MetaKron said:You know you're a troll, don't you?
Nice, after I spent hours teaching you everything you now know about heat pumps. See if I ever help you again, jerk!
MetaKron said:You know you're a troll, don't you?
You want support for your unruly and destructive behaviour because you helped them?Light said:Nice, after I spent hours teaching you everything you now know about heat pumps. See if I ever help you again, jerk!
Buddha1 said:You want support for your unruly and destructive behaviour because you helped them?
MetaKron said:What do you expect from someone who taught intelligent design in Kansas before it was fashionable?
He was god-awful rude about it, the way he is in every thread he is in. Isn't that the living end. A 67 year old retired college professor is now an Internet troll and not a particularly interesting one. Up all night because he doesn't know what to do with himself. Deliberately misunderstands things and then gets rude with people based on those misunderstandings. It's been quite a week already.
No kiddling! I swear I thought he was a kid!MetaKron said:What do you expect from someone who taught intelligent design in Kansas before it was fashionable?
He was god-awful rude about it, the way he is in every thread he is in. Isn't that the living end. A 67 year old retired college professor is now an Internet troll and not a particularly interesting one. Up all night because he doesn't know what to do with himself. Deliberately misunderstands things and then gets rude with people based on those misunderstandings. It's been quite a week already.
Buddha1 said:You want support for your unruly and destructive behaviour because you helped them?
Buddha1 said:No kiddling! I swear I thought he was a kid!
On the contrary, I'm amused.MetaKron said:That was hyperbole and I have to admit that I did it because I knew it would bug him. My apologies if I offended you, Buddha.
Buddha1 said:If Darwin is right then there is no basis for sexual desire amongst same-sex to exist at all, leave alone to exist at such a large extent. It's basically using this theory as a shield (and by suppressing/ destroying/ ignoring data from the wild) that the scientific community has been dismissing the experiences of countless number of men and women who have claimed same-sex desires, especially as gays and lesbians.
James R, you are doing a very poor job at moderating. How can you let Buddha1 continually post his trolling "heteroexuality is wrong" threads in multiple sub-fourms? His trolling has steadily progressed from pseudo-scientific psychology to outright preaching devoid of any science whatsoever. It’s pure bullshit that is designed to induce arguments. I have stopped asking him for substantiating evidence because, like all offensive and divisive trolls, he continually refuses to provide it. And when arguments predictably pop up within his threads, you have a go at the people who Buddha1 has antagonized rather than the initial instigator!James R said:Satyr,
When you signed up to sciforums, you agreed not to post obscene material. The next time you do so, you will be banned for seven days. Editing your posts is becoming tiresome.
a). If you want to discuss seriously, then first learn to respect the other person. If you start by putting the other person down, or insulting him your arguments will be seen as nothing more than a vent of your frustration (when they often are!).c'est moi said:One: You claim heterosexuality is culturally imposed on males (and females).
Yet, you use this very same process as "evidence", i.e. homosexual behaviour from more ancient cultures like the Greeks and so-called more "natural" tribes/societies.
Secondly, I asked you the question (in one of your first threads) what you understood by the term "natural".
Clearly, you haven't spend enough time thinking about this, yet, this is one of the key factors in this whole discussion.
From the moment people grouped together and formed a social system, "natural" and "nature" have no more invariant meaning. It is a mistake to use these terms (or the very concept) within a socio-cultural context. We have to ask the question: Was there a time where there was no social pressure? If not, then any reference to "natural" as in "like it was meant to be" is misplaced. The is still a major topic of discussion and the end of it is not in sight. Whatever we think or feel, it is quite possible that nothing was "meant to be" making it impossible to distinguish good from evil as there is no such thing in absolute terms.
Maybe it is time that you read works like "Jenseits von Gut und Böse", F. Nietschze (Beyond Good and Evil) and let that machinary which you call brain really work.
Btw, inbetween the improper language of Satyre, there were some clever objections to your statements.
I'm a serious and busy person.
Then stop spending so much time on a forum and finally understand the meaning of "evidence" and "science".
I have one question for you which bundles all my thoughts on this:
Why is the male anus not biologically adapted to the apparent "natural" behaviour of men-men sex?
Why blame James R!Hercules Rockefeller said:James R, you are doing a very poor job at moderating. How can you let Buddha1 continually post his trolling "heteroexuality is wrong" threads in multiple sub-fourms? His trolling has steadily progressed from pseudo-scientific psychology to outright preaching devoid of any science whatsoever. It’s pure bullshit that is designed to induce arguments. I have stopped asking him for substantiating evidence because, like all offensive and divisive trolls, he continually refuses to provide it. And when arguments predictably pop up within his threads, you have a go at the people who Buddha1 has antagonized rather than the initial instigator!
I originally came to SciForums because it seemed that this was one of the few science forums that actually moderated the idiots. That seems to have changed somewhat. If you can’t be bothered, then I’m willing to have a go. Where do I sign up?
What, pray is the meaning of the words 'evidence' and 'science'?c'est moi said:I'm a serious and busy person.
Then stop spending so much time on a forum and finally understand the meaning of "evidence" and "science".
What is the relevance of the male anus here? Is this the intelligence of someone who calls others 'idiots'!c'est moi said:I have one question for you which bundles all my thoughts on this:
Why is the male anus not biologically adapted to the apparent "natural" behaviour of men-men sex?
c'est moi said:From the moment people grouped together and formed a social system, "natural" and "nature" have no more invariant meaning. It is a mistake to use these terms (or the very concept) within a socio-cultural context.
That societies exert pressures on people to conform does not mean that 'nature' loses its relevance. If the society pressurises its people and want them to make sacrifices or to foregor their natural freedom/ needs/ desires, the societies must have a valid reason for doing so. It must benefit the society in some manner. And the benefit should be at least equivalent to the amount of sacrifice that it is asking of its subjects.c'est moi said:We have to ask the question: Was there a time where there was no social pressure? If not, then any reference to "natural" as in "like it was meant to be" is misplaced. The is still a major topic of discussion and the end of it is not in sight. Whatever we think or feel, it is quite possible that nothing was "meant to be" making it impossible to distinguish good from evil as there is no such thing in absolute terms.
Ah! The myth of the noble savage. Poppycock.Buddha1 said:The term nature has only been misused and misrepresented since the time Christianity came along. Before that human societies existed respecting nature and in tandem with it.
So there really are gods in every tree and every river and every mountain and every wind?Buddha1 said:These societies had no misconceptions about nature. .
But it matters if you introduce the existence of such papers and addresses of yours into the discussion. If it was not relevant to introduce them, why did you do so? If it was relevant please provide evidence that they are more than a figment of your imagination.We are here to discuss using a scientific anlysis (with the spirit of science) and it does not matter if our work or our theories are approved by the scientific agencies or not. Or if our work has been published or not.
And I would add "also those who are frustrated by illogic, poor science, lack of evidence, faulty logic and general haphazard thinking."Only those who are not on the side of the truth take the help of such tactics.
As above.My threads will antagonise only those who depend on the fake social power that the heteroseuxal ideology brings.