Subject:
|
Re: Couldn't resist
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.space
|
Date:
|
Mon, 25 Jun 2001 21:53:09 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
6908 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.space, Jesse Alan Long writes:
> Tim, in this statement, his words ARE insignificant because they are
> incorrect, even though he IS an astrophysicist. This is what Mister Paul
> Hertzog said to me, 'What the flipping space monster burgers are you talking
> about? Friction in space? NOT, noway, nohow. Wings are useless in space,
> dude. I'm an astrophysicist, I know whereof I speak (I'm sure this has
> been said elsewhere but hey, I don't have the time to look it up.)
>
> -Paul (Hertzog)'
>
> If he was even concerned in the slightest part of his mind in disproving the
> fact that there is friction in space he should at least TRY to make some
> evidence disproving what I say, Tim.
Well then, politely ask him for evidence, don't disrespect him by trying to
diminish his experience in a field with smarta** remarks (eg. Does your
title of an astrophysicist amuse me? Have you worked with such people as
Carl Sagan or Issac Asimov? I have not worked with these people but then
again, neither have you...)
Those kind of comments are not appreciated around here in the least,
speaking for myself, and with the knowledge that others are annoyed at them
as well.
> I am not a harsh person but I hate
> stupidity and his reply is another prime example of stupidity, Tim.
Who are you to call his reply an example of stupidity? You don't know Paul
at all, you don't know his experience, etc. Yet you come here and ask
questions of everyone, then shoot them down with no proof yourself - like
you're right solely on the basis that you said so.
> Education does not necessarily mean a degree but rather using the degree to
> a point where you actually know what you mean in your area of expertise and
> people have graduated from high school without being able to read so he
> should at least know about the aspects of gravity and friction in outer
> space if he became an astrophysicist.
Uhm, this makes absolutely no sense at all.
> I feel insulted that he says that I am wrong and yet can not even prove his
> own words and that, to my mind not only makes his reply appear stupid but
> also lazy and cowardly, Tim.
Whatever. Its just you not wanting to be told you're wrong, IMNSHO.
> I work this way in life and so do you so
> please do not argue this point to me but these people, as well as you, do
> not know is that I AM willing to change my thoughts if people can, without
> the shadow of a doubt, change my mind and show me their evidence for their
> ideas in life.
We don't know you're willing, because you certainly haven't shown that
you're willing.
> This is my way of saying that when I am proven wrong that I
> will change the way that I think and I will have become the better person
> for changing my ways of thought in life.
Its kinda nice to say something, but its a bit harder to do it. As for my
opinion on your willingness to be proven wrong, I'll take your attitude --
I'll believe it when I see it.
Perhaps if you could communicate better in writing, you would be understood
better here. I know of many people (because I've talked to them) who are
frustrated at your posts and the attitude contained within them. I've been
harsh too (and if you continue to be ignorant of others here, I'll still be
harsh, but if you show you're willing to learn here, I'll help you).
In general, Lugnet is a pretty welcoming place. People are patient with
newbies here. But when newbies don't respond to gentle correction or
suggestions and consistently keep up acting ignorantly of others, we don't
lie down and take it either.
For example, you continued to argue the point about Classic Space/Futuron,
when EVEYRONE here is at a concensus on an explanation of them. We've been
at that concensus for YEARS. Arguing the point on that when people tell you
the way it is here just gets people riled.
Since you said you don't subscribe to the 'normal' way of building LEGO
spaceships, I won't begin to argue the point on your space technology. Just
keep in mind the way you have described your ships is considered well in the
realm of fantasy versus reality based spaceships here (ie. weapon count/size
ratio, exhaust weapons, etc).
Anyways, my suggestion to you (if you're willing to learn how to carry
yourself here) is to take some time to formulate ideas. Don't go off on
tangents that make little sense to others too - this just throws people off
and gets them going 'WTF?' - from the people I've talked to.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Should resist (Was: Couldn't resist)
|
| (...) Tim, (and all), I've come into this discussion late, and it occurs to me that this is the best part of it so far. It is great advice, which most everyone involved in this thread would to well to take. i.e. if you don't want to perpetuate (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jun-01, to lugnet.space)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Couldn't resist
|
| (...) Tim, in this statement, his words ARE insignificant because they are incorrect, even though he IS an astrophysicist. This is what Mister Paul Hertzog said to me, 'What the flipping space monster burgers are you talking about? Friction in (...) (23 years ago, 25-Jun-01, to lugnet.space)
|
195 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
