09 May '22 14:34>
@suzianne saidI agree. Politicians have all proved that.
Hint: Just because Trump lies with every breath, that doesn't make lies okay.
The Clintons even perfected it!
@suzianne saidI agree. Politicians have all proved that.
Hint: Just because Trump lies with every breath, that doesn't make lies okay.
@suzianne saidYou do have to prove it if you don't want your reputation as a liar to continue.
I don't have to prove anything.
Untrue information is disinformation. Period.
For the billionth time, it's okay if you don't understand that something is untrue. Just don't waste everyone's time with stuff you don't even know is true, because it's likely not, because your education is stunted (or maybe you never learned to distinguish truth from fiction, that is a fa ...[text shortened]... rew up in, which is why it's important to not raise your kid in a Republican state -- like Florida).
@metal-brain saidI don't have a "reputation" as a liar.
You do have to prove it if you don't want your reputation as a liar to continue.
@suzianne saidTrue. You, and both your pals, have a reputation as gaslighters.
I don't have a "reputation" as a liar.
@shallow-blue said"Both" my pals?
True. You, and both your pals, have a reputation as gaslighters.
@suzianne saidYou just lied again.
I don't have a "reputation" as a liar.
You'll have to explain better than that.
@suzianne saidThe biggest threat to science and the scientific method is the corruption of it by sociopathic greed or simply the greater need to keep one's paycheck. Whenever honest science threatens big profits, science usually loses. The best example of this is the food, drug and health care industry.
This thread is a grand example how science gets pushed back. And then you claim "censorship did it". No, disinformation (that too many people believe) did it. Every time false info is embraced as true, science dies a bit. The scientific method is the best way we have to eliminate false info.
Hypothesis > experimentation > analyze the results > eliminate the false hypo ...[text shortened]... claiming that eliminating disinformation is censorship) and science would enjoy a renaissance again.
@suzianne saidEliminating disinformation is censorship because you don't know disinformation when you see it. You have opinions of what is disinformation which means you don't have proof.
This thread is a grand example how science gets pushed back. And then you claim "censorship did it". No, disinformation (that too many people believe) did it. Every time false info is embraced as true, science dies a bit. The scientific method is the best way we have to eliminate false info.
Hypothesis > experimentation > analyze the results > eliminate the false hypo ...[text shortened]... claiming that eliminating disinformation is censorship) and science would enjoy a renaissance again.
@metal-brain saidNone of those sentences mean anything.
Eliminating disinformation is censorship because you don't know disinformation when you see it. You have opinions of what is disinformation which means you don't have proof.
For example, you claimed time dilation results from gravity as if it is some sort of byproduct of gravity or something. I told you that you had it backwards, which you did. If you had your way you ...[text shortened]... nding up or laying down? There are people that cannot agree which it is. Which one would you censor?
@shallow-blue saidStill nothing to offer? I will offer this:
None of those sentences mean anything.
@metal-brain saidBecause you're wrong.
Eliminating disinformation is censorship because you don't know disinformation when you see it. You have opinions of what is disinformation which means you don't have proof.
For example, you claimed time dilation results from gravity as if it is some sort of byproduct of gravity or something. I told you that you had it backwards, which you did. If you had your way you ...[text shortened]... nding up or laying down? There are people that cannot agree which it is. Which one would you censor?
@shallow-blue saidI've been trying to beat some reality into him for well over a year now about Relativity.
None of those sentences mean anything.
@metal-brain saidI already proved suzi wrong. She is the perfect example of why science should never be censored. Suzi made my case better than I could imagine. The irony is that she is embracing Lysenkoism even though she claims to be against Russia.
Still nothing to offer? I will offer this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKxQTvqcpSg
...and this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNOFxmcECPQ
@suzianne saidScience is looking for truth, and reality, as it is discovery. If you don't allow people
Because you're wrong.
Wrong science needs to go straight to the nearest bin.
"Eliminating disinformation is censorship because you don't know disinformation when you see it."
You mean, of course, that YOU don't know disinformation when you see it.
I finished school and went on to get my BS and am now working on my MS. Disinformation is stuff that is not true, us ...[text shortened]... ination of backwards science. Your idiotic version of Relativity is wrong. This is not an opinion.