28 Jun 09
2 edits
Originally posted by robbie carrobie…exactly my point, it is completely unsatisfactory and should therefore be abandoned
Scandinavia ( which doesn’t say much ).
exactly my point, it is completely unsatisfactory and should therefore be abandoned lest the uninitiated ascribe to it, characterises which it does not possess. My goodness, is this the science forum or middle earth?
…
You mean we should abandon calling anyone “Scandinavia” or “British” etc?
In your opinion, is there any way of describing, conveniently with just one word, just one characteristic that a particular person has without “labelling” that person?
Isn’t calling me a “man” or adult “male” also “labelling” me and, if so, is there a way you could point out to somebody that I am a man or adult male without “labelling” me as a “man” or adult “male” (short of tearing my cloths off and visually exposing my male characteristics)?
28 Jun 09
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonHe's just not serious. He likes to throuw out an (proposterous) argument, and I bit the bait. Sorry I did that in the first place. He's just not serious. That's how I label him.
[b]…exactly my point, it is completely unsatisfactory and should therefore be abandoned
…
You mean we should abandon calling anyone “Scandinavia” or “British” etc?
In your opinion, is there any way of describing, conveniently with just one word, just one characteristic that a particular person has without “labelling” that person?
Isn’t c ...[text shortened]... or adult “male” (short of tearing my cloths off and visually exposing my male characteristics)?[/b]
28 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by Andrew HamiltonYou mean we should abandon calling anyone “Scandinavia” or “British” etc?
[b]…exactly my point, it is completely unsatisfactory and should therefore be abandoned
…
You mean we should abandon calling anyone “Scandinavia” or “British” etc?
In your opinion, is there any way of describing, conveniently with just one word, just one characteristic that a particular person has without “labelling” that person?
Isn’t c ...[text shortened]... or adult “male” (short of tearing my cloths off and visually exposing my male characteristics)?[/b]
Yes, exactly, it says nothing, we should treat and refer to persons as individuals, this was the entire point that Fabian managed to miss, and why i resent being labelled a creationist, for i have my own mind, my own evaluations and my own perceptions and in this i am entirely serious, i am not clever enough to bait Fabian, nor brave enough for that matter.
Now i would like to ask you guys a question that has been bothering me for ages, do you class (evaluate) the social sciences as actual science for example sociology?
29 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf you want to be labelled as 'serious' you have at least read my postings in this thread. If you think you have, then you have to, in order to be labelled 'serious', try to understand what I've written.
You mean we should abandon calling anyone “Scandinavia” or “British” etc?
Yes, exactly, it says nothing, we should treat and refer to persons as individuals, this was the entire point that Fabian managed to miss, and why i resent being labelled a creationist, for i have my own mind, my own evaluations and my own perceptions and in this i am entir ...[text shortened]... e for ages, do you class (evaluate) the social sciences as actual science for example sociology?
Until then I don't think you are 'serious' in this thread.
29 Jun 09
1 edit
I have littered the science forum enough with my thoughts, it is clear to me, that you guys are not free and original thinkers, but instead prefer to simply assimilate the thoughts of others, it is noble in itself, but originality of thought is to be aimed at, i will therefore now, with a kind of sigh of relief, take my leave, good riddance to you Robbie is what i say, they were not ready to embrace such freedom, instead they were intent to dwell in their world of labels and libels and limit their search to unintelligent agencies, so be it! their house is abandoned to them!
29 Jun 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieAnother one labelled as a fundamentalist bites the grass.
I have littered the science forum enough with my thoughts, it is clear to me, that you guys are not free and original thinkers, but instead prefer to simply assimilate the thoughts of others, it is noble in itself, but originality of thought is to be aimed at, i will therefore now, with a kind of sigh of relief, take my leave, good riddance to you Ro ...[text shortened]... s and limit their search to unintelligent agencies, so be it! their house is abandoned to them!
He thinks that his thoughts are original, surprise, they aren't. He think, like other fundamentalists that he thinks outside the box, when he's just stuck in the box. Pity.
29 Jun 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieYou really are a strange man.
I have littered the science forum enough with my thoughts, it is clear to me, that you guys are not free and original thinkers, but instead prefer to simply assimilate the thoughts of others, it is noble in itself, but originality of thought is to be aimed at, i will therefore now, with a kind of sigh of relief, take my leave, good riddance to you Ro ...[text shortened]... s and limit their search to unintelligent agencies, so be it! their house is abandoned to them!
29 Jun 09
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI really don’t understand; if somebody asked you just out of curiosity what nationality I am of, how would you answer? wouldn’t you say “he is British”? If not, how else can you answer this simple question?
You mean we should abandon calling anyone “Scandinavia” or “British” etc?
Yes, exactly, it says nothing, we should treat and refer to persons as individuals, this was the entire point that Fabian managed to miss, and why i resent being labelled a creationist, for i have my own mind, my own evaluations and my own perceptions and in this i am entir ...[text shortened]... e for ages, do you class (evaluate) the social sciences as actual science for example sociology?
…Now i would like to ask you guys a question that has been bothering me for ages, do you CLASS (evaluate) the social sciences as actual science for example sociology?
… (my emphasis)
Yes; at least I do. Any reason why I shouldn’t?
-as long as scientific method is consistently used then, of course, it is a science.
And which “CLASS” are you referring to above?
And why would that question bother you?
29 Jun 09
Originally posted by robbie carrobieyou guys are not free and original thinkers
I have littered the science forum enough with my thoughts, it is clear to me, that you guys are not free and original thinkers, but instead prefer to simply assimilate the thoughts of others, it is noble in itself, but originality of thought is to be aimed at, i will therefore now, with a kind of sigh of relief, take my leave, good riddance to you Ro ...[text shortened]... s and limit their search to unintelligent agencies, so be it! their house is abandoned to them!
I think I see a label there. Should we be offended?
--- Penguin.
02 Jul 09
Originally posted by Proper KnobHoy Mate!
Saw an article on the BBC website about the Creation Museum in Kenticky, US. Only to find out there is one i can visit here in the UK in Portsmouth. Unbelievable, i shall be popping there sometime soon for a good chuckle. On their website it states, topics covered include -
- A study of genetics shows that all humanity came from one man and one woma ...[text shortened]... their fossil counterparts.
If anyone wants a look. http://www.genesisexpo.co.uk/links.html