Spindrift
Time Person of the Year, 2006
No, I think he just understands that he doesn't understand freefall.
-
Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more
Common Sense
- Thread starter uk_dave
- Start date
No, I think he just understands that he doesn't understand freefall.
First you post rubbish, then you cheat by deleting it, then you accuse others of dirty tricks?
To be perfectly clear, do you claim that Architect, Skibum, uk_dave, beachnut and I made up your post about freefall times?
Maybe the forum-software allows the mods to view the consecutive versions of a post. That would expose this incredible lie of 28th Kingdom!
28th Kingdom, you lie about 9/11, you accuse people of crimes without any evidence, you mock the victims of 9/11, your posts are a disgrace for the school(s) you spent some time at, and now you lie about what's going on on this forum. How low get one get?
aggle-rithm
Ardent Formulist
If I suffered from the dearth of neurons that 28K does, I guess I wouldn't take any chances, either.
A W Smith
Philosopher
OK ill admit I was wrong. He didn't pull them up. They are now tangled up and backward on his ankles. With skid-marks even. Dude stop your making it worse!
First off, amazing that you link to my post, while I am on your ignore list.
Second, this post got you reported, for acusing us of editing your quoted post.
Those of us who are trained in and rely on the Scientific Method follow these steps:
1) Define the question. This is a simple question, usually of the form "What effect will result from this cause?"
2) Gather information and resources. Research similar questions and their answers. Determine if someone else has already answered your question with the scientific method.
3) Form hypothesis. The statement is of the form "A certain change in a certain system will result in certain events." It is also called the model (which is much easier to spell).
4) Perform experiments and collect data. Computer simulations are sometimes used, but nothing beats the old "Let's try different ways to collapse a buildng and record the events during the collapse."
5) Analyze the data. Does the data fit the model in all cases, is there a statistical spread, or does the data outright contradict the model?
6) Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypotheses. If the data matches the model, then flesh out the details of the model. If the data does not fit the model, then change the hypothesis (NOT the data) and start over at step 2.
7) Publish your results. Expect others to draw dissenting conclusions. In fact, demand that they do! Not as a challenge to their expertise, but as a challenge to yours.
8) Formulate a theory. This is done only after an exhaustive peer-group review of the data, research methods, and reasoning processes that led to the theory. The theory itself can be proven repeatedly and independently.
(Currently, for example, "String Theory" is a misnomer (it's really an hypothesis), as there is no experimental evidence, virtual or otherwise, to support it. "Relativity Theory" has been suported (so far) by experimental evidence.)
"Truthers" will follow the "Common Sense" method, which is:
1) Form a theory. Key Rule: "Whatever the one can imagine is possible."
2) Challenge knowledgeable experts. Key rule: "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
3) Gather information to support the theory. Key Rule: "Whatever is possible must be true."
4) Publish the theory as fact. Key Rule: "I've made up my mind, so don't bother me with facts."
Science starts with a question and ends with a theory, which can itself be brought into further question; while "Common Sense" starts with a theory, and rejects all questions, since the theory is falaciously accepted as fact.
For example, the Scientific Method has revealed that Iraq did not have any weapons of mass destruction, while "Common Sense" accepted as fact that Iraq had innumerable stockpiles of WMD's. In this case, the Scienctific Method showed the way to peace, while "Common Sense" led to war.
"Common Sense" ain't as common as the Truthers want us to believe.
-Fnord of Dyscordia-
1) Define the question. This is a simple question, usually of the form "What effect will result from this cause?"
2) Gather information and resources. Research similar questions and their answers. Determine if someone else has already answered your question with the scientific method.
3) Form hypothesis. The statement is of the form "A certain change in a certain system will result in certain events." It is also called the model (which is much easier to spell).
4) Perform experiments and collect data. Computer simulations are sometimes used, but nothing beats the old "Let's try different ways to collapse a buildng and record the events during the collapse."
5) Analyze the data. Does the data fit the model in all cases, is there a statistical spread, or does the data outright contradict the model?
6) Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for new hypotheses. If the data matches the model, then flesh out the details of the model. If the data does not fit the model, then change the hypothesis (NOT the data) and start over at step 2.
7) Publish your results. Expect others to draw dissenting conclusions. In fact, demand that they do! Not as a challenge to their expertise, but as a challenge to yours.
8) Formulate a theory. This is done only after an exhaustive peer-group review of the data, research methods, and reasoning processes that led to the theory. The theory itself can be proven repeatedly and independently.
(Currently, for example, "String Theory" is a misnomer (it's really an hypothesis), as there is no experimental evidence, virtual or otherwise, to support it. "Relativity Theory" has been suported (so far) by experimental evidence.)
"Truthers" will follow the "Common Sense" method, which is:
1) Form a theory. Key Rule: "Whatever the one can imagine is possible."
2) Challenge knowledgeable experts. Key rule: "Imagination is more important than knowledge."
3) Gather information to support the theory. Key Rule: "Whatever is possible must be true."
4) Publish the theory as fact. Key Rule: "I've made up my mind, so don't bother me with facts."
Science starts with a question and ends with a theory, which can itself be brought into further question; while "Common Sense" starts with a theory, and rejects all questions, since the theory is falaciously accepted as fact.
For example, the Scientific Method has revealed that Iraq did not have any weapons of mass destruction, while "Common Sense" accepted as fact that Iraq had innumerable stockpiles of WMD's. In this case, the Scienctific Method showed the way to peace, while "Common Sense" led to war.
"Common Sense" ain't as common as the Truthers want us to believe.
-Fnord of Dyscordia-
Last edited:
Skibum
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2006
- Messages
- 1,659
I was thinking of doing the same. Going back and editing his own post only makes his true colors shine through, accusing several members of fabricating what we quoted is just beyond belief.
While I personally don't think much of 28th Kingdom, I would have guessed he had more integrity than that.
Last edited:
Unbelievable. I was online when his post hadn't yet been edited (needless to say, that's exactly what was there), but to be honest his tinfoil crap about cell phones, microwaves and "unprocessed" food eclipsed his dodgy maths for me.
CHF
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,871
28th Kingdom, have you ever thought of becoming an engineer?
You seem to think you know more about building collapses than engineers do....and the twoof movement has no structural engineers of note.
So how about you go to school, become an engineer and then you can enlighten the rest of the world's engineers as to what they're missing.
You'd be a hero, dude!
What say you?
You seem to think you know more about building collapses than engineers do....and the twoof movement has no structural engineers of note.
So how about you go to school, become an engineer and then you can enlighten the rest of the world's engineers as to what they're missing.
You'd be a hero, dude!
What say you?
CHF
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,871
Ah so you're a parody of a twoofer.
Good one indeed. Know what's sad? I've met REAL ones with the exact same logic as your character. Well done.
Last edited:
Skibum
Graduate Poster
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2006
- Messages
- 1,659
Sure, use the new address though, I just uploaded it to the JREF image server.Great pic, Skibum! Can I use it some time?
Ah, I thought it was a big scalemodel of a steamtrain, one of those that really run on steam. Thanks for clearing that up.
ETA: Hey, just realized... here's a shining example of common sense at work for you
slingblade
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2005
- Messages
- 23,466
Quoting myself, I now have evidence that 28th thinks this post:
means I have now converted and believe 9/11 was an inside job. If I will confess to him I believe, he will not tell on me.
28th, I will explain this post to you, okay?
IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THE TRAGEDIES OF 9/11/2001 WERE COMMITTED BY OUR GOVERNMENT, AND YOU DO NOTHING WITH THAT EVIDENCE, YOU ARE GUILTY AS AN ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT.
IF YOU KNOW "THEY" DID IT, AND YOU CAN PROVE IT, AND YOU DONT, YOU ARE ONE OF THEM AND ARE HELPING THEM TO COVER IT UP.
Now. What are you doing with your evidence, 28th? Are you covering it up for the government? Are you helping those YOU believe murdered thousands of your fellow citizens?
Have you become complicit, my lad?
I will continue to wait for you to report what you know to someone who can take the next step. I will wait for all of you to alert the media, get them to take you as seriously as you take yourselves, and I will expect to hear reports of your activities on all major news sources around the world, because trust me, boy, this would be news. If it were true.
so, is it true? can you prove it? then go to it, boy.
means I have now converted and believe 9/11 was an inside job. If I will confess to him I believe, he will not tell on me.
28th, I will explain this post to you, okay?
IF YOU HAVE EVIDENCE THAT THE TRAGEDIES OF 9/11/2001 WERE COMMITTED BY OUR GOVERNMENT, AND YOU DO NOTHING WITH THAT EVIDENCE, YOU ARE GUILTY AS AN ACCESSORY AFTER THE FACT.
IF YOU KNOW "THEY" DID IT, AND YOU CAN PROVE IT, AND YOU DONT, YOU ARE ONE OF THEM AND ARE HELPING THEM TO COVER IT UP.
Now. What are you doing with your evidence, 28th? Are you covering it up for the government? Are you helping those YOU believe murdered thousands of your fellow citizens?
Have you become complicit, my lad?
I will continue to wait for you to report what you know to someone who can take the next step. I will wait for all of you to alert the media, get them to take you as seriously as you take yourselves, and I will expect to hear reports of your activities on all major news sources around the world, because trust me, boy, this would be news. If it were true.
so, is it true? can you prove it? then go to it, boy.
CHF
Illuminator
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2006
- Messages
- 3,871
Submitting research to an engineering journal would be a good first step.
slingblade
Unregistered
- Joined
- Jul 28, 2005
- Messages
- 23,466
Exactly. Something like that.
I've already stated what I believe to be true, in another post. But 28th and his ilk are sooooo convinced of their own truth, I wonder that they are willing to JAQ off here, rather than try to save the rest of us.
What a waste of time, when lives are at stake. I mean, they are, aren't they? We keep getting called shills for believing what we believe.
What are those of you who believe our government did this to its own people, and yet do nothing with what you know? You can prove this! You keep saying it over and over. So prove it! Save us!
Or shut up.