Error in Rigour
Re: Error in Rigour
Hans Rosling makes science's contribution visual: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
-
chaz wyman
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: Error in Rigour
This is not demonstrating the contribution of science alone, but the grow of left wing politics, democracy, enlightenment, imperialism and its decline, communications and many other things that have contributed to the increase in life expectancy.spike wrote:Hans Rosling makes science's contribution visual: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
Nice though.
Re: Error in Rigour
Another of chaz's #!*% thoughts.This is not demonstrating the contribution of science alone, but the grow of left wing politics, democracy, enlightenment, imperialism and its decline, communications and many other things that have contributed to the increase in life expectancy.
Nice though.
-
chaz wyman
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: Error in Rigour
And what do you think the graph represents, idiot?spike wrote:Another of chaz's #!*% thoughts.This is not demonstrating the contribution of science alone, but the grow of left wing politics, democracy, enlightenment, imperialism and its decline, communications and many other things that have contributed to the increase in life expectancy.
Nice though.
Re: Error in Rigour
chaz,
The graph tells me more about you, in how you responded to it, that you seem to have one big chip on your shoulder. It sounds as though you have a problem and are blaming everybody else for it.
The graph tells me more about you, in how you responded to it, that you seem to have one big chip on your shoulder. It sounds as though you have a problem and are blaming everybody else for it.
-
chaz wyman
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: Error in Rigour
Yes, and this tells me that you are displaying evidence of clinical insanity.spike wrote:chaz,
The graph tells me more about you, in how you responded to it, that you seem to have one big chip on your shoulder. It sounds as though you have a problem and are blaming everybody else for it.
Congratulations.
Re: Error in Rigour
So that's why I read my own posts over and over! (chaz wyman wrote:[I don't even think Grok knows what he himself is saying.
-
chaz wyman
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: Error in Rigour
Do they make more sense the second time??groktruth wrote:So that's why I read my own posts over and over! (chaz wyman wrote:[I don't even think Grok knows what he himself is saying.for typist!)
-
i blame blame
- Posts: 176
- Joined: Wed Oct 17, 2007 11:26 am
- Location: Elsewhere
Re: Error in Rigour
Thanks for refuting the claims at the start of the thread.chaz wyman wrote:
Total rubbish. Cite; Karl Popper, Thomas Kuhn, Bertrand Russell, Carl Sagan, have all provided major contributions to the theoretical issues concerning science in the 20thC, and here are a few more.
http://www.academia.edu/People/Philosophy_Of_Science
At random..
What you need to understand is that to those people, these insanities are realities.chaz wyman wrote:
It seems increasingly we seem to be seeing a lot more of this weirdness form you over the last few days. You seem to be finding meaning in the meaningless.
None of this seems to make sense, to me either. Now either John and me are both mad or you are not explaining yourself very well. Which is the most likely ?
Englightenment led to more science, science led to telecommunications technology.chaz wyman wrote:This is not demonstrating the contribution of science alone, but the grow of left wing politics, democracy, enlightenment, imperialism and its decline, communications and many other things that have contributed to the increase in life expectancy.spike wrote:Hans Rosling makes science's contribution visual: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jbkSRLYSojo
Nice though.
Last edited by i blame blame on Fri Dec 03, 2010 1:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Re: Error in Rigour
Why do you ask?chaz wyman wrote:Do they make more sense the second time??groktruth wrote:So that's why I read my own posts over and over! (chaz wyman wrote:[I don't even think Grok knows what he himself is saying.for typist!)
-
chaz wyman
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: Error in Rigour
groktruth wrote:Why do you ask?chaz wyman wrote:Do they make more sense the second time??groktruth wrote:
So that's why I read my own posts over and over! (for typist!)
I was asking you. My question was for your benefit, not mine.
Re: Error in Rigour
Then my answer is, "Yes." Another example of inspired writing being a new source of discovery every time they are read? To those with eyes to see.chaz wyman wrote:
I was asking you. My question was for your benefit, not mine.
As I have noted, most of my posting is to discover exactly what it is that I am thinking.
Thank you for your questions.
-
chaz wyman
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: Error in Rigour
groktruth wrote:Then my answer is, "Yes." Another example of inspired writing being a new source of discovery every time they are read? To those with eyes to see.chaz wyman wrote:
I was asking you. My question was for your benefit, not mine.
As I have noted, most of my posting is to discover exactly what it is that I am thinking.
Thank you for your questions.
ROTFLMFHO
Re-reading stuff is what you do to another's work not your own !!!
You are supposed to know what you think before, or as, you write it.
If you have to llok back then that would indicate a lack of certainty, attention, memory, or intelligence; and re-reading it ain't gonna help you with that stuff.
Talk about an ERROR in RIGOUR
Re: Error in Rigour
I knew I was doing something wrong! Maybe this is it.chaz wyman wrote:
ROTFLMFHO
Re-reading stuff is what you do to another's work not your own !!!
You are supposed to know what you think before, or as, you write it.
If you have to llok back then that would indicate a lack of certainty, attention, memory, or intelligence; and re-reading it ain't gonna help you with that stuff.
![]()
Talk about an ERROR in RIGOUR
-
chaz wyman
- Posts: 5304
- Joined: Fri Mar 12, 2010 7:31 pm
Re: Error in Rigour
groktruth wrote:I knew I was doing something wrong! Maybe this is it.chaz wyman wrote:
ROTFLMFHO
Re-reading stuff is what you do to another's work not your own !!!
You are supposed to know what you think before, or as, you write it.
If you have to llok back then that would indicate a lack of certainty, attention, memory, or intelligence; and re-reading it ain't gonna help you with that stuff.
![]()
Talk about an ERROR in RIGOUR