Caedes

Joined

• started 57 topics
• posted 2,254 times   see topics posted on
• send a message

Posts by Caedes

• 
  579

  Won't get fooled again ...Moon Landing.

  by The Rebel in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so i was fooled by the witnesses.

  what can i learn from that?

  not to accept things at face value but to seek out opinion and different view points.. hence my question " do you believe man landed on the moon?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Caedes

  A) Because NASA are not funded to the same degree as they were in the sixties, not even taking into account inflation NASA has a budget less than the cost of the moon landings. You would have to increase the NASA budget tenfold to get to the sort of money they need to get to the moon. The cost in the sixties for the moon landing was $25Billion, NASAs entire budget this year was $18Billion.

  B) Because it is a matter of public record that NASA is not funded to the same degree and hence is the sort of question that you could find the answer to yourself given a computer and five minutes.

  In engineering you have three criteria cheap, accurate and on-time. You get to pick two so if you want it cheap and you don't want it to go wrong then it is going to take time.

  Re-posted as the OP seems to have missed my answer to his/her question.
• 
  579

  Won't get fooled again ...Moon Landing.

  by The Rebel in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so i was fooled by the witnesses.

  what can i learn from that?

  not to accept things at face value but to seek out opinion and different view points.. hence my question " do you believe man landed on the moon?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Caedes

  A) Because NASA are not funded to the same degree as they were in the sixties, not even taking into account inflation NASA has a budget less than the cost of the moon landings. You would have to increase the NASA budget tenfold to get to the sort of money they need to get to the moon. The cost in the sixties for the moon landing was $25Billion, NASAs entire budget this year was $18Billion.

  B) Because it is a matter of public record that NASA is not funded to the same degree and hence is the sort of question that you could find the answer to yourself given a computer and five minutes.

  In engineering you have three criteria cheap, accurate and on-time. You get to pick two so if you want it cheap and you don't want it to go wrong then it is going to take time.
• 
  579

  Won't get fooled again ...Moon Landing.

  by The Rebel in

  1. jw
  2. friends

  so i was fooled by the witnesses.

  what can i learn from that?

  not to accept things at face value but to seek out opinion and different view points.. hence my question " do you believe man landed on the moon?.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Caedes

  I suppose I would count as an expert in engineering and to a lesser degree in physics and I have not seen a single piece of believable 'evidence' that the moon landings were faked.
• 
  449

  Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

  by LAWHFol in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

  i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

  "atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Caedes

  I think this thread may be used in the future as an example of someone having their arse handed to them on a plate. Wow.
• 
  449

  Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

  by LAWHFol in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

  i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

  "atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Caedes

  Poor wording, it is about conceiving of something you don't know.

  If by poor wording you are talking about your post I would agree, although everything I've seen of your argument suggests that the poor wording is merely a reflection of the lack of cogency you put into it's formulation.

  The fact that most atheists have put a great deal of thought and critical thinking into labelling themselves atheist does not mean that it is a necessary step, in fact as has been previously pointed out it is agnosticism that implies a thought process without knowledge.
• 
  449

  Labeling one self "Atheist" is Unscientific

  by LAWHFol in

  1. watchtower
  2. beliefs

  i have not meet all atheists, and it would be foolish for me to assume that all atheists, share the same prototypical view points.

  i am inclined to feel that this classifies the views of a large percentage of atheists.

  "atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Caedes

  I told you to pick something you don't know and have not thought about...

  Also, you may not think about it after, and use that in your conclusion

  Wow, the logic train really did leave you at the station!
• 
  32

  Jesus Christ explains the particle used in my cosmology theory using parables in the bible.

  by Aleon in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i wrote a cosmology theory using an expanding particle shaped as a perfect sphere.

  in the bible jesus christ speaks of this particle in his parables.

  this is good news!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Caedes

  In this case the "theory" is a system that is a logical deduction of particle behavior that explains real life phenomena. And everything fits just as it should. Even gravity is fully explained.

  That isn't the standard scientific definition of the word theory but If everything fits as it should how are quantum mechanics and special relativity related?
• 
  32

  Jesus Christ explains the particle used in my cosmology theory using parables in the bible.

  by Aleon in

  1. watchtower
  2. bible

  i wrote a cosmology theory using an expanding particle shaped as a perfect sphere.

  in the bible jesus christ speaks of this particle in his parables.

  this is good news!.

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Caedes

  Can you define the word theory for me?
• 
  56

  Sick of the nanny state. Polictical correctness can kiss my donkey!

  by punkofnice in

  1. social
  2. current

  i am sick of this bloody nanny state here in the uk.

  political correcness has become a drag.

  (am i allowed to say drag without offending someone?).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Caedes

  Hence the banning of Baa Baa Black Sheep to protect people that are not offended by it in the first place. I see PC as a thin end of a wedge that will erradicate ANY free speech.

  But there is no ban on baa baa black sheep, you keep on saying it but it simply is not the case.

  You mentioned health and safety earlier, which has a similar problem. The people who make the sort of decisions that end up in the pages of the Sun are not health and safety legislators, they are ordinary people interpreting a set of rules. Nobody from the government has gone to a school and banned conkers, it is simply one person reacting or being overzealous.

  In exactly the same way that nobody in government has banned baa baa black sheep, all it takes is one person to say we should sing something else and suddenly we are all on the highway to hell because political correctness has gone mad. Political correctness is in an even worse position because it is merely opinion, nobody goes to jail because they were not sufficiently PC.

  You claim that political correctness is a slippery slope but generally it is used to describe societal peer pressure, if society is changing and becoming more PC that is a result of a change in social attitudes. Nobody is forced to comply, complaining about peer pressure is a bit like complaining that we are hairless apes.
• 
  56

  Sick of the nanny state. Polictical correctness can kiss my donkey!

  by punkofnice in

  1. social
  2. current

  i am sick of this bloody nanny state here in the uk.

  political correcness has become a drag.

  (am i allowed to say drag without offending someone?).

  1. 
  2. 
  3. 
• 

  Caedes

  Personally I think free speech applies to everyone - so echoing a view put forward in The Sun or by UKIP is allowed after all. Thanks.

  I merely pointed out that you were echoing their arguments, disagreeing with those arguments does not equate to wanting them suppressed. Glad to see you are embracing your inner UKipper.

  it just means that offensive free speech such as racism isn't given a platform in the public sphere - this point has nothing to do with this thread. There have been no racist views expressed in this thread.

  You seemed to be suggesting that free speech and political correctness were not compatible, I think they are. You are the one that raised the issue of people being accused of being 'waaycist' (sic).

  Since white people are not subject to institutional racism - very dubious statement. Zimbabwe's white farmers, together with their black colleagues, were driven from their farms by Mugabe's institutional racism. Some were beaten and killed.

  Non-sequiter, this thread is about the UK being too PC in the opinion of PON, yourself and a number of others. If you wish to discuss Zimbabwe then that would be best served in a different thread. I presume you aren't claiming that white people are subject to institutional racism in the UK?