Believe in science & ethics
-
Quoting you is not highlighting what you said but highlighting my shortcomings?Originally posted by soul_rage:Thanks for highlighting your shortcomings
at least that demonstrates your stupidity.
By the way, you keep insisting I am delusional, so I really wonder in your cowardly mind how are you going to prove that
That is how you do your logic? 
huh? There is no proof (to you) that you have delusions in your head? Telling you that the things you said about me without proof and evidence remain as delusions in your head... and since you admitted that you see no need for proof and evidence, that confirms your delusional state. There is no need for me to provide more evidence, you have given us ample. -
don't know what are you trying to get to, coz your arguments are always so messed up,Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Quoting you is not highlighting what you said but highlighting my shortcomings? That is how you do your logic?
huh? There is no proof (to you) that you have delusions in your head? Telling you that the things you said about me without proof and evidence remain as delusions in your head... and since you admitted that you see no need for proof and evidence, that confirms your delusional state. There is no need for me to provide more evidence, you have given us ample.
But I just read somewhere we should refrain from personal attacks (with regards to TheGoodEarth postings), so I will refrain from further personal attacks at you.
Just remember that the more you accuse others, the more you expose your bad morals and cowardly behavior. -
My "your arguments are always so messed up" or your brain is so messed up? Considering how (there is no need for proof and evidence) delusional you, I would suggest the latter.Originally posted by soul_rage:don't know what are you trying to get to, coz your arguments are always so messed up,
But I just read somewhere we should refrain from personal attacks (with regards to TheGoodEarth postings), so I will refrain from further personal attacks at you.
Just remember that the more you accuse others, the more you expose your bad morals and cowardly behavior.
Even when the accusations come with ample proof and evidence, "you expose your bad morals and cowardly behavior"? I think not.
Without proof and evidence, it is delusional. With, it is valid. That is what Science is about. Delusional (there is no need for proof and evidence) people like you will find it hard to understand. -
whatever, you are the smartest of them all, cowardOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:Even when the accusations come with ample proof and evidence? I think not.
Without proof and evidence, it is delusional. With, it is valid. That is what Science is about. Delusional (there is no need for proof and evidence) people like you will find it hard to understand.
-
Ok, so without proof and evidence, it is delusionalOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:Without proof and evidence, it is delusional. With, it is valid. That is what Science is about. Delusional (there is no need for proof and evidence) people like you will find it hard to understand.
How about moral values? Which comes to the next part of the topic, ethics
So you are saying ethics is delusional coz there is no proof or evidence? -
another delusion... what proof do you have that I am the smartest of them all?Originally posted by soul_rage:whatever, you are the smartest of them all, coward and what proof do you have that I am a coward? So many delusions you have -
as I said you don't even have the courage to answer simple questions, nor stand up to those statements you made, therefore that makes you a cowardOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:another delusion... what proof do you have that I am the smartest of them all? and what proof do you have that I am a coward? So many delusions you have -
Let us take away the personal insults for a more objective view of your statement above.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Without proof and evidence, it is delusional. With, it is valid. That is what Science is about.
ALL things without proof and evidence is delusional.
Questions:
- Is "Dark Energy" thereby delusional? (Assuming that you know what it is)
- Is "Dark Matter" thereby delusional, since there is no direct proof that it exists.
- Is the "Big Bang" delusional, since its only a theory and is not considered scientifically proven yet?
Simple questions again. Let's see whether you will exhibit the same tactic of avoiding what you claimed. -
Sure it is delusional if you believe, without evidence, the existence of "Dark Energy" and "Dark Matter"Originally posted by soul_rage:Let us take away the personal insults for a more objective view of your statement above.
ALL things without proof and evidence is delusional.
Questions:
- Is "Dark Energy" thereby delusional? (Assuming that you know what it is)
- Is "Dark Matter" thereby delusional, since there is no direct proof that it exists.
Simple questions again.
If you think that they exist and then you look for evidence to support your theory and discard your theory when you find none, that is not delusional.
I don't believe I have to explain simple things like that to you. It is no wonder you are so delusional. -
Urm...Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:Sure it is delusional if you believe, without evidence, the existence of "Dark Energy" and "Dark Matter"
If you think that they exist and then you look for evidence to support your theory and discard your theory when you find none, that is not delusional.
I don't believe I have to explain simple things like that to you.
do you know that the 3 above are standard terms in science?
You are telling us that the scientists proposing these hypothesis are delusional? -
Yes, if they come out and say that they exist without evidence and proof. They would not, unlike you, of course.Originally posted by soul_rage:Urm...
do you know that the 3 above are standard terms in science?
You are telling us that the scientists proposing these hypothesis are delusional? -
From the looks of it, you don't quite understand the above terms. Again a point proven that you talk before you even understandOriginally posted by AndrewPKYap:Yes, if they come out and say that they exist without evidence and proof. They would not, unlike you, of course.
So its pointless to talk to you anymore
Frankly, you are a disgrace to Science. I wonder how much you really know. -
I guess a delusional will always come up with more delusions. Show proof and evidence that IOriginally posted by soul_rage:From the looks of it, you don't quite understand the above terms. Again a point proven that you talk before you even understand
So its pointless to talk to you anymore
Frankly, you are a disgrace to Science. I wonder how much you really know.
1. don't quite understand the above terms
2. talk before you even understand
and don't tell me you "don't need to come up with proof and evidence" like you said that last time or that would only confirm your delusional state -
if everyone thinks like our very special Andrew Yap, ie everything beyond scientific proof is superstition, then everyone will not explore beyond into the unknown and adopt the attitude of waiting until someone else do the dirty work of proof for him.
that someone else wont be Andrew, i am sure. Because he is so adamant that everything beyond scientific proof is superstition and hence no motivations to work on the proof.
one major distinction between an animal and human being is that human being is capable of imagination, animals are incapable of imaginations. I think Andrew's attitude is incapable of imaginations because he will not imagine anything beyond concrete scientific proof and hence he will have no imaginations. Therefore Andrew Yap should be classified into the "animal" class.
Andrew is so special, an ANimal's brain in a human body.
Andrew Yap becomes ANimal ANdrew Yap or AA Yap in boogie wonderland. -
For the 2 guys who have doublt on science.Pls tell us which portion or branch of science u don't believe and which part u do.Surely u can't say all the science is false.
-
Did i say we should not believe in Science? Dont put words in people's mouth.Originally posted by PRP:For the 2 guys who have doublt on science.Pls tell us which portion or branch of science u don't believe and which part u do.Surely u can't say all the science is false.
All i said is our science is very limited and there is lots more to learn and explore. What we dont know, we should not discard as superstition.
Ships, airplanes physically disappeared mysteriously in the bermuda triangle. So should we discard them as superstition because our scientists are unable to explain it? Or should we explore and keep trying to understand these weird phenomena ?
Are you one of those who think our science is highly developed already so that it can explain most things and therefore those things which it cannot explain are bullsh.it superstition? -
Mass: you must be thinking that mass is so simple and you dont know meh. Everyone with a bit of education would say "Mass is the amount of matter a body has." You dont know meh. You so stupid until even mass also dont know meh.
The truth is that scientists are still struggling to fully understand what exactly is mass which is everywhere around us. if scientists cannot fully understand or explain what is mass which is so elementary to our lives and you discard things which scientists cannot explain as superstition, you would have discarded a lot of things or most things in nature. -
there are many billions of human beings who lived and died through human being's history. Why is it that no two human beings are 100% perfectly identical? Science cannot fully explain this weird phenomena, so you discard it as superstition. In your "discard as superstition whatever science cannot explain" proposition, we are all physically non-existence, but we do exist. Come and touch my hand, I am real. -
You love your parents and children. Love and affection is there, always there through the little things you do to your loved ones. But love can never be proven in science labs. So you discard love and affection as superstition. Even animals dont discard love for their offsprings and animals know love. So your proposition that "discard everything which science cannot prove as superstition' means you dont know love or believe in love, and that will make you less than an animal. -
light: there is no scientific proof to integrate and fully explain the hypothesis that light itself is a particle and a wave at the same time. but you will accept light as real because you can see it even when light is not fully understood or explained by scientists. why? because you can see it? -
What do you think the scientists doing basic research day in and day out, what do you think they are doing, if not trying to get scientific proof? Doing basic research and getting scientific proof is "dirty work"?Originally posted by Daddy!!:if everyone thinks like our very special Andrew Yap, ie everything beyond scientific proof is superstition, then everyone will not explore beyond into the unknown and adopt the attitude of waiting until someone else do the dirty work of proof for him.
What an exceptionally stupid statement. With such an exceptionally stupid statement for openers, there is no need to read anything else you write. -
science, freedom of speech and democracy
in order to make discoveries and scientific progress, one must adopt an open and inquisitive mind. for instance, one would freely ask questions and dare to challenge the status quo. for example, albert einstein dared to challenge the status quo and proposed his own theories, he dared to imagine beyond the current widely accepted concepts. many of his theories were pure imaginations. in order to have this type of thinking mind, the environment would have to allow people to freely discuss issues and to freely challenge the status quo without fear of repercussions and also so that it becomes a second nature to the people. it is perhaps of this that the western democracies would always be able ahead in scientific inventions and knowledge.
the ability to imagine beyond what the current scientific concepts and at the same time ask questions freely is somewhat related to the culture of freedom of speech.
by going against freely imaginative minds, AA Yap has proven himself to be another autocratic person because he tries to restrict people from free imaginations. Soul_rage on the other hand is more democratic than AA Yap since he proposed one to be open in mind and thinking. -
For the LAST TIME, PLEASE DO NOT practise extremism. Its VERY irritating to keep repeating my stanceOriginally posted by PRP:For the 2 guys who have doublt on science.Pls tell us which portion or branch of science u don't believe and which part u do.Surely u can't say all the science is false.
1) I DO NOT doubt Science and its greatness
2) I just am telling you that if you don't think out of the box, you cannot discover new things.
3) If Einstein or Galileo or Stephen Hawkings were to behave like Andrew, its the end of Science as we know it, coz anything outside of what current Science knows now, are superstitions and delusions.
4) If Edison were to behave like Andrew, then he would not believe his idea and insisted on testing > 1000 times until he got the light bulb invented
The above are just examples of how people think out of the box (and be delusional like what Andrew said) and created the current technology that we have now.
Its very hard to knock sense into a pretender of Science, since he doesn't understand that for research to succeed, researchers must think beyond what we have now (which means these believers of future technology are delusional and stupid according to Mr Andrew's defn) -
If you did not read, then you have no credibility anymore.Originally posted by AndrewPKYap:What do you think the scientists doing basic research day in and day out, what do you think they are doing, if not trying to get scientific proof? Doing basic research and getting scientific proof is "dirty work"?
What an exceptionally stupid statement. With such an exceptionally stupid statement for openers, there is no need to read anything else you write.
At least we make the effort to read your postings, no matter how ridiculous your postings, or rude and obnoxious your postings are.
Other than and , what else are you good in besides being as stubborn as a mule. -