Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
First of all...you forgot this: "I agreed with Arach's claim...I view it the same...and I stand by it. It doesn't even need to be assessed academically or scientifically...basic observation and common sense is more than sufficient."
My perception, intuition,, common sense,, and wisdom has led me to my conclusion..
So...get hip to that.
THAT is my reasoning...and, I submit that it will lead me to more and better valid deductions about basic issues than any other method you've got to put against it.
Something very probative, in my view...is that for all your "detailed" methods you are unable to do what 84% of the entire world is able to do: Perceive God. That is very telling...show me someone that fails at a intellection over 8 out 10 other people are able to achieve...and that's probably not going to be someone I put much credence in.
My questioning of Arach's claims was based on the fact that he spoke about looking in a biology book and then comparing the traits of life in the biology book with that of Earth/biosphere. That is an academic or scientific claim. I was questioning the part of his claim that, in his words, included looking in a biology book. Which, if you excuse me, I assumed was a science biology book. But given some of the nonsense that is posted here, maybe that assumption was wrong of me.
So if you don't think these claim need to be assessed academically or scientifically, then your problem should be with that poster.
Otherwise you can believe whatever you want. As long as your belief is not harmful, you are free to believe it even if it is a delusion.
My questioning of Arach's claims was based on the fact that he spoke about looking in a biology book and then comparing the traits of life in the biology book with that of Earth/biosphere. That is an academic or scientific claim. I was questioning the part of his claim that, in his words, included looking in a biology book. Which, if you excuse me, I assumed was a science biology book. But given some of the nonsense that is posted here, maybe that assumption was wrong of me.
So if you don't think these claim need to be assessed academically or scientifically, then your problem should be with that poster.
Otherwise you can believe whatever you want. As long as your belief is not harmful, you are free to believe it even if it is a delusion.
Gldn, you have all these people telling you the same thing - that your manner is overbearing and condescending, and that your posts are all egoticially self-centered. They aren't likely to all be wrong.
In other words, you are your own worst enemy.
Instead of taking this opportunity to moderate, you continue to defend the indefensible conduct that derails so many threads.
Man (or woman) up and do the right thing.
Yeah...all the Religion/Religious bashers I call out & shine a light on take it the same way.
Those that don't do that...typically don't take it that way.
That is a science book. In the previous post you claimed that you didn't need academic or science thought. You can't even be consistent between posts, such is the laughably foolish level of your posts.
So:
-If you are making a claim based on science, get the relevant sections from that book, and explicitly write out your reasoning. This probably would be best had in the science forum.
-If you are not making a claim based on science, then believe whatever you want to. Delusional or not you are free to believe in anything as long as it is not harmful to others.
That is a science book. In the previous post you claimed that you didn't need academic or science thought. You can't even be consistent between posts, such is the laughable level of your posts.
So:
-If you are making a claim based on science, get the relevant sections from that book, and explicitly write out your reasoning.
-If you are not making a claim based on science, then believe whatever you want to. Delusional or not you are free to believe in anything.
It doesn't. But you kept pushing that it did....so, I figured I'd help you out. Cuz I'm cool like that.
That title is pretty cool, huh?!!
You are the one pushing it...you read it and do your thing with it.
My intuition, perception, wisdom, and common sense already provided me with a conclusion. I'm good.
It doesn't. But you kept pushing that it did....so, I figured I'd help you out. Cuz I'm cool like that.
That title is pretty cool, huh?!!
You are the one pushing it...you read it and do your thing with it.
My intuition, perception, wisdom, and common sense already provided me with a conclusion. I'm good.
Arach is the one pushing it. Arach made the claim, I am questioning his claim. It is his claim not mine. Reading comprehension is not a strength for you, is it?
I would not have even brought up the topic if that poster wasn't going around talking about traits of life in a biology book, like a stuck record that can't play anything else.
You can believe whatever delusion or otherwise you want.
Arach is the one pushing it. Arach made the claim, I am questioning his claim. It is his claim not mine. Reading comprehension is not a strength for you, is it?
I would not have even brought up the topic if that poster wasn't going around talking about traits of life in a biology book, like a stuck record that can't play anything else.
You can believe whatever delusion or otherwise you want.
Arach said to look in a text book to support his contention.
You said textbooks would disagree.
I say you don't even need a textbook to make such basic deductions...you said I do. So, I linked a textbook.
I must say...all I had to do was read the cover to know what the deal is...just like I figured.
You are working off your own frame of reference with that "delusion" spew.
So...there ya go.
Arach said to look in a text book to support his contention.
You said textbooks would disagree.
I say you don't even need a textbook to make such basic deductions...you said I do. So, I linked a textbook.
I must say...all I had to do was read the cover to know what the deal is...just like I figured.
You are working off your own frame of reference with that "delusion" spew.
So...there ya go.
More of that lack of reading comprehension I see. Here is the conversation, starting in other threads.
-Arach made a claim involving a biology textbook. He claimed that he uses "bottom up thinking"
-I said that if he is making a claim about a textbook, then he should explicitly state the part of the textbook he is using, the logic he is using, etc
-He says that logic and reasoning is required for claims, but says he can't post that because it is against the rules
-I say how about the science forum
-He acts like I asked him to throw his first born child in a volcano.
-I find out this thread is a special one where moderators may allow more science to be discussed
-I do his job for him and post an excerpt from a biology book
-He responds with some logic. I commend him for that.
-I point out that his logic is flawed. His logic would lead to a house being classified as more alive than not. I am still not making a claim myself about the topic, I am pointing out the flaw in his claim.
-Some foolish posters act as if I was the one making a claim about a biology book.
The title of that textbook is catchy, means nothing about the detail inside. But then you are not one for the detail are you?
-Arach made a claim involving a biology textbook. He claimed that he uses "bottom up thinking"
-I said that if he is making a claim about a textbook, then he should explicitly state the part of the textbook he is using, the logic he is using, etc
-He says he can't because it is against the rules
-I say how about the science forum
-He acts like I asked him to throw his first born child in a volcano.
-I find out this thread is a special one where moderators may allow more science to be discussed
-I do his job for him and post an excerpt from a biology book
-He responds with some logic. I commend him for that.
-I point out that his logic is flawed. His logic would lead to a house being classified as more alive than not. I am still not making a claim myself about the topic, I am pointing out the flaw in his claim.
The title of that textbook is catchy, means nothing about the detail inside. But then you are not one for the detail are you?
You don't see very well if you see others as lacking comprehension relative to you.
Guess what?! Arach said he would share your lunch with me!
What's with the Scooby-Doo lunch box? Oh, right...well, that figures.
You don't see very well if you see others as lacking comprehension relative to you.
Guess what?! Arach said he would share your lunch with me!
What's with the Scooby-Doo lunch box? Oh, right...well, that figures.
Most on this forum don't lack comprehension, just a very small select few. When I first came to this site I wondered why there seemed to be such disdain for a select few posters, it is now clear to me why.
You be you.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
