We really need to start having a serious conversation about this....

[Tubetec]

Your right I hadnt really taken much notice of the detail ,
I wasnt trying to argue ,
Another interesting fact about the Vatican is while preaching about sex only within the confines of marriage and the use of contraception being bad they were themselves riding all around them and invested heavily in condom production , its a bit of an incongruity ,you'd have to agree . Again Im not too bothered to core drill the subject but on one hand they were saying using contraception is morally wrong , yet on the other they were telling people their use wont help prevent them getting nasty diseases like hiv .
In the end it was discovered that a surfactant substance used in condom production was in fact causing people to become more susceptable to disease .
Again Im not searching for someone to argue with , what we probably all can agree on is were in big trouble as a species at the rate were going .

 

[AnalogPackrat]

If people start talking about "faith" and "trust" they are certainly not being scientific. Those are terms more appropriately applied in religious or philosophical realms. The fact is that it is the very (fervent) people who froth about "trust the science" who are most clueless about it. They also boost the egos of "scientists" who are more akin to charlatans rather than actual scientists, thereby doing double damage.

Science is about proposing, testing, probing, questioning, careful data collection, unbiased analysis, and rational thought. When people who rightfully and rationally question science or scientific findings are shouted down, censored, and labeled heretics, your society has entered another Dark Age.

 

[Tubetec]

A good example of this is the people who suggested the world was in fact round not flat and that it was impossible to simply sail off the edge were practically burnt at the stake .
It seems Pythagoras was the first to offer a reasonable explanation , but that certainly didnt stop people hundreds of years later getting thrown in jail for suggesting the same .
Pythagoras correctly noted the earths shaddow cast on the moon was proof of his concept . It seems like a no brainer now ,but what superstition prevented people believeing a logical explanation in favour of utter bullshit .

 

[living sounds]

Still, the world can hold many, many more humans. Some people say they all could live in Texas, maybe? the US, definitely. No worries.

P.S. No surprise that your article comes from The Guardian....

At what cost? And the usual ad hominem... The Guardian is among the best newspapers worldwide, in a very tough market.

 

[Matador]

You probably thought you were making a great comeback to my "science is not infallible" argument, however, it would be a good idea for you to at least get acquainted with the concepts and doctrines of that which you wish to criticize or use as a counter argument beforehand, otherwise, it just shows that you are completely ignorant on that topic, as I have just pointed out.

Why the rudeness? You can convey your point without having to be abrasive.

 

[crazydoc]

I tend to separate people into those who know everything, and those who search for knowledge.

 

[user 37518]

Why the rudeness? You can convey your point without having to be abrasive.

Im not being rude, I am being polite, my answer was respectful. I haven't offended anyone like crazydoc or whoever it was did by calling anyone crazy or throwing insults. Unlike some of you, I am not throwing insults or slurs. I believe my answer was respectful. But, then again, the left gets offended with facts

 

[AnalogPackrat]

At what cost? And the usual ad hominem... The Guardian is among the best newspapers worldwide, in a very tough market.

The Guardian may sell a lot of ads (and be financially successful), but it certainly is not "among the best newspapers" by any true journalistic standard.

 

[user 37518]

Your right I hadnt really taken much notice of the detail ,
I wasnt trying to argue ,
Another interesting fact about the Vatican is while preaching about sex only within the confines of marriage and the use of contraception being bad they were themselves riding all around them and invested heavily in condom production , its a bit of an incongruity ,you'd have to agree . Again Im not too bothered to core drill the subject but on one hand they were saying using contraception is morally wrong , yet on the other they were telling people their use wont help prevent them getting nasty diseases like hiv .
In the end it was discovered that a surfactant substance used in condom production was in fact causing people to become more susceptable to disease .
Again Im not searching for someone to argue with , what we probably all can agree on is were in big trouble as a species at the rate were going .

Since it was evident that you didn't know what you were talking about, now you want to go to a tangent to somehow prove a point and find leverage. You weren't trying to argue, but immediately start talking about a controversial unrelated topic to your previous post, so you are now trying to argue? "Not trying to argue, but.... Again, not too bothered with the subject, but....."

Stop the passive aggressiveness, dont keep beating on a dead horse.

Also, it doesn't give you much credibility when you say "Another interesting fact about the Vatican...." when your previous statement about the Pope wasn't a fact, but a fallacy.

 

[JohnRoberts]

It is impossible to herd cats on the internet, but some people find it a good way to waste time...

JR

 

[user 37518]

At what cost? And the usual ad hominem... The Guardian is among the best newspapers worldwide, in a very tough market.

Of course ad hominem, the Guardian is known for being an extreme left newspaper, so I don't think it is too much to point out that the article fits their agenda.

 

[JohnRoberts]

Of course ad hominem, the Guardian is known for being an extreme left newspaper, so I don't think it is too much to point out that the article fits their agenda.

newspapers just like any media business cater to their target audience. It is unclear whether the newspapers control modern sentiment or public sentiment control the newspapers, but it no coincidence that wealthy people buy influential newspapers to use those megaphones to push their personal agenda.

JR

 

[AnalogPackrat]

I tend to separate people into those who know everything, and those who search for knowledge.

I separate them into people who can't communicate without using profanity and those who express themselves with restraint and eloquence. It indicates a certain mindset at work when raw emotion trumps considered self-control.

 

[crazydoc]

Whatever works.

 

[living sounds]

Of course ad hominem, the Guardian is known for being an extreme left newspaper, so I don't think it is too much to point out that the article fits their agenda.

Actually they are good reporting facts. But some people here some to get their "news" from pretty questionable sources. You guys moved to the right for decades now. Unfortunate.

 

[Matador]

Im not being rude, I am being polite, my answer was respectful.

Characterizing describing another poster as "completely ignorant on [a] topic" as "polite and respectful" may be the most meta post in the history of the Brewery.

 

[user 37518]

Characterizing describing another poster as "completely ignorant on [a] topic" as "polite and respectful" may be the most meta post in the history of the Brewery.

That is the only way to describe when someone is completely ignorant on a topic, there is no other way to put it, but, perhaps, you wanted more softness. I could've said much more derogatory terms, I didn't, I pointed out he is completely ignorant on a topic. Is ignorant an insult to you? Again, you probably find objective facts offensive.

 

[Matador]

but, perhaps, you wanted more softness.

I don't want anything, but I also wasn't policing tone in this thread.

 

[user 37518]

I don't want anything, but I also wasn't policing tone in this thread.

Saying someone needs to take their crazy meds, and saying someone is ignorant are completely different things. But you want to pick on anything, and use sarcasm.

 

[crazydoc]

"If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck"