Steamboy has no freaking clue what the word 'theory' means in a scientific context.
http://www.staredit.net/?topic=686

How about you quit with the Psudo-intellect? It makes you look like a 'huge fucking tool'.

No need for personal attacks.

True, I give this to you, but it also might not.

Some make things to meet our needs or wants, they are called inventors, and manufacturers. Science is the whole picture, and people called scientist contribute to our understanding of it.

Is that really a reason...

Of course our science is flawed, nothing is perfect. And I am flawed, so is everyone else.

The word theory means a statement that is believed to be true. In SCIENCE it is something that is proved over and over and thought to be true.

First, I will start off with your blasphemistic statements of your theory of 'flaw'. Although you cannot prove it since it is way too abstract and has no support whatsoever.

Enough reason to close down a topic? Yes. Enough reason to win a debate? Yes. Enough reason to give a student F- on a essay? Yes.

Sigh. How old are you? Don't you know we classify scientists too? Science is not the entire picture. How can science, a literature that never existed until the end of christian rule. We don't know what the whole picture is. I could explain about how we have lived over the years and say History is the whole picture. We have to designate what the 'WHOLE PICTURE' is.
And you don't need to explain what these people are because I know far better than you on what they do. General picture is not needed.

It's a theory for god damn sakes. They teach it in class because its a worthwhile material. Theory is not a law. It is still bound to change, as even laws have. General belief is not meant to be the truth anyways. Its like the people who believed that Earth was the center of the universe and everything else revolved around Earth.

Don't reply if you give it to me. It hurts my eyes to see your useless supportless comments.

I was proving how your brain really is flawed constructively with reason.

A person can't prove anything.

Well I tried to convince people numbers were everything, but I got the response, "How old are you, you're stupid, science is everything."

No such things as laws, everything called a "law" is a theory. For example, gravity is a theory.

Pseudo? I don't know if you noticed, but I'm the only person here who has any fucking clue what they're talking about.

Just because you don't understand something, doesn't mean you have to ridicule others who do.

Theory == Law.

I understand this subject perfectly, to how I wish to understand it. Just because I'm not in depth as you are, doesn't mean I'm wrong. You were the one that started with the ridicule to begin with, so please take your own advice? Thanks

You don't understand it, you're just making up moronic shit that has nothing to do with the subject to make yourself look intelligent. If anyones being pseudo logical, it's you. And yes, not having the correct understanding does mean you're wrong.

Actually, I got the "moronic shit" off of a friend about three years ago.

I simply gave that as a suggestion, or opinion (which as far as I know, I'm entitled to here on dramatized-SeN) to see what kind of responses I'd get, and It's clear that all you can do is flame people Syphon

I can debate with people who have valid, varying scientific opinions or insights. You do not.

Since when can you read minds Syphon?! I want that power!


Just because I choose not to discuss things the way you want me to, doesn't mean I don't know anything about it.

Good logical fallacy though

A person isn't trying to prove the fact itself, or rather to convince other people. In that case, you can prove everything with reasonable fact, logic, and support.

Because numbers isn't everything. It's just common sense. If you ask any philosopher how numbers are everything, ( or if they do agree with you, they must be a minority part of philosophers who are technocrats ) there has to be more to life than numbers.

And Akar, nobody wants to trust your outworldly statements because you act like a prophet of somekind. You're not. We first got your point that numbers are everything, or science is the whole picture. But you just couldn't make me understand how or what you're talking about, or convince me for that matter.

Try asking a physicist.

Well since my life revolves around a computer. No, not really.
J/k. Most of the universe can be seen using strictly numbers, and everything that one does relates to mathematics in some way.

Making an assumption based on presented facts isn't a logical fallacy, it's the scientific process.

Okay, first of all, stop quoting that damn long quote...
Secondly, stop bitching at each other or I'll ask for the close of that topic.

And physicist is the only job there has to be in the world? Or is physics the only subject thats considered science.
Can you relate how you've randomly met a girl that was just passing by while you made a turn and bumped into her mathematically? I am sure everyone can put that in some wierd kind of chart, graph, or equation. OH YES. I MET A GIRL BY x^2 + y^2 = x/y^2 ITS COMPLETELY LOGICAL.
I can also relate how NUMBERS are related to EVERY POSSIBLE THING IN THE UNIVERSE. Starting from how I think out of the BLUE by z^-2h^-2 is sinpie/4 to whatever.
You make it look like your opinion is a fact when it is only your opinion on how things should be. It upsets me to see such a failure, a fallacy that doesn't even have constructive supports that isn't gonna convince me at all. ( Of course, your idea is just absurd. If it had any reason into it, It could've. )

Well, everything does relate to mathematics in some way. I don't like saying something is a fact, because nothing can ever be 100% proven. And facts are considered 100% true by most people.

When it comes to Science, yes.

Debate and Science are two different aspects.

So you're saying my handphone is on my desk, is 7 cm from the left, 9 cm from the bottom from the bottom-left corner at 10:58 PM isn't a 100% proven fact? Stop using absolutees, because thats what makes you a horrid debater, and a biggest failure with 'absolutes' is that simply using them is a fallacy in most cases.

Plus you're not even relying on common sense, not relying on supports by simply saying 'not everything can be proven 100%'. Well guess what. What you're doing is proving -100% because it leads me to believe that you're just bs'ing and not doing anything but out of your own un-supported mind.

And you're also saying that if it is believed to be true by most people, it is true? Not true. Facts can change if it isn't relatively simple enough to prove. They thought earth being flat and sun revolved around earth was a FACT back in the middle ages.