Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Normal
Sublime thinks you're overeducated, I don't, I think you are using information to obscure the discussion deliberately.You made the statement, "We all know that the universe is finite and contingent."When I simply asked you to prove your statement you come back to me with a demand that I prove it wrong. The onus is on the person making the claims, your claims are not automatically true if someone else can't prove them wrong. One of your obscurist tactics is to use a term that sounds like it might be scientifically based, but you never define it. A case in point is "the materialist premise of science". It makes you come across as a pseudo-intellectual using terms without definition so that you can deride people who don't know what you mean.The fact that I cannot give you an example as you requested in no way proves your initial statement, Num. You draw a lot of conclusions from the "science" that you talk about, but I think you are a bullshipper because your posts obscure rather than enlighten. If you really had a working knowledge of the things you write about and a willingness to share them with others you wouldn't post cryptic one or two sentence replies using terms that are ambiguous. I've been to college, I work with well educated people, most of them like nothing better than to lecture in their field of expertise, many of them will explain in excruciating detail to make themselves understood. Not you though, and that makes me think you are a poser.
Sublime thinks you're overeducated, I don't, I think you are using information to obscure the discussion deliberately.
You made the statement, "We all know that the universe is finite and contingent."
When I simply asked you to prove your statement you come back to me with a demand that I prove it wrong. The onus is on the person making the claims, your claims are not automatically true if someone else can't prove them wrong. One of your obscurist tactics is to use a term that sounds like it might be scientifically based, but you never define it. A case in point is "the materialist premise of science". It makes you come across as a pseudo-intellectual using terms without definition so that you can deride people who don't know what you mean.
The fact that I cannot give you an example as you requested in no way proves your initial statement, Num. You draw a lot of conclusions from the "science" that you talk about, but I think you are a bullshipper because your posts obscure rather than enlighten. If you really had a working knowledge of the things you write about and a willingness to share them with others you wouldn't post cryptic one or two sentence replies using terms that are ambiguous. I've been to college, I work with well educated people, most of them like nothing better than to lecture in their field of expertise, many of them will explain in excruciating detail to make themselves understood. Not you though, and that makes me think you are a poser.
