Things Adaher has learned today: {null set}
I am careful. But I have been spectacularly wrong – often because I didn’t realize I was letting myself believe something more because I WANTED to believe it than because I had carefully researched it.
During the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy, I posted a story about union workers on electrical crews in New Jersey that had turned away assistance from Virginia crews there to help, because the Virginia crews were not unionized.
I didn’t make it up…I was quoting a publication.
But that publication, in it’s haste to publish the story, had engaged in too-shoddy fact checking. And of course that story was not accepted at face value here – it was vigorously checked.
And it shortly became clear that I was way off base.
It happens. When I was convinced of my error, I simply owned up to it. It took more than a simple denial; I had a cite, after all. But eventually it became clear my cite was valueless.
Now,in my area of expertise, that is very unusual, because I know how to do legal research and I know enough about the law that even a tempting wrong answer isn’t likely to slip past me.
It’s not OK. But it’s OK to heap scorn on wrong arguments.
Definitely. I haven’t actually been excusing being wrong so much as saying it’s not a sin worthy of personal condemnation. If it is, then the nation’s leaders and experts are not meant to be taken seriously, and by SDMB standards, are almost uniformly idiots.
However, I would never complain about my arguments being ridiculed. That’s all part of the spirit of debate.
Self-effacing? Is that a new flavor of troll?
The problem was already mentioned, even granting the dubious point that you never complain when the argument is being ridiculed, an acknowledgement that it was not a good one to use is never made by you.
You really are a complete loser.
Thanks for the class and order clarification Colibri. What’s the family? Confused-idae?
Dipshiticus? Weinie-dorcus?
When I saw that quoted above, and the last two words were bolded, I couldn’t help but hear it in the voice of Don Pardo in Weird Al’s “I Lost on Jeopardy!”.
No, you won’t.
You’ve spent this entire thread saying that you’re no more wrong than anybody else, it’s not a problem to be wrong, and there’s not always a right answer anyway.
You will continue ruining intelligent debates by requiring everyone to refute your personal nonsense, without even realizing it.
[Real Men of Genius]
I salute you, Dunning-Kruger poster boy, for showing us all that Psychologists occasionally have theories that work.
[/RMoG]
I can ruin a discussion? You have bigger problems than I thought.
Ah … Negat Penuriosus Denial-idae!
Anyone collecting them? He/she’s free for the taking. Please? I’ll pay…
So your claim, adaher, is that you aren’t fundamentally different in your level of wrongness from the average Doper.
This is, I think we all agree, a rather extraordinary claim, which therefore requires extraordinary evidence, which so far hasn’t been forthcoming.
No one here is claiming that everyone here is perfectly correct, except for you. What people are saying is that if you piled up everyone’s wrongess, the average Doper would have, perhaps, a good-sized hill to their name. You have Olympus Mons. So pointing at other peoples’ hill doesn’t really address the fundamental disagreement.
Heck, adaher, if it could be proven you were wrong half the time, that would constitute a major improvement over your current mark.
As for a quarter wrong: It’s OK to have dreams, but try getting yourself down to 50% wrong first.
I didn’t make that claim. Back up your assertion, if you can.
I said people are wrong a lot. You disagreed. That implies that you believe the opposite: people are not wrong a lot.
Back up your assertion or back down from it. I made no assertion other than a disbelief in yours.
Every single time you post that I should back up something I didn’t assert, you will look like more of an idiot to every other poster on this message board.
Every time you avoid backing up your statement, you will look like a bigger fool as well.
Back it up to back down from it.
Why is it so hard to do? Are you unable to? Then why would you make such a broad, sweeping statement if you can’t back it up with facts?
Ignoramus tedious, in the family Wankeridae.
So? “Personal” and “accurate” are not contradictory.
I’ve read many of your posts, and it is clear enough that you are an idiot.
Adaher, in the spirit of this board, I would ask that you support your claim that you are no more wrong about your assertions than the majority of the posters of this board. You would be doing us all a service if you were to actually engage a poster on a point of dissension and bring evidence to support your assertion. You would be doing yourself a service as well.
Or, alternatively, you can continue to act like a child and act out against the ‘meanies’ who won’t accept your world-view without substantial reasons to do so.
Remember, many of us here have jobs that require that we recognize when we are incorrect and correct for our errors. My robotics control systems (for one example) don’t work correctly because I am convinced that they will, but because I have tested them and have had others test them for boundary conditions, bad input data, faulty actuation chains and any number of possible vectors of error. I make mistakes much more often than I succeed, but that is the nature of experimentation. It takes a certain kind of courage to acknowledge when an idea that ‘felt’ so great turned out to be a completely false trail.
I know nothing of your real-life existence, but I am willing to wager that you are not a scientist. You appear to take yourself too seriously to be effective at such an avocation.
Have you ever considered stand-up comedy?