CKA Forums
Login 
canadian forums
bottom
 
 
Canadian Forums

Author Topic Options
Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 11:32 am
 


Lemmy Lemmy:
When non-experts cite works that they haven't the technical experience to understand, they're dismissed.

Wow, the arrogance. Just because we cannot legally call ourselves "economists", does not mean we are too fucking stupid to understand a "work".

$1:
It's the academic equivalent of hearsay.

EVERYTHING that you have not personally experienced is hearsay, regardless of your education.

$1:
Nice that you chose to inflame things a second time, under the flag of peace, by restating your bullshit attacks on the Nobel's validity.

We don't all care much for Nobel prizes that are awarded and some wonder why they are in the first place. Al Gore ring a bell?

$1:
Now get back to work on the chapeau, troll.
Classy.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33492
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:29 pm
 


The Nobels in science are valid, tho I bet there's politics at play there too. Peace prizes like for Gore and Obama are bullshit.

The Economics Nobel isn't a Nobel at all - it's given out by a Swedish bank that takes on the trappings of Nobel, and apparently there's some movement afoot to sue them for copyright infringement. But that isn't really the main point - it's that economics isn't a real science the way physics, chemistry and medicine are. It just doesn't have the ability to validate it's theories with the same amount of rigor as the hard sciences, nor does it have the predictive ability that the hard sciences have. Economics has it's uses, but as we've seen in the recent meltdown, and the article by Stiglitz I posted, it seems to be mostly an educated guessing game.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33492
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 12:31 pm
 


Brenda Brenda:
Lemmy Lemmy:
When non-experts cite works that they haven't the technical experience to understand, they're dismissed.

Wow, the arrogance. Just because we cannot legally call ourselves "economists", does not mean we are too fucking stupid to understand a "work".
Very well put.



Brenda Brenda:
Lemmy Lemmy:
Now get back to work on the chapeau, troll.
Classy.


To be fair, I am kinda hitting him where it hurts. I understand he would react, and fuck your hat I can live with. The troll part I just ignore, because I'm not trolling.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23555
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 2:49 pm
 


Brenda Brenda:
Lemmy Lemmy:
When non-experts cite works that they haven't the technical experience to understand, they're dismissed.

Wow, the arrogance. Just because we cannot legally call ourselves "economists", does not mean we are too fucking stupid to understand a "work".


Oh Brenda, now come on. Me quoting what an economist wrote abuot the European debt crisis to Lemmy would be like me saying I understand the pain of childbirth to you because I listened to my wife scream when giving birth. :lol:

There's a certain truth that Lemmy is saying here even if you don't like to hear it.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:07 pm
 


Gunnair Gunnair:
Brenda Brenda:
Lemmy Lemmy:
When non-experts cite works that they haven't the technical experience to understand, they're dismissed.

Wow, the arrogance. Just because we cannot legally call ourselves "economists", does not mean we are too fucking stupid to understand a "work".


Oh Brenda, now come on. Me quoting what an economist wrote abuot the European debt crisis to Lemmy would be like me saying I understand the pain of childbirth to you because I listened to my wife scream when giving birth. :lol:

There's a certain truth that Lemmy is saying here even if you don't like to hear it.

You want to compare a "work" that is for everybody to read to childbirth, that is a different experience for every woman. Ok.

The moment you dismiss anyone's opinion, insult their intelligence, only because they lack a piece of paper (or, like Lemmy says "YOU do not have that piece of paper, THUS you miss the technical experience"), you are making a mistake and are being nothing but arrogant.

Also, you hearing your wife scream makes your expertise nothing more than hearsay.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23555
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:17 pm
 


Brenda Brenda:
Gunnair Gunnair:
Brenda Brenda:
Wow, the arrogance. Just because we cannot legally call ourselves "economists", does not mean we are too fucking stupid to understand a "work".


Oh Brenda, now come on. Me quoting what an economist wrote abuot the European debt crisis to Lemmy would be like me saying I understand the pain of childbirth to you because I listened to my wife scream when giving birth. :lol:

There's a certain truth that Lemmy is saying here even if you don't like to hear it.


Also, you hearing your wife scream makes your expertise nothing more than hearsay.


I think that's the point.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33492
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:34 pm
 


Gunnair Gunnair:
Brenda Brenda:
Lemmy Lemmy:
When non-experts cite works that they haven't the technical experience to understand, they're dismissed.

Wow, the arrogance. Just because we cannot legally call ourselves "economists", does not mean we are too fucking stupid to understand a "work".


Oh Brenda, now come on. Me quoting what an economist wrote abuot the European debt crisis to Lemmy would be like me saying I understand the pain of childbirth to you because I listened to my wife scream when giving birth. :lol:

There's a certain truth that Lemmy is saying here even if you don't like to hear it.


You made essentially the opposite argument in regard to land mines.

I don't think what economists are saying about the EU debt crisis is so arcane a layman can't understand it. The question is what to do about it, and there you have economists on both sides - those that advocate austerity and those that advocate more borrowing and then some more in the middle. I think we are as qualified as Lemmy to have an opinion about that - there isn't one right answer.

Of course on economic theory he's the expert. But we don't discuss that here - we discuss different ideas about the economy. We all get a say there. And we've all got plenty of economists to choose from to back up our pov.

Same with landmines. On the technical side I'll defer to anybody that actually has knowledge about them. Discussing their morality vs other means of killing, we all have equally valid opinions.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23555
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:40 pm
 


andyt andyt:
Gunnair Gunnair:


Oh Brenda, now come on. Me quoting what an economist wrote abuot the European debt crisis to Lemmy would be like me saying I understand the pain of childbirth to you because I listened to my wife scream when giving birth. :lol:

There's a certain truth that Lemmy is saying here even if you don't like to hear it.


You made essentially the opposite argument in regard to land mines.


Not quite.

When it comes to the technical side of things, I bow to the expert. As a sailor, I'll no more lecture Guy on land mines and their tactical use than I would expect he'd give me a lot of what for on the tactical application of patrol craft in port security. When it comes to the discussion of IEDs and land mines with respect to their moral equivalency, then it's more open since moral equivalency doesn't tend to be a topic covered specifically as an EO/PO in land mine ops or any other weapons/ammunition training.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:46 pm
 


Gunnair Gunnair:

I think that's the point.

I guess you missed my sarcasm there :lol:


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 33492
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 3:51 pm
 


Gunnair Gunnair:

Not quite.

When it comes to the technical side of things, I bow to the expert. As a sailor, I'll no more lecture Guy on land mines and their tactical use than I would expect he'd give me a lot of what for on the tactical application of patrol craft in port security. When it comes to the discussion of IEDs and land mines with respect to their moral equivalency, then it's more open since moral equivalency doesn't tend to be a topic covered specifically as an EO/PO in land mine ops or any other weapons/ammunition training.


Yes, quite. Did you stop reading after my first sentence? Because you're saying exactly what I said. You obviously don't have an ESL problem, so I don't know what it is - in my real life people seem to understand what I mean.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23555
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:05 pm
 


andyt andyt:
Gunnair Gunnair:

Not quite.

When it comes to the technical side of things, I bow to the expert. As a sailor, I'll no more lecture Guy on land mines and their tactical use than I would expect he'd give me a lot of what for on the tactical application of patrol craft in port security. When it comes to the discussion of IEDs and land mines with respect to their moral equivalency, then it's more open since moral equivalency doesn't tend to be a topic covered specifically as an EO/PO in land mine ops or any other weapons/ammunition training.


Yes, quite. Did you stop reading after my first sentence? Because you're saying exactly what I said. You obviously don't have an ESL problem, so I don't know what it is - in my real life people seem to understand what I mean.


Not quite. You don't have an ESL issue I'm sure but your point might be more effective if you don't lead with your chin, as it were.

In other words, don't start out with a point of contention that you argue yourself out of by the end.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
 Vancouver Canucks


GROUP_AVATAR

GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 23555
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:06 pm
 


Brenda Brenda:
Gunnair Gunnair:

I think that's the point.

I guess you missed my sarcasm there :lol:


Your ESL issues cause me EPL issues, Dutchie.

That's why I prefer you simply shut up and make me a sammich!

Less confusing that way.


Offline
CKA Uber
CKA Uber
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 50938
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:08 pm
 


Gunnair Gunnair:
Brenda Brenda:
Gunnair Gunnair:

I think that's the point.

I guess you missed my sarcasm there :lol:


Your ESL issues cause me EPL issues, Dutchie.

That's why I prefer you simply shut up and make me a sammich!

Less confusing that way.

Yeah, sure. After you shoveled my damned snow, Scottie :P


Offline
CKA Elite
CKA Elite
 Calgary Flames


GROUP_AVATAR
User avatar
Profile
Posts: 3480
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 4:55 pm
 


eureka eureka:
The chief angst seems to have been that I refused to divulge personal information. Bart phrased it rather instructively when he demanded that I give the information so that the Ministry of Defense could be contacted to check on whether I was lying.

What extraordinary arrogance.


Only because you lied your way through and made stories about your past that conflicted with other stories you concocted. If you would have been more upfront rather than trying to fluff people that are smarter than that, there probably wouldn't have been much of a problem. You speak of arrogance, yet you thumb your nose at those who disagree with you and see through your smoke and mirrors.

eureka eureka:
You all read only what you want. You screamed "lie" for every FACT I gave you that offended your personal comfort zones. Those involved are no more than a bunch of schoolyard billies threatening from behind a fence.


Your facts were immediately disproved, and your stories and explanation contained more holes than swiss cheese. Add to the fact that you almost always degenerated into flaming and personal attacks, it's no wonder your credibility diminished faster than a fresh stack of twenties.

Call it bullying if you wish, but you quite hastily brought all this on yourself, and deserve nothing less. If you have a problem with your treatment and can't figure out why your only friend is MacGuyver, all you need to do is look in a mirror, and there will you find the one to blame.

-J.


Offline
Forum Elite
Forum Elite
Profile
Posts: 1244
PostPosted: Sat Jan 14, 2012 9:27 pm
 


CDN_PATRIOT CDN_PATRIOT:
eureka eureka:
The chief angst seems to have been that I refused to divulge personal information. Bart phrased it rather instructively when he demanded that I give the information so that the Ministry of Defense could be contacted to check on whether I was lying.

What extraordinary arrogance.


Only because you lied your way through and made stories about your past that conflicted with other stories you concocted. If you would have been more upfront rather than trying to fluff people that are smarter than that, there probably wouldn't have been much of a problem. You speak of arrogance, yet you thumb your nose at those who disagree with you and see through your smoke and mirrors.

eureka eureka:
You all read only what you want. You screamed "lie" for every FACT I gave you that offended your personal comfort zones. Those involved are no more than a bunch of schoolyard billies threatening from behind a fence.


Your facts were immediately disproved, and your stories and explanation contained more holes than swiss cheese. Add to the fact that you almost always degenerated into flaming and personal attacks, it's no wonder your credibility diminished faster than a fresh stack of twenties.

Call it bullying if you wish, but you quite hastily brought all this on yourself, and deserve nothing less. If you have a problem with your treatment and can't figure out why your only friend is MacGuyver, all you need to do is look in a mirror, and there will you find the one to blame.

-J.


Not a single fact was disproved and there was not a single story that conflicted with any other. Not one! There were just a couple of serial liars who made those claims repeatedly and you and a few others believed them because you wanted to believe them.

You wanted to believe them either because you are too stupid and lazy to enter into debate on my postings or because truth and facts that support truth take you out of your little shell.


Post new topic  Reply to topic  [ 124 posts ]  Previous  1 ... 3  4  5  6  7  8  9  Next



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest




 
     
All logos and trademarks in this site are property of their respective owner.
The comments are property of their posters, all the rest © Canadaka.net. Powered by © phpBB.