expelled

Originally posted by KellyJay
You are free with the word liar. At no point have I lied here, it is
sickening that you would suggest it too. I have no doubt after talking
to you, you would sink someone's lively hood because they don't
agree with you after on this matter. That isn't a lie, I believe it and
I'm saying it because I do believe it.
Kelly

If you're not lying then you're most definitely incomprehensibly wrong and have made no real apparent effort to understand what my point is. I'm not free with the word liar, in fact I don't use it lightly - whether you believe it or not.

I would not sink someone's livelyhood because they don't agree with me on this matter. That is just plain wrong and if you believe it then your beliefs are wrong.

If you want to try to talk to me and find out what my view truly is then let me know and I will try to explain. I don't explain myself as well as I would like sometimes and so I might be partially at fault for that, but you have a number of times jumped to illogical and wrong conclusions based off of what I have said - that's not a lie.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Not in this case, in this case it is loss of jobs and everything else.
Kelly

Where are the specific cases and evidence for this claim?

Originally posted by KellyJay
Not in this case, in this case it is loss of jobs and everything else.
Kelly

You wrote
"If you cannot use something and make a prediction no matter what it is, it isn't science? Is that how you have come to define science, or I
should say is that how science is defined now? The ability to predict
is a must?"

I wrote
"That's the way science works. Several theories has gone down the drain because it cannot be tested experiemtally to support the statements. Science is not about believing, it is about testing the theories."

You wrote
"Not in this case, in this case it is loss of jobs and everything else."

I write: Jobs has nothing to do with science in this casse. It's a matter of politics or manegement or whatever, it's not within the realm of science.

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
If you're not lying then you're most definitely incomprehensibly wrong and have made no real apparent effort to understand what my point is. I'm not free with the word liar, in fact I don't use it lightly - whether you believe it or not.

I would not sink someone's livelyhood because they don't agree with me on this matter. That is just plain wrong and ped to illogical and wrong conclusions based off of what I have said - that's not a lie.

Really, I may not be lying? You are a piece of work! You are very
free with calling me names, liar isn't one I use unless I know the
other person is doing just that! If I'm mistaken, that isnlt the same
thing as lying about it, and for you to accuse me of being a liar is
beyond me! How can you not grasp the meaning of that term and the
word use and grasp the topic we are discussing? You do use that word
very freely and I don't think you grasp how demeaning it is and care
little on how your words and the use of them affect other people. Small
wonder you would hinder someone else from a job, you simply have
a point of view and so what if others don't suit you, you can paint them
any way you want to justify your stance.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
Really, I may not be lying? You are a piece of work! You are very
free with calling me names, liar isn't one I use unless I know the
other person is doing just that! If I'm mistaken, that isnlt the same
thing as lying about it, and for you to accuse me of being a liar is
beyond me! How can you not grasp the meaning of that term and the
word use and gra ...[text shortened]... f others don't suit you, you can paint them
any way you want to justify your stance.
Kelly

You're quite the piece of work too. I admit that I might have made a mistake and all you can do is attack me. That's fine if that's what you want, but don't pretend to be taking the higher moral ground.

You are pretty quick to attack me without making any significant effort to understand what I'm actually trying to get across to you.

You also still maintain your mistaken view that I would hinder someone else from a job for no reason and apparently have no ability to conceive of the possibility that you are wrong - and you are.

You have failed throughout this conversation to understand what I'm actually trying to communicate to you and I frankly don't think you want to believe anything but what you want to believe.

Quite hypocritical of you to accuse me of painting people any way I want when it's quite apparent that's exactly what you have done to me.

I still have no problem talking civilly with you if you actually honestly want to know what my position REALY is.

Originally posted by KellyJay
Really, I may not be lying? You are a piece of work! You are very
free with calling me names, liar isn't one I use unless I know the
other person is doing just that! If I'm mistaken, that isnlt the same
thing as lying about it, and for you to accuse me of being a liar is
beyond me! How can you not grasp the meaning of that term and the
word use and gra ...[text shortened]... f others don't suit you, you can paint them
any way you want to justify your stance.
Kelly

You are very
free with calling me names,

Am I? In this case I said that you lied once - note I didn't use the term liar.

When have I called you name before? I am willing to bet you can't find a specific example. If you can, I will openly apologize. I'll even start a new thread to do it.

liar isn't one I use unless I know the
other person is doing just that!

Good for you. I didn't use that word and I'm sorry it hurt you - honestly.

You accuse me of not knowing how words can be hurtful, but do you understand how your wrongful accusations could be hurtful to me?

Originally posted by PsychoPawn
[b]You are very
free with calling me names,

Am I? In this case I said that you lied once - note I didn't use the term liar.

When have I called you name before? I am willing to bet you can't find a specific example. If you can, I will openly apologize. I'll even start a new thread to do it.

liar isn't one I use unless I know the
othe ...[text shortened]... an be hurtful, but do you understand how your wrongful accusations could be hurtful to me?

I tell you what, before this gets any worse for either of us, I am
sorry for my part. Lets try to start over.
Kelly

Originally posted by KellyJay
I tell you what, before this gets any worse for either of us, I am
sorry for my part. Lets try to start over.
Kelly

Deal! All is forgotten. 🙂

Were we talking about anything in this thread? 😉

Originally posted by KellyJay
You don't think those guys with degrees in those very subjects you are
saying ID people shouldn't be allowed to teach, don't have a clue? Is it
that they just need to get their heads right, get help, go see a doctor
to get their minds right or something? Could it be they do have a clue,
but just because they may not agree with you they don't obviously
...[text shortened]... her are just off the
mark and sinners that need to be dealt with one way or another?
Kelly

Read the post again KJ and answer the question without a side step and a fabrication of my words.

I start by saying leave ID out of the equation, I also mention that no one is saying they cannot teach full stop.

Lets try to put things a littler simpler for you:

ALL of the academic curriculum needs to be monitored to ensure the material is based upon our best knowledge. No great conspiracy theory KJ just a solid teaching method to give the next generation the best possible education.

I hope you can note that I did not mention ID in the above paragraph.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You equate suggesting ID is a possiblity, that is like saying to you
that someone could translocate themselves at hyper luminal velorcites
using pure thought? Wow, you got it in for those that agree it may
be required in life don't you?
Kelly

I equate between two examples of teaching an unsupported "hypothesis" (that coincidentally agrees with my favorite book, be it a scifi novel or the bible) as truth. Do it without proof - you're out. Prove it - and it's a Nobel Prize for you.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You go back and read the posts in this thread, simply acknowledging
ID to more than a few people here means they cannot teach various
subjects, period. That is what I mean by the thought police, they look
at a something someone acknowledges and punishes them for it, they
would restrict their ablitiy to earn an income in certain fields,
regardless of the degrees they could have in it.
Kelly

Would you hire a math teacher that opposes square roots?

Yes, but only if he can put his belief aside while teaching.

Originally posted by KellyJay
At what point has a "magic man" popped up in our conversation? As
was pointed out before, simply acknowledging ID does not mean any
thing outside of acknowledging ID, going beyond that is just like
saying evolution is true, because there is no God, Your bringing that
up suggests you are not going to acknowledge ID more so because
you are scared of whose ID it could have been, not because it is
possible life requires ID.
Kelly

What is ID but a "Magic Man did it" answer?


P.S

Kelly Jay, you haven't responded to me answering your question of
Originally posted by KellyJay
If you cannot use something and make a prediction no matter what it
is, it isn't science? Is that how you have come to define science, or I
should say is that how science is defined now? The ability to predict
is a must?
Kelly

My answer:
It's scientific method time!

1)First, you begin with a phenomenon or finding you want to explain.

2) Then, construct and hypothesis that explains them.

3) Testing of the hypothesis. Conduct an experiment that tests predications made by the hypothesis.
Do the results verify the predictions?

4a) If not, discard hypothesis or modify it and restart the process

4b) If true, re-challenge it again and again while attempting to construct a logically self-consistent framework from it - a theory

5) Put the theory to more tests, retaining, modifying or discarding it, depending on the results.

----

So, without making predictions, how can you test an hypothsis (3) ?



Thanks again.

Originally posted by KellyJay
You don't think those guys with degrees in those very subjects you are
saying ID people shouldn't be allowed to teach, don't have a clue? Is it
that they just need to get their heads right, get help, go see a doctor
to get their minds right or something? Could it be they do have a clue,
but just because they may not agree with you they don't obviously
...[text shortened]... her are just off the
mark and sinners that need to be dealt with one way or another?
Kelly

As a side point, I don't believe obtaining a degree in anything is a reliable measure of whether someone should be believed or not.

Obtaining a degree is easy, I'm sure even you have one KJ?

Originally posted by KellyJay
Obviously, not biology and things like that. Why would anyone in those
fields not fear for their jobs with your mind set out there?
Kelly

Incompetents SHOULD fear for their jobs. Are you a commie or something?

Originally posted by KellyJay
If you cannot use something and make a prediction no matter what it
is, it isn't science? Is that how you have come to define science, or I
should say is that how science is defined now? The ability to predict
is a must?
Kelly

Uh...yes. You know...hypotheses, experiments? That's science.