Jump to content

Petty Things That Get On Your Nerves...


Recommended Posts

I want to seriously hurt people who call this binary day. Two points:

1) If today is "binary day", then so was 1/1/10, 10/1/10, 11/1/10, 1/10/10, and so is 11/10/10, 1/11/10, 10/11/10, 1/1/11, 10/1/11, 11/1/11, 1/10/11, 10/10/11, 11/10/11, 1/11/11, 10/11/11 and 11/11/11.

2) The year is 2010 anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to seriously hurt people who call this binary day. Two points:

1) If today is "binary day", then so was 1/1/10, 10/1/10, 11/1/10, 1/10/10, and so is 11/10/10, 1/11/10, 10/11/10, 1/1/11, 10/1/11, 11/1/11, 1/10/11, 10/10/11, 11/10/11, 1/11/11, 10/11/11 and 11/11/11.

2) The year is 2010 anyway.

You're cool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I want to seriously hurt people who call this binary day. Two points:

1) If today is "binary day", then so was 1/1/10, 10/1/10, 11/1/10, 1/10/10, and so is 11/10/10, 1/11/10, 10/11/10, 1/1/11, 10/1/11, 11/1/11, 1/10/11, 10/10/11, 11/10/11, 1/11/11, 10/11/11 and 11/11/11.

2) The year is 2010 anyway.

There are 10 types of people who unders.... nah, I can't do it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A non-scientist by choice rather than through lack of ability or credentials ;)

That's clearly nonsense, because anyone who has the ability to be a scientist is one.

You would not choose a different career path.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's clearly nonsense, because anyone who has the ability to be a scientist is one.

You would not choose a different career path.

Science is based on empiricism, and the evidence suggests contrary to your hypothesis... perhaps it is you who does not apply consistently the derived scientific methods?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Science is based on empiricism, and the evidence suggests contrary to your hypothesis... perhaps it is you who does not apply consistently the derived scientific methods?

On the contrary, the evidence is very much in my favour as proven by lawyers requiring expert witnesses.

Clearly, if they were capable of scientific thought, they would construct their own arguments and not rely on somebody else's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the contrary, the evidence is very much in my favour as proven by lawyers requiring expert witnesses.

Clearly, if they were capable of scientific thought, they would construct their own arguments and not rely on somebody else's.

You make three classic errors not very becoming of a so-called scientist:

Anecdotes don't serve as rules

Ability and capacity are not the same

An isolated means cannot necessarily be inferred from the result alone

You also make a factual error, as in a court of law expert witnesses don't "construct" arguments at all. They present evidence, from which lawyers infer facts and construct arguments with respect to the law.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...