Re: That was science
Posted by Dale on Jan 31, 2002 at 10:50
Re: That was science (Sparrow)It's been over two years that I've watched you poke at Daniel.
Is it poking or just pointing out errors? By my definition of poking it has only been a few months. If you mean pointing out errors, then I would agree that it started the day Danny arrived.He's been playing this game all his life and you just don't think like he does.
No two people think alike. I would agree with you that Danny lacks the intelligence to respond with logic or even rational thought and so has developed a technique of ad hominum attack combined with strawman arguments and fabrication. If these donít work he ultimately ignores the discussion entirely as if it never happened.Let me tell you from my observations, you're not getting to him.
I totally agree. I learned this 2 years ago. Danny has no intention of learning by his mistakes. He isnít faking a belief that he never makes a mistake. He truly believes it. No amount of proof can shake his faith.
No, my comments are not to change Danny. They are to change those who are capable of learning. I think I have had a small (much smaller than I would have liked but measurable none the less) effect on the discussions. When the forum started I thought the discussions were quite loose. More opinion than fact. (I am not denying that I have contributed extensively in that direction.) One of my goals here is provide a more factual foundation for the discussions. If you make a statement here you know that Iím around (as well as others) to come back and ask for your references. Danny provides me with the perfect foil with his continual ludicrous statements such as the one just above on the joke. My comments are no so much to change Danny but to make others think twice before spouting such nonsense. My goal is to get people to think before they type. That goal will never be reached with Danny but he hasnít been the target since the first week.You're getting to YOU.
Agreed and that is a GOOD thing. Thinking is always a good thing. Whether it is thinking about how to use quantum gravity in a practical device or thinking about why Dannyís comments on people not being able to understand a joke about a person ignoring the obvious if they donít know Arthur Conan Doyle, is asinine. Just as your comments got to me, so do Dannyís and so, I hope, do everyoneís.You empower him to control YOUR physiology with your reactions.
Yes, and so do we all. How we channel that motivation is what is important. If you read anger in any of my comments then I am not communicating very well. My comments are simply the result of my analysis of what Danny said and why it is wrong. If I can inject some humor into my comments, so much the better.We all answer for that later, y'know?
You better believe it! We will answer for both what we did and for what we didnít do.Let it go --
And let Danny go back to running all newbies off with his proclamations that he is the forum administrator and you have to agree with him to post here? Sorry.reread a bit of what I posted 'way below about belief and science (more on this later)...
I reread a bit. :) I donít have any disagreement. These factors alter the preferential release of specific hormones. An individual's personality thus becomes the determinant of the type, the strength, and the length of the reaction. Aggressive, competitive personalities have been reported to have more acute, larger vasomotor responses and produce more norepinephrine which enhances the body's response to epinephrine. Sustained epinephrine release is associated with anxiety and helplessness, and elevated cortisol (hydrocortisone) levels have been correlated with reduced, negative performance and fear in humans.
Do I have an aggressive/competitive personality. You bet your bippy! But do I have anxiety? Nope. Helplessness? Nope. Negative performance? Oh, ok, I could do better sometimes but a cup of coffee helps. Fear? FEAR?!!! I was working 2.5 miles from the WTC when it fell. I went outside to see what the commotion was, grabbed my camera, took some pictures, and went back to work. Worked there all week (sure was quiet on Wednesday when the mayor told everyone to stay home) and drove home on Friday and Saturday because the airports were still closed. Never once did I fear anything. I got a Big Guy who promised to take care of me. He has never let me down in 35 years and I donít believe He ever will.
Physical responses to stimuli are not as cut and dried as your posting would imply. Belief alters reality. If you believe that something can hurt you, then you will be distressed at the potential impact and the physical consequences apply. But if you donít believe there is anything to be distressed aboutÖ Danny doesnít distress me. He entertains and provides ample opportunity to teach others. My responses are simple mental activity to see the humor and create a response of which I can be proud."...both on the cellular and the interpersonal level, we do not always recognize what is and what is not worth fighting."6(p.41)"
Dale, "get" that last part and take it to heart. I'm sincere in my concern.
I appreciate your concern. Is education worth fighting for? Is truth worth fighting for? If not then we are all wasting our time. Personally I believe they are.
- Re: That was science Shasta 14/2 18:03 (0)
- If my comments "got" to you.... Sparrow 01/2 07:41 (1)
- Re: If my comments "got" to you.... Dale 01/2 08:50 (0)
- Re: That was science mara 31/1 12:59 (21)
- Re: That was science Shasta 14/2 18:05 (0)
- Re: That was science Dale 01/2 09:18 (11)
- Re: That was science Shasta 14/2 18:58 (0)
- Re: That was science mara 08/2 11:28 (9)
- Re: That was science Dale 09/2 10:32 (8)
- Re: That was science mara 12/2 12:45 (2)
- Re: That was science Amaranth Rose 10/2 03:21 (4)
- Re: That was[n't] science bobbapink 31/1 13:22 (7)
- Re: That was[n't] science Shasta 14/2 19:14 (0)
- Re: That was[n't] science mara 08/2 11:39 (5)
Post a Followup