Sayonara

The mostly recently replied-to threads float just as the normal forum threads do.

Not to worry, I only popped in briefly myself over Christmas. I asked because the direction of the discussion seemed to run contrary to the original post, which seemed (on the face of it, at least) an open invitation to discuss the issue. Maybe it would help to re-read the thread and try and recall what you wanted out of it.

Posting your infraction messages is not going to impress anyone. It will simply encourage a further infraction for trolling, which will edge you closer to being automatically banned.

Do you not think that the parents have been reckless as to the abuse that their children will receive?

This has gone on long enough.

Lance, answer my question.

You can remove "instead of" and everything that follows it from that sentence. Falsification of one hypotheses does not inherently lend support to another hypothesis. To answer your question, you would falsify the accepted theory by designing an experiment that breaks its predictions.

If it can't be falsified, it is not a scientific theory. If you cannot predict the effects of a given system, you have not explained it.

If people are not allowed to disagree with: ...then what is the point of this thread?

Epiménides, your ideas appear to fly in the face of the evidence. Perhaps you should rethink them?

Addressing the original question is not an undertaking with which Pioneer is familiar.

See below! I personally don't think that the Ghandi and Martin Luther King examples do the job. Sure, they influenced the degree to which society allowed that hate to dictate public policy (marginalisation), but they did not remove or "fix" the people with the hate problem. Or is that not what you meant ParanoiA? I may have taken your comment a bit literally.

Well it's not like you got full disclosure This is why we have staff to do the staffy things.

I wish you would stop using the past tense of "throw" when you mean through. It makes you look like a mental.

I'm asking ParanoiA for a practical example of a society removing a category of hate through the power of being nice.

Did you just reply to yourself?

Can you give an example where this approach has worked?

There are social effects on selection as well, in a species such as ours. It would be very interesting to observe those over a few thousand years, but of course none of us will be able to do that

Karl Popper was a highly influential philosopher: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Poppers share this characteristic.

Bearing in mind that this has been discussed extensively and accurately in previous threads, I don't see the point. Falling through the Earth, Gravity at the centre of the Earth, Why wouldn't a hole through the Earth work?, Hole in Earth?, If there was a hole..., and several others.

Make sure you have an awesome question lined up in case you get to speak to Bush.

Reality should only be described in objective and rational terms. If you can't or won't describe it in these terms, don't continue.

I don't think it can be explained in simpler terms. Regardless, the fault does not lie with me but with you, so it is not my explanation to give. You are the one who needs to explain why your fallacious statement has any bearing on this discussion. If you can't then I suggest that you don't try, because you can't afford any more infractions. Refer to the site rules if you are in any doubt as to why infractions are given out.

I am not about to teach you Logic 101. If you don't understand its structure or purpose you should not be making sweeping statements about it. You identify an attribute of A and then point out that B does not have that attribute, without showing any necessity for B to have that attribute. Ergo, a false comparison. In any case, your statement was utterly meaningless since most forms of logic are formalisations of reason.

No, it's because logic doesn't need to "evolve in and of itself". What you propose is a false comparison.