Neveos Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Neveos, this isn't censorship. Censorship would've been closing this thread outright, which wasn't done. We are giving you all the available tools and patience we can bear so you have the opportunity to actually give us some substance,rather than tangential rants and mythos. Science works by evidence, Neveos, not be what seems to make sense to you. The current theories, as was pointed out to you many times in the thread, are not only "making sense" but they also have the power of having evidence on their side and the power of prediction. That is, using the ucrrent theory we can successfully predict how things will behave. For us to accept your theory, you must show us this step. For three pages and 50 posts,you haven't. Don't insult us by claiming censorship when this thread is clearly letting you continue ranting for 50 posts without a shred of actual valid science. You're in a science forum, not in your personal rant blog. It's time you provide some evidence and actual science. Remember, we didn't invite you to lecture, you chose to come to us, and by choosing that, you agreed to follow our rules. Maybe you should go over them. ~moo Once again, welcome to philosophy. I know that it probably feels good to you to hide behind a wall and demand for something which I cannot give, asking for credentials when I came to post a bright idea on a forum for some feedback. Its like asking an orphan for a parent on parent's day just because you don't want to invite any orphans. No, instead, I come on to a thread in which I very plainly watch everyone commit the same fallacy believing they are backed by evidence. The person asks why objects appear smaller at a distance, and everyone claims it was due to the objects taking up less space on the retina. I laughed as I saw everyone repeating the question using circular logic. No, in fact, common sense drove me to back up Weird Theory who was threatened by this machine of idiocy, and I very clearly understood that he put up the only valid argument. One which I disagreed with slightly, but the very sense he was making was awe-inspiring in comparison to you all.
Klaynos Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Thread closed, I gave you a final opportunity, this is a science forum, not a philosophy forum. Please read the forum rules. 1
Recommended Posts