California's Costly Propositions

[Humanoid]

Originally Posted by sav858

Yes I am fully aware of that, planners obviously use that data. So to be specific, since that is what you need, stick to mathematical modeling aspect of transportation instead of pretending to know about planning.

You don't do "planning" without first having an understanding of traffic and how it flows, that requires mathematics. Although a "transportation planner" need not understand the details of the mathematics they do most certainly rely on the results. That is to say the two are related and are in no sense separate. Raw data doesn't tell you much at all, you need a theory to interpret the data with.

But none of this is relevant really, your comment was just amusing as you obviously don't know about how mathematics/computing is used in transportation. This just makes the authority you carry on your shoulder that much more amusing. If you want to make arguments that actually convince people you need to learn how to not 1.) Appeal to false senses of authority (or even real ones), 2.) Tell people they "don't understand" or similar such comments as a way of justifying yourself.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Humanoid

You don't do "planning" without first having an understanding of traffic and how it flows, that requires mathematics. Although a "transportation planner" need not understand the details of the mathematics they do most certainly rely on the results.

No sh*t Sherlock!Thanks for stating the obvious again, after I already said we use the data.

That is to say the two are related and are in no sense separate. Raw data doesn't tell you much at all, you need a theory to interpret the data with.

And the theory is what I understand to interpret the data. I interpret transit data for a living.

But none of this is relevant really,

And that is why I didn't feel the need to mention or explain that.

This is what you keep doing, BRINGING UP IRRELEVANT BS JUST TO ARGUE! You have found a new thing to argue about so you're just gonna keep at it. You just argue for the sake of arguing AGAIN!

your comment was just amusing as you obviously don't know about how mathematics/computing is used in transportation. This just makes the authority you carry on your shoulder that much more amusing. If you want to make arguments that actually convince people you need to learn how to not 1.) Appeal to false senses of authority (or even real ones), 2.) Tell people they "don't understand" or similar such comments as a way of justifying yourself.

I do understand the role mathematics play in transportation planning but I said that b/c "math and computers" is what you have on your profile as interests so i figured that is what you do. I was basically telling you to stick to what you do and know best. But of course you have to twist a simple comment around to make it seem like I am completely unaware of the role mathematics plays in transportation planning and make a completely irrelevant point to try to bolster your argument AGAIN.

I am simply amazed at how you keep finding ways to twist things around, GO OFF ON TANGENTS, and keep finding a new way to argue b/c that is all you like to do, argue for the sake of arguing. It doesn't matter what the subject is but you will just argue to argue. You can probably find a way to argue about a partly sunny day vs a partly cloudy day for another week.

screw math and computers, just stick to BASKET WEAVING instead.

(can't wait to see how you turn basket weaving into another argument....)

[Humanoid]

Originally Posted by sav858

I do understand the role mathematics play in transportation planning but I said that b/c "math and computers" is what you have on your profile as interests so i figured that is what you do. I was basically telling you to stick to what you do and know best.

Dude, I don't know why you are trying to back paddle from your comment. The implication you were trying to make was obvious and that is why it was amusing. Why tell me to stick to math and computers, unless you are trying to say I should focus on those subjects instead of talking about transportation. But the subjects aren't exclusive.....

Seriously, your argument is essentially as follows: I'm a transportation planner, you don't understand, I'm not going to "scoop feed you", stick with X. Oh, and now "you argue about anything". Yet, oddly.....you keep responding. But, I'm only responding at this point because I think your responses are funny. This isn't really the place for this though, so free feel to have the last word Mr. Transportation Planner.

[sav858]

Originally Posted by Humanoid

Dude, I don't know why you are trying to back paddle from your comment. The implication you were trying to make was obvious and that is why it was amusing. Why tell me to stick to math and computers, unless you are trying to say I should focus on those subjects instead of talking about transportation. But the subjects aren't exclusive.....

Seriously, your argument is essentially as follows: I'm a transportation planner, you don't understand, I'm not going to "scoop feed you", stick with X. Oh, and now "you argue about anything". Yet, oddly.....you keep responding. But, I'm only responding at this point because I think your responses are funny. This isn't really the place for this though, so free feel to have the last word Mr. Transportation Planner.

I'm not trying to back paddle from anything, you take a simple comment and twist it around as usual to find more things to argue about. I thought telling you to stick to math and computers obviously implied you shouldn't talk about transportation planning with regards to what we've discussed, but apparently if I don't spell out every detail you take a comment, twist it around, and make it seem like I am saying or implying something I am not and this is on top of your whole argument at this point being completely irrelevant.

After about 5 times of trying to explain the same thing over and over I'm not sure what else to say besides "you just don't understand", I can try to keep explaining it but whats the point if you just don't get it or you keep twisting it around to argue some more about a pointless tangent. Even after I address something you will keep bringing the same crap up over and over. That seems to be your strategy, argue about random, irrelevant crap to the point the opposition just can't take it anymore.

It's just amazing how you try to twist things around and bring up completely irrelevant tangents to try to bolster your argument, which it does not at all except in you're head. It's not even funny anymore, just annoying.