A Calorie is a Calorie?

Originally posted by sonhouse
Just wonder why you need to discuss anything here since you already know everyone else here is some kind of moron or ignorant or some such.

If you want to have a relevant discussion, you need to drop the ego act and grow up.

Oh, I know, I am a moron for saying that. You don't even have to go there.

Everyone here isn't a moron. I don't think you are a moron, just an anti-Christian hater type.

If you want to see the actual topic of the thread, read the first post.

Originally posted by Eladar
Everyone here isn't a moron. I don't think you are a moron, just an anti-Christian hater type.

If you want to see the actual topic of the thread, read the first post.

just an anti-Christian hater type.

If that is true, and I am not implying it is, it would be because, like me, he doesn’t like anti-science hater types.

Originally posted by humy

just an anti-Christian hater type.

If that is true, and I am not implying it is, it would be because, like me, he doesn’t like anti-science hater types.

I don't hate science, I just have a problem when people try make science their religion.

Originally posted by Eladar
I don't hate science, I just have a problem when people try make science their religion.

You MUST hate science else you wouldn't, in effect, call it a religion. Your motive to call it a religion even though it isn't couldn't be more obvious; it is because, deep down, you know religion is irrational but science is rational so, to level the playing field, you pretend to us ( and to yourself? ) that science is just another religion so to make it on a par to real religion i.e as intellectually weak and irrational as religion -you wouldn't do that if you were not against what science implies which is that your religious faith is wrong. But real religion is not on a par with real science because real science is evidence and/or logic based while real religion, isn't.

Originally posted by humy
You MUST hate science else you wouldn't, in effect, call it a religion. You call it a religion even though it isn't because, deep down, you know religion is irrational but science is rational so, to level the playing field, you pretend to us ( and to yourself? ) that science is just another religion so to make it on a par to real religion -you wouldn't do that ...[text shortened]... ith real science because real science is evidence and/or logic based while real religion, isn't.

I hate your view of science.

Do you believe you have the right to define science?

Science has its limits. Once you ignore that fact and start preaching, you have gone beyond simply science and delved into religion.

Originally posted by Eladar
I hate your view of science.

Do you believe you have the right to define science?

Science has its limits. Once you ignore that fact and start preaching, you have gone beyond simply science and delved into religion.

I hate your view of science.

My 'view' on what science is based on formal definitions of what science is. This 'view' is not just my view but that of anyone that has bothered to think and learn and accept what science is and that includes the vast majority of scientists.
If you hate that overwhelmingly most common accepted meaning of the word 'science', tough!

Do you believe you have the right to define science?

What has moral right got to to do with correctly defining what something is? Yes, I have the 'right', just like I have a 'right' to define any other word of the English dictionary -why not?

Science has its limits.

Who said it didn't?

Once you ignore that fact and start preaching,

nether I nor anyone in these forums pretends that science doesn't have “its limits”. For example, science would almost certainly never tell us for sure EXACTLY how many millions of years ago life began to the extreme accuracy to the nearest year! Nobody pretends the contrary thus nobody claims science has no such limits. Science will never break the laws of physics -isn't that also a stated 'limit' to science?
As usual, I note that when you sense that you are loosing the argument, you resort to straw man as you do here above.

Originally posted by humy

I hate your view of science.

My 'view' on what science is based on formal definitions of what science is. This 'view' is not just my view but that of anyone that has bothered to think and learn and accept what science is and that includes the vast majority of scientists.
If you hate that overwhelmingly most common accepted meaning of th ...[text shortened]... when you sense that you are loosing the argument, you resort to straw man as you do here above.

Hey humy, how about keeping your comments to the topic of the thread. Obviously you don't want to talk about the actual topic of the thread and now you just want to preach to me about your religious convictions. This is not a very helpful tactic.

Originally posted by Eladar
I don't think you are a moron, just an anti-Christian hater type.

Why do you think Sonhouse hates anti-Christians?

Originally posted by Eladar
Hey humy, how about keeping your comments to the topic of the thread. Obviously you don't want to talk about the actual topic of the thread and now you just want to preach to me about your religious convictions. This is not a very helpful tactic.

Hey humy, how about keeping your comments to the topic of the thread.

If that's your complaint, why don't you then? Reminder of two of your posts:

Originally posted by Eladar
I don't hate science, I just have a problem when people try make science their religion.

I hate your view of science.

Do you believe you have the right to define science?

Science has its limits. Once you ignore that fact and start preaching, you have gone beyond simply science and delved into religion.

-and that last post above is what I responded to -what? -I am not allowed to respond to the topic of your posts even when it is about me? WHY not?

And what has those two posts of yours got to do with the topic of the thread; “A Calorie is a Calorie?” ?

and now you just want to preach to me about your religious convictions.

Nope, and I didn't. I was speaking about science there which is not a religion and I have no religion to preach.

Originally posted by wolfgang59
Why do you think Sonhouse hates anti-Christians?

Because he is always putting Christians down. Look up his posts about Christians if you like. If you can't be bothered, then I can't be bothered.

Originally posted by Eladar
Because he is always putting Christians down. Look up his posts about Christians if you like. If you can't be bothered, then I can't be bothered.

Because he is always putting Christians down.

No, No, that is not what wolfgang59 meant because wolfgang59 said
“Why do you think Sonhouse hates anti-Christians? “
NOT
“Why do you think Sonhouse hates Christians? “.

He said that because you first said “I don't think you are a moron, just an anti-Christian hater type. “ which is a statement ending with the words “ anti-Christian hater type” which, according to the rules of grammar and semantics, could be validly interpreted as meaning the same as “hater of anti-Christian type” ( even through obviously that was not what you meant ) which imply you could be saying that Sonhouse hates not Christens but anti-Christians! - wolfgang59 was making fun of language but you didn't get the joke.

Originally posted by humy

Because he is always putting Christians down.

No, No, that is not what wolfgang59 meant because wolfgang59 said
“Why do you think Sonhouse hates [b]anti-Christians? “
NOT
“Why do you think Sonhouse hates Christians? “.

He said that because you first said “I don't think you are a moron, just an anti-Christian hater type. “ whi ...[text shortened]... istens but anti-Christians! - wolfgang59 was making fun of language but you didn't get the joke.[/b]

Sorry. He hates Christians or is anti-Christian.

Anything else you feel self righteous about?

Originally posted by Eladar
Sorry. He hates Christians or is anti-Christian.

Anything else you feel self righteous about?

It's interesting how you equate "putting X down" with "hating X."

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
It's interesting how you equate "putting X down" with "hating X."

He puts them down because he hates them. He grew up under their influence and now he hates them.