UFO Disclosure
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
15-09-2015, 08:09 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:06 AM)Free Wrote:  
Quote:Scientific observations are not anecdotal evidence. They can be independently verified. A scientific paper whose observations are not confirmed carries a lot less weight and may be in the worst case thrown out. Or for example when there was that furor over faster than light neutrinos, further analysis may show that there was experimental error, which is why the observations are not confirmed.

You follow? Peer *fucking* review. It's not a difficult concept, except for twits who wish science didn't work that way.

Just, you know, "yes or no" to the question please.

Drinking Beverage

You can read? Or are you a bot?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2015, 08:13 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:07 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Free I'm confused (sorry If I'm not getting something here) if I test the ph of a liquid and the litmus paper turns red does my assertion that the liquid is acidic qualify as anecdotal evidence ?

Yes, because it is what you observed, and therefore you believe that the effect has a cause. Now it's a matter of proving the cause.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2015, 08:16 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
So it doesn't matter that a proven test has taken place ?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2015, 08:19 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 08:06 AM)Free Wrote:  Just, you know, "yes or no" to the question please.

Drinking Beverage

You can read? Or are you a bot?

So your answer is no.

Therefore, you can also be correctly classified as a hypocrite and a fucking liar, for without a scientist(s) first observing objects moving away from a central point, no scientists could generate any kind of "belief" in a Big Bang or a singularity insomuch as to continue the investigation.

They eyewitness the effect, and postulate a cause. Why? Because, by necessity, they believe it has one according to the anecdotal evidence.

You are fucking equally done here.

Drinking Beverage

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2015, 08:21 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:07 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Free I'm confused (sorry If I'm not getting something here) if I test the ph of a liquid and the litmus paper turns red does my assertion that the liquid is acidic qualify as anecdotal evidence ?

No, it doesn't. And it would be a conclusion, anyway, not an assertion; the two are quite different.

This question he's suddenly so obsessed with is honestly one of the more incredibly stupid things that I've seen posted in the thread. Presumably he's actually attempting to imitate me, as I have in the past - and even in this very thread - pointed out that there are some very simple questions that people like Free cannot answer, and the idea of vanquishing me with my own tactic strokes his overgrown ego. But, unfortunately, he lacks the ability to actually come up with a coherent question that does what he wants it to do - mostly because, again unfortunately, he's not on the side of rationality here.

What he thinks is happening is that he's presented us with a catch-22 scenario: if we answer "yes, scientists give us anecdotal evidence", then we have to admit his unverified stories, and if we answer "no, they give us a different kind", then...

...well, to be perfectly honest, that's where the whole thing kind of falls apart.

Presumably he thinks that we can't answer "no" and remain coherent, since scientists - shock of all shocks! - must use their eyes in their work, and - oh, the horror! - report their findings to others. This must make it anecdotal evidence, so saying "no" is a sign of irrefutable idiocy.

Unfortunately for Free, that isn't the case.

"Tested, verified, verifiable evidence (that someone incidentally used their eyes to look at)" is not what "anecdotal evidence" - or even "eyewitness account" means. In fact, "anecdotal evidence" still doesn't mean anything, as anecdotes are not evidence, but that's rather beside the point; what is meant by "anecdote" in this case is "someone claims to have seen something and presents nothing else to verify that they actually did".

Free is just playing silly, pointless word games and pretending that they mean something. Unfortunately, since he doesn't understand what the words involved actually mean, he's having a bit of trouble.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Unbeliever's post
15-09-2015, 08:22 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:21 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 08:07 AM)adey67 Wrote:  Free I'm confused (sorry If I'm not getting something here) if I test the ph of a liquid and the litmus paper turns red does my assertion that the liquid is acidic qualify as anecdotal evidence ?

No, it doesn't. And it would be a conclusion, anyway, not an assertion; the two are quite different.

This question he's suddenly so obsessed with is honestly one of the more incredibly stupid things that I've seen posted in the thread. Presumably he's actually attempting to imitate me, as I have in the past - and even in this very thread - pointed out that there are some very simple questions that people like Free cannot answer, and the idea of vanquishing me with my own tactic strokes his overgrown ego. But, unfortunately, he lacks the ability to actually come up with a coherent question that does what he wants it to do - mostly because, again unfortunately, he's not on the side of rationality here.

What he thinks is happening is that he's presented us with a catch-22 scenario: if we answer "yes, scientists give us anecdotal evidence", then we have to admit his unverified stories, and if we answer "no, they give us a different kind", then...

...well, to be perfectly honest, that's where the whole thing kind of falls apart.

Presumably he thinks that we can't answer "no" and remain coherent, since scientists - shock of all shocks! - must use their eyes in their work, and - oh, the horror! - report their findings to others. This must make it anecdotal evidence, so saying "no" is a sign of irrefutable idiocy.

Unfortunately for Free, that isn't the case.

"Tested, verified, verifiable evidence (that someone incidentally used their eyes to look at)" is not what "anecdotal evidence" - or even "eyewitness account" means. In fact, "anecdotal evidence" still doesn't mean anything, as anecdotes are not evidence, but that's rather beside the point; what is meant by "anecdote" in this case is "someone claims to have seen something and presents nothing else to verify that they actually did".

Free is just playing silly, pointless word games and pretending that they mean something. Unfortunately, since he doesn't understand what the words involved actually mean, he's having a bit of trouble.

You are done.

Nothing you say will hold an ounce of credibility whatsoever. There isn't an intellectually honest bone in you entire fucking body.

How can anyone become an atheist when we are all born with no beliefs in the first place? We are atheists because we were born this way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2015, 08:22 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:19 AM)Free Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 08:09 AM)morondog Wrote:  You can read? Or are you a bot?

So your answer is no.

Therefore, you can also be correctly classified as a hypocrite and a fucking liar, for without a scientist(s) first observing objects moving away from a central point, no scientists could generate any kind of "belief" in a Big Bang or a singularity insomuch as to continue the investigation.

They eyewitness the effect, and postulate a cause. Why? Because, by necessity, they believe it has one.

You are fucking equally done here.

Drinking Beverage

You asked a question, I answered, in addition I gave reasoning behind my answer, you didn't like my answer and failed to address any of the reasoning contained therein, but simply went the easy route - that makes me a hypocrite and a liar? Hmm. You know who comes off deranged in this exchange?

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
15-09-2015, 08:23 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:19 AM)Free Wrote:  They eyewitness the effect, and postulate a cause.

You're leaving out a few steps there, such as "verifying that what they believe they saw is actually what is happening".

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Unbeliever's post
15-09-2015, 08:24 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:22 AM)Free Wrote:  You are done.

Nothing you say will hold an ounce of credibility whatsoever. There isn't an intellectually honest bone in you entire fucking body.

Hm. I'm no psychologist, but really, it seems to me that you're projecting a bit here.

"Owl," said Rabbit shortly, "you and I have brains. The others have fluff. If there is any thinking to be done in this Forest - and when I say thinking I mean thinking - you and I must do it."
- A. A. Milne, The House at Pooh Corner
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
15-09-2015, 08:26 AM
RE: UFO Disclosure
(15-09-2015 08:23 AM)Unbeliever Wrote:  
(15-09-2015 08:19 AM)Free Wrote:  They eyewitness the effect, and postulate a cause.

You're leaving out a few steps there, such as "verifying that what they believe they saw is actually what is happening".

Writing a paper, stating their methodology, getting criticism from other scientists, other scientists attempting to reproduce their results, alternative hypotheses being considered to explain the observations, further experimentation...

We'll love you just the way you are
If you're perfect -- Alanis Morissette
(06-02-2014 03:47 PM)Momsurroundedbyboys Wrote:  And I'm giving myself a conclusion again from all the facepalming.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes morondog's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: