Discussion Topic |
|
This thread has been locked |
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 - 08:37pm PT
|
It's been fun, gotta go! :)
...
but in closing down, just caught this gem...
"Craig and HFCS, Hmm, let me clear this up since you guys seem dense." - Mark Force
No ad hominem there!!!! lol
But Craig deleted his post. So perhaps he saw the light? lol
Evolution is the real deal. -Mark Force
And so is our mechanistic nature, both cosmically and biologically. It's just a matter of (socially and individually) getting around to accepting it, adopting it (through enough education, precisely as with evo as an analog).
|
|
WBraun
climber
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 - 08:40pm PT
|
You are still insane as ever .....
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 - 08:47pm PT
|
Do you actually "do" science or do you just proselytize?
HFCS, It's an ad hominem when I'm making spurious allegations about your character or qualifications to undermine your argument.
When I call you a dick that's just stating an opinion.
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 - 08:51pm PT
|
If you were passionate about mechanistics as I am (it's what led me, sustained me, through biology and engineering) you WB and MF would likely have the very same perspective else attitude. Food for thought.
So-called "mechanisms of action" are the common denominator across all studies or sciences of systems of all kinds. So when I see posts here at this site denying "mechanism" (the philosophical analog) it rather gets my attention. Surely climber people can understand this?
I'll end on this: There's been no name-calling or ad hominems on my part in this discussion. Despite WB and MF. FWIW.
For the record...
When I say you're a dick, it's just stating an opinion. -Mark Force
Do you actually "do" science or do you just proselytize? Ah, your favorite word of late, it seems. Yes, if you tell me there's a component part in your genetic mechanisms of action that is "free" of causation ("floating free" ala Dilbert) then yes I'll probably object (else your "proselytize" I guess). So be it. But your use of "proselytize" is pretty loose if not strange, but whatever, go for it.
No, I do not do science any more. I did it for 20 years. In engineering and brain sciences environments. That was enough. Now I'm on to different things. But I still follow along. (Maintaining a science edu and moreover living up to it are part of my core creed.)
Don't make it personal. Make it about the idea or ideas. Where I post bullsh#t, shoot it down. Otherwise you got nothing.
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 - 08:57pm PT
|
Bit the question remains... Where the rubber meets the road, what's really the difference between an evolution denier and a mechanistics denier?
Fruitcake with all that edumacation if you had a prescribe-able syrup you should have us all frothing at the bits and standing in line! but you aint got shite. Ur forever muddying the waters, so obliviously clarification has nothing to do wit ur motive.
i'll up ya one if, you can even wholeheartedly describe the difference evolution and "mechanistics'
|
|
High Fructose Corn Spirit
Gym climber
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 - 08:58pm PT
|
Too good not to quote...
Fruitcake with all that edumacation if you had a prescribe-able syrup you should have us all frothing at the bits and standing in line! but you aint got shite. Ur forever muddying the waters, so obliviously clarification has nothing to do wit ur motive... i'll up ya one if, you can even wholeheartedly describe the difference evolution and "mechanistics' -blu
Oh, god, now I really have to go.
You guys enjoy each other, it seems you're all on the same page.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 - 09:25pm PT
|
Passion and attachment makes for bad science. Excitement, wonder and non-attachment seem to be more effective.
Assuming a scientific model does more than it's designed to do is bad science.
Assuming you know rather than assuming you probably don't know is bad science.
Being a bully on a thread or forum is bad manners.
Using arguments that are intentionally full of logical fallacies is intellectually dishonest and sacrifices rigor, discipline, humility and kindness for the shallow gratification of "bullying" participants and an argument to your desired outcome.
I know a few things and don't know a bunch of things. I also know that I don't know the TRUTH and I know that you don't either and so I humbly proclaim that I am a radical agnostic.
I also have this really weird belief that our inherent nature is kindness in its' various iterations. The presence of it may have species survival value and may have no deeper meaning, but my right brain keeps whispering that there's more to it. Based on that, I look at the absence of kindness as a perversion of our nature. So, when I call someone out, which may be me, often as not, it's for the perversion of our nature and not the gem at the heart of the lotus.
Now that shit's gettin' weird. Is there any beer left around here?
|
|
BLUEBLOCR
Social climber
joshua tree
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 - 10:06pm PT
|
can you ever answer a question, Fruitless-loop?
edit; Happy Everyday MikeL! Pssst, are you a father?
vvvv
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Jun 16, 2017 - 11:05pm PT
|
Been traveling for Father’s Day’s events. Happy Father’s Day!.
HFCS,
You refer to “relevant issues and questions,” as if that is what separates the men from the boys in serious thinking. What qualifies as “relevant?” That alone could establish a pasture for an interesting dialogue.
I think you think you are asking taunting questions. Sometimes that can be useful. Being controversial can create interest in people, but too much of a good can be a little too much.
It could be more engaging with readers if you were to come forward with a full-fledged narrative that establishes a position and why you think it should stand. That would put a stake in the ground for the rest of us. (You’d could do well at Hyde Park where people stand soap boxes and proclaim their positions, but you’d have to make fuller arguments than you do here.)
BTW, what is a “free speech fundamentalist?” I think we all get the idea of free speech here in North America, but what extra meaning does “fundamentalist” bring to your mind?
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 05:33am PT
|
BB,
Happy everyday to you, too! The Mad Hatter would say that we all have 364 days of Happy unbirthdays.
I am embarrassed to say that I am not a legitimate father. Mis-spent youth has left seeds about.
I am an only boy in a family of 10, and raised most of my sisters. I thought I had my fill. I've also been teaching since 1979, and my students have been my offspring so to say.
|
|
MikeL
Social climber
Southern Arizona
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 08:22am PT
|
HFCS: Not an evolution denier (of course not) but a mechanistics denier.
It’s never simply “this” or “that.” At least I’ve never seen it that way. It always appears to be not what we can say finally, completely, or accurately. Reality appears to be infinitely complex, not just complicated. The web of correlations or connections in the matrix appear to be infinitely dense. One finds it difficult to talk ONLY about this thing or that thing in isolation.
You seem to want to argue that the question of free will cannot be divorced from physics, biology, chemistry, neurobiology, etc. That might well be the case, but it’s far from proven even if one gives leeway to inconclusive statistical measurements. The claim amounts to a speculation. There appears to be nothing intrinsically wrong with generating speculations, it’s great fun, but we can’t say for sure what things are. This is not a post-modern view. It is a scientific view that can be taken from the journals. We are always coming up with new interpretations of the same data we generated, and when we do, our worldviews change (Kuhn’s point in his book, “The Structure of Scientific Revolutions”). The fun of these activities seem to be how inventive we can be in our speculations—never straying too far from the data, but never quite relying strictly on the data. The fun leaves, however, when our speculations become dogma—that is, received and unquestioned truth. Then things become serious and concrete.
|
|
donini
Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 08:32am PT
|
Religion has been good to me. Leaving tomorrow for a three week pilgrimage. I'll be worshipping at the "Church of Outdoor Pursuits." Chapels to be visited include the City of Rocks, Mt, Borah, the Grand Ronde River and the Rogue River.
|
|
Craig Fry
Trad climber
So Cal.
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 08:47am PT
|
Werner is a master mechanic
|
|
norwegian II
Trad climber
camino, ca
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 08:51am PT
|
every time my soul loosens
i borrow werner's monkey wrench; left-hand of course;
and spin reality counter-thought-wise.
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 09:00am PT
|
A good friend of mine, a blended incarnation of Thoreau and Muir, says he belongs to The Church of the Here and Now and he practices what he preaches.
|
|
Norton
Social climber
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 09:11am PT
|
and Flip Wilson said he belonged to the Church of Whats Happening Now...
|
|
Mark Force
Trad climber
Ashland, Oregon
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 10:04am PT
|
I hear Werner's a great mechanic. His universal viewpoint gives him understanding of the mechanics of the universe and he always has an extra hand when he needs one.
|
|
Gnome Ofthe Diabase
climber
Out Of Bed
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 11:22am PT
|
Cogar or kcogar - spent in the nor weed a'gain- II -2-
The deity I owe . . .dwells wherever rocks are
And in my Brest
the KoGaR . . . . . .lets me climb to climb again (o-to0)
With the return of your faithful son, the bottle blond
My blood upon the trax
I'll say that spelt any way : -gnashkor- or -nascar- ?
going fast and turnin' left, never holds a wit of in'trest
till all things go west, -air-born- wheels a-sky ward
anymore than
that
and his allusion to it
a fitting return
At best. . .
It Has Been Nice , ; I, H,B, N
|
|
Bob D'A
Trad climber
Taos, NM
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 07:28pm PT
|
|
|
madbolter1
Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
|
|
|
Jun 17, 2017 - 08:34pm PT
|
Well, the word "unnatural" isn't really helpful in this context.
Whatever it's moral status, homosexuality is anomalous because it is not evolutionarily advantageous in mammals. That itself doesn't make it "wrong" or even "bad." But it could be argued to be "unnatural" by one obvious interpretation of that term.
Of course, the left wants us to believe that (by Gary Gates estimates, which is probably the best research we have) about 3.5% of the population should be represented as "everywhere you look" and very disproportionately represented in all forms of media.
You know, whatever. But "unnatural," well, probably yes from an evolutionary point of view, certainly an evolutionary dead-end. Again, it all comes down to what you mean by that term.
|
|
|
SuperTopo on the Web
|
Let us know!