Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

Paranormal investigation and the darkness.


  • Please log in to reply
50 replies to this topic

#31    Heaven Is A Halfpipe

Heaven Is A Halfpipe

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 914 posts
  • Joined:10 Mar 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:England

  • Hi. My name is Spike.

Posted 09 May 2013 - 09:00 PM

View PostAlisdair.MacDonald, on 05 May 2013 - 02:36 AM, said:

I'm not actually a skeptic. That doesn't mean I don't try to be scientific about things and look for all possible explanations for what people may or may not be experiencing. Personally I am sick to death of television programs on the subject. I don't know where you're basing your criticisms, but you're not even close.

I'm being lazy because I am using the appropriate forum to ask a legitimate question?

Well yeah...I would have thought it's common sense to ask those who are more likely to possess the answers you seek rather than just anyone on some forum...may as well just go around asking people on the street.

You can go the distance, you can run the mile and you can walk straight through HELL with a smile.

My UM Credentials: http://www.unexplain...5


#32    JesseCuster

JesseCuster

    Secret Jesus

  • Member
  • 2,894 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 10 May 2013 - 01:54 AM

View PostAlisdair.MacDonald, on 04 May 2013 - 07:43 PM, said:

That's terrible.  Barely a couple of sentences in and the ignorance is astonishing.

Quote

If the theory of gravity were true, it would show that the sun's gravitational force on the moon is much stronger than the earth's gravitational force on the moon, so the moon would go around the sun
The moon does go around the sun.  If it didn't go round the sun as well as going round the earth, then it wouldn't remain in orbit as earth orbited the sun.  Think about it.

The rest of the article is just too depressing to deal with.  It reads like a parody of anti-science religious fundy nonsense.

Clyde Tombaugh's discovery of Pluto is apparently problematic because he relied on gravitational calculations and not on scripture.  That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.

Adherents of gravity have a tough time explaining why airplanes don't fall?  No they don't.  You can't build an airplane without taking gravity into account.  The whole goddamn point behind an airplane is that it is designed to generate lifting force to counteract gravity.  It's him that needs to explain why airplanes have wings to generate lift if there's no such thing as gravity that would pull them downward.  What bizarre nonsense.

It is not even clear why we need a theory of gravity -- there is not a single mention in the Bible, and the patriotic founding fathers never referred to it.  Having read that I am now convinced it must be parody.  Nobody can be so stupid as to believe that something doesn't exist because the founders of the United States never mentioned it.  No-one in a sane state of mind can possibly believe such a thing.

Do you believe this article you just linked to?

edit: It's one of the first links on Google if you search for 'gravity is only a theory' so I'm wondering if Alisdair merely did a Google search and linked to one of the first things he found.  At least I hope he did.

edit2:  Ho ho. My suspicions were right. It is indeed a parody of creationism written by a physicist called Ellery Schemp, originally for The Humanist magazine.  Either Alisdair got Poe'd or he's having us on.

Edited by Archimedes, 10 May 2013 - 02:12 AM.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

#33    Guest_SKPI_*

Guest_SKPI_*
  • Guests

Posted 10 May 2013 - 07:45 AM

We investigate both day and night, but night is preferable due to it being quieter and less human activity going on. When we investigate public houses or commercial buildings there would be far too much electrical interference and general noise, as well as passing traffic. The darkness does help raise your awareness and your hearing is more finely tuned.


#34    Alisdair.MacDonald

Alisdair.MacDonald

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Closed
  • Pip
  • 143 posts
  • Joined:07 Jun 2012

Posted 13 May 2013 - 05:27 AM

I must say I am very impressed with the efforts to criticize every notation of everything I have to say, simply because they don't agree with me. I would just have to add, that if it take so much effort to prove I am wrong..then maybe you should reconsider your position. I've said nothing I am going to back down from, so i don't really know what you people expect.

I do appreciate everyone who has stayed on topic though.

:tu:


#35    JesseCuster

JesseCuster

    Secret Jesus

  • Member
  • 2,894 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 13 May 2013 - 12:24 PM

View PostAlisdair.MacDonald, on 13 May 2013 - 05:27 AM, said:

I've said nothing I am going to back down from, so i don't really know what you people expect.
Does that include not backing down from linking to a parody article that is making fun of creationism to defend the idea that gravity is pure speculation?

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

#36    Alisdair.MacDonald

Alisdair.MacDonald

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Closed
  • Pip
  • 143 posts
  • Joined:07 Jun 2012

Posted 13 May 2013 - 10:09 PM

View PostArchimedes, on 13 May 2013 - 12:24 PM, said:

Does that include not backing down from linking to a parody article that is making fun of creationism to defend the idea that gravity is pure speculation?

It includes knowing that even a parody article has a better fundamental understanding of the principles of the scientific method than you do.


#37    JesseCuster

JesseCuster

    Secret Jesus

  • Member
  • 2,894 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 13 May 2013 - 11:32 PM

View PostAlisdair.MacDonald, on 13 May 2013 - 10:09 PM, said:

It includes knowing that even a parody article has a better fundamental understanding of the principles of the scientific method than you do.
Do you agree with the article with the following claims:

1. The fact that Clyde Tombaugh discovered Pluto without using the Bible is a problem.
2. The fact that the Founding Fathers of the United States never mentioned gravity in their writings is evidence that it does not exist.
3. That engineers do not take gravity into account when designing airplanes.
4. That the moon does not go round the sun. [hint: it simultaneously goes around the earth and the sun. Think about it.]
5. That Jupiter has no rings.
6. That the theory of gravity supports the communist idea that '

Those are just a few of the deliberately ridiculous claims that the author made up to make fun of creationists.  If you think those claims involve understanding the scientific method, then you are beyond reasoning with.

Edited by Archimedes, 13 May 2013 - 11:33 PM.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

#38    JesseCuster

JesseCuster

    Secret Jesus

  • Member
  • 2,894 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 14 May 2013 - 12:20 AM

View PostAlisdair.MacDonald, on 14 May 2013 - 12:09 AM, said:

Yes you are. ;)

..now, go away.
No.

Do you agree with the article with the following claims:

1. The fact that Clyde Tombaugh discovered Pluto without using the Bible is a problem.
2. The fact that the Founding Fathers of the United States never mentioned gravity in their writings is evidence that it does not exist.
3. That engineers do not take gravity into account when designing airplanes.
4. That the moon does not go round the sun. [hint: it simultaneously goes around the earth and the sun. Think about it.]
5. That Jupiter has no rings.
6. That the theory of gravity supports the communist idea that "to each according to his weight, from each according to his mass".

Do you agree with those claims in the anti-creationist parody article you are defending or not?

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

#39    Brian Topp

Brian Topp

    Dynamic Interactions Coordinator Of Paradoxes.

  • Member
  • 3,006 posts
  • Joined:10 Sep 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Year next Tuesday!

  • My youtube channel, Has horror stories and skits.
    https://www.youtube.com/user/TheCreepyCorridor

Posted 14 May 2013 - 01:48 AM

This thread reminds me of an episode of father ted.



It is easier to claim it is paranormal than taking the hard route and find out what really happened.


#40    Alisdair.MacDonald

Alisdair.MacDonald

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Closed
  • Pip
  • 143 posts
  • Joined:07 Jun 2012

Posted 14 May 2013 - 02:29 AM

View PostArchimedes, on 14 May 2013 - 12:20 AM, said:

No.

Do you agree with the article with the following claims:

1. The fact that Clyde Tombaugh discovered Pluto without using the Bible is a problem.
2. The fact that the Founding Fathers of the United States never mentioned gravity in their writings is evidence that it does not exist.
3. That engineers do not take gravity into account when designing airplanes.
4. That the moon does not go round the sun. [hint: it simultaneously goes around the earth and the sun. Think about it.]
5. That Jupiter has no rings.
6. That the theory of gravity supports the communist idea that "to each according to his weight, from each according to his mass".

Do you agree with those claims in the anti-creationist parody article you are defending or not?

I'm not defending those beliefs. Those are not my words. Don't hold me to something I did not personally say.

If you want to call me on anything, call me on linking an article without reading the entire thing. I am guilty of that, I admit. You have me there.

However the entire conversation is pointless. Since you cannot understand a simple fact that no matter what your 6th grade science teacher may have taught you, a theory is only ever just a theory. It may be "highly likely", however it will always be there, to continue to be tested. Even in science it is very difficult to call something a "law".

Walk into any credible university and ask any science professor the same question and you will get the same response. I don't think that would matter for you however, because it is obvious that there is no room for abstract thought in your narrow minded worldview.

People have always criticized those working on the 'fringe' of scientific thought, and yet the majority of major scientific breakthroughs have come from those very same fringe elements.


#41    Alisdair.MacDonald

Alisdair.MacDonald

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Closed
  • Pip
  • 143 posts
  • Joined:07 Jun 2012

Posted 14 May 2013 - 02:34 AM

I didn't come here to educate the masses in science, or morals, or thread etiquette. I came here to use a public forum, to ask a really simple question.

I  think anyone who has come here without any interest in the topic of conversation whatsoever, and only to 'stir the pot' should be ashamed of themselves, and should really consider getting a hobby besides trolling web forums for attention, or using them as a vent to express intellectual insecurities.


#42    Brian Topp

Brian Topp

    Dynamic Interactions Coordinator Of Paradoxes.

  • Member
  • 3,006 posts
  • Joined:10 Sep 2008
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Year next Tuesday!

  • My youtube channel, Has horror stories and skits.
    https://www.youtube.com/user/TheCreepyCorridor

Posted 14 May 2013 - 04:45 AM

View PostAlisdair.MacDonald, on 14 May 2013 - 02:34 AM, said:

I didn't come here to educate the masses in science, or morals, or thread etiquette. I came here to use a public forum, to ask a really simple question.

I  think anyone who has come here without any interest in the topic of conversation whatsoever, and only to 'stir the pot' should be ashamed of themselves, and should really consider getting a hobby besides trolling web forums for attention, or using them as a vent to express intellectual insecurities.
No offense but...

So, You are basically saying "I am right and you are wrong, if people who discredit my theories (Which I claim/act like they are facts) with use of commonsense and proven facts, I will call them trolls"?

You are your own train wreck.

It is easier to claim it is paranormal than taking the hard route and find out what really happened.


#43    JesseCuster

JesseCuster

    Secret Jesus

  • Member
  • 2,894 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 14 May 2013 - 12:30 PM

View PostAlisdair.MacDonald, on 14 May 2013 - 02:29 AM, said:

I'm not defending those beliefs. Those are not my words. Don't hold me to something I did not personally say.

If you want to call me on anything, call me on linking an article without reading the entire thing. I am guilty of that, I admit. You have me there.
So you linked to a parody article without reading it and without realising that it was a parody of creationism in order to defend your belief that gravity is 'pure speculation' and claimed that the parody article is a good representation of the fundamentals of scientific understanding.  And now that that has been explained to you, you are desperately backtracking from defending said article.  Got it.

Quote

However the entire conversation is pointless. Since you cannot understand a simple fact that no matter what your 6th grade science teacher may have taught you, a theory is only ever just a theory. It may be "highly likely", however it will always be there, to continue to be tested. Even in science it is very difficult to call something a "law".
As I already explained, the word 'theory' is just a word.  It means different things in different contexts.  When scientists talk about a scientific theory (a systematic explanation of a natural phenomenon) they do not mean the same thing as when people talk about a 'theory' (as in a mere hypothesis).  Look up 'equivocation' on Google to learn about the fallacy you are engaging in.

Quote

Walk into any credible university and ask any science professor the same question and you will get the same response.
What question?

Quote

I don't think that would matter for you however, because it is obvious that there is no room for abstract thought in your narrow minded worldview.
You know nothing about my worldview and how narrow minded or open minded it is.  Just because I call shenanigans on your bizarre anti-gravitationism doesn't make my worldview narrow minded.

Quote

People have always criticized those working on the 'fringe' of scientific thought, and yet the majority of major scientific breakthroughs have come from those very same fringe elements.
People laughed at Galileo.  They also laughed at Koko the Clown.  The fact that people laugh at something is not evidence that it isn't laughable.  If you're right, prove yourself right instead of thinking that people criticising at you is evidence that you are right.

Edited by Archimedes, 14 May 2013 - 12:31 PM.

"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool." - Richard P. Feynman

#44    coldethyl

coldethyl

    ~☆~Public Animal #9~☆~

  • Member
  • 16,331 posts
  • Joined:22 Mar 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:~*★*~Under Your Eyelid~*★*~

  • ~*★*~I'm not in this world to live up to your expectations and you're not in this world to live up to mine.
    Bruce Lee~*★*~

Posted 14 May 2013 - 07:04 PM

View PostAlisdair.MacDonald, on 13 May 2013 - 10:05 PM, said:


Congrats.

Wow, first friendly thing you've said.  EVER.


#45    coldethyl

coldethyl

    ~☆~Public Animal #9~☆~

  • Member
  • 16,331 posts
  • Joined:22 Mar 2005
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:~*★*~Under Your Eyelid~*★*~

  • ~*★*~I'm not in this world to live up to your expectations and you're not in this world to live up to mine.
    Bruce Lee~*★*~

Posted 14 May 2013 - 07:06 PM

View PostAlisdair.MacDonald, on 14 May 2013 - 02:34 AM, said:

I didn't come here to educate the masses in science, or morals, or thread etiquette. I came here to use a public forum, to ask a really simple question.

I  think anyone who has come here without any interest in the topic of conversation whatsoever, and only to 'stir the pot' should be ashamed of themselves, and should really consider getting a hobby besides trolling web forums for attention, or using them as a vent to express intellectual insecurities.

No, you certainly didn't because you have no thread etiquette.  And you asked the question over 6 months ago.  You should have just bumped the original thread.  Who wants attention?  You're the one who started fighting.  It's there in black and white, so is the link to the original thread.

Posted Image

Edited by coldethyl, 14 May 2013 - 08:04 PM.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users