Sociopath Community

LiYang said: 

And you call yourself a scientist. A scientist with no data is just a religious charlatan, lol.

Hmm, apologies for throwing you under the bus.

It's called a data backed hypothesis. Maybe you should re-educate yourself on what real science is.

I'll re-educate myself on what real science is, but I'm afraid I'll most likely arrive at the same conclusions I've arrived at thus far.

How ironic that science has turned to consensus based money religion where the peer group is everything. Bunch of flat earthers with their heads in the sand and their hands out begging for money. lol

Aha. Well, thank God we have you, am I right?

I hope you enjoyed the troll. I did find it funny.

So what's your primary account's name? Are you Inquirer?

LiYang said: 

AppleGenius said: 

In my opinion, LiYang is representative of a person that lacks credibility as he only gathers evidence to support his foregone conclusions, so I was curious if you would extend the same courtesy to other people as you expect in return. Hence, if you investigate LiYang's claims, as you expect others to investigate yours, I believe you are being consistent. If you do not investigate LiYang's claims but still discredit his claims, then you would be inconsistent. However, it seems that you mostly agree with him. I've personally started ignoring him because, in my opinion, he is clearly biased towards certain conclusions. However, unlike you, he also has a bad habit of switching topic and ignoring people when they present conflicting evidence, at least in my humble opinion.

And you call yourself a scientist. A scientist with no data is just a religious charlatan, lol.

It's called a data backed hypothesis. Maybe you should re-educate yourself on what real science is.

 

How ironic that science has turned to consensus based money religion where the peer group is everything. Bunch of flat earthers with their heads in the sand and their hands out begging for money. lol

 

 

 For some, evidence just isn't enough. Maybe one day evidence won't hold any weight in a court of law.

Maninist said: 

LiYang said: 

AppleGenius said: 

In my opinion, LiYang is representative of a person that lacks credibility as he only gathers evidence to support his foregone conclusions, so I was curious if you would extend the same courtesy to other people as you expect in return. Hence, if you investigate LiYang's claims, as you expect others to investigate yours, I believe you are being consistent. If you do not investigate LiYang's claims but still discredit his claims, then you would be inconsistent. However, it seems that you mostly agree with him. I've personally started ignoring him because, in my opinion, he is clearly biased towards certain conclusions. However, unlike you, he also has a bad habit of switching topic and ignoring people when they present conflicting evidence, at least in my humble opinion.

And you call yourself a scientist. A scientist with no data is just a religious charlatan, lol.

It's called a data backed hypothesis. Maybe you should re-educate yourself on what real science is.

 

How ironic that science has turned to consensus based money religion where the peer group is everything. Bunch of flat earthers with their heads in the sand and their hands out begging for money. lol

 For some, evidence just isn't enough. Maybe one day evidence won't hold any weight in a court of law.

Evidence is not self-evident though, it needs context. 

Turncoat said: 

Maninist said: 

LiYang said: 

AppleGenius said: 

In my opinion, LiYang is representative of a person that lacks credibility as he only gathers evidence to support his foregone conclusions, so I was curious if you would extend the same courtesy to other people as you expect in return. Hence, if you investigate LiYang's claims, as you expect others to investigate yours, I believe you are being consistent. If you do not investigate LiYang's claims but still discredit his claims, then you would be inconsistent. However, it seems that you mostly agree with him. I've personally started ignoring him because, in my opinion, he is clearly biased towards certain conclusions. However, unlike you, he also has a bad habit of switching topic and ignoring people when they present conflicting evidence, at least in my humble opinion.

And you call yourself a scientist. A scientist with no data is just a religious charlatan, lol.

It's called a data backed hypothesis. Maybe you should re-educate yourself on what real science is.

 

How ironic that science has turned to consensus based money religion where the peer group is everything. Bunch of flat earthers with their heads in the sand and their hands out begging for money. lol

 For some, evidence just isn't enough. Maybe one day evidence won't hold any weight in a court of law.

Evidence is not self-evident though, it needs context. 

 Transexual logic.

What's self evident is nothing but evidence, something or someone with evidence is self evident because they have evidence.

Of course there's bullshit that proves nothing evident, like a man being a penis denying self proclaimed woman, or some guy spreading lies about himself and someone else, Nate, then the evidence comes about and it's enough, while the liar remains quiet.

Evidence if presented without context means nothing. 

If I brought you a fish and didn't tell you why, what does the fish prove? 

Turncoat said: 

Evidence if presented without context means nothing. 

 That hasn't been the case with any of our subjects here.

Maninist said: 

Turncoat said: 

Evidence if presented without context means nothing. 

 That hasn't been the case with any of our subjects here.

Howso? 

Turncoat said: 

Maninist said: 

Turncoat said: 

Evidence if presented without context means nothing. 

 That hasn't been the case with any of our subjects here.

Howso? 

 lol at this point to claim there's a lack of context is laughable. 

It would be a waste of time to assist you.

Maninist said: 

Turncoat said: 

Maninist said: 

Turncoat said: 

Evidence if presented without context means nothing. 

 That hasn't been the case with any of our subjects here.

Howso? 

lol at this point to claim there's a lack of context is laughable. 

It would be a waste of time to assist you.

I was only responding to this point: 

Maninist said:

For some, evidence just isn't enough. Maybe one day evidence won't hold any weight in a court of law.

Turncoat said: 

Maninist said: 

Turncoat said: 

Maninist said: 

Turncoat said: 

Evidence if presented without context means nothing. 

 That hasn't been the case with any of our subjects here.

Howso? 

lol at this point to claim there's a lack of context is laughable. 

It would be a waste of time to assist you.

I was only responding to this point: 

Maninist said:

For some, evidence just isn't enough. Maybe one day evidence won't hold any weight in a court of law.

I'm glad you agree you need more than just evidence alone. 

 You'd find sarcasm agreeable. Off into delusion you go.