From one of hauss’s page 1 postings:
*It’s just that I know what is knowledge/truth and what is speculation and I demand knowledge when most people would settle for supported speculation.
*
Well my ape’s brain cannot comprehend that subtle distinction.
In GQ, a typical questoin might be “What is the mass of the Sun?” and within a few minutes someone comes back with 2 x 10[sup]33[/sup] grams. There we have it - problem solved. But hauss does that answer have to be qualified with “this is supported speculation” OR “this answer is 77% supported speculation 22% knowledge and 2% other” ? And since you said you demand knowledge, are you going to take someone else’s word for the Sun’s mass or are you going to do some firsthand experimentation?
and a quote from the second page: I use technology only in cases where I know for a fact it will help me.
Yeah somehow I had a feeling that computers and the Internet do not offend your scientific sensibilities.
Lordy, does a day go by without misrepresentations of what people say? From what I gather, unless you write a three-page treatise leaving no nuance of inference untouched, then you’re fair game.
Two weeks ago I was going to pit my brother for this same degree of ignorance. Just because someone synthesized it does not mean it’s bad for you. We are not brainwashed slaves opiated by Nutrasweet and Tylenol.
That’s your opinion. Risk aversion is a euphemism for paranoia. If you continue to delegate your trust so meticulously I wish you a good time living in your own ‘safe’ little world.
You’re using technology right now. You’re sitting about a foot away from a computer monitor. I’ve heard they emit radiation. If I were you I’d hurry on down to the organic computer parts store and buy a tofu monitor.
