Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 58 of 94 1 2 56 57 58 59 60 93 94
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
give me proof that he's not.


It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.

IE: Should you say that pluto is composed of Rocky Road icecream, it is your burden to prove it so, and not my burden to fly to pluto and prove it false.



your the science guy, you believe in plenty of uproven things like global warming,the age of the earth for examples.


but back to the issue at hand, dont go asking me to prove something that you cannot disprove. it's weak sauce.

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734

 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
also you forgot to log into you Cylabis alt.


I hope you're not saying he's my alt. You've gotta be talking to Ray, right?


I no longer speak to ray, not since Macho Grande.

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
 Originally Posted By: Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man
the hippies were to blame for vietnam, not the men giving the orders and starting the wars nor the men making millions off the war?



While JFK is at fault for not sending in enough men to do the job in the first place, it is in some respect the fault of the hippies for making it politically inconvenient to win the war. Just like Iraq if the Obama's of the world had their way, there would have not been a surge and it would have been Vietnam 2(yes Electric Boogaloo), and just like JFK, Bush and Rumsfeld bare a lot of blame for not sending enough troops in the first place. This would all have been over by now had they listened to people like Powell and McCain.

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.


There's nothing groundless about Hollywood being exclusive with certain actors. Voight is going through a Ron Silver after talking to Fox.

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Offline
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
give me proof that he's not.


It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.

IE: Should you say that pluto is composed of Rocky Road icecream, it is your burden to prove it so, and not my burden to fly to pluto and prove it false.



your the science guy, you believe in plenty of uproven things like global warming,the age of the earth for examples.


but back to the issue at hand, dont go asking me to prove something that you cannot disprove. it's weak sauce.


It is not weak sauce. It's the basis on which to sort verifiable fact from opinion and nonsense. When you assert that something is fact, you must have the evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it's gossip, rumor, conjecture, slander, or libel.

I accept that 4.5 billion years is the age of the Earth. Why? Because we can measure the decay of isotopes and we have physical evidence of rocks that read consistently as 4+ billion years old. Not just from the Earth, but from the moon also.

There's more proof of this, than of J.V. being blacklisted.

Last edited by The Dread Pirate Westley; 2008-08-08 2:03 AM.

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Offline
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
 Originally Posted By: Pariah
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.


There's nothing groundless about Hollywood being exclusive with certain actors. Voight is going through a Ron Silver after talking to Fox.


J.V. was having a tough time long before he criticized Obama. Shit the man's been doing bit parts and minor supporting roles for 10 years. The only way things could get worse for him is if he were to get nothing at all.

Considering he's got 3 movies all either in post production or current production, I don't really see the proof that he's been blacklisted.


EDIT; Adding example:
Movie starring Voight, PreObama

Face it, the guy burned his bridges long before now. Hell, his own daughter won't even talk to him.

Last edited by The Dread Pirate Westley; 2008-08-08 2:11 AM.

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
I accept that 4.5 billion years is the age of the Earth. Why? Because we can measure the decay of isotopes and we have physical evidence of rocks that read consistently as 4+ billion years old. Not just from the Earth, but from the moon also.

There's more proof of this, than of J.V. being blacklisted.


Oh Gawd. Not this again.

Radiometric dating can't accurately measure the isotopes if they're past the age of 50,000 years. Aside from the travel-distance of radiation from the stars of other systems indicating a certain run time, there's actually very little credible evidence that Sol is even 4.5 billion years old. It's easy enough to guesstimate how long it took for the light from other systems to get to earth (or at least its constituent elements), but that doesn't actually tell us how long Sol's been here. So in the end we suffer from circular reasoning: Scientists think they can measure the lifespan of the Sun by earth/moon's age. But their dating process is too corrupted to make such a conclusion. Ergo there's no way to prove that the radiation from other stars started reaching Sol at the time they predict.

Personally, I'm open to the possibility, but I'm not fully convinced there's enough evidence to measure earth's age based on the universe around us. That's not to say I couldn't accept it though.

 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
J.V. was having a tough time long before he criticized Obama. Shit the man's been doing bit parts and minor supporting roles for 10 years. The only way things could get worse for him is if he were to get nothing at all.

Considering he's got 3 movies all either in post production or current production, I don't really see the proof that he's been blacklisted.


This isn't just about movies; there's more indicators than that. Ron Silver was never a big star but he was a notorious liberal who attended all the social functions. After he supported the war, he stopped being invited to Hollywood social occasions. If this happens for Voight, are you still going to call us conspiracy nuts?

 Quote:
Face it, the guy burned his bridges long before now. Hell, his own daughter won't even talk to him.


I'm not sure what bridges you're talking about, but considering the public spectacle he and Jolie put on, I doubt she'd be estranged from him because of any burned bridge, that is to say I doubt he was the sole destructive party in that relationship.

Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 95
25+ posts
Offline
25+ posts
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 95
 Originally Posted By: Pariah
Oh Gawd. Not this again.

Radiometric dating can't accurately measure the isotopes if they're past the age of 50,000 years. Aside from the travel-distance of radiation from the stars of other systems indicating a certain run time, there's actually very little credible evidence that Sol is even 4.5 billion years old.


Oh dawg... not this again.

Pariah, you're simply wrong on this point. Ask any astronomer, chemist, or geologist. Radiometric dating has an upper effectiveness limit, yes--but the 50,000 year mark applies only to organic material, not inorganic ones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating#Modern_dating_techniques

You're thinking of CARBON DATING, which is a (relatively) short-term isotope and is less accurate at its upper range of 50,000 years or so. URANIUM-LEAD dating, which works with much longer-lived isotopes, operates in the range of hundreds of millions of years.

Unless you think the U.S. Geological Survey is in on the conspiracy, you'll have to give this one up.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001
Likes: 1
PJP Offline
We already are
15000+ posts
Offline
We already are
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001
Likes: 1
In a few minutes I'm going to give birth to a brown baby boy. The contractions are about 3 minutes apart.

Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,230
Likes: 1
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002.
15000+ posts
Offline
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002.
15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,230
Likes: 1
Here I am overseas.

We get a different but thorough perspective on US politics.

Forgive me for being blunt, Republicans....

...but how can he lose?

(and, frankly even if he does, McCain is noone to sneeze at.)


Pimping my site, again.

http://www.worldcomicbookreview.com

Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001
Likes: 1
PJP Offline
We already are
15000+ posts
Offline
We already are
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001
Likes: 1
It was 6 pounds 8 oz. and I named him Silky Johnson.

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Offline
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
 Quote:
This isn't just about movies; there's more indicators than that. Ron Silver was never a big star but he was a notorious liberal who attended all the social functions. After he supported the war, he stopped being invited to Hollywood social occasions. If this happens for Voight, are you still going to call us conspiracy nuts?


Are you telling me this is about parties?

First, show me the proof that he's been consistantly invited to these parties in the past, then illustrate the decline in invitation that begins, more or less, after his Obama speech. That's at least something to go on.

But just so you know, J.V. has been openly pro-war and republican since 2004. Yet, now is when the blacklist nonsense starts?

The truth is, Jon Voight just doesn't matter anymore and he hasn't mattered for a long time. He's done fine work, but his peak was long ago and he's been coasting ever since. Nobody cares that he's anti-Obama, because honestly, nobody cares about Jon Voight. The man's no Kevin Costner - The Guardian after all.


Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001
Likes: 1
PJP Offline
We already are
15000+ posts
Offline
We already are
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001
Likes: 1
He's right about that. Kevin Costner is a God.

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Offline
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
 Originally Posted By: First Amongst Daves
Here I am overseas.

We get a different but thorough perspective on US politics.

Forgive me for being blunt, Republicans....

...but how can he lose?

(and, frankly even if he does, McCain is noone to sneeze at.)


Well, considering the fact that Obama's lead keeps shrinking the closer we get to election day, how the hell do you think that he can't lose?


whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules.
It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness.
This is true both in politics and on the internet."

Our Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man said: "no, the doctor's right. besides, he has seniority."
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001
Likes: 1
PJP Offline
We already are
15000+ posts
Offline
We already are
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001
Likes: 1
It's a toss up. It will be very close andf quite possibly a repeat of 2000 where McCain wins the electoral college and the Presidency but Obama wins the meaningles popular vote.

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Offline
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Or vice versa. It's really anyone's game at this point. Anyone declaring either side the clear winner at this point is not only premature, but it's also bullshit.


whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules.
It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness.
This is true both in politics and on the internet."

Our Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man said: "no, the doctor's right. besides, he has seniority."
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
OP Offline
Officially "too old for this shit"
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951
Likes: 6
 Originally Posted By: First Amongst Daves
Here I am overseas.

We get a different but thorough perspective on US politics.

Forgive me for being blunt, Republicans....

...but how can he lose?


Didn't you guys think Kerry was a lock also? PJP and doc are more or less correct. This race is either's to lose at this point.

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
give me proof that he's not.


It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.

IE: Should you say that pluto is composed of Rocky Road icecream, it is your burden to prove it so, and not my burden to fly to pluto and prove it false.



your the science guy, you believe in plenty of uproven things like global warming,the age of the earth for examples.


but back to the issue at hand, dont go asking me to prove something that you cannot disprove. it's weak sauce.


It is not weak sauce. It's the basis on which to sort verifiable fact from opinion and nonsense. When you assert that something is fact, you must have the evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it's gossip, rumor, conjecture, slander, or libel.

I accept that 4.5 billion years is the age of the Earth. Why? Because we can measure the decay of isotopes and we have physical evidence of rocks that read consistently as 4+ billion years old. Not just from the Earth, but from the moon also.

There's more proof of this, than of J.V. being blacklisted.



really how many isotopes have you measured the decay of? this should be interesting.

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: Pariah
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.


There's nothing groundless about Hollywood being exclusive with certain actors. Voight is going through a Ron Silver after talking to Fox.


J.V. was having a tough time long before he criticized Obama. Shit the man's been doing bit parts and minor supporting roles for 10 years. The only way things could get worse for him is if he were to get nothing at all.

Considering he's got 3 movies all either in post production or current production, I don't really see the proof that he's been blacklisted.


EDIT; Adding example:
Movie starring Voight, PreObama

Face it, the guy burned his bridges long before now. Hell, his own daughter won't even talk to him.



burned his bridges? bullshit no one would burn a bridge based on his political views, you said so yourself

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
 Originally Posted By: The New Adventures of Old PJP
He's right about that. Kevin Costner is a God.



yeah but i got a feeling Westley never would have known about Costner's greatness had it not been for this board.

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
 Originally Posted By: First Amongst Daves
Here I am overseas.

We get a different but thorough perspective on US politics.

Forgive me for being blunt, Republicans....

...but how can he lose?




I think once the American people have time to think about it, they'll decide a closet Muslim socialist isn't a safe choice for President.

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Offline
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: Pariah
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.


There's nothing groundless about Hollywood being exclusive with certain actors. Voight is going through a Ron Silver after talking to Fox.


J.V. was having a tough time long before he criticized Obama. Shit the man's been doing bit parts and minor supporting roles for 10 years. The only way things could get worse for him is if he were to get nothing at all.

Considering he's got 3 movies all either in post production or current production, I don't really see the proof that he's been blacklisted.


EDIT; Adding example:
Movie starring Voight, PreObama

Face it, the guy burned his bridges long before now. Hell, his own daughter won't even talk to him.



burned his bridges? bullshit no one would burn a bridge based on his political views, you said so yourself


There are many ways to burn bridges in Hollywood, I don't imagine Mickey Rourke hit the shit can because of his politics.


Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Offline
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
give me proof that he's not.


It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.

IE: Should you say that pluto is composed of Rocky Road icecream, it is your burden to prove it so, and not my burden to fly to pluto and prove it false.



your the science guy, you believe in plenty of uproven things like global warming,the age of the earth for examples.


but back to the issue at hand, dont go asking me to prove something that you cannot disprove. it's weak sauce.


It is not weak sauce. It's the basis on which to sort verifiable fact from opinion and nonsense. When you assert that something is fact, you must have the evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it's gossip, rumor, conjecture, slander, or libel.

I accept that 4.5 billion years is the age of the Earth. Why? Because we can measure the decay of isotopes and we have physical evidence of rocks that read consistently as 4+ billion years old. Not just from the Earth, but from the moon also.

There's more proof of this, than of J.V. being blacklisted.



really how many isotopes have you measured the decay of? this should be interesting.


Considering I get my time from an atomic clock, I measure radio-decay on a millisecond basis. Unless you're going to tell me that Atomic Clocks are also a global conspiracy of this "made up science stuff."


Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: Pariah
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.


There's nothing groundless about Hollywood being exclusive with certain actors. Voight is going through a Ron Silver after talking to Fox.


J.V. was having a tough time long before he criticized Obama. Shit the man's been doing bit parts and minor supporting roles for 10 years. The only way things could get worse for him is if he were to get nothing at all.

Considering he's got 3 movies all either in post production or current production, I don't really see the proof that he's been blacklisted.


EDIT; Adding example:
Movie starring Voight, PreObama

Face it, the guy burned his bridges long before now. Hell, his own daughter won't even talk to him.



burned his bridges? bullshit no one would burn a bridge based on his political views, you said so yourself


There are many ways to burn bridges in Hollywood, I don't imagine Mickey Rourke hit the shit can because of his politics.



i believe getting you to use Mickey Rourke as a basis for an argument counts as a win.

Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
give me proof that he's not.


It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.

IE: Should you say that pluto is composed of Rocky Road icecream, it is your burden to prove it so, and not my burden to fly to pluto and prove it false.



your the science guy, you believe in plenty of uproven things like global warming,the age of the earth for examples.


but back to the issue at hand, dont go asking me to prove something that you cannot disprove. it's weak sauce.


It is not weak sauce. It's the basis on which to sort verifiable fact from opinion and nonsense. When you assert that something is fact, you must have the evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it's gossip, rumor, conjecture, slander, or libel.

I accept that 4.5 billion years is the age of the Earth. Why? Because we can measure the decay of isotopes and we have physical evidence of rocks that read consistently as 4+ billion years old. Not just from the Earth, but from the moon also.

There's more proof of this, than of J.V. being blacklisted.



really how many isotopes have you measured the decay of? this should be interesting.


Considering I get my time from an atomic clock, I measure radio-decay on a millisecond basis. Unless you're going to tell me that Atomic Clocks are also a global conspiracy of this "made up science stuff."



so your saying you've never measured the decay of an isoptope? the wins keep coming.

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Offline
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
You guys leave Mickey Rooney out of this! All that old, crazy bastard ever wanted to do was make us laugh!


whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules.
It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness.
This is true both in politics and on the internet."

Our Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man said: "no, the doctor's right. besides, he has seniority."
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Offline
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
give me proof that he's not.


It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.

IE: Should you say that pluto is composed of Rocky Road icecream, it is your burden to prove it so, and not my burden to fly to pluto and prove it false.



your the science guy, you believe in plenty of uproven things like global warming,the age of the earth for examples.


but back to the issue at hand, dont go asking me to prove something that you cannot disprove. it's weak sauce.


It is not weak sauce. It's the basis on which to sort verifiable fact from opinion and nonsense. When you assert that something is fact, you must have the evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it's gossip, rumor, conjecture, slander, or libel.

I accept that 4.5 billion years is the age of the Earth. Why? Because we can measure the decay of isotopes and we have physical evidence of rocks that read consistently as 4+ billion years old. Not just from the Earth, but from the moon also.

There's more proof of this, than of J.V. being blacklisted.



really how many isotopes have you measured the decay of? this should be interesting.


Considering I get my time from an atomic clock, I measure radio-decay on a millisecond basis. Unless you're going to tell me that Atomic Clocks are also a global conspiracy of this "made up science stuff."



so your saying you've never measured the decay of an isoptope? the wins keep coming.


Just do me a favor real quick, unplug your computer and run it on ignorance and nay-saying.


Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
give me proof that he's not.


It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.

IE: Should you say that pluto is composed of Rocky Road icecream, it is your burden to prove it so, and not my burden to fly to pluto and prove it false.



your the science guy, you believe in plenty of uproven things like global warming,the age of the earth for examples.


but back to the issue at hand, dont go asking me to prove something that you cannot disprove. it's weak sauce.


It is not weak sauce. It's the basis on which to sort verifiable fact from opinion and nonsense. When you assert that something is fact, you must have the evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it's gossip, rumor, conjecture, slander, or libel.

I accept that 4.5 billion years is the age of the Earth. Why? Because we can measure the decay of isotopes and we have physical evidence of rocks that read consistently as 4+ billion years old. Not just from the Earth, but from the moon also.

There's more proof of this, than of J.V. being blacklisted.



really how many isotopes have you measured the decay of? this should be interesting.


Considering I get my time from an atomic clock, I measure radio-decay on a millisecond basis. Unless you're going to tell me that Atomic Clocks are also a global conspiracy of this "made up science stuff."



so your saying you've never measured the decay of an isoptope? the wins keep coming.


Just do me a favor real quick, unplug your computer and run it on ignorance and nay-saying.



this is really easy, no wonder halo like your company, nothing but silly comebacks.

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Offline
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
give me proof that he's not.


It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.

IE: Should you say that pluto is composed of Rocky Road icecream, it is your burden to prove it so, and not my burden to fly to pluto and prove it false.



your the science guy, you believe in plenty of uproven things like global warming,the age of the earth for examples.


but back to the issue at hand, dont go asking me to prove something that you cannot disprove. it's weak sauce.


It is not weak sauce. It's the basis on which to sort verifiable fact from opinion and nonsense. When you assert that something is fact, you must have the evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it's gossip, rumor, conjecture, slander, or libel.

I accept that 4.5 billion years is the age of the Earth. Why? Because we can measure the decay of isotopes and we have physical evidence of rocks that read consistently as 4+ billion years old. Not just from the Earth, but from the moon also.

There's more proof of this, than of J.V. being blacklisted.



really how many isotopes have you measured the decay of? this should be interesting.


Considering I get my time from an atomic clock, I measure radio-decay on a millisecond basis. Unless you're going to tell me that Atomic Clocks are also a global conspiracy of this "made up science stuff."



so your saying you've never measured the decay of an isoptope? the wins keep coming.


Just do me a favor real quick, unplug your computer and run it on ignorance and nay-saying.



this is really easy, no wonder halo like your company, nothing but silly comebacks.


You're right, I shouldn't be stealing your thunder.

Until you have creditible proof to back anything you've said, I'm done debating a fool.


Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Offline
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you)
50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
give me proof that he's not.


It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.

IE: Should you say that pluto is composed of Rocky Road icecream, it is your burden to prove it so, and not my burden to fly to pluto and prove it false.



your the science guy, you believe in plenty of uproven things like global warming,the age of the earth for examples.


but back to the issue at hand, dont go asking me to prove something that you cannot disprove. it's weak sauce.


It is not weak sauce. It's the basis on which to sort verifiable fact from opinion and nonsense. When you assert that something is fact, you must have the evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it's gossip, rumor, conjecture, slander, or libel.

I accept that 4.5 billion years is the age of the Earth. Why? Because we can measure the decay of isotopes and we have physical evidence of rocks that read consistently as 4+ billion years old. Not just from the Earth, but from the moon also.

There's more proof of this, than of J.V. being blacklisted.



really how many isotopes have you measured the decay of? this should be interesting.


Considering I get my time from an atomic clock, I measure radio-decay on a millisecond basis. Unless you're going to tell me that Atomic Clocks are also a global conspiracy of this "made up science stuff."



so your saying you've never measured the decay of an isoptope? the wins keep coming.


Just do me a favor real quick, unplug your computer and run it on ignorance and nay-saying.



this is really easy, no wonder halo like your company, nothing but silly comebacks.


You're right




i know. i knew that before the first letter was typed. check out the archives, i've yet to be wrong.

Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Offline
Timelord. Drunkard.
15000+ posts
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 24,593
Gas prices have fallen about 25 cents in the last two weeks at the pumps around here with the current drop in crude per barrel dropping down to about $115. Wall Street is also rebounding as well as the dollar. Considering the rebounding of the economy and the settling down of Iraq, how is this gonna affect the presidential race since those have, so far, been the key issues?


whomod said: I generally don't like it when people decide to play by the rules against people who don't play by the rules.
It tends to put you immediately at a disadvantage and IMO is a sign of true weakness.
This is true both in politics and on the internet."

Our Friendly Neighborhood Ray-man said: "no, the doctor's right. besides, he has seniority."
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Offline
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
 Originally Posted By: thedoctor
Gas prices have fallen about 25 cents in the last two weeks at the pumps around here with the current drop in crude per barrel dropping down to about $115. Wall Street is also rebounding as well as the dollar. Considering the rebounding of the economy and the settling down of Iraq, how is this gonna affect the presidential race since those have, so far, been the key issues?


Wall street recently took another huge hit. More Americans are taking out loans, while unemployment nationwide seems to be hovering. This caused massive instability in the market.

But the good news is, home loans are up 5% above projections.

Walmart stock was a big item of conversation yesterday. I haven't checked today, but yesterday it was stagnant.


Joined: May 2008
Posts: 80
Insurgent
25+ posts
Offline
Insurgent
25+ posts
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 80
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
 Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
[quote=britneyspearsatemyshorts]give me proof that he's not.


It is for the positive position to prove their point. If it were not so, groundless, ridiculous claims would have to be taken as fact just on the basis that one cannot always disprove the impossible to observe.

IE: Should you say that pluto is composed of Rocky Road icecream, it is your burden to prove it so, and not my burden to fly to pluto and prove it false.



your the science guy, you believe in plenty of uproven things like global warming,the age of the earth for examples.


but back to the issue at hand, dont go asking me to prove something that you cannot disprove. it's weak sauce.


It is not weak sauce. It's the basis on which to sort verifiable fact from opinion and nonsense. When you assert that something is fact, you must have the evidence to back it up. Otherwise, it's gossip, rumor, conjecture, slander, or libel.

I accept that 4.5 billion years is the age of the Earth. Why? Because we can measure the decay of isotopes and we have physical evidence of rocks that read consistently as 4+ billion years old. Not just from the Earth, but from the moon also.

There's more proof of this, than of J.V. being blacklisted.



really how many isotopes have you measured the decay of? this should be interesting.


Considering I get my time from an atomic clock, I measure radio-decay on a millisecond basis. Unless you're going to tell me that Atomic Clocks are also a global conspiracy of this "made up science stuff."



so your saying you've never measured the decay of an isoptope? the wins keep coming.


Just do me a favor real quick, unplug your computer and run it on ignorance and nay-saying.



this is really easy, no wonder halo like your company, nothing but silly comebacks.


You're right




 Quote:
i know. i knew that before the first letter was typed. check out the archives, i've yet to be wrong.


Wow! Such a massive display of ignorance from such a tiny brain. Amazing, simply amazing.

It's a wonder BSAMS even has motor function let alone pretense to an intellect.


Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001
Likes: 1
PJP Offline
We already are
15000+ posts
Offline
We already are
15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 32,001
Likes: 1
are you a bringer of change?

because that didn't work out too well the last time.

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
 Originally Posted By: Calybos
Oh dawg... not this again.

Pariah, you're simply wrong on this point. Ask any astronomer, chemist, or geologist. Radiometric dating has an upper effectiveness limit, yes--but the 50,000 year mark applies only to organic material, not inorganic ones.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating#Modern_dating_techniques

You're thinking of CARBON DATING, which is a (relatively) short-term isotope and is less accurate at its upper range of 50,000 years or so. URANIUM-LEAD dating, which works with much longer-lived isotopes, operates in the range of hundreds of millions of years.

Unless you think the U.S. Geological Survey is in on the conspiracy, you'll have to give this one up.

http://pubs.usgs.gov/gip/geotime/age.html


Carbona and Uranium-Lead suffer from the same calibur problem though. Scientists have no way of knowing if the daughter cells they measure within the half-life were there from the beginning or not. They both need perfect environments to work.

I'm not sure exactly what a Wiki article is supposed to prove. Here's something that explains how the particles in the Radiometric methods actually work:

http://www.trueauthority.com/cvse/radiometric.htm

Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
Are you telling me this is about parties?


More to point, it's about being persona non grata. If he's forced into the status of Hollywood social pariah, that alludes to more casting bias.

Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,753
the Offline
Ignored by 3 users and 2 moderators
4000+ posts
Offline
Ignored by 3 users and 2 moderators
4000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,753
The Dread Pirate Westley argumentative User only mostly dead
100+ posts Fri Aug 08 2008 11:10 PM Making a new reply
Forum: Politics and Current Events
Thread: Re: Hollywood Calls For Blacklisting

Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Offline
only mostly dead
300+ posts
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 336
 Originally Posted By: Pariah
 Originally Posted By: The Dread Pirate Westley
Are you telling me this is about parties?


More to point, it's about being persona non grata. If he's forced into the status of Hollywood social pariah, that alludes to more casting bias.


Well, if he suddenly stops getting bit parts and minor supporting roles I'll go ahead and give you the point.

The one condition is that his lack must not be due to the fact that he's 70 or more years old, or dead.


Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,774
Feared by the RKMB morons
3000+ posts
Offline
Feared by the RKMB morons
3000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,774
 Originally Posted By: The New Adventures of Old PJP
are you a bringer of change?

because that didn't work out too well the last time.


Nobody wanted to change you assholes. Just call you out. And despite all your half assed attempts at maligning/miscontrueing our motives...that's what we did.


Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Offline
The conscience of the rkmbs!
15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,833
Likes: 7

Page 58 of 94 1 2 56 57 58 59 60 93 94

Link Copied to Clipboard
Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5