6
   

A question about intelligent design

 
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Sun 25 Oct, 2009 08:42 pm
@Lightwizard,
Lightwizard wrote:

There was really only one notable scientist before the Wright Bros. flight who stuck his foot firmly into his mouth, otherwise there was no consensus among scientist that heavier than air flying machines were, indeed, impossible. It was eight years before the Wrights launched their aircraft into the air. Lord Kelvin, President of the the Royal Society of England made his emphatic declaration, "Heavier than air flying machines are impossible." Would anyone have wanted to be a fly on the wall when Lord Kelvin received the news? Man, was his face red.

Did he address the Society
on this point after the Kitty Hawk revelations ?





David
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 08:24 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Search for it on Google, pal. Haven't got that time to waste.

In profiler mode, users who have to make their point with huge, bold capital letters (that's not shouting, it's bellowing) is arrogance personified.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 10:00 am
@Lightwizard,
Lightwizard wrote:

Search for it on Google, pal. Haven't got that time to waste.

In profiler mode, users who have to make their point with huge,
bold capital letters (that's not shouting, it's bellowing) is arrogance personified.
Are u hallucinating, pal?
I did not do that in the post to which u refer.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 10:41 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Have you been checked for Alzheimers as well? I wish I had a nickle for every time you've gone schizo with your font-itis.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 10:57 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Capitalizing letters in a post is really an etiquette thing David. When you embolden and capitalize, you appear to be shouting to your communicant. I did that one time when my last laptop had a major lockup on my caplock. Everybody was accusing me o shouting and I was criticized for being a berserker.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 11:08 am
@farmerman,
Capitalizing is one thing but blowing it up to the size of a billboard is another. If that's what someone needs to make their point, they must raise their voice in their social surroundings and knock everyone out with their bad breath and/or slobbering. It doesn't matter that it is obviously a sign of insecurity, it's online arrogance. Of course, it is possible to do that without the crutch of inflated fonts.

0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 12:57 pm
@Lightwizard,
Lightwizard wrote:

Have you been checked for Alzheimers as well?
I wish I had a nickle for every time you've gone schizo with your font-itis.
The question is withdrawn. I 've lost interest.
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 01:07 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:

Capitalizing letters in a post is really an etiquette thing David.
When you embolden and capitalize, you appear to be shouting to your communicant.
I did that one time when my last laptop had a major lockup on my caplock.
Everybody was accusing me o shouting and I was criticized for being a berserker.
If we were speaking face-to-face, I really WOUD raise n lower my voice, not speak in a monotone.
No one does that. In writing, we cannot use vocal intonation,
nor manual gestures, nor facial expressions. Everyone shoud go
out of his way to lay stress in the appropriate places in a sentence.

I used to use color to indicate which parts of what I was saying
were of relative importance, but I got too many complaints,
so I seldom use it any more. The etiquette shoud be the OPPOSITE of what it is.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 02:44 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
etiquette shoud be the OPPOSITE of what it is
Sorry but I dont make the rules of the road. I endorse conventioal communication and all its drawbacks.

Many times when you embolden certain phrases and words, it actually looks like a ransom note where you clip typed words out of newspapers. Remember that from the movies?
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 03:03 pm
@farmerman,
Laughing
0 Replies
 
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 08:51 pm
@farmerman,
farmerman wrote:
Quote:
etiquette shoud be the OPPOSITE of what it is
Quote:
Sorry but I dont make the rules of the road.
I endorse conventioal communication and all its drawbacks.
U r telling me that it is your opinion that insofar as communication is concerned,
there is no room for improvement over the status quo ?
(Actually, back in the days of typewriters, there were a few times that I re-typed
over words to darken them for emphasis; and I raised them up to CAPITALS,
to lay greater stress on a point; there were no complaints back then.)
I wonder whether psychologists have a label for that.
Its not OCD; I seldom did it. I did it then, as now, to draw attention --
to enact a hierarchy of values in what I wrote, to attract special attention
to the strongest parts of the writing.

(I am demonstrating that I can be a LIBERAL.)

Indeed, as I think back: I created a hierarchy of values,
based on shapes n colors, in coded marginalia for textbooks,
to indicate to myself which concepts were particularly worthy of remembrance.
That worked very well.

farmerman wrote:
Quote:

Many times when you embolden certain phrases and words,
it actually looks like a ransom note where you clip typed words out of newspapers.
Remember that from the movies?
I do. That probably happened for real.

It seems to me that u r all over reacting to my laying of stress
on some words and concepts by use of size and color, etc.
The reaction that I get is as if I had slashed all of your tires n u all had to walk home.

One guy accused me of driving him blind.
Lightwizard
 
  1  
Reply Mon 26 Oct, 2009 10:30 pm
@OmSigDAVID,
If I can suggest something, when I find it absolutely necessary with some posters to stress something they are continually overlooking, or if I take a phrase in an article I've cut-and-pasted, I use italics and sometimes reedit it with the bold font. If it's a quote, I note that I've altered the text with italics and/or bold type. It's kind of a happy medium and keeps lines of text looking like newspaper banners. It's assertive but not aggressive.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Oct, 2009 03:57 am
@Lightwizard,
Lightwizard wrote:

If I can suggest something, when I find it absolutely necessary with some posters to stress something they are continually overlooking, or if I take a phrase in an article I've cut-and-pasted, I use italics and sometimes reedit it with the bold font. If it's a quote, I note that I've altered the text with italics and/or bold type. It's kind of a happy medium and keeps lines of text looking like newspaper banners. It's assertive but not aggressive.
Lightwizard wrote:

If I can suggest something, when I find it absolutely necessary with some posters to stress something they are continually overlooking, or if I take a phrase in an article I've cut-and-pasted, I use italics and sometimes reedit it with the bold font. If it's a quote, I note that I've altered the text with italics and/or bold type. It's kind of a happy medium and keeps lines of text looking like newspaper banners. It's assertive but not aggressive.

Lightwizard wrote:

If I can suggest something, when I find it absolutely necessary with some posters to stress something they are continually overlooking, or if I take a phrase in an article I've cut-and-pasted, I use italics and sometimes reedit it with the bold font. If it's a quote, I note that I've altered the text with italics and/or bold type. It's kind of a happy medium and keeps lines of text looking like newspaper banners. It's assertive but not aggressive.
I have done that, but as u know, I have not limited myself to that.
We occasionally debate matters in this forum that are controversial, to an emotional degree.
Sometimes, the posters become impassioned in their opinions of what is morally right or rong,
or in deciding the merits of competing political candidates, or of war and peace, etc.

I understand what u said about keeping it limited to italics that are possibly emboldened.
We do not always believe that in every case bold italics will be sufficient to expressing
an important point -- meaning that bold italics will succeed in attracting enuf attention.
We are, each of us, the architect of our own means of expression; as such, it behooves
each of us to build structures that will be strong and enduring. For those purposes,
we take interest in our choice of materials, that thay will suffice.

In other words, there is concern that italics might be too weak and too ineffective
to accomplish their mission. U don 't wish to use tools or materials that are not
of sufficient strength to accomplish their purpose.

I feel strongly, that it is NOT rong to erect a hierarchy of values
in one 's expressions be thay oral, or written.
Who among us woud condemn Lincoln if we discovered
that in his denunciation of slavery, he raised his voice
at points in his presentations that he deemed appropriate,
and that he waved his hands and arms, gesturing to convay
his meaning -- the same as use of facial expressions ??

Who among us woud condemn Churchill, if we found that he gave a speech
upon the occasion of Chamberlain 's pacifistic appeasement of Hitler,
wherein Churchill gave emphasis to parts of his presentation that he deemed proper
to promote taking the necessary measures to resist the onslaught of National Socialism ?

I 'd be very pleased if we had the option of buying books
whose authors used size and color of font to express their own vu
of the hierarchy of values in their work. To those possibilities
cud be added other indicia of particular and special significance;
e.g. a square bracket, on the side of text, or a colored star,
with different colors signifying ranking of value.
I used black ink to signify trouble and red ink for
good intellectual assets and green to superaccentuate the good value.
It was successfully helpful, for my future reference.

When I was in college, I had a military science professor who waved
a small American Flag during his lectures, to emphasize particular points to be remembered.

English professors shoud tell their students to use colorful emfasis
and fonetic spelling in their writing. One of my tenants is an English professor.
Maybe I 'll integrate that as a requirement in his next lease.





David
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Oct, 2009 04:25 am
@OmSigDAVID,
Quote:
Who among us woud condemn Lincoln if we discovered
that in his denunciation of slavery, he raised his voice
at points in his presentations that he deemed appropriate


At the time of his pronouncements he was villified by several sectors. What is Lincoln would have given his speeches in a black dialect with appropriate minstrel show gestures and in colereful face paint??
I think that you flatter yourself with comparisons to Lincoln or Churchill. THis is, after all, a Bulletin board which enetertains all sorts of viewpoints. AS long as your viewpoints are valid, I think Id appreciate any variance with prevailing logic as long as the arguments were sound. USing visual tricks or the equivalent of electronic shouting doesn advance arguments that you may have. This is just my opinion and I dont consider this such a world shaking subject overall. You do what you wish. Just remember, Many people have been discussing your posts with much more civility than in the past (me included), mostly becuase you did asjust your fonts and colors. Your arguments are pretty much similar today as they were in your more "florid font" days, its just that , with non "ransom note" fonts and type, you actually sound reasonable.

Excuse me if your offended but Im trying to understand why you think that your use of pretty fonts and ultra bold letters and phonetic spelling makes your discussion points sound more compelling.
OmSigDAVID
 
  1  
Reply Tue 27 Oct, 2009 08:32 am
@farmerman,
David wrote:
Quote:
Who among us woud condemn Lincoln if we discovered
that in his denunciation of slavery, he raised his voice
at points in his presentations that he deemed appropriate
farmerman wrote:
Quote:
At the time of his pronouncements he was villified by several sectors.
U think ?



farmerman wrote:
Quote:
What is Lincoln would have given his speeches in a black dialect with appropriate
minstrel show gestures and in colereful face paint??
I dunno. I give up. What woud have happened?





farmerman wrote:
Quote:
I think that you flatter yourself with comparisons to Lincoln or Churchill.
Did I claim to have provoked a civil war?




farmerman wrote:
Quote:
THis is, after all, a Bulletin board which enetertains all sorts of viewpoints.
AS long as your viewpoints are valid, I think Id appreciate any
variance with prevailing logic as long as the arguments were sound.
USing visual tricks [ ?? ] or the equivalent of electronic shouting
doesn advance arguments that you may have. This is just my opinion
and I dont consider this such a world shaking subject overall.

You do what you wish.
OK




farmerman wrote:
Quote:
Just remember, Many people have been discussing your posts with
much more civility than in the past (me included), mostly becuase
you did asjust your fonts and colors. Your arguments are pretty
much similar today as they were in your more "florid font" days,
its just that , with non "ransom note" fonts and type, you actually sound reasonable.
Thank u.




farmerman wrote:
Quote:
Excuse me if your offended
I 'm not offended.





farmerman wrote:
Quote:
but Im trying to understand why you think that your use of pretty fonts and ultra bold letters
Thay were intended to draw attention to the more important concepts.







farmerman wrote:
Quote:

and phonetic spelling makes your discussion points sound more compelling.
My friends n libertarians have criticized me
for the distractions of fonetic spelling.





David
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

New Propulsion, the "EM Drive" - Question by TomTomBinks
The Science Thread - Discussion by Wilso
Why do people deny evolution? - Question by JimmyJ
Are we alone in the universe? - Discussion by Jpsy
Fake Science Journals - Discussion by rosborne979
Controvertial "Proof" of Multiverse! - Discussion by littlek
 
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 08/02/2021 at 06:21:54