Posted on 12/25/2008 7:55:05 PM PST by Soliton
After 10 years and many thousands of replies, I am leaving FR.
I don't really care, and I don't know why anyone else would.
I am leaving before I am banned (again). Truth doesn't seem to matter on FR. I don't know if it is donations or sympathetic opinions that do, but I have been suspended twice when I followed the rules and the people who complained to the moderators didn't, yet the moderators sided with them.
For the record, evolution is a fact and the Shroud of Turin is a fraud. I would prove it if the admin moderators would let me, but they won't. Your resident "expert", Swordmaker won't debate me because he can't.
I will work to build a forum where members have rights and truth matters.
Merry Christmas
What phenomenon are you detecting with your displacement example?
And are you defending the claim that gravity cannot be directly detected?
I just told you all the examples that water displacement detects...
Now where did you come up with your idiotic notions again?
DU?
MoveON?
What you measure in your example is volume.
You are not measuring weight, nor mass, nor fat content.
Sure it does. Look it up.
Your idiocy?
DU?
MoveON?
Any other science gurus want to defend tpanther and metmom?
What we have here is claims that gravity cannot be directly detected.
And a claim that water displaced by an immersed [human] body measures weight, mass and fat content, rather than volume.
Anyone care to defend these claims?
Humor me. show me a link to a claim that the water displaced by an immersed human body measures weight, mass and body fat.
I'm willing to accept the possibility that body fat can be estimated by comparing weight (measured independently) and body volume. But that isn't what you are claiming.
I would like to see a reference to a procedure that measures the weight of a human body by displacing water.
By the way, do you claim that gravity cannot be directly detected?
I don't think you have any idea, one way or another, much less any idea what I'm claiming or not claiming at this point. Maybe you should re-read my post!
YOU are saying it's not the case, it's your burden of proof, not mine.
DU?
MoveON?
Humor US!
Sorry, but I have never been to DU unless it was linked fro FR, and that’s been a long time ago. I recognize the phrase Move On from the Gore campaign, but I don’t know anything it’s done since.
Since I post almost entirely on science and tech threads, I don’t know why you want to muddy the waters with politics.
If you want to have a dick swinging contest over our conservative credentials, I’ll gladly compare my military service with yours. I’ve been here more than ten years and posted more than forty thousand time without a suspension.
(js):I think you'd like to know that this post, in it's brief lifetime, has achieved quite an internet following. It has been nominated as the dumbest thing ever posted on the internet.
tp: I'd like to know what crowd decided this?
DU?
MoveOn?
744 posted on Wednesday, December 31, 2008 1:06:39 AM by tpanther
js: Does this mean you agree that gravity cannot be directly detected?
No, but looks like it means that you cannot answer a simple question.
Why are you changing the subject?
What's wrong with answering what he asked?
http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/01/23/041227
Gravity can be neither seen nor touched. It is not material.
YOU evos are the ones who have been consistent in telling us that gravity is detected by the effect it has on objects around us. That is not direct detection.
If you step off a bridge, you ignore gravity at your peril.
But you just go ahead and pretend its not there as you do with other scientific evidence.
What a moronic statement- seriously- Did metmom ever state that because it can’t be directly detected that she beleives it doesn’t exist? I swear you evos must go to some ‘special ed school’ that teaches you how to ignore intent and twist people’s words around till they aren’t even recognizable anymore- You make mountains out of tottally irrelevent issues that weren’t even part of the oeriginal intent! It’s like watching a gradeschooler argue
Good grief, back to the “I’m a vietnam vet, you can’t talk down to me that way” again?
Maybe you should try to learn the golden rule or something!
You made an absurd accusation and now you have to live with it!
Colin Powell and Wesley Clark were in the military and attained a rank well beyond yours of this much I am sure, but to call either one of them conservative just won’t fly.
John F’n Heinz-Kerry served in vietnam too, but to assert he’s a conservative is funny.
Your logic within the confines of science is often blisteringly shallow, and now we see it’s not confined just to science.
I’ve been on FR for many years. I didn’t decide to join right away though, too much on my plate at the time with trying to be a hospice nurse, and raise kids while my wife was dying with a misdiagnosed problem while finishing my third nursing degree.
I’ve seen liberals posting in here for several years.
You should familialarize yourself more with the term and idea of “conservativism”.
Hey, I know!!! ... concerning that very subject on FR itself:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1103363/posts
Do you have any concept of the differences between direct detection and existence?
Oh wait, of course you don’t.
Hey, that's what they do with God.
Funny how when it suits their purposes, that kind of evidence is good enough. If it doesn't suit their purposes, that kind of evidence will never be good enough.
You can detect the effect of gravity... but you really cannot detect gravity. Place yourself in free fall and then try to detect it. It's there. But where? And in what direction is its force vector? How many gravity sources are there? Where? Can you detect them?
Another brilliant support of the ToE.
Do you really think that you’ll win people over like that?
What do you mean by "detect"? How is your feeling of weight different from your feeling of hot or cold, or from hearing.
Bear in mind that our inner ears are rather sensitive to the direction of gravity (or acceleration, if you will).
But the argument isn't about semantics. It's about whether a phenomenon is regular and quantifiable and subject to study by science.
The claim was made that gravity is just as elusive as God. I'm rather amused that Newton's icon of scientific investigation is being attacked by creationists. It's a real hoot.
Gravity is as material as anything is material. It is a form of energy; unless Einstein is wrong, gravity propagates at the speed of light, which makes it a form of energy interchangeable with matter.
I made an absurd accusation? Right.
You made the rather interesting claim that the displacement of water by a human body measures weight and fat content rather than volume, and you think I'm absurd?
Your fellow poster says gravity is not material, and you think I'm absurd?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.