Science is not a perfect institution

Ophiolite said:
Inappropriate move on two counts:
1. I am not trolling, nor have I been trolling at any point.
2. I have previously challenged the relevance of your citations. You chose to ignore them.

So now, as justification for your speculations, you are citing something a scientist with an extreme view says in an interview. Get real.
Click to expand...
So now, Bagemihl becomes a scientist with an extreme view. I hope you have a peer-reviewed paper to prove that!

Ophiolite said:
Please provide some evidence of his contentions that comes from quality sources: they don't even need to be peer reviewed. If you can find anything pm me. I shan't see it here. You are on Ignore.
Click to expand...
Does that mean you're not going to troll my posts anymore!

Does that mean you're running away, finally that you are forced to deal with the evidences?
 
oh for gawwwwd's sakes Oph don't go on a sulk now when it's getting interesting...!

and how can you both 'ignore' and yet ask for a pm...?dont make no sense...

anddddd. all here want to explore about this. we cant if ya havin privae discussion can we??
 
It's typical. I mean it's really typical. Ophiolite is probably the 101th such quitter.

First they try all sorts of bullying, accusing, and other tactics. And when everything else fails --- they just quietly slip off. They will do anything to avoid the truth. Is that scientific?
 
You give me a reasonable proven evidence and I'll gladly change my assertions, and would not think twice before admitting I have been wrong. You don't become less of a man by admitting such. It will only show that you indeed care about the truth.
 
MetaKron said:
If Ophiolite says he's done talking to you, does that mean he's done spitting on you also?
Click to expand...
All of Bhudda1's injuries and belittlements, real or imagined, are self imposed by his outrageous advocacy and dishonest posting style. Much like yourself really.
Thank you for posting by the way. I knew there was someone else who merited an exit from my sight.
 
duendy said:
oh for gawwwwd's sakes Oph don't go on a sulk now when it's getting interesting...!

and how can you both 'ignore' and yet ask for a pm...?dont make no sense...

anddddd. all here want to explore about this. we cant if ya havin privae discussion can we??
Click to expand...
The Ignore means I don't have to read page after page of inane claptrap and excuses. But, contrary to what you often think, I have an open mind. If Bhudda1 is serious about having an intelligent discussion I will be glad to engage in one. But I am not going to wade through a morass of innuendo, lies, claptrap and misinformation to get to that point. If he has quality information, as requested in my post, and wishes to discuss it, a pm will provide that opportunity. [As far as I know the Ignore function does not exclude the option of sending pms. If it does, perhaps you would be good enought to act as an intermediary. It will not be an onerous task, as I do not expect Bhudda1 to come up with anything.]

This approach provides the ideal solution. Bhudda1 thinks he has won, by driving me from the battlefield. I have lost, in that I have failed to convince Bhudda1 he is sorely misguided. Now, I don't have to worry about him anymore. He can wallow in his own ignorance.

You will note that I have also placed Metakron on ignore. Now the bad news. You ain't going on Ignore ever again. You are far too endearing.

Edit: Also, re your point about the private discussion excluding others from it. My intention is that if Bhudda1 comes up with anything relevant I shall take him off ignore and return to a public discussion.
 
i often suspect, when people leave like this, it is to stop you from further divulging the truth. Because it hurts the cause of heterosexual ideology.
 
another link:

http://myweb.lsbu.ac.uk/~stafflag/zoology.html

"Bagemihl's research challenges the theory that homosexuality might be a natural way to reduce population size when a species becomes too numerous for its environment. Even in a species of bird such as the black stilt, of which fewer than 100 pairs are left in the wild, there are still female homosexual couples. He does not believe they pose any particular threat to the population's survival."
 
Ophiolite said:
This approach provides the ideal solution. Bhudda1 thinks he has won, by driving me from the battlefield. I have lost, in that I have failed to convince Bhudda1 he is sorely misguided. Now, I don't have to worry about him anymore. He can wallow in his own ignorance.
Click to expand...
Let not individuals win or lose. Let the truth win, and let the lie lose. :m:
 
Ophiolite said:
All of Bhudda1's injuries and belittlements, real or imagined, are self imposed by his outrageous advocacy and dishonest posting style. Much like yourself really.
Thank you for posting by the way. I knew there was someone else who merited an exit from my sight.
Click to expand...
Come down from your high pedestal ..... Come out of your 'institution' and see this world for what it is. Let non-scientists speak and listen to them. Consider and evaluate what they have observed for their own merit instead of asking for validation from the institution.

You are no different than the church which denies an individual's right to seek god on his own.....and its insistence that only church knows who is God and how to reach him.
 
MetaKron said:
If Ophiolite says he's done talking to you, does that mean he's done spitting on you also?
Click to expand...
Impeccable timing!

He never thought of ignoring me earlier when there were accusations and counter accusations. He chooses to do so just when he asked for details about my evidences and I am providing him the links.

Does that ring a bell?

Remember, how Devils_reject left a discussion on a thread he specially created challenging me to discuss whether heterosexuality is natural and then left abrubtly when he realised he was trapped --- even risking being called a (heterosexual) queer (that was the bet!)!

And how Spuriousmonkey left the continuation of the same discussion --- and it was going so well --- no accusations, insults nothing, ...... and he leaves abruptly when it became clear that his stand that 'sex is primarily for reproduction' was clearly shown to be faulty. (He is done this disappearing act on an earlier occasion too!).

And there are several dozens of such instances on this forum right from the first time I started posting (last year!) to the first time I started my own thread (There is no evidence for heterosexuality in nature!) --- they all show a similar trend. People come challenging you boldly. Calling you names and generally brandishing their social power. And when they realise their stand --- which is so heavily corroborated by the heterosexual society is not all that secure --- they abruptly leave the battle field. It is their last resort, the last weapon they have to keep the heterosexual lie going. The assumption is that when you don't discuss, the other party will not raise any more points. Surprisingly it often works.

Not to mention the several dozens of time this has happened on other forums where I discussed this issue.

They can afford to do so because, well, the heterosexual ideology is extremely powerful. And like I have been saying, might is right.

Needless to say that not one person out of the thousands who have read my posts have been able to refute my assertions (of course I've done my homework --- 10 years of work, including 2 years of studying history, science, etc. (personal study)). Of course, I realise that most men would like to see what I have been saying, to win. It's only that men are not empowered enough to support it directly.
 
Last edited:
Ophiolite said:
Your single source that you continue to cite is Bagemihl's work. Now I have not read it, but I have read reviews of it. So far I have deliberately restricted myself to reviews that are favourable towards it.
Note the following:
1. I have never denied that animals engage in homosexual behaviour.
2. Bagemihl presents many examples of it.
3. Nowehere in his book, as far as I can determine, does he claim that homosexual behaviour takes precedence over heterosexual behaviour. Please quote chapter and verse if he does so.
Click to expand...
If he was going to ignore me anyway, why did he finally decide to probe me on the above :confused: And leave as soon as I get the required information. What has transpired in the meantime! :bugeye:
 
Ophiolite said:
You will note that I have also placed Metakron on ignore.
Click to expand...
Sure, anyone who criticises Ophiolite's ways will be on his ignore list. So much for 'vigorous questioning'.
 
Oph....thanks for compliment....BUT.

listen, i have had to put up wit much shit from some---not thay Buddha1 has given you what i am meaning i have had to deal with from such as 'Light' etc.....but the fun is to stick in

i see discussions as not formerlized fart-arsed pretentious rhetoric---to of course they can be.....in essence i would like to see them full of passion, crosses out...you know like you were doing some kind of exploration yerself on paper and it wasuntidy yet full of life...kind of thang? that

REALLY we do NO KNOW why we are here....where we have COME from, an where we re GOING. we reeeaaallly don't knowtis. if you say you DO, your a liar. so...puleeeze let uuuus continue, knowing we are strangers in a strange universe feeling our way in the Labyrinthe of communicado...HOLEY!!!!!!!!!
 
And as far as I am concerned, I did find Ophiolite to be a sincere and intellingent debater at least most of the time. That was my first impression of him and I told him so. But then he supported Light and sometimes did seem to follow his ways, although it may be a misunderstanding that we had.

To his credit, he did guide me like a teacher at one point of time and I am really going to use what he has suggested, for I can see how I can fight the biased scientific institution with that.
 
Last edited:
Ophiolite said:
All of Bhudda1's injuries and belittlements, real or imagined, are self imposed by his outrageous advocacy and dishonest posting style. Much like yourself really.
Thank you for posting by the way. I knew there was someone else who merited an exit from my sight.
Click to expand...

I could only hope to be so lucky.
 
Solid evidence of fallibility of science and of Peer-reviewed papers

South Korean Professor Hwang Woosuk's stem cell research being outed as 'fake':

As you all know by now, and I'm quoting today's paper --- "medical journals need to have more rigorous criteria for publishing research papers. Spurious claims are often made......"

"......the only question likely to be asked now is: whose research can be trusted? Whatever the outcome of the investigations. Hwang Woo-suk cried wold. So the next time someone comes up with a 'breakthrough', the world will be doubly careful about believing him."

The research was published in one of the most 'credible' scientific journals --- "Science".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top