Re: That was science
Posted by Dale on Feb 09, 2002 at 10:32
Re: That was science (mara)did you get mine ?
I got your point. I just think your point was wrong (not just that I disagree) in this context. The topic was a specific joke. Danny said that it wasnít a real scientific study because ďWhat are the chances that people in a wide range of countries and cultures would even have a passing acquaintance wiht Arthur Conan Doyle?Ē. It is certainly obvious to me that the joke doesnít depend on knowing Arthur Conan Doyle. But, in case it wasnít obvious to everyone, I presented the same joke with no such reference. That seemed conclusive proof since AR obviously got it.
I have continued to point out what I think should be obviously wrong. As I said earlier today, this isnít rocket science. I donít need to present a long chain of evidence in this situation. If you disagree (or even think Iím wrong) then present your evidence. Why is a knowledge of Arthur Conan Doyle a prerequisite to understanding that joke?
I think there is a fine line between thinking someone is wrong and just disagreeing. If you just disagree it means you havenít taken the time to figure out what you think (or at least why you think it). As I said before, if I just disagree, I tend to not comment. Thatís why Danny thinks I think Iím always right Ė because if I say something it is because Iíve thought it out enough to know Iím right about what I am saying. Danny has a habit of flap his fingers on any topic he wants and making ludicrous statements such as the one about this joke. He often finds that he is wrong. So he thinks that he is acknowledging that he isnít always right. I know that I am often wrong also but Imake as sure as I am capable that I am right before I set words to keyboard. Seldom do I regret those words because seldom does anyone point out an error. When they do, you will notice I am the first to acknowledge my error. I even revel in my errors since, without them I would be far less humble than I am. ;)