What happens if your spelling, grammar or the like are so bad that you are incoherent?
Will you ban yourself? :dubious:
I am not sure you changed any opinions at all.
Ascenray doesn’t seem to be very impressed with your position
Shalmanese apologized for an error he made but then asked you to back up what you have claimed.
Are you seeing posts that I am not?
I dispute this.
Cite 15 different examples from 15 completely different threads spread across more than 3 main catagories of the SDMB (no you can’t just quote GD and Pit threads).
Come back when you are done and I’ll consider changing my opinion.
“Computer, calculate to the last digit the value of pie…”
…I knew those damn channel 29 Star Trek reruns would come in handy one day…!
That issue is actually covered in Rule 3:
Lol. Read a few posts down where I quote from the actual book and show that ascenray was dead wrong.
Shalmanese claimed that Guns, Germs & Steel represents some kind of scientific consensus. I asked whether, in his view, Diamond’s claim that New Guineans are probably genetically innately superior to Westerners in mental ability was the scientific consensus. Shalmanese never answered the question and instead disappeared.
It’s just an educated guess, but I doubt that in the future, Shalmanese will claim that Guns, Germs & Steel represents a scientific consensus. Now that he or she knows what the book says about the innate mental abilities of New Guineans.
As I said above, it’s unusual for a poster to argue for Position X in a thread and later openly admit that they have been convinced to abandon Position X. However, if one presents compelling evidence that Position X is wrong, and the poster immediately disappears, there’s a pretty good chance they’ve realized their position is untenable.
That’s not an educated guess, that’s a wild-ass guess. If Shalmanese comes here and claims that GG&S represents a scientific consensus to approximately the degree that he believed it did before reading your devastating argument, will you admit that your guesswork needs work?
Daniel
I did so, but I fail to see where acsenray conceded your point. Unless you can point that out for me, your claim that “it’s likely that [you] changed ascenray’s mind about Guns, Germs & Steel” is pure, Grade-A bullshit.
The word “approximately” gives him a little too much wiggle room for my comfort, so no.
But if he comes in and indicates that he still believes that GG&S represents the scientific consensus as far as he now knows, then yes, I will agree that my guess was wrong.
And of course I would be interested in his answer to my question as to whether the scientific consensus is that New Guineans are probably innately superior to westerners in mental ability.
As I said a couple times, it’s unusual for someone to concede in that way. Which is why I qualified my statements. The question I was asked was (basically) if I had convinced anyone to change their mind.
From circumstantial evidence, I think the answer is probably “yes,” but one can never be sure. Ascenray was presented with compelling evidence that he was wrong and did not respond. The most obvious explanation is that he realized his position had become untenable. Granted, there are other possible explanations.
Then, “I don’t know” would have been a far more honest answer. I believe, therefore, that this thread now qualifies as a cite for What Exit?'s claim that you post misinformation.
Happy holidays.
:shrug: I clearly qualified my response:
(my bold)
And I believe that you need to read more carefully before you hit the “submit reply” button. Please respond to what I actually post, and not what you (apparently) wish I had posted.
ETA: By the way, feel free to respond to my earlier challenge. Please QUOTE the actual misinformation which I supposedly posted/promoted in the Al Gore thread.
Saying something is merely “likely” doesn’t absolve you of the requirement to support your assertion; nothing in the linked thread does so, nor has anything you’ve posted here. Until acsenray, in some manner or other, posts to concede your point(s), your statement is disingenuous and entirely without meaning.
Brazil84, I don’t see any evidence in that thread that anyone changed their mind on the issues.
Really, I think they lost respect for you and just gave up Maybe they will show up and say I misunderstood.
Sure, but it does absolve me of the requirement to supply the degree of proof you are demanding.
Let me ask you this: Do you agree that ascenray was presented with very strong evidence that his claim was incorrect?
Same question to you: Do you agree that ascenray was presented with very strong evidence that his claim was incorrect?
I’m not asking you to supply anything. Either acsenray conceded your argument, or he didn’t.
Entirely irrelevant. It only matters if he agrees that was the case. Did he, or did he not, do that? A simple yes or no will suffice.
Sure you are, as far as I can tell. Basically, you are saying (as far as I can tell) that unless ascenray explicitly concedes, then there is no evidence that I changed his mind about anything.
Lol. Of course you evaded my question.
He absolutely did not.
Now let me ask you this: Is it ever possible to make a decent guess, based on circumstances (and not an explicit concession), as to whether a poster’s mind has been changed about something?
A simple yes or no will suffice.
But YOU don’t have to supply that. He does.
:rolleyes:
Because, as I stated, it’s irrelevant. If you can show compelling cause why it is relevant, then I’ll be happy to answer.
I need to clarify something before I will give you an answer: what “circumstances,” specifically, are present which lead you to conclude that it’s likely that you changed his mind?
Don’t take it as being reasonable. It’s gives him an out to “ban” someone who’s kicking his ass. It’s a flight tactic.
Proudly banned by brazil84, 2008
By “circumstances,” I am including anything which is posted or not posted to any thread on the message board.
Most people change their minds when presented with strong evidence that some fact they believed is wrong. (As long as (1) they have not yet invested themselves extensively in that fact; and (2) they don’t have any other strong interest in believing that fact).
Most likely, acsenray would never have made the claim he did if he had known (in advance) about the quote from the book. That’s just human nature. Unless they are trolling, most people just aren’t gonna claim “Book X doesn’t say Y” if they know in advance that Book X does in fact say Y.