Forum Replies Created
First of all sorry rommel for polluting your history tread, maybe someone could move the current discussion to a new one.
PR-sods law, very funny but i do believe you are affected by various laws of nature you cant break, like the ones of thermodynamics. If you or someone claims that it can be done I and many others are interested- especially science if there was a totally new and simple way of making reality behave with unthinkable profits.
So if anyone wants to make that claim it goes against the scientific understanding we have how “stuff” behaves- you better have a good demonstration.You would pretty much have to reject science.
I like to keep an open mind and one nice (close) quote from ‘friends’
“Scientists said the world was flat, but turned out they were wrong
Scientists said the atom was the smallest thing in the universe, hang on, theres loads of stuff in an atom”
LOTS of information we can get is censored, the level varies throughout.
There are always people who make silly claims-the scientists who claimed the world was flat were proven wrong and the overwhelming majority of people today believe the scientific consensus-eart is an irregular sphere.
When the atom was dicovered some claimed it was the smallest building block the world was made of, but when others learned more about it they saw atoms behave in a non orderly way- there had to be something else.
If you conclude science was wrong you dont seem to grasp what science really is- the combined knowledge of this world.That doent mean its perfect, the method of science tries to describe how this world we live in behaves- despite our limitations.It has a lot of methods that tries to distinguish between real and not real.
Once a hypothesis has survived testing, it may become adopted into the framework of a scientific theory. This is a logically reasoned, self-consistent model or framework for describing the behavior of certain natural phenomena. A theory typically describes the behavior of much broader sets of phenomena than a hypothesis—commonly, a large number of hypotheses can be logically bound together by a single theory. These broader theories may be formulated using principles such as parsimony (e.g., “Occam’s Razor”). They are then repeatedly tested by analyzing how the collected evidence (facts) compares to the theory. When a theory survives a sufficiently large number of empirical observations, it then becomes a scientific generalization that can be taken as fully verified. These assume the status of a physical law or law of nature.-wikipedia
Thats what i like about it it`s self critical-like me.Altough i cant be 100% sure im right, i have been wrong before, my understanding of science gives me confidence to distinguish between real and not real.
Personal beliefs- there are as many personal beliefs as there are people, i dont mind people believing what they believe but its different when you start claiming truth.If you do make sure what you`re talking about is not something other people can ridicule easily.
To me the claim viking made was the equivalent of buying snake oil and bragging how great it is and that you going to live to be 200. Easily to ridicule hard to have a rational discussion about.
And i have an open mind-if someone has a better truth than i have i will adopt that truth.
Cold fusion is a controversial effect reported by some researchers to have been produced from nuclear reaction at conditions near room temperature and atmospheric pressure.-wikipedia
cold fusion is currently unproven- see the contoversial in there. It might be true but its too vague to call it a scientific truth.
On January 27, 2006, researchers at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute claimed to have produced fusion reactions by sonoluminescence, without an external neutron source, according to a paper published in Physical Review Letters. To date, these results have not been reproduced by other members of the scientific community.-wiki,solumenence
Another controversial claim-they did it but noone after that has been able to reproduce it.There might be something going on there but its not easy to do.And these are “serious” scientists who have a well equipped laboratory and write serious papers with serious claims.They could be just decieving themselves or trying to get money for their research.
If such a grand claim is made by people who you cant easily discard thousends of scientists will look at it immediatly and if they cant do it they will regard it as contovesial.
If some guy in his garage build something like that and writes it on the internet its too unlikely to be true and should be adressed that way.
This post is long enough as it is so for all your questions about “how to differentiate between real and not real”, or critisism about what i said please reply.I am always prepared to hear what you think about it and willing to discuss it.
Dont believe what i tell you do your own thinking you lazy bastages 😈 -bazzz
But Da vike i have done enough research in whats real and whats not ,and for sure i dont accept things for what they are.
Say, if someone makes a claim that doesnt confirm what i believe i wont let him get away with it as i believe there is a lot of false claims and if possible they have to be corrected.Not that i rule out that i could be wrong but in this case it would be very unlikely.
I suppose with your quote you suggest that man is me. If you truly believe you werent talking out of the wrong orfice- I challenge you to a duel where we both compare our personal beliefs and use rational arguments to decide who will be the champion.
If you dont want a rational argument i suggest you give me no reply- feel free to not do it publicly and pm me.
slightly less than highest regards,bazzz
Wow,i dont even know how to react to this,for this to make sense you would have to believe that any attempt to find a better way of getting energy in the last 80 years has failed. I guess you believe that the government and big oil are working together to prevent us from getting clean energy.Or something else….
I dont want to ridicule anyone but there is a lot that doesnt make sense in your post.All the claims you make about hydrogen producing violate the laws of thermodynamics.
I would love to believe there is an easy way to get cheap energy but it hasnt been done, claims on the internet i would treat with care. People are masters of decieving themselves, make sure you dont lose your self-critisism and keep an open mind.
I think you are mistaken if this is what you believe, i dont believe i have the skill to make you change you mind but if you want to know why i think youre wrong feel free to pm me.
highest regards, bazzz
People are capable of decieving others ,just like animals can so they will. Im not too sure if there was a time when it was better tough.
With the easyness of gathering information and comparing we have not it just seems ridiculously obvious to a lot of us. For a lot of people it is confusing tough so they may just stop caring or thinking about it.
Its scary, but we must believe reason will have more value in the end.
oh yeah and that we wont frak things up too badly. 😕
I know, you`re a funny guy 😛
Unlikely that big bear likes to be told what to do PR, given the usual replies.
May i assume that you just teasing?
Oh yeah nice one DB, it made me smile 😀
Dont stop the drama, it could get boring in here 😛
Now lets all take a deep breath……
This seems very wrong indeed, lets hope this will be dealt with appropriatly, last thing this community needs is people abusing their power.
The power over others that is, as i dont have anything agains reasoning power.
Its nice to see that you have stopped the swearing, if you could only stop the personal attacks people might listen to what you have to say.
With your thread title and first post you have set the tone of this thread, you insult people and dont listen to reason.
Why are you attacking DB anyway he even defended you at a moment, his last post was only fair as you attacked his integrity. I dont understand what you try to get from that, but i dont believe it helps you getting it.
If you want people to listen to you ,and this is not just for you, be reasonable, have some real thought through arguments, and be open for the arguments of others.
You cant expect someone to do what you say by yelling, if they know you cant do anything worse than yelling.In the real world yelling people may seem impressive but online its just silly.
If you have any critisism for me feel free, if you want me to listen to it be polite.
I looked there ,now you look somewhere i looked.
Sorry if i dont agree with you but if you say global warming isnt a problem i wonder where you got that information. But i would rather go what the overwhelming majority of climate scientists tell us. If you can find the time to investigate look at the statements some scientific organisations have made:
“A Growing Threat to Society”
AAAS Board of Directors Statement on Climate Change: “The scientific evidence is clear,” the AAAS Board says in a new statement. “Global climate change caused by human activities…is a growing threat to society.” The statement was approved on 9 December 2006 and released on 18 February at the AAAS Annual Meeting in San Francisco.
AAAS Urges Support for Earth-Observation Satellites: U.S. budget cuts are threatening satellites essential for weather forecasting, hurricane warnings, climate change studies and more, the AAAS Board of Directors said in a 28 April 2007 statement.
If you like to call them scaremongerers feel free but if you want to know more watch http://wonderingmind42.com/?page=1 its called The most terrifying video youll ever see and i must agree on most things he talks about.Its a rational way of looking at the facts about global warming.
Actually I DARE YOU to watch the whole 7 hours where he covers every aspect and even gives you a solution. And best of all you dont have to agree with him, he encourages people to think for themselves.
Then i would like to have a educated and rational discussion with you about global warming.
The points you raise altough they make not much sense regarding the global warming debate,they are interesting things to think about and i may agree with some of the things you think about them but to group them into a do and don`t list to dismiss the point i raised is just not helpfull.
I look forward to improve your understanding of the subject.
If i would be called a little girl by anyone i wouldnt even take it serious, especially by PR. Hes just trying to get a reaction like that in almost every post i remember from him, enough reason to laugh and move on.
I try not to judge people on their behaviour on the internet, there`s no use for that we are usually anonymous anyway.
I dont really mind how people behave too much, but for me personally i feel most confortable with those that know how to think in a rational matter and dont take themselves too seriously-anyone could be wrong.
so-make love not war ,man
Wouldnt that make a great mod-a big peace sign map where you shoot rainbows and when you hit you get love points. 🙄
Global Warming=Change that will destroy a few species and create new ones.
Ozone Depletion=Change that will kill us all and destroy everything.
Neither of those is likely to kill us all, ozone depletion is a simple and obvious problem compared to global warming. The mechanism is well understood and the solution is a slight adjustment in the chemicals we produce, we replaced cfc for stuff that doesnt eat our beautiful ozone.
The result is that ozone depletion has slowed down, but cfcs take 50-100 years to break down so the final effect we only know in the future.
Global warming is a different problem, and so much more complicated too.We do not fully know the mechanism ,only that its almost certain linked to the extra carbon we dig up from deep underground.To change that we have to change our way of thinking as almost everything we do depends on that cheap and easy carbon.Once the carbon has been taken out it will take thousands of years for it to return to the ground.The biggest problem will be to convince to leave it in the ground as we depend on it at the moment, we could change that but it is going to be a huge effort.
As for the effects- we have no clue what will happen, we change the balance of the atmosphere it will find a new balance with effects that are unknown,but likely it will be more extreme weather and droughts are projected troughout most of the world.This could result in a destabilised world where today looks like paradise.
If you dont like the cold buy yourself a tropical island but make sure its well above sealevel. 😛
Looks like legion has a shield that blocks all critisism, maybe he should trade it for a shield that keeps the rage from getting out. 😉
I have been playing since septemer i think, I have played rommels apoc mod 3 or 4 hours a day and after 3 weeks i could keep up with the top players.Then apoc champions disappeared and i stopped playing until v 41 Then i played thrax merge mod for 4 or 5 weeks getting to rank 1 for one day(i had to play at least 5 hours a day to get up to princey) then i lost interest, at the moment i play sometimes in main and i usually keep up, but i prefer mods- they change a lot and its a challenge to adapt to the changes.Too bad not too many people play them.
The main thing to get a high rating is to play as much as possible when noone is on so you can just target practice on bots and occasional players.
You probably get 3 times the kills compared to when there are “pros” in the room.
The statistics give a distorted view of who is the better player, it merely indicates who plays most.
Its almost impossible to get any hard evidence from statistics only suspicion, imo they are unneccesary but i dont suggest or to get any support for them to be removed.It would be nice to see a better representation of the quality of players tough.imo someone who plays only 2 hours a week never gets to the top ten.