Reply to: Quick Poll

[Sysman]

You sound like an arts graduate who has picked up science later.

The opposite, I have a Computer Science degree, but now doing a Philosophy, Politics and Economics degree. I have always been a ferocious reader of both realms of knowledge. I actually find people who have interest in only one are usually bores and have a deficiency of some sort.

My comment was based on a my observations during a Psychology course I did at Uni.

With a Maths, Physics and Chemistry background myself, I thought that the Psychology lot were trying too hard to become a hard science like Physics or Chemistry without understanding that in those disciplines any theory is only valid until something crops up which doesn't obey that theory.

In other words the Psychology lot put "hard sciences" on a pedestal which in my opinion wasn't justified.

In one of my Psychology final exam papers I explored this area, and got excellent marks for it

[LatteLiberal]

Sas when you're so down on religion, why have you created an imaginary friend of your own in LatteLiberal? Did you feel you needed to agree with you so people would think your arguments weren't so moronic?

You are off there mate, if you are positing that all atheists are the same person you might reduce the population of the western world a bit.

[Old Hack]

Religious people are weird.

[d000hg]

Sas when you're so down on religion, why have you created an imaginary friend of your own in LatteLiberal? Did you feel you needed to agree with you so people would think your arguments weren't so moronic?

[sasguru]

And NAT would be wrong fitting 2, not none. Having tried, unsuccesfully, to explain this to you before. It would be akin to putting brand new tyres on the front, and bald tyres on the rear; one part of the car would have grip, the other none, leading to one end of the car being very unstable on braking, especially given the back end would be snaking around and hard to control.

I don't know - there does seem to be an inbuilt cretinism with religious types.

[sasguru]

Scientific method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I hope that gets you started, always good to set someone on the path to enlightenment.

You need to understand that EO is a postmodernist who believes the random neuronal firing of his aged alcohol-addled brain has the same value as a controlled experiment.

Welcome to the cretin fest that is CUK general.

[Old Hack]

Nobody said it was safer to fit 2 than 4. NAT suggested it was safer to fit 2 than 0. HTH.

And NAT would be wrong fitting 2, not none. Having tried, unsuccesfully, to explain this to you before. It would be akin to putting brand new tyres on the front, and bald tyres on the rear; one part of the car would have grip, the other none, leading to one end of the car being very unstable on braking, especially given the back end would be snaking around and hard to control.

[fckvwls]

Nope I meant what I said, maybe a dictionary is in order?

Oh, you were being pacific were you? Does your dictionary have the word malapropism in it you

[LatteLiberal]

come on then , how DOES the scientific method work einstein?

or is it Frankenstein

Scientific method - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I hope that gets you started, always good to set someone on the path to enlightenment.

[EternalOptimist]

come on then , how DOES the scientific method work einstein?

or is it Frankenstein

[d000hg]

You mean like my insistence that it's far safer to fit 4 winter tyres than 2 - as mandated in Germany, Finland and Austria?

Nobody said it was safer to fit 2 than 4. NAT suggested it was safer to fit 2 than 0. HTH.

What you say has some reasoning to it, it opens the door for any phenomena to be considered possible, which of course is plausible however so improbable that it can be safely ignored.

'safely' is a debatable conclusion to draw

[LatteLiberal]

Did you mean voracious or do you turn the pages aggressively?

Nope I meant what I said, maybe a dictionary is in order? To save you some time here is one definition

"extremely intense"

I like to inject some originality into my phrases.

[Old Hack]

Did you mean voracious or do you turn the pages aggressively?

Nah, just angry in the 'why don't I understand this tulip' way...

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to fckvwls again.

[fckvwls]

The opposite, I have a Computer Science degree, but now doing a Philosophy, Politics and Economics degree. I have always been a ferocious reader of both realms of knowledge. I actually find people who have interest in only one are usually bores and have a deficiency of some sort.

Did you mean voracious or do you turn the pages aggressively?

[Old Hack]

The opposite, I have a Computer Science degree, but now doing a Philosophy, Politics and Economics degree. I have always been a ferocious reader of both realms of knowledge. I actually find people who have interest in only one are usually bores and have a deficiency of some sort.

You do sound a lot like assguru you know: full of self important horse tulipe carrying very little weight intellectually.