Nice Interview

Then you thought wrong.

Some things are absolute. We know objects aren’t going to fly into space even though the earth is spinning on its axis while it orbits the sun at 1,000 miles per hour. That’s because we know gravity exists.

We know that the world’s climate is changing. We know that sea levels are rising and ice caps are melting. We know that the earth’s temperature has risen 0.32° F every decade since 1981.

Just because we don’t know everything doesn’t mean we don’t know anything. We know the earth is spherical. People who deny that are ignorant. We know the earth’s climate is changing. People who deny that are ignorant.

Scientific methodology dates back to ancient times. The methods of scientific inquiry have been refined throughout the years by people like Epicurus and Newton and so on.

“The scientific method was not invented by any one person, but is the outcome of centuries of debate about how best to find out how the natural world works. The ancient Greek philosopher Aristotle was among the first known people to promote that observation and reasoning must be applied to figure out how nature works. The Arab Muslim mathematician and scientist Hasan Ibn al-Haytham (known in the western world as Alhazen) is often cited as the first person to write about the importance of experimentation. Since then, a large number of scientists have written about how science should ideally be conducted and contributed to our modern understanding of the scientific method. Those scientists include Roger Bacon, Thomas Aquinas, Galileo Galilei, Francis Bacon, Isaac Newton, John Hume, and John Stuart Mill. Scientists today continue to evolve and refine the scientific method as they explore new techniques and new areas of science.”

https://www.britannica.com/science/scientific-method

In the case of the scientific method being applied to climate change, first we observe. We observe global temperatures, we observe ocean temperatures, we observe rising sea levels, we observe ice caps disappearing, and so on.

Secondly, we form a hypothesis as to why this is occurring. Could it be solar flares?

Next, you conduct tests and experiments. We measure the amount of heat entering and leaving our atmosphere. Less infrared radiation is leaving our atmosphere. No, it isn’t solar flares.

Therefore, you can determine that climate change is not influenced by the sun.

And you continue to hypothesize and test and so on.

Climate change, like gravity, exists. These are observable phenomenon. The why part is where the scientific method comes into play.

You can deny gravity exists. You can deny the earth orbits the sun. You can deny water changes its molecular structure when exposed to freezing temperatures. And you can deny that the earth’s climate is changing. But doing so would mean you’re ignorant. No other way to say it.

Con air is the worst movie ever made. EVER Nickel back is the best band ever made

1 Like

This poster’s entire modus operandi is to ask rhetorical questions about the fallibility of the source or method used to come to your conclusion.

They are a strident, vocal believer of God and believe most of the Bible in the literal interpretation. Allow me to save you from the confusion for why most of your arguments will be lost on them.

1 Like

So, does that mean I get to question climate science now?

I’m so confused. Why does anything require further study things when absolute knowledge exists?

So these people were flawless? Which is why Science is arbitrarily absolute and not absolute at the same time? Or…wait, still confused.

1 Like

Sorry, I will be mindful to heed your scientific authority, comrade.

1 Like

I don’t know why you’re confused. I’m still waiting for you to answer why the scientific method is flawed.

They aren’t wrong. You’ve gone from one weird thing to the next without actually saying anything.

We live in a reality.

To a certain end, we can study this reality. The rules that govern it.

Is it possible we are living in the matrix and the real rules outside of this reality differ completely? Is it possible that the rules are completely different under the hood from how we have researched, studied, and calculated them out to be? I suppose? That’s not what science is, though. Science is a collection of theories (not the layman theory, the highest form of regard type of theory), which means it is the best known assessment of reality that we have.

Uchuyagi, all your posts really tell us is that you’ve spent way too much time studying your spirituality and a dearth of time studying in the realm of science because you fundamentally don’t even understand the point of science, or it’s application to fact-based discussion.

1 Like

I think I’ve been given an out. Noticed you liked Zipzo’s post where he said the following:

Since asking questions is clearly something you are against doing, why would you ask me to answer yours?

Seems in very bad faith for you to proceed in this manner. How will you solve this?

1 Like

I haven’t asked you any questions.

I’ve nothing to learn from you, so naturally, there is no need.

1 Like

WoW has now become inseparable with modern US politics. I’m not American and I don’t understand the growth model for these games - most people overseas don’t care about US domestic social issues.

Taking your countries social issues and shoehorning it into everything is causing the decline of a lot of US products overseas as people just don’t understand or care. Is this agenda more important than making a good product or your business?

3 Likes

I would argue the only reason it becomes a big deal is because of the reaction.

It’s possible that people could just…not screech when a company mentions the word “diversity” and nobody would bat an eye and we could all be focusing on something else.

My refrigerator is acting up. I’d better finish that book by Friday.

I got sick after eating sushi last week. Pizza is the best.

Da, comrade.

1 Like

I don’t think people at least where I live care about the diversity aspect of these things so far as they want to see a good product made in time. The problem is that there’s a trend where US social issues come to the forefront (in this case ahead of the games development) when there are development problems to compensate for a lack of content and to distract from the real issues the company is having.

1 Like

You don’t even read, else you’d probably have realized I wasn’t responding to you.

Not really concerned about what your opinions are concerning what I say when you either fail to read or comprehend what you read.

1 Like

I did realize, so I deleted that post.

But I’m still waiting for you to answer how the scientific method is flawed.

You don’t need to be so snotty.

This is the part of the post I’m responding to. If you can’t answer it, that’s fine. But it’s not a good look to blame other people for that.

WoW is a US developed game, by a US-based company.

So, naturally, everything it does is subject to US cultural values. Your personal gaming enjoyment does not take priority over equality and social progress in an entire country.

1 Like

First you gotta explain why my asking questions is wrong for me to do but okay for you to do.

1 Like

I knew I had something in common with a Forum Druud

Isn’t it in your own interest to get a good product? Or are you satisfied with Blizzard provided they address the correct social issues and don’t see the product as a priority next to that?

They have said they want to expand to overseas markets and make the game appeal elsewhere as part of their choice to add diversity. How is forcing US cultural values on people diversity?

2 Likes

You first need to prove that focus on properly navigating social “issues” is somehow worsening the product, I.E. Blizzard mentioning diversity is an indication of why WoW is getting worse.

Until you can do that, this is a red herring.