Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Pics and Videos Buffet
The Toronto hearings. 9/11 investigation.
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="hb712" data-source="post: 11652018" data-attributes="member: 42038"><p>If you insist...</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Now with that quick definition out of the way, you should be able to see why your theories shouldn't be used to define something as absolute (i.e., 9/11 was a conspiracy). </p><p></p><p>Often times, the word "theory" is used incorrectly to describe ideas that cannot, or have not, been tested/proven. While this may seem like a simple argument, it has far reaching consequences. For example, you have taken "theories" (remember, untested/unproven) and used them to support your presupposed conclusion. Without using a sample of factual information and tested theories, combined with expert <em>opinions</em>, you have drawn a possibly flawed conclusion. Further, by presenting opinions/ideas as scientific theories, you are able to justify your conclusion to other similarly biased or unintelligent people.</p><p></p><p>Hopefully that makes sense for you. I'm fairly sure your ego will force you to simply make a sarcastic comment and disregard what I have said, but maybe there's a little piece of you clinging to a sliver of reality.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="hb712, post: 11652018, member: 42038"] If you insist... Now with that quick definition out of the way, you should be able to see why your theories shouldn't be used to define something as absolute (i.e., 9/11 was a conspiracy). Often times, the word "theory" is used incorrectly to describe ideas that cannot, or have not, been tested/proven. While this may seem like a simple argument, it has far reaching consequences. For example, you have taken "theories" (remember, untested/unproven) and used them to support your presupposed conclusion. Without using a sample of factual information and tested theories, combined with expert [I]opinions[/I], you have drawn a possibly flawed conclusion. Further, by presenting opinions/ideas as scientific theories, you are able to justify your conclusion to other similarly biased or unintelligent people. Hopefully that makes sense for you. I'm fairly sure your ego will force you to simply make a sarcastic comment and disregard what I have said, but maybe there's a little piece of you clinging to a sliver of reality. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Pics and Videos Buffet
The Toronto hearings. 9/11 investigation.
Top