The core of the problem of everything

[Jeff Bergquist]

Well, facts are subjective. One need only look at history for that,. We're taught that "X is how Y event happened", but such events are written from the side of the conqueror, not the conquered. If you look at our history books and compare them with the history as known by the native americans, you'll see two different stories. Some things may coincide and jive, but never exactly. So all history is wrong certainly in part, and in some cases, in whole. This isn't a new concept, and I'm certainly not the only one to believe in such things, Howard Zinn wrote about it in People's History of the United States: The Wall Charts by Howard Zinn and George Kirschner (1995) ISBN 1-56584-171-9., but he's not the only one either.

1+1=2 and that's a fact, right?

If I have one apple and add another apple, that's two apples, correct? Well, yes it is and no it's not. Yes, it is because we see two individual objects, but no it's not, because science has shown that everything is in motion, made of energy that's not solid objects and nothing really touches another thing at the subatomic/molecular level, etc. So how far down the rabbit hole do you want to go?> If you want to stop and say that you have two apples and 1+1=2, then yes, that's a "fact" and in that assumption and opinion, you're correct. If you want to drill down further and look at everything as energy connected and that nothing is really separate, then that's a "fact". Funny thing is, science will back both "facts" and both are provable, so in short, yes, you CAN choose your own facts, and in fact, you do, and that's a fact; but all of this is also just my opinion and you can have and are entitled to your own opinion, just as I am mine.

Warm cookie now?

You are mistaken. History books are not facts, they are peoples interpretations of facts, in actuality nothing more than fact based opinion. Fact: Caucasians came to the New World and found it already populated. The implications and interpretations of that are opinions, none of which change the known fact that I originally stated. That's what is meant by the statement that you can have your own opinion but not your own facts.

As for 1+1=2, That's a fact, and it's been a fact every time it's been checked. Your argument basically brings in metaphysics to argue that it's not a fact, because you can't even know for sure what you're counting. But if people agree on what's being counted, it's been true every time. I'd be interested if you could show me a single example where 1+1 did not in fact equal 2.

[XDM45]

You are mistaken.

In your opinion, but go on......

By the way, I'm not out to "prove" anyone "right" or "wrong", merely voice my opinion; so don't think that I'm saying that "you're wrong and I'm right" below, because I'm not vested in such things for everyone. I believe whats right and wrong as it relates to ME, but I would never presume to say what's right or wrong for another or everyone else.

History books are not facts, they are peoples interpretations of facts, in actuality nothing more than fact based opinion.

So they have opinions about facts, thus both are subjective; and I can guarantee you that if you stood up in 6th grade and said "Hey teacher, I call bs that this didn't happen" you'd be going to the office. They teach it as fact. Heck, religious schools teach the bible's words as factual eyewitness accounts, which they aren't. If teachers said "Well, this is all opinion, but here's what we believe to be true...." then they're teaching opinion, not fact.

You and I and 10 other people could sit down and watch a movie, agreeing to write about a certain scene in it, you may notice the lamp and the open door, I may notice the table and chair, all of them were in the scene, but we each saw different things. Both are "fact" that they were in there, but just because you noticed something differently than I did, does not mean what I saw didn't exist or isn't a fact.

Facts are subjective, as are opinions.

Fact: Caucasians came to the New World and found it already populated. The implications and interpretations of that are opinions, none of which change the known fact that I originally stated. That's what is meant by the statement that you can have your own opinion but not your own facts.

I disagreed before and I shall again. I agree to disagree. Whether others do the same is up to them. That ball is in their court.

As for 1+1=2, That's a fact, and it's been a fact every time it's been checked. Your argument basically brings in metaphysics to argue that it's not a fact, because you can't even know for sure what you're counting. But if people agree on what's being counted, it's been true every time. I'd be interested if you could show me a single example where 1+1 did not in fact equal 2.

At the atomic level, physical objects do not have clear, hard boundaries. Physical objects are made of atoms, which contain electrons, which have repulsive forces. It is these forces that interact when physical objects come into contact with each other. We can feel texture because texture is a macroscopic property of objects, far, far larger in scale than the individual atoms.

Think of this: say I'm standing in a forest, at night, wearing a pair of boxing gloves. OK, sure I can't touch small things, such as grass or pine needles, but would I be able to feel my way through the forest that's filled with foot thick trees? Of course I can. Think of trees as the "texture" of the forest. As long as the texture is much bigger than my boxing gloves, I'll be fine.

[Jeff Bergquist]

Facts are not subjective. Facts are what are left behind when you stop believing in something.

They have opinions about facts: thus both are subjective.

What does that even mean? That how I feel about something decides whether it even exists? That's pretty close to a definition of insanity. If your "facts" are only subject to what you believe, then there is no point in arguing anything with you, since nothing even matters.

Good thing you're not trying to prove who's right or wrong, since by your philosophy there's no difference between the two. You should probably relax about the world's problems and just change your opinion, since that would work just as good, and be much easier than actually dealing with the issues.

Since there really is no point in arguing it further, I won't waste my time.

[XDM45]

Facts are not subjective. Facts are what are left behind when you stop believing in something.

They have opinions about facts: thus both are subjective.

What does that even mean? That how I feel about something decides whether it even exists? That's pretty close to a definition of insanity. If your "facts" are only subject to what you believe, then there is no point in arguing anything with you, since nothing even matters.

I'm not arguing, I'm merely expressing my opinion...agree, disagree, matters not to I. ..and perception is reality. If you don't perceive your own reality, then I have to ask if someone else is doing that for you? If so, I think that's insane if so.

Good thing you're not trying to prove who's right or wrong, since by your philosophy there's no difference between the two.

Correct. There is only right or wrong for each individual. Who am I to tell you or anyone else what is right or wrong for them to believe and do? If they believe for instance that it's right to rob my home and I believe that it's right to defend my life, we are each acting accordingly to what we each believe is right (for us) and wrong (for the other) to do.

Scary part here.............

The reason I don't do all sorts of crazy things, like rob people's homes, is because I don't believe that it's right for me to do that. I don't do it because of any law made by some deity or man. I don't do it because I don't believe it's right for ME to do. I'm quite capable at self-governing. Some people are, but "people" generally are not, thus why we have laws and religion.

You should probably relax about the world's problems and just change your opinion, since that would work just as good, and be much easier than actually dealing with the issues.

Oh I'm not in a knot over anything at all. You are right though about changing one's opinion may make it easier because you ignore things, thus changing your own reality. I've done that on some things in the past, but now I just don't get all vested in and emotional about it.

Since there really is no point in arguing it further, I won't waste my time.

I was never arguing, only discussing things and voicing my opinion.

Of course I can discuss things (like politics, religion, etc) that really rile people up, and while I discuss it, I do so with the same vestment and emotion that I'd do if I were discussing if one likes decaf or regular coffee. Of course many people can't do that, they get all hot 'n bothered by it, so I avoid such subjects if possible. No point in irking anyone.

[Evad]

Look at the lack of glaciers in Glacier National Park over the past 100 years. Look at our own MN winters and how mild they've become compared to the ones we had in the 60s, 70s and even 80s. Yes, we had some bad storms, like the Halloween storm of 1991, but I'm talking about overall. It's been warmer and milder. Lots of examples. I'm not sure why people want to deny the fact that we're pollution the Earth, it's all connected, and we are changing the Earth and the climate not for the better. I'm not saying the end is near, I'm saying that it is happening with the climate change, pollution, how everything is connected and thus affected, whether we like it or not, whether we admit it or not.

Personally, I believe weather is cyclical. We as a race haven't accurately recorded weather long enough to establish cycles. To me, it's as simple as that.

No proof on either side for weather patterns. Only opinions. We just don't know what the weather on Decebmer 12th, 1733 was.

[Erud]

[/quote]
Correct. There is only right or wrong for each individual. Who am I to tell you or anyone else what is right or wrong for them to believe and do? If they believe for instance that it's right to rob my home and I believe that it's right to defend my life, we are each acting accordingly to what we each believe is right (for us) and wrong (for the other) to do.

Scary part here.............

The reason I don't do all sorts of crazy things, like rob people's homes, is because I don't believe that it's right for me to do that. I don't do it because of any law made by some deity or man. I don't do it because I don't believe it's right for ME to do. I'm quite capable at self-governing. Some people are, but "people" generally are not, thus why we have laws and religion.
[/quote]

Ahh yes, post-modernism - the most nonsensical of all philosophies.

[tman]

I'm not arguing, I'm merely expressing my opinion...agree, disagree, matters not to I.

When you continue to express your opinion in the face of conflicting information, you ARE arguing. Saying you aren't is silly.


As far as your whole-house RO, as long as your plumbing is plastic'ish, then I wouldn't worry about the corrosiveness of the water. In the water business we used to label it, "aggressive."

Remember, too, that RO devices CANNOT produce potable water from a non-potable source.

[grousemaster]

So because you disagree with my opinion, I'm a court jester?

Thou doth assumeth too much.

a) That there's a court of which you are king. There may be a narcissistic ego problem there if you believe that, but to each their own.
b) That your opinion is somehow more valid than another's.
c) That one opinion invalidates another's.

meh. whatever. Think me a jester. I think some people on here are a-hats. Not all, not even most, but that's my opinion.

As for pollution, we've done more of that in the past 150 years than ever before I believe; and climate change, to each their own opinion. I'm not going to get into it. I'm all for a civil discussion of opinions, but when one side gets into an Internet p-ing contest because they believe themselves right and the other wrong, when it becomes an ego-driven, name calling playground, yeah, I'm out of here. Granted, most of the Internet is like that forums, but just like guns, forums aren't the problem - people are.

There was recently a user (which I believe was also moderator) which quit here due to some a-hattery by the resident troll after a personal attack and being fed up with the bs on here. Should I quit too? Would that make you feel better so you can have one giant circle jerk with a small group of people who agree with you 100% all of the time?

If certain people want to have a closed-membership elitist place to hang out with select individuals, then I suggest making this place invite-only, closing down open registration, booting everyone you disagree with, and then you can have your happy lil nirvana in this corner of the Internet all to yourselves. If that's not possible here, then how about starting your own forum where you set it up just as that? Don't invite me. I'll stay here and don't want to go there. You'll be free of me and everyone else whom you disagree with. Personally, I think that's a GREAT idea. You'd be rid of me and my opinions, but then that may also rid you of your entertainment. Which I have to say, if someone finds me entertaining, they're pretty easily amused; and likewise, if I irritate them, they are pretty easily annoyed as well.

Ok, now take another hit of my words, inhale deeply, absorb my words which arey our drug of choice, and flame on now that you've got your next fix....or ignore me and my opinion. I think it's rather sad how people get all riled up by my opinions about things and I wonder how those same people would react in-person and not when hiding behind a keyboard.

Even though you have 1245 posts, the sheer volume of words has to be near the top.

[XDM45]

I'm not arguing, I'm merely expressing my opinion...agree, disagree, matters not to I.

When you continue to express your opinion in the face of conflicting information, you ARE arguing. Saying you aren't is silly.


As far as your whole-house RO, as long as your plumbing is plastic'ish, then I wouldn't worry about the corrosiveness of the water. In the water business we used to label it, "aggressive."

Remember, too, that RO devices CANNOT produce potable water from a non-potable source.

Ah good to know about the source of the non-vs-potable. Yeah, the tubing in the house all plastic.

As for "When you continue to express your opinion in the face of conflicting information, you ARE arguing" Well, I consider it merely re-stating my opinion, however, II can see that being viewed as arguing by some, so it's probably semantics and dependant upon your viewpoint.

To me, arguing is more about when one is trying to prove something to another person, when they are vested in being right and proving the other person wrong; and to me, none of that applies. I'm simply saying "Hey, that wall is green and this is how I see it", to which someone else says "No, that wall is blue." and I state "Well, ok, for you it's blue and for me it's green." It's hard to clap one-handed and it's hard to argue with someone who isn't arguing. Who am I to tell people what to believe? Never have and never will.

[XDM45]

So because you disagree with my opinion, I'm a court jester?

Thou doth assumeth too much.

a) That there's a court of which you are king. There may be a narcissistic ego problem there if you believe that, but to each their own.
b) That your opinion is somehow more valid than another's.
c) That one opinion invalidates another's.

meh. whatever. Think me a jester. I think some people on here are a-hats. Not all, not even most, but that's my opinion.

As for pollution, we've done more of that in the past 150 years than ever before I believe; and climate change, to each their own opinion. I'm not going to get into it. I'm all for a civil discussion of opinions, but when one side gets into an Internet p-ing contest because they believe themselves right and the other wrong, when it becomes an ego-driven, name calling playground, yeah, I'm out of here. Granted, most of the Internet is like that forums, but just like guns, forums aren't the problem - people are.

There was recently a user (which I believe was also moderator) which quit here due to some a-hattery by the resident troll after a personal attack and being fed up with the bs on here. Should I quit too? Would that make you feel better so you can have one giant circle jerk with a small group of people who agree with you 100% all of the time?

If certain people want to have a closed-membership elitist place to hang out with select individuals, then I suggest making this place invite-only, closing down open registration, booting everyone you disagree with, and then you can have your happy lil nirvana in this corner of the Internet all to yourselves. If that's not possible here, then how about starting your own forum where you set it up just as that? Don't invite me. I'll stay here and don't want to go there. You'll be free of me and everyone else whom you disagree with. Personally, I think that's a GREAT idea. You'd be rid of me and my opinions, but then that may also rid you of your entertainment. Which I have to say, if someone finds me entertaining, they're pretty easily amused; and likewise, if I irritate them, they are pretty easily annoyed as well.

Ok, now take another hit of my words, inhale deeply, absorb my words which arey our drug of choice, and flame on now that you've got your next fix....or ignore me and my opinion. I think it's rather sad how people get all riled up by my opinions about things and I wonder how those same people would react in-person and not when hiding behind a keyboard.

Even though you have 1245 posts, the sheer volume of words has to be near the top.

Probably.

[TommyMN]

I wish most of you spent as much time helping people in the real as you do pretending to be a scientist.

I gave up on xds posts. I don't have that much internet time to read that much nonsense.

[TommyMN]

I have a still for water I swear

[XDM45]

I wish most of you spent as much time helping people in the real as you do pretending to be a scientist.

I gave up on xds posts. I don't have that much internet time to read that much nonsense.

We all choose the nonsense we read.

[Geezer43]

To shed some interesting and informative light on some issues relevant to this read. I encourage all of you to watch the show called
NOVA: Earth From Space on the TPT2 LIFE Channel (Channel 2.3) at 8:00 PM tomorrow (Sunday) night.
The last 10 - 15 minutes are directly related to much of what has been discussed here.
The first part of the show is extremely informative about just what is happening on a daily basis on this little blue pebble.

Here is a link to the schedule and a brief discussion of the show -- http://www.tpt.org/?a=programs&id=54

[xd ED]

NOVA's gonna do a show about inter web pissin matches?