Believe in science & ethics
-
and obviously you believe that what you wrote is true and factual?Originally posted by soul_rage:Nay, you are arguing on hindsight. You cannot use "Modern scientific person" becoz there is no such person in that time. It's like you asking people from the year 3030 to come back to 2007 now to ask you to provide scientific standards OF THEIR TIME to convince them. Your argument is at best, flawed
The fact remains that Galileo provided a theory, and he just wasn't able to convince the MASS OF THAT TIME of his theory. And thus, it remained then as just a theory, nothing else. On hindsight, you now say he provides convincing proof
It's just like you in this current era. You belong to the Mass population of this time, and you wouldn't believe anyone who doesn't provide sufficient scientific proof to convince you. Ghost hunters use EM radiation and hot and cold spots to determine the existence of supernatural presence, but you wouldn't believe that coz they aren't convincing enough to you 
That is the problem with unscientific people. They actually believe that the delusions in their own head is true and accurate.
Galileo Galilei (15 February 1564 – 8 January 1642)[1][2] was an Italian physicist, mathematician, astronomer, and philosopher who played a major role in the scientific revolution. His achievements include the first systematic studies of uniformly accelerated motion, improvements to the telescope and consequent astronomical observations, and support for Copernicanism. Galileo's empirical work was a significant break from the abstract Aristotelian approach of his time.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Even with Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia just a mouse click away, you prefer the delusions in your mind. 
-
So how does the above support your argument?Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:and obviously you believe that what you wrote is true and factual?
That is the problem with unscientific people. They actually believe that the delusions in their own head is true and accurate.
Galileo Galilei (15 February 1564 – 8 January 1642)[1][2] was an Italian physicist, mathematician, astronomer, and philosopher who played a major role in the scientific revolution. His achievements include the first systematic studies of uniformly accelerated motion, improvements to the telescope and consequent astronomical observations, and support for Copernicanism. Galileo's empirical work was a significant break from the abstract Aristotelian approach of his time.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Even with Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia just a mouse click away, you prefer the delusions in your mind.
Again, you din answer my question.
Wikipedia is a tool of OUR TIMES. There is no Wikipedia in Galileo's time. All your arguments are on hindsight. You did not even attempt to think about yourself being in Galileo's time, and whether you would believe his theory when all along, you were taught that the Sun revolves around the Earth
And by the way, don't believe too much in wikipedia will you? Its not legally accepted to have the correct facts -
You might continue to live in the dark ages (mentally you are) where "There is no Wikipedia" but sorry hor, we have no desire to go back in time and be that stupid.Originally posted by soul_rage:So how does the above support your argument?
Again, you din answer my question.
Wikipedia is a tool of OUR TIMES. There is no Wikipedia in Galileo's time. All your arguments are on hindsight. You did not even attempt to think about yourself being in Galileo's time, and whether you would believe his theory when all along, you were taught that the Sun revolves around the Earth
And by the way, don't believe too much in wikipedia will you? Its not legally accepted to have the correct facts -
another typical example of your delusion... suggesting that I should "believe" you instead of Wikipedia because "Its not legally accepted to have the correct facts"Originally posted by soul_rage:And by the way, don't believe too much in wikipedia will you? Its not legally accepted to have the correct facts
Whether "Its not legally accepted to have the correct facts" or it is, the Wikipedia, is vastly more superior than the delusions in your head.
Just as the scientific method is vastly more superior than anything else currently on earth and only a delusional like you will continue to live in the dark ages. -
well, when you make accusations of others, do watch your own behaviorOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:You might continue to live in the dark ages (mentally you are) where "There is no Wikipedia" but sorry hor, we have no desire to go back in time and be that stupid.
You again prove that you don't dare to think differently, and accept it that if you are a person of that time, you won't believe Galileo. Why I say that? Because you won't believe anyone now if they come out with a theory that goes against what you were taught in current known Science
Using modern day knowledge of the past to argue that Galileo is correct is nothing spectacular. -
So crappyOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:another typical example of your delusion... suggesting that I should "believe" you instead of Wikipedia because "Its not legally accepted to have the correct facts"
Whether "Its not legally accepted to have the correct facts" or it is, the Wikipedia, is vastly more superior than the delusions in your head.
Just as the scientific method is vastly more superior than anything else currently on earth and only a delusional like you will continue to live in the dark ages.
I am having loads of fun seeing your behavior
I din ask you to believe me
I just merely tell you that Wikipedia cannot hold water in the eyes of the Law.
You just love jumping to conclusions -
Originally posted by soul_rage:well, when you make accusations of others, do watch your own behavior
You again prove that you don't dare to think differently, and accept it that if you are a person of that time, you won't believe Galileo. Why I say that? Because you won't believe anyone now if they come out with a theory that goes against what you were taught in current known Science
Using modern day knowledge of the past to argue that Galileo is correct is nothing spectacular.
What a stupid person you are... after 9 pages and you still don't get it!
Who is talking about believing in what the science textbook says? -
putting so many smileys only make you look so childishOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:
What a stupid person you are... after 9 pages and you still don't get it!
Who is talking about believing in what the science textbook says?
and you never answer any questions, just beating around the bush.
before u demand others to adopt a certain standard, perhaps its best to self-reflect on your behavior.
Either way, I don't wish to continue this useless argument with you, coz it wastes both of our time.
We cannot see eye to eye, so let's just steer clear of each other -
No lah... many times, when I write "to you" it is not "to you" at least not "only to you"Originally posted by soul_rage:putting so many smileys only make you look so childish
and you never answer any questions, just beating around the bush.
before u demand others to adopt a certain standard, perhaps its best to self-reflect on your behavior.
Either way, I don't wish to continue this useless argument with you, coz it wastes both of our time.
We cannot see eye to eye, so let's just steer clear of each other
A lot of young people are reading this and hopefully they learn something from your stupidity.
TO THE YOUNG PEOPLE READING THIS:
Go and read up what the SCIENTIFIC METHOD is all about and reflect on why you should only accept findings that have undergone rigorous examination by qualified people. This way, you will build up your knowledge with reliable and proven facts instead of filling your head with unreliable imaginings of delusional people and clinging on to the delusions in your head. -
Then I also reserve the right to write something about your stupidityOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:No lah... many times, when I write "to you" it is not "to you" at least not "only to you"
A lot of young people are reading this and hopefully they learn something from your stupidity.
TO THE YOUNG PEOPLE READING THIS:
Go and read up what the SCIENTIFIC METHOD is all about and reflect on why you should only accept findings that have undergone rigorous examination by qualified people. This way, you will build up your knowledge with reliable and proven facts instead of filling your head with unreliable imaginings of delusional people and clinging on to the delusions in your head.
TO THE YOUNG PEOPLE READING THIS:
It is not wrong to believe in the Scientific Method. Just don't pretend to understand it, like AndrewPKYap, and he is not even able to answer simple questions.
Truly comprehend the Scientific Method, and learn how to question outside the realms of the current.
And one last question to Andrew
Do you know the difference between understand and comprehend?
A simple question... -
The issue is actually very simple... should people trust Wikipedia more (even though the facts in there are not accept in a court of law) or should people believe the delusions in your head.Originally posted by soul_rage:Then I also reserve the right to write something about your stupidity
TO THE YOUNG PEOPLE READING THIS:
It is not wrong to believe in the Scientific Method. Just don't pretend to understand it, like AndrewPKYap, and he is not even able to answer simple questions.
Truly comprehend the Scientific Method, and learn how to question outside the realms of the current.
And one last question to Andrew
Do you know the difference between understand and comprehend?
A simple question...
Should people accept findings that have undergone the rigorous standards required of the scientific community or just accept anything they are told? -
haha, again never answer questionOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:The issue is actually very simple... should people trust Wikipedia more (even though the facts in there are not accept in a court of law) or should people believe the delusions in your head.
Should people accept findings that have undergone the rigorous standards required of the scientific community or just accept anything they are told? -
hahaha you don't even "know the difference between understand and comprehend " and have to ask me.Originally posted by soul_rage:haha, again never answer question -
why don't u just answer, instead of hiding and hiding.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:hahaha you don't even "know the difference between understand and comprehend " and have to ask me.
Won't blame you for not understanding the question though
Just say so. -
You are asking the question, showing that you do not know the answer...Originally posted by soul_rage:why don't u just answer, instead of hiding and hiding.
Won't blame you for not understanding the question though
Just say so. (Let me do you a favor... hint, you can find the answer in an online dictionary the diff between understanding and comprehending, you don't need to remain stupid about the meanings just because I do not want to tell you ) -
You are so afraid...Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:You are asking the question, showing that you do not know the answer... (Let me do you a favor... hint, you can find the answer in an online dictionary the diff between understanding and comprehending, you don't need to remain stupid about the meanings just because I do not want to tell you )
Now I understand why you don't dare to do many things -
er... it is wrong to simply believe anything, even if it is the Scientific Method. It would be better if you understand what it is without believing or not believing it.Originally posted by soul_rage:TO THE YOUNG PEOPLE READING THIS:
It is not wrong to believe in the Scientific Method. -
afraid of what? now what new delusion has come into your head?Originally posted by soul_rage:You are so afraid...
Now I understand why you don't dare to do many things -
nay you are deluding yourselfOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:afraid of what? now what new delusion has come into your head?
You happen to be just a coward pretending to be a scientific person, so I don't think there's much more to be said -
more delusions have come into your head? You just "know" and "believe" that I am "a coward pretending to be a scientific person" and there is no need for any evidence or proof for it? Everyone should just simply believe the delusions in your head?Originally posted by soul_rage:nay you are deluding yourself
You happen to be just a coward pretending to be a scientific person, so I don't think there's much more to be said -
don't need me to prove it.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:more delusions has come into your head? You just "know" and "believe" that I am "a coward pretending to be a scientific person" and there is no need for any evidence or proof for it? Everyone should just simply believe the delusions in your head?
You have proven it yourself that you are a coward *shrugs*
So be it. cowards never face up and admit their own mistakes. So there's no need to continue this, coz you won't admit to your own failures and shortcomings.
Coward -
wah, more delusions? "you are a coward"; "mistakes"; "failures and shortcomings"; and "don't need" you "to prove it"? You simply cling on to your delusions without any proof because "don't need ... to prove it"?Originally posted by soul_rage:don't need me to prove it.
You have proven it yourself that you are a coward *shrugs*
So be it. cowards never face up and admit their own mistakes. So there's no need to continue this, coz you won't admit to your own failures and shortcomings.
Coward
The scientific method cannot work for you because it requires proof and evidence? Now we know where you are coming from! 
-
more cowardly behavior?Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:wah, more delusions? "you are a coward"; "mistakes"; "failures and shortcomings"; and "don't need" you "to prove it"? You simply cling on to your delusions without any proof because "don't need ... to prove it"?
The scientific method cannot work for you because it requires proof and evidence? Now we know where you are coming from!
Reading this thread, people know you have no substance. Did you ever contribute one useful posting, other than writing rude remarks?
You are just rude, and cowardly. And cowardly can be SEEN from your cowardly ways of not daring to answer questions, and changing topics when you are caught.
So what more do people need? They don't need scientific proof to know you are a coward. You are so stupid to believe that everything needs scientific proof!
Your postings already show who you really are. A cowardly person hiding behind the nobility of Science pretending to supporting it
It's like Evil in the guise of Good. -
More delusions and you do not need to come up with any proof or evidence thatOriginally posted by soul_rage:more cowardly behavior?
Reading this thread, people know you have no substance. Did you ever contribute one useful posting, other than writing rude remarks?
You are just rude, and cowardly. And cowardly can be SEEN from your cowardly ways of not daring to answer questions, and changing topics when you are caught.
So what more do people need? They don't need scientific proof to know you are a coward. You are so stupid to believe that everything needs scientific proof!
Your postings already show who you really are. A cowardly person hiding behind the nobility of Science pretending to supporting it
It's like Evil in the guise of Good.
1. "Reading this thread, people know you have no substance"?
2. "not daring to answer questions"
3. "changing topics when you are caught"
4. "A cowardly person hiding behind the nobility of Science pretending to supporting it "
5. "Evil in the guise of Good"
anymore? I doubt that's all the (no need proof and evidence) delusions you have in your head. -
Thanks for highlighting your shortcomingsOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:More delusions and you do not need to come up with any proof or evidence that
1. "Reading this thread, people know you have no substance"?
2. "not daring to answer questions"
3. "changing topics when you are caught"
4. "A cowardly person hiding behind the nobility of Science pretending to supporting it "
5. "Evil in the guise of Good"
anymore? I doubt that's all the (no need proof and evidence) delusions you have in your head. at least that demonstrates your stupidity.
By the way, you keep insisting I am delusional, so I really wonder in your cowardly mind how are you going to prove that