Does this post offend you?
-
Hehe... Another post with nothing but claims and rubbish and your one person point of view again. If u want to conclude the thread, I can do my conclusion as well.
The point which is argued tremendously in tis thread dwells on 2 issues.
1) on oral exams
2) about a statement which I said tat the more important skill of an engineer is to solve practical problem.
On (1), wat do u really discussed on ? Your only side of the story is your claims. U did not show anything tat support your argument at all. Wat did I do ? I show u websites from schools which u handpicked yourself and also comments made by people who had gone through the system. And wat do u do is try to discredit the website of TUM, a well known german university. U even claim tat message posted on all official website cannot be treated seriously
on (2), the arguments is even more ridiculous. I have claimed the rationale for saying tat the more important skill of an engineer is really to solve practical problem (which is really engineering) and tat is defined by wiki, board of professional engineers and dictionary. Wat he do is make tons of stupid claims on tis. He claim software engineer just do software, he claims finding the problem of a chip is not a solution, he claims a professor is not an occupation and make tons of stupid logic errors to confuse people. I can post the evidence of wat he claimed in the subsequent post and if u r interested, u can read back the replies he made and do your own judging.
Finally he claims tat education is AS IMPORTANT as engineering for an engineer. I have given him the answer MULTIPLE times and he refused to comment on it. He even acknowledge tat wat I said is true and tat "engineering" is still more important than "education" for an engineer. I will repeat for u again
If your education is passing information to your junior or presenting research paper, it is clear tat u need to have some result before u can "educate". Without results obtained from engineering, there is no content to educate. On the other hand, engineering can survive withut educating. They can repair a broken machine and the company go back into production and he has performed an important service even without educating
And u do acknowledged. post on 19 aug 420 by me
I am telling u the MORE IMPORTANT skill is still to come out with the SOLUTION to the practical problem. And if u look at my statement on research, it is to write paper too. If u do not come out with any results, r u even doing research ?? And if u consider "writing paper" as education, then my previous statement is still correct.
Your post on 19 aug 444
I didn't deny what you said is wrong.
I have been telling you all the while that is only part of the scope
So wat has he done is really just ignoring logic and twisting and turning in his own stand. When his argument is broken, he just abandon the whole argument and talk in a different tangent. He has repeatedly shown tis bahavior throughout the exchange. He has never substantiate the statement "The more important skills for an engineer or a research is to come out with the solution or write a world class research paper" is wrong in the end
The only skill he has is really good in is just hurling personal insults over. I have tried to hurl insults over however sad to say, I am not as cunning as him in writing one sided propaganda and claims. Effectively, tis is wat he has been doing for the last few replies to whitewash his logical flaws.
The next reply I will just paste some of his ridiculous points which hightlight his flawed logic and insincere arguments (which i have done before and he refused to comment) Instead of one sided claims, I give out evidence. If free to verify by going through the arguments tat had been done
-
-
1) he claims software engineer can just use software applications. In tis way my son who plays game is a software engineer
page 5, eagle post on 18 aug 448
For a software engineer that does graphic designing in windows using Photoshop as part of a team, which part of his job scope encompasses computer science and maths?
page 6, 18 aug 515
Software engineering is the application of a systematic, disciplined, quantifiable approach to the development, operation, and maintenance of software
1) Using photoshop is considered as operation of software.
2) Photoshop is not only for beautifying things here and there. Don't talk rubbish and take only 1 aspect of photoshop to prove a general point.
3) Your understanding of graphic designers is flawed
Look at your underlined words. U underline "operation" and "software" and then proceed with saying using photoshop is operation of software and say because of tis, software engineer can do the whole day just using photoshop which is clearly a spastic remark.
2) He claims professor is not an occupation. He say it despite many or all universities and name cards show people refering their job as professor.
page 6, 18 aug 515
Professors are merely legal titles and a form of address. An engineer with the title of "Professor" coaches new engineering students; his main job is education. He is still an engineer.
3) He claims all website cannot be trusted. He had said tat TUM official website is not to be trusted, a website informing other people of their experience is not to be trusted and even wiki is not to be trusted while his claims can
page 4 18 aug 220
You are still trying to tell us that some statements from the university websites is indeed much much more accurate than what was experienced first hand???
You have not even proved yet that the info you got from the university is a much more accurate description, and you are asking me whether I'm more qualified to talk about it as compared to the university?
page 5, 18 aug 416
Not 3rd party info? Are you joking? You see it on a website, then you post it out and tell me it is not 3rd party info???
page 5 18 aug 448
Are you going to believe the website, or someone who has come back from there and experienced everything first hand?
page 6,18 aug 637
Your logic of using the website to substantiate is already flawed.
You are still telling us that you believe the webmaster of the website (of whom you have no idea about at all) more than a person with first hand experience? Are you very sure the webmaster is the expert that you are claiming?
4) He felt the definition made by the board of professional engineer on their job to be badly defined and want to define the word for them. He think he knows their job better than the board of professional engineer
page 6 18 Aug 637
There's a reason why your strict definition from wiki is limited and does not encompass everything.
page 6, 18 aug 745
You know what's limiting you in your wiki definition of an engineer? That's because they took their primary source of definition from a Professional Engineers Board.
page 6,19 aug 1100
Prove wiki to be wrong? All the while, I have been telling you the definition is inadequate.
5) he make logical errors such as saying ' A is similar to B and C is similar to D. If A is found to have some difference with B, then C has the same problem with D". He do not know wat is mutually exclusive.
page 8, 17 sep 1221
a professor is a qualified expert" is an inadequate explanation of what a professor is. With your same logic, you will have nailed yourself a 2nd time on the statement that "an engineer is concerned with blah blah blah" because clearly, an engineer will also contain characteristics (or in other words, do other things) that is not included in the subset of pple concerned with blah blah blah
6) He make the error of saying "professor is a qualified expert and since qualified expert is not an occupation a professor is not an occupation". Using his logic, then a teacher is a man and a man is not an occupation. A teacher is not an occupation.
page 8,16 sep 926
Are you really that dumb? It is already stated clearly in black and white that a professor is a qualified expert.
So, is a qualified expert an occupation?
page 8,17 sep 1221
However, you still failed to explain how when wiki says a professor is a qualified expert, how can a professor thus be an occupation?
7) he kept telling people "educating" is as important as "work". However without result to show, he cannot educate. If he cannot repair the machine, he cannot educate. If he cannot find the source of problem he cannot educate. He refused to comment on tis point.
page 7, 13 sep 132
The skill of educating, the job scope of education.
When I have already told (and replied) you that I did not deny that you need to have research results to publish, but it is equally important to be able to publish and educate
8) he had made error in referencing other people claims and then insist his conclusion based on the wrong evidence. He claims I make 2500 when I never specifically mentioned tis and he have to apologise for it
page 4 18 aug 847
1) I admit being wrong to throw a personal insult on you based on your salary earlier (and on a wrong number somemore). That's pretty uncouth of me, I admit.