NATION

PASSWORD

MAGAThread XVII: All Things NOT Impeachment

For discussion and debate about anything. (Not a roleplay related forum; out-of-character commentary only.)

Advertisement

Remove ads

Which would be your favored candidate for the 2020 Republican Party presidential nomination?

Donald Trump
47
27%
Rocky De La Fuente
5
3%
Joe Walsh
4
2%
Bill Weld
23
13%
Bob Ely
0
No votes
Zoltan Istvan
6
3%
None of the above/other
30
17%
David Hasselhoff
58
34%
 
Total votes : 173

User avatar
Vassenor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 49056
Founded: Nov 11, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Vassenor » Fri Nov 15, 2019 1:47 am

Telconi wrote:
Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:Which would be a valid point if scientists were criticised for their methods, which can be found in each paper. However, this is not the case. Scientists are mainly criticised for being scientists, usually with no actual material argument being made about a specific study.

“You are a scientist, and therefore I will mistrust your work, but I won’t actually go i to the study to see what was wrong. I just assume it is”


So it's a valid point, thank you.


So where were you criticising the methods?
Jenny / Sailor Astraea
WOMAN

MtF trans and proud - She / Her / etc.
100% Asbestos Free

Hufflepuff/Team Mystic
#iamEUropean

User avatar
Vassenor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 49056
Founded: Nov 11, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Vassenor » Fri Nov 15, 2019 1:48 am

Last edited by Vassenor on Fri Nov 15, 2019 1:53 am, edited 2 times in total.
Jenny / Sailor Astraea
WOMAN

MtF trans and proud - She / Her / etc.
100% Asbestos Free

Hufflepuff/Team Mystic
#iamEUropean

User avatar
The Alma Mater
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17388
Founded: May 23, 2004
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Alma Mater » Fri Nov 15, 2019 1:50 am

Telconi wrote:


Which is an interesting point. Science, in it's essence, deals with facts, and therefore is trustworthy. Scientists, on the other hand, are people, subject to all of the failings thereof.


Hence why the scientific method treats scientists as untrustworthy, and demands peer review and reproducibility.
It is not a new point ;)
Getting an education was a bit like a communicable sexual disease.
It made you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and then you had the urge to pass it on.
- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

User avatar
Telconi
Post Czar
 
Posts: 30743
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:08 am

The Alma Mater wrote:
Telconi wrote:
Which is an interesting point. Science, in it's essence, deals with facts, and therefore is trustworthy. Scientists, on the other hand, are people, subject to all of the failings thereof.


Hence why the scientific method treats scientists as untrustworthy, and demands peer review and reproducibility.
It is not a new point ;)


We're not talking about the scientific method, we're talking about people.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Vassenor
Post Czar
 
Posts: 49056
Founded: Nov 11, 2010
Left-wing Utopia

Postby Vassenor » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:19 am

Telconi wrote:
The Alma Mater wrote:
Hence why the scientific method treats scientists as untrustworthy, and demands peer review and reproducibility.
It is not a new point ;)


We're not talking about the scientific method, we're talking about people.


But the "valid point" was criticising for the methodologies.
Jenny / Sailor Astraea
WOMAN

MtF trans and proud - She / Her / etc.
100% Asbestos Free

Hufflepuff/Team Mystic
#iamEUropean

User avatar
Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States
P2TM RP Mentor
 
Posts: 18107
Founded: Feb 20, 2012
Democratic Socialists

Postby Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:19 am

Telconi wrote:
Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:Which would be a valid point if scientists were criticised for their methods, which can be found in each paper. However, this is not the case. Scientists are mainly criticised for being scientists, usually with no actual material argument being made about a specific study.

“You are a scientist, and therefore I will mistrust your work, but I won’t actually go i to the study to see what was wrong. I just assume it is”


So it's a valid point, thank you.

I have never seen you criticising the methodology of an academic paper before.
The name's James. James Usari. Well, my name is not actually James Usari, so don't bother actually looking it up, but it'll do for now.

Lack of a real name means compensation through a real face. My debt is settled


Part-time Kebab tycoon in Glasgow.

User avatar
The Alma Mater
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17388
Founded: May 23, 2004
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Alma Mater » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:20 am

Telconi wrote:
The Alma Mater wrote:
Hence why the scientific method treats scientists as untrustworthy, and demands peer review and reproducibility.
It is not a new point ;)


We're not talking about the scientific method, we're talking about people.


And so does science. Science is founded entirely on the idea that people are flawed and prefer to confirm their own bias over finding truth.
Getting an education was a bit like a communicable sexual disease.
It made you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and then you had the urge to pass it on.
- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

User avatar
An Alan Smithee Nation
Senator
 
Posts: 4268
Founded: Apr 18, 2018
New York Times Democracy

Postby An Alan Smithee Nation » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:24 am

Telconi wrote:
The Alma Mater wrote:
Hence why the scientific method treats scientists as untrustworthy, and demands peer review and reproducibility.
It is not a new point ;)


We're not talking about the scientific method, we're talking about people.


In the context of Democrats believing scientists and Republicans believing what Trump says.

Unless you are going to say Trump isn't a person I'm not sure what your point is.
The Holy Trinity: Fatty Arbuckle, Oliver Hardy, Boris Johnson

User avatar
Telconi
Post Czar
 
Posts: 30743
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:26 am

Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:
Telconi wrote:
So it's a valid point, thank you.

I have never seen you criticising the methodology of an academic paper before.


It's an anonymous posting medium, you haven't the slightest clue rather you have or haven't.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Telconi
Post Czar
 
Posts: 30743
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:27 am

An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:
Telconi wrote:
We're not talking about the scientific method, we're talking about people.


In the context of Democrats believing scientists and Republicans believing what Trump says.

Unless you are going to say Trump isn't a person I'm not sure what your point is.


My point is that believing scientists is bad. And people ought not do this thing.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
The Alma Mater
Post Marshal
 
Posts: 17388
Founded: May 23, 2004
Liberal Democratic Socialists

Postby The Alma Mater » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:28 am

Telconi wrote:
An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:
In the context of Democrats believing scientists and Republicans believing what Trump says.

Unless you are going to say Trump isn't a person I'm not sure what your point is.


My point is that believing scientists is bad. And people ought not do this thing.


Yep. Believe science, not scientists.
Something everybody learns at school at age 10 or so.
Getting an education was a bit like a communicable sexual disease.
It made you unsuitable for a lot of jobs and then you had the urge to pass it on.
- Terry Pratchett, Hogfather

User avatar
Telconi
Post Czar
 
Posts: 30743
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:29 am

The Alma Mater wrote:
Telconi wrote:
My point is that believing scientists is bad. And people ought not do this thing.


Yep. Believe science, not scientists.
Something everybody learns at school at age 10 or so.


Evidently not everyone.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Gormwood
Powerbroker
 
Posts: 9815
Founded: Mar 25, 2019
New York Times Democracy

Postby Gormwood » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:32 am

The Alma Mater wrote:
Telconi wrote:
My point is that believing scientists is bad. And people ought not do this thing.


Yep. Believe science, not scientists.
Something everybody learns at school at age 10 or so.

So he wants to ignore the message (science) by bitching about the messengers (scientists). What a shock.
Bloodthirsty savages who call for violence against the Right while simultaneously being unarmed defenseless sissies who will get slaughtered by the gun-toting Right in a civil war.
Breath So Bad, It Actually Drives People Mad

User avatar
Telconi
Post Czar
 
Posts: 30743
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:33 am

Gormwood wrote:
The Alma Mater wrote:
Yep. Believe science, not scientists.
Something everybody learns at school at age 10 or so.

So he wants to ignore the message (science) by bitching about the messengers (scientists). What a shock.


More shocking than you lying on NSG again. :roll:
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States
P2TM RP Mentor
 
Posts: 18107
Founded: Feb 20, 2012
Democratic Socialists

Postby Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:44 am

Telconi wrote:
An Alan Smithee Nation wrote:
In the context of Democrats believing scientists and Republicans believing what Trump says.

Unless you are going to say Trump isn't a person I'm not sure what your point is.


My point is that believing scientists is bad. And people ought not do this thing.

Do you believe that, if a morally dubious scientist and a morally upright scientist do the same experiment and come to the same conclusion using the same method, that one of them is right and one of them is wrong?

If Hitler and Ghandi both put 2 and 2 together, and they both get 4, does that mean one of them is wrong?
The name's James. James Usari. Well, my name is not actually James Usari, so don't bother actually looking it up, but it'll do for now.

Lack of a real name means compensation through a real face. My debt is settled


Part-time Kebab tycoon in Glasgow.

User avatar
Telconi
Post Czar
 
Posts: 30743
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Fri Nov 15, 2019 2:58 am

Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:
Telconi wrote:
My point is that believing scientists is bad. And people ought not do this thing.

Do you believe that, if a morally dubious scientist and a morally upright scientist do the same experiment and come to the same conclusion using the same method, that one of them is right and one of them is wrong?

If Hitler and Ghandi both put 2 and 2 together, and they both get 4, does that mean one of them is wrong?


Of course not, 2+2 does equal 4. This is factually verifiable.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States
P2TM RP Mentor
 
Posts: 18107
Founded: Feb 20, 2012
Democratic Socialists

Postby Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States » Fri Nov 15, 2019 3:38 am

Telconi wrote:
Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:Do you believe that, if a morally dubious scientist and a morally upright scientist do the same experiment and come to the same conclusion using the same method, that one of them is right and one of them is wrong?

If Hitler and Ghandi both put 2 and 2 together, and they both get 4, does that mean one of them is wrong?


Of course not, 2+2 does equal 4. This is factually verifiable.

As opposed to scientific papers, which are not factually verifiable?
The name's James. James Usari. Well, my name is not actually James Usari, so don't bother actually looking it up, but it'll do for now.

Lack of a real name means compensation through a real face. My debt is settled


Part-time Kebab tycoon in Glasgow.

User avatar
Telconi
Post Czar
 
Posts: 30743
Founded: Oct 08, 2016
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Telconi » Fri Nov 15, 2019 3:48 am

Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:
Telconi wrote:
Of course not, 2+2 does equal 4. This is factually verifiable.

As opposed to scientific papers, which are not factually verifiable?


Scientists don't say things other than scientific papers?

And as for the such papers being verifiable, I believe an article was posted on the subject recently.
-2.25 LEFT
-3.23 LIBERTARIAN

PRO:
-Weapons Rights
-Gender Equality
-LGBTQ Rights
-Racial Equality
-Religious Freedom
-Freedom of Speech
-Freedom of Association
-Life
-Limited Government
-Non Interventionism
-Labor Unions
-Environmental Protections
ANTI:
-Racism
-Sexism
-Bigotry In All Forms
-Government Overreach
-Government Surveillance
-Freedom For Security Social Transactions
-Unnecessary Taxes
-Excessively Specific Government Programs
-Foreign Entanglements
-Religious Extremism
-Fascists Masquerading as "Social Justice Warriors"

"The Constitution is NOT an instrument for the government to restrain the people,it is an instrument for the people to restrain the government-- lest it come to dominate our lives and interests." ~ Patrick Henry

User avatar
Valrifell
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22988
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Fri Nov 15, 2019 5:06 am

Telconi wrote:
Great Confederacy of Commonwealth States wrote:As opposed to scientific papers, which are not factually verifiable?


Scientists don't say things other than scientific papers?

And as for the such papers being verifiable, I believe an article was posted on the subject recently.


So you don't know what verifiable means.

Hint: it's not a synonym for "correct".
I like to imagine Sisyphus happy
I did some things

User avatar
Galloism
Khan of Spam
 
Posts: 62777
Founded: Aug 20, 2005
Father Knows Best State

Postby Galloism » Fri Nov 15, 2019 6:37 am

The Alma Mater wrote:
Telconi wrote:
Which is an interesting point. Science, in it's essence, deals with facts, and therefore is trustworthy. Scientists, on the other hand, are people, subject to all of the failings thereof.


Hence why the scientific method treats scientists as untrustworthy, and demands peer review and reproducibility.
It is not a new point ;)

And, notably, we're having severe problems on this front. Many many studies that pass peer review can't be reproduced, but are sold as fact anyway.
Venicilian: wow. Jesus hung around with everyone. boys, girls, rich, poor(mostly), sick, healthy, etc. in fact, i bet he even went up to gay people and tried to heal them so they would be straight.
The Parkus Empire: Being serious on NSG is like wearing a suit to a nude beach.
New Kereptica: Since power is changed energy over time, an increase in power would mean, in this case, an increase in energy. As energy is equivalent to mass and the density of the government is static, the volume of the government must increase.


User avatar
Valrifell
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22988
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Fri Nov 15, 2019 12:20 pm

Last edited by Valrifell on Fri Nov 15, 2019 12:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I like to imagine Sisyphus happy
I did some things

User avatar
Valrifell
Postmaster of the Fleet
 
Posts: 22988
Founded: Aug 18, 2013
Left-Leaning College State

Postby Valrifell » Fri Nov 15, 2019 12:22 pm

Galloism wrote:
The Alma Mater wrote:
Hence why the scientific method treats scientists as untrustworthy, and demands peer review and reproducibility.
It is not a new point ;)

And, notably, we're having severe problems on this front. Many many studies that pass peer review can't be reproduced, but are sold as fact anyway.


This is a problem with the culture of science publications, not a problem with how scientists do their business.

The correct data is there and is often revealed during meta-studies.
I like to imagine Sisyphus happy
I did some things

User avatar
Zurkerx
Forum Moderator
 
Posts: 5935
Founded: Jan 20, 2011
Anarchy

Postby Zurkerx » Fri Nov 15, 2019 12:33 pm



Ah so justice has been served. This pretty much concludes I think one of the main people in the Mueller Case. Of course, Trump isn't happy but when is he ever happy? But the fact that Stone lied and obstructed should tell us that there's likely more we'll learn about his interactions, as well as Trump's, pertaining to Wikileaks and potentially Russia.
A Golden Civic: the New Pragmatic Libertarian
My Words: Indeed, Indubitably & Malarkey
Retired Admin in NSGS and NS Parliament

Accountant, Author, History Buff, Political Junkie
I Do What I Want
Albert Einstein wrote:"Try not to become a person of success, but rather try to become a person of value."
Ronald Reagan wrote:"Trust, but verify."

User avatar
Tombradyonia
Chargé d'Affaires
 
Posts: 477
Founded: Jul 15, 2019
Civil Rights Lovefest

Postby Tombradyonia » Fri Nov 15, 2019 1:26 pm

Zurkerx wrote:


Ah so justice has been served. This pretty much concludes I think one of the main people in the Mueller Case. Of course, Trump isn't happy but when is he ever happy? But the fact that Stone lied and obstructed should tell us that there's likely more we'll learn about his interactions, as well as Trump's, pertaining to Wikileaks and potentially Russia.


According to Trump, two things that are not equal, are equal.

Roger Stone found guilty in court based on evidence
(in Trump world) is equal to
The right wing desperately wishing the smears it has endlessly launched at the Clintons for 25+ proves the Clintons guilt

They never ask themselves why no prosecutor has ever taken up any of the ludicrous claims they make about the Clintons and for which they always seem to be saying there's so much evidence.
All those prosecutors, even all the republican and conservative ones, none of them seems or has seemed willing to go after the Clintons based on that supposed mountain of evidence that the right wing echo chamber swears is out there.

Could it be because... most of the charges against the Clintons were total BS to begin with? It either never occurs to them or they just don't care.

ButwhataboutHillary...

Yeah... what about Hillary? Where's the evidence? How exactly is Benghazi the worst security failure of all time when Reagan let 250 marines die in Beirut? How exactly is Whitewater a scandal when two prosecutors (including Ken Starr) say it wasn't, and yet Iran-Contra was supposedly a minor thing if the right is to be believed? And how exactly is Reagan campaign communication with Iran's new government in 1979-1980 not treason (for which Iran-Contra might well have been the quid pro quo). How is Ollie North not in jail today?
Inverted Flag Law: US Code Title 4 Section 8 Paragraph (a): The flag should never be displayed with the union down, except as a signal of dire distress in instances of extreme danger to life or property.
The United States of America has been in a state of dire distress since November 8, 2016. Flying the flag upside down is not only our right, it is our duty!
Make Maine Massachusetts again!

User avatar
Evil Dictators Happyland
Senator
 
Posts: 3509
Founded: Aug 03, 2016
Corrupt Dictatorship

Postby Evil Dictators Happyland » Fri Nov 15, 2019 1:33 pm

Telconi wrote:My point is that believing scientists is bad. And people ought not do this thing.

I'm sigging this because it's just too perfect.
Killer Queen has already touched this signature.

Telconi wrote:My point is that believing scientists is bad. And people ought not do this thing.

PreviousNext

Advertisement

Remove ads

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Alvecia, Ard al Islam, ArenaC, Atlantarctica, Austria-Bohemia-Hungary, Bortslovakia, Fartsniffage, Fifth Imperial Remnant, Grinning Dragon, Hurdergaryp, Imperial Joseon, Jetan, Lost Memories, Nakena, North American Environmental Alliance, Ors Might, Post War America, Rainbowsix, Saiwania, Sao Nova Europa, Shrillland, Suburbistanistan, Tarsonis, The Chuck, The New California Republic, The of Korea, Unstoppable Empire of Doom, Valrifell

Advertisement

Remove ads