field has developed because he believes they are all are wrong, despite the fact that that doctor keeps failing and everyone else is having great success. It would be near criminal of him.


Considering how overwhelming the agreement among experts is about AGW, the reality is that it is probably far more "established science" than how to deal with premature babies. I am sure there are a number of different methods out competing to see which will become the established practice for newborns of a certain gestational age. Every time you have a newborn earlier in gestation, there are a new host of problems you have to deal with. . .and we are constantly pushing the boundary of who can survive, and thus it is constantly in new, uncharted territory. This is not the case for AGW. We have plenty of data to look at and we can see the obvious trend.

I understand that there is no way to convince people, via scientific argument, that AGW is the real deal. But keep in mind you are rejecting the opinion of the vast majority of experts in the field. Why? I've heard a lot of ridiculous reasons. One of the major ones is that there is some conspiracy among scientists from different organizations, across the world in order to make themselves, or other people money.

If that is the case for you. Ask yourself the simple question and answer it honestly. If you were to conspire to use scientists to deceive the public on a certain issue. What would be easier? Manipulating the overwhelming percentage of the scientists across the global across numerous scientific bodies? Or by promoting/encourgaing the few that disagree?

That's a very long post considering you missed the point.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

I wonder what crawled up Whiny's ass. Or who.

I knew he was a closet Trumpazoid. Just like we've always known he was a Republican.

Reality is that Whiny and his pals on the RWW reject science unless it suits them. They reject medicine unless it suits them. They reject freedom and personal liberty unless it suits them.

But ignorance and hypocrisy ALWAYS suit them. That's why they're gripping so hard as Trump disappears - kicking, screaming and Tweeting - down the chemical toilet that is the remains of the GOP.

At least they're not making it personal. Right, dipshits?

Or are you just trying to wrap your tiny little minds around the idea of a Ted Cruz candidacy?

Jesus.

You're lying again, AssupLiar? What compels you to meltdown so? You already know you're stupid, and an asshole, so that couldn't have a surprise. Is it because I outed your Amigay, LittleLiberalEva for being as cognitively challenged as you? Do you look up to him that much? The type of relationship you two have is no business of mine. Libertarians do not believe in standing between two who love each other, regardless of their gender.


Don't meltdown like this, Assup. It's degrading to you and your Amigay. Embrace your ignorance and your orientation. Own it! Be proud! And I know it's not possible for you to quit lying about me. Just know that I forgive you. No, don't thank me. I just worry about your mental health. Are you eating well? Getting enough sleep? Remember to take your meds. Hang in there, Assup!

[Yssup Rider]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You're lying again, AssupLiar? What compels you to meltdown so? You already know you're stupid, and an asshole, so that couldn't have a surprise. Is it because I outed your Amigay, LittleLiberalEva for being as cognitively challenged as you? Do you look up to him that much? The type of relationship you two have is no business of mine. Libertarians do not believe in standing between two who love each other, regardless of their gender.


Don't meltdown like this, Assup. It's degrading to you and your Amigay. Embrace your ignorance and your orientation. Own it! Be proud! And I know it's not possible for you to quit lying about me. Just know that I forgive you. No, don't thank me. I just worry about your mental health. Are you eating well? Getting enough sleep? Remember to take your meds. Hang in there, Assup!

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

That's a very long post considering you missed the point.

LMAO @ THE Whiny.

[Guest042616-1]

Originally Posted by DSK

The "fact" that you will always be pulled to earth is a "theory"?

No, it's not a fact. It's a theory. The law of gravity is a mathematical model of how we observe gravity to work. The "how and why" of it is the theory. For all we know, tomorrow, something might change and we will not be pulled to the earth any more. Or we will observe to masses appearing to repel, rather than attract, one another. We would then have to rework the theory. This is a fundamental part of science and anyone discussing something scientific should understand this beforehand. I don't like to tell people they have no place in a debate, but if you don't understand this very basic and fundamental thing, then you have no place in a debate about science.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

That's a very long post considering you missed the point.

I didn't miss the point. You incorrectly dismissed the validity of a scientific theory because it's "just a theory." When, in reality, for something to rise to the level of "theory" in science, it requires a hypothesis that goes through a lot of rigorous testing that confirms the claims of the hypothesis. On top of that, you doubled down on your lack of understanding by not realizing that the same scientific method that is used to confirm climate change has been used to help younger newborns live.

If we are talking science you, like DSK, seem to be out of your element. You don't understand something very, very basic and absolutely vital to understanding what things are and how we got to them.

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by eatfibo

No, it's not a fact. It's a theory. The law of gravity is a mathematical model of how we observe gravity to work. The "how and why" of it is the theory. For all we know, tomorrow, something might change and we will not be pulled to the earth any more. Or we will observe to masses appearing to repel, rather than attract, one another. We would then have to rework the theory. This is a fundamental part of science and anyone discussing something scientific should understand this beforehand. I don't like to tell people they have no place in a debate, but if you don't understand this very basic and fundamental thing, then you have no place in a debate about science.


I didn't miss the point. You incorrectly dismissed the validity of a scientific theory because it's "just a theory." When, in reality, for something to rise to the level of "theory" in science, it requires a hypothesis that goes through a lot of rigorous testing that confirms the claims of the hypothesis. On top of that, you doubled down on your lack of understanding by not realizing that the same scientific method that is used to confirm climate change has been used to help younger newborns live.

If we are talking science you, like DSK, seem to be out of your element. You don't understand something very, very basic and absolutely vital to understanding what things are and how we got to them.

No. Seriously. You missed the point.

[Guest042616-1]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

No. Seriously. You missed the point.

Then, please, explain it to me. What did I get wrong?

[DSK]

Originally Posted by eatfibo

No, it's not a fact. It's a theory. The law of gravity is a mathematical model of how we observe gravity to work. The "how and why" of it is the theory. For all we know, tomorrow, something might change and we will not be pulled to the earth any more. Or we will observe to masses appearing to repel, rather than attract, one another. We would then have to rework the theory. This is a fundamental part of science and anyone discussing something scientific should understand this beforehand. I don't like to tell people they have no place in a debate, but if you don't understand this very basic and fundamental thing, then you have no place in a debate about science.


I didn't miss the point. You incorrectly dismissed the validity of a scientific theory because it's "just a theory." When, in reality, for something to rise to the level of "theory" in science, it requires a hypothesis that goes through a lot of rigorous testing that confirms the claims of the hypothesis. On top of that, you doubled down on your lack of understanding by not realizing that the same scientific method that is used to confirm climate change has been used to help younger newborns live.

If we are talking science you, like DSK, seem to be out of your element. You don't understand something very, very basic and absolutely vital to understanding what things are and how we got to them.

I may be a humble baker but I can tell you, it is a fact that gravity pulls you to earth!!

[Guest042616-1]

Originally Posted by DSK

I may be a humble baker but I can tell you, it is a fact that gravity pulls you to earth!!

Scientifically speaking, you are incorrect, you cannot call it a "fact," because that doesn't exist. All you can say is that observation strongly supports the current theory.

In a sense, you would be irrational to treat it as anything other than a "fact" that you are going to be pulled to the earth, considering how much observation, scientific and personal, confirms the theory.

However, this similarly applies to the theory of AGW as well. The evidence and observation we have supporting the theory is overwhelming. The reason I stop short of calling it irrational to deny it is because, unlike gravity, the evidence confirming the theory isn't as obvious and in your face as it is with the theory of gravity. So the personal evidence isn't there, so I can see how some might find it harder to believe. But, make no mistake about it, the theory of AGW is ridiculously well supported by evidence and observation. If you treat gravity as a "fact," you should likewise treat AGW as a fact.

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by eatfibo

Scientifically speaking, you are incorrect, you cannot call it a "fact," because that doesn't exist. All you can say is that observation strongly supports the current theory.

In a sense, you would be irrational to treat it as anything other than a "fact" that you are going to be pulled to the earth, considering how much observation, scientific and personal, confirms the theory.

However, this similarly applies to the theory of AGW as well. The evidence and observation we have supporting the theory is overwhelming. The reason I stop short of calling it irrational to deny it is because, unlike gravity, the evidence confirming the theory isn't as obvious and in your face as it is with the theory of gravity. So the personal evidence isn't there, so I can see how some might find it harder to believe. But, make no mistake about it, the theory of AGW is ridiculously well supported by evidence and observation. If you treat gravity as a "fact," you should likewise treat AGW as a fact.

Gee whiz, eatfibo... you act like you know what you're talking about... Last week you said it was an "actual fact" that Trump supporters are stupid white trailer park trash. Now you've been humbled enough to tell us global warming is just a "theory"? Good... maybe you're making progress.

So how strong is the correlation between carbon emissions and global temperature increases? Above 0.65? More than 0.80? And how do the scientific models account for other variables that are at play here? And how does the strength of the correlation change depending on the data period under consideration?

[bambino]

Originally Posted by lustylad

Gee whiz, eatfibo... you act like you know what you're talking about... Last week you said it was an "actual fact" that Trump supporters are stupid white trailer park trash. Now you've been humbled enough to tell us global warming is just a "theory"? Good... maybe you're making progress.

So how strong is the correlation between carbon emissions and global temperature increases? Above 0.65? More than 0.80? And how do the scientific models account for other variables that are at play here? And how does the strength of the correlation change depending on the data period under consideration?

What's an "actual fact"? A law? A theory? Or is actually A figment of Fido's imagination?

[lustylad]

Originally Posted by bambino

What's an "actual fact"? A law? A theory? Or is actually A figment of Fido's imagination?

Depends on how steamed up you get him... he probably watched a show on the Discovery Channel about the Big Bang Theory or the latest variations of Einstein's relativity theory... now he wants to school everyone about the nature of scientific knowledge...