Australian Politics Forum - Motivated Rejection of Science

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: Motivated Rejection of Science Reply #30 - Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:08pm # wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 1:29pm: My job was to detect, not to treat. In Ajax, I see some of what I was trained to detect. Psychiatry is more about detailed diagnosis and treatment. Oh well, we'll have to settle on just detection then. It's a pity though. ECT is definitely indicated for the subject.
Back to top	1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Motivated Rejection of Science
Reply #31 - Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:23pm

Ajax wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 1:02pm:

You guys never question these things like you question the pros and cons of the AGW religion.....????

Strange........................!!!!!

That you would accept one thing at face value and not the other....????

Quote:

Now about the moon landing did that really happen...??

Well between the Earth and the moon there is a radiation belt was the lunar module insulated to stop this radiation passing through.....??

Well it must of been cause the astronauts are still alive today.

The lunar module had a rocket propellant device under its fuselage as it descended to make the landing this rocket should have dug out a little bit of a crater directly under it.

But guess what no crater of any size to report of.

This would have caused a lot of sand particles to become air borne (rocket pressure) even though the moon has only one sixth of the earth's gravity, eventually all these sand particles would have eventually settled back down again.

If one looks at the lunar module after it landed it looks like the astronauts have taken a rag and Mr. Sheen to its exterior, its squeaky clean.

But hell what do I know.......??

Now where the twin towers demolished or did they fall in accordance with the official story the authorities gave.

What pulverises steel reinforced concrete........????

What can melt steel....???

You know we may not be as educated as you would like us to be, but we're not smacking stupid either.....

You wouldn't like to rethink the highlighted bit would you??

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

# Gold Member Offline A fool is certain: an ignorant fool, absolutely so Posts: 2603	Re: Motivated Rejection of Science Reply #32 - Sep 8^th, 2013 at 4:53pm muso wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:08pm: ... ECT is definitely indicated for the subject. Perhaps the problem stems from the subject failing to take his med's.
Back to top	IP Logged

Postmodern Trendoid

Gold Member

Offline

International socialist

Posts: 892
Gender: male

Re: Motivated Rejection of Science
Reply #33 - Sep 8^th, 2013 at 5:59pm

muso wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:03pm:

We Conservatives quite like hard facts too. Brain food, old chap. The nutritional value of facts is considerably more than that of bullsh1t.

Relieved to hear that the truth is not a partisan issue.

Let me guess - Business and Government?

The truth will be what we progressives say it

Back to top

Only the boat people can save us from our own evil.

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Motivated Rejection of Science
Reply #34 - Sep 8^th, 2013 at 6:47pm

# wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 4:53pm:

muso wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:08pm:

... ECT is definitely indicated for the subject.

Perhaps the problem stems from the subject failing to take his med's.

I think I should take mine and spend some time horizontal. I have the mother of all stomach bugs so I might be absent for a few days. Keep up the good work.

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

Chimp_Logic

Gold Member

Offline

πολιτικός

Posts: 4826
Mawson Base
Gender: male

Re: Motivated Rejection of Science
Reply #35 - Sep 8^th, 2013 at 11:55pm

Postmodern Trendoid wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 5:59pm:

muso wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:03pm:

We Conservatives quite like hard facts too. Brain food, old chap. The nutritional value of facts is considerably more than that of bullsh1t.

Relieved to hear that the truth is not a partisan issue.

Let me guess - Business and Government?

The truth will be what we progressives say it

is

Back to top

Mini Ice Age (2014-2029)
Dr Sircus cures cancer with Baking Soda and Magnesium - Jethro the MENTAL GIANT & his flute madness

IP Logged

Ajax Gold Member Offline CO2 has never controlled temperature on Earth Posts: 11070 Australia Gender:	Re: Motivated Rejection of Science Reply #36 - Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:35am gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:23pm: You wouldn't like to rethink the highlighted bit would you?? Nope not at all.....!
Back to top	1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax 2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Motivated Rejection of Science
Reply #37 - Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:56am

Ajax wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:35am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:23pm:

You wouldn't like to rethink the highlighted bit would you??

Nope not at all.....!

Hmm, so you are quite happy to let stand a comment about sand particles becoming 'air borne' on the Moon, which doesn't actually have any 'air', or other type of atmosphere ?

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 11070
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Motivated Rejection of Science
Reply #38 - Sep 9^th, 2013 at 9:02am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:56am:

Ajax wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:35am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:23pm:

You wouldn't like to rethink the highlighted bit would you??

Nope not at all.....!

Hmm, so you are quite happy to let stand a comment about sand particles becoming 'air borne' on the Moon, which doesn't actually have any 'air', or other type of atmosphere ?

Quite happy indeed, because if the rocket under the fuselage had any sort of pressure dust would definitely be kicked up and then it would settle again.

More than likely the dust would've settled on the lunar module.

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Motivated Rejection of Science
Reply #39 - Sep 9^th, 2013 at 9:14am

Ajax wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 9:02am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:56am:

Ajax wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:35am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:23pm:

You wouldn't like to rethink the highlighted bit would you??

Nope not at all.....!

Hmm, so you are quite happy to let stand a comment about sand particles becoming 'air borne' on the Moon, which doesn't actually have any 'air', or other type of atmosphere ?

Quite happy indeed, because if the rocket under the fuselage had any sort of pressure dust would definitely be kicked up and then it would settle again.

More than likely the dust would've settled on the lunar module.

Quite possibly a small amount it might have, however, saying that the whole lunar landing didn't happen because you can't see that dust on the lander or see the crater on footage taken with Westinghouse Apollo Lunar Television Camera is as silly as saying the troposphere hot spot does exist, but is just invisible.

NONE of the reasoning you've used makes the Apollo lunar landings (all 6 of them) impossible, or faked.

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 11070
Australia
Gender: male

Re: Motivated Rejection of Science
Reply #40 - Sep 9^th, 2013 at 9:51am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 9:14am:

Quite possibly a small amount it might have, however, saying that the whole lunar landing didn't happen because you can't see that dust on the lander or see the crater on footage taken with Westinghouse Apollo Lunar Television Camera is as silly as saying the troposphere hot spot does exist, but is just invisible.

The lunar module looks like someone had taken a rag and Mr.sheen to it.

Do you know if the lunar module was insulated against the radioactive belt between the Earth & the moon....???

If the hot spot in the tropopause existed then our weather balloons and satellite data would've detected it.

As it stands there is no hot spot in the real world proved by empirical methods.

The hot spot exists in computer circulation models.

Quote:

NONE of the reasoning you've used makes the Apollo lunar landings (all 6 of them) impossible, or faked.

True I agree, still the question needs to be asked...???

OR

Are you happy to accept........

"Because they said so"..........?????

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

muso

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 13151
Gladstone, Queensland
Gender: male

Re: Motivated Rejection of Science
Reply #41 - Sep 9^th, 2013 at 11:03am

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:56am:

Ajax wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 8:35am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 3:23pm:

You wouldn't like to rethink the highlighted bit would you??

Nope not at all.....!

Hmm, so you are quite happy to let stand a comment about sand particles becoming 'air borne' on the Moon, which doesn't actually have any 'air', or other type of atmosphere ?

cheese particles Wink

Back to top

1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not

IP Logged

gizmo_2655

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16010
South West NSW
Gender: male

Re: Motivated Rejection of Science
Reply #42 - Sep 9^th, 2013 at 2:25pm

Ajax wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 9:51am:

gizmo_2655 wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 9:14am:

Quite possibly a small amount it might have, however, saying that the whole lunar landing didn't happen because you can't see that dust on the lander or see the crater on footage taken with Westinghouse Apollo Lunar Television Camera is as silly as saying the troposphere hot spot does exist, but is just invisible.

The lunar module looks like someone had taken a rag and Mr.sheen to it.

Do you know if the lunar module was insulated against the radioactive belt between the Earth & the moon....???

If the hot spot in the tropopause existed then our weather balloons and satellite data would've detected it.

As it stands there is no hot spot in the real world proved by empirical methods.

The hot spot exists in computer circulation models.

Quote:

NONE of the reasoning you've used makes the Apollo lunar landings (all 6 of them) impossible, or faked.

True I agree, still the question needs to be asked...???

OR

Are you happy to accept........

"Because they said so"..........?????

I'm happy to accept it because IF it had been 'faked', it would have looked a lot better and there are far too many people (not employed by the government in any way) involved for a con or fake to have worked.

Back to top

"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition.

It's similar to a strawman fallacy"
Bobbythebat

IP Logged

muso Gold Member Offline Posts: 13151 Gladstone, Queensland Gender:	Re: Motivated Rejection of Science Reply #43 - Sep 9^th, 2013 at 5:00pm Gizmo, Now you know how I feel. Hey Ajax! I saw the Apollo 11 burn that started its journey to the moon.
Back to top	1523 people like this. The remaining 7,134,765,234 do not IP Logged

gizmo_2655 Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 16010 South West NSW Gender:	Re: Motivated Rejection of Science Reply #44 - Sep 10^th, 2013 at 8:17am muso wrote on Sep 9^th, 2013 at 5:00pm: Gizmo, Now you know how I feel. Hey Ajax! I saw the Apollo 11 burn that started its journey to the moon. I saw the launch, the landing, Armstrong coming down the ladder, the flag planting and the return. Yeah, muso, I'm beginning to see your point.
Back to top	"I just get sick of people who place a label on someone else with their own definition. It's similar to a strawman fallacy" Bobbythebat IP Logged