What Do You Refuse to Accept as Fact?

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . . . 15 NEXT
 

I refuse to accept that Dubstep is an actual form of music.

dalek sec:

Lilani:
I refuse to believe Walt Disney was an anti-Semite. There is just no evidence of it at all. He used no characters or stereotypes that other animators and entertainers weren't using at the time. As far as I've been able to discover, the very first charge of this came from the Simpsons. It just amazes me how much people take it seriously now.

Pretty much this as well. I just don't see it unless I travel back in time and hear the man make anti-semite comments or something.

Also, I refuse to believe on any grounds that that piece of shit "50 Shades of Grey" is a best seller made from fucking fan-fiction. I know the lord has it in for me but that's just too harsh I think.

Actually he held anti semetic parties during wartime, a huge historical taboo in that time was when Charlie Chaplin (silent actor) left his party after realizing the theme of the party. Though I would state that at that time walt was more open to some beliefs within fascism then a true Nazi believer, he also kept more neutral so that sales could still increase in European countries.

That being said,

I find it hard to believe that so many charities need to use the majority of donations on there establishment and not on the charity itself.Not all charities are as bad as others, but some straight out discourage me from happy thoughts.

That 0.9 is 1, to me that breaks numbers.

I am shit at maths, like times tables are the da vinci code to me. I was so bad at maths they never even tried to teach me trigonometry.

So when somebody tries to argue that 0.9 is 1, it makes me think "well if 0.9 is 1, then isn't 0.8 0.9, which is 1 ... so does 0.8 also = 1?"

Where does that stop? Is it like rounding? 0.5 is 1 but 0.4 is 0? does it also mean that 1.9 is 2?

Nobody try to explain it to me 'cos it doesn't matter so I wont learn it, so I wont even read your reply

Captcha: make my day ....

I refuse to believe that fat in foods is what makes you fat when it has been shown time and time again that it's sugars/carbohydrates that give you the beer belly. Look it up. The food pyramid is probably the reason why people are getting fat!

That we are the only sentient race in existence.

I refuse to accept that a tomato is a fruit.

Nimzabaat:

lacktheknack:

Nimzabaat:

Keep in mind that people thought we would explode if we travelled faster than sound. People also thought the world was flat. So yeah, we'll break the light barrier eventually.

The sound barrier myth came from natural extrapolation and urban mythology. The fact that we'll disintegrate into a spectacular fireball when we approach the speed of light and accidentally hit a cloud of atoms (read: everywhere in space that's not absolute zero) is advanced atomic theory crossed with basic physics.

The only way we'll possibly achieve "faster-than-light travel" is if we master wormholes.

Just keep in mind, one hundred years from now, our "atomic theory" and "basic physics" may be written off as urban mythology. I refuse to accept that we are the pinnacle of human development and scientific understanding.

Well, we're still not sure on quarks, if that makes you feel better.

And there's nothing "mythological" about atomic fusion - we've done it. No one had proven that moving faster than sound would cause an explosion, because they didn't have the technology to prove it. We DO have the technology to learn what happens then you transfer altogether too much energy to an atom (it deconstructs and explodes). We've already stepped past the mythology stage and gone straight to the "testing how it works" stage. There's no discovery we can make that will make fusion not happen.

This is the equivalent of us finding out that traveling faster than sound DOES make things explode and now we're finding out why.

Geez, I'M the crazy Christian here. I'M the one who's supposed to doubt advanced scientific progress. What happened?

TL:DR

Anything that's not light (since light doesn't have mass) traveling at the speed of light:

image

End of story. We've observed it. There's no way to "scientifically advance" past this unless we develop unkillable synthetic atoms (in which case everything EXCEPT the object traveling faster light will explode).

Our only hope for FTL travel:

image

Also end of story.

That there is a life after this, I mean, I watch many shows related to spiritual things and often think to myself, "My, what a nice fantasy that is". However, I cannot believe in an afterlife, and if there is I couldn't be happy or sad about it since emotions are produced in the brain which dies. Same goes for the mind and everything, so it's just impossible... Hearing about how people find "near death experiences" pleasant with a welcoming light and seeing relatives, science says this is just mindtricks which happens when the brain is shutting down.. I'm fine with that, I don't mind feeling calm and happy before my brain shuts down and my mind disappears permanently.

I've often wondered if I find this to be a good or a bad thing, but it's mostly good for me, who would wanna be around for an eternity? It's hard enough to live with all the bad things you do for about 40-50 years, so I choose to see it as a welcome relief.

Sorry for being so serious :P Here's a joke, two monkeys were flying over a jungle, the first one says "Why do you have a meatball in your eye??", the other one responds with "What?" and the first one repeats the question a couple of times until the second one finally shouts "I can't hear you, I got a meatball in my eye!".

doomspore98:
I refuse to accept that a tomato is a fruit.

Fruit: "Seed bearing pod". Your argument is invalid.

omega 616:
That 0.9 is 1, to me that breaks numbers.

I am shit at maths, like times tables are the da vinci code to me. I was so bad at maths they never even tried to teach me trigonometry.

So when somebody tries to argue that 0.9 is 1, it makes me think "well if 0.9 is 1, then isn't 0.8 0.9, which is 1 ... so does 0.8 also = 1?"

Where does that stop? Is it like rounding? 0.5 is 1 but 0.4 is 0? does it also mean that 1.9 is 2?

Nobody try to explain it to me 'cos it doesn't matter so I wont learn it, so I wont even read your reply

Captcha: make my day ....

Are you thinking of 0.999... as in nought point nine recurring. Because no-one has ever claimed 0.9=1

Lizardon:
Snip.

Based on my understanding we don't need to prove 0.333...=1/3. It wasn't something that was discovered but rather defined. Essentially when mathematicians invented decimals as an alternative way of writing fractions there were some fractions that wouldn't translate neatly in the case of 1/3 you get 0.3 and 1/30 left over if you divide 1/30 you get 0.03 and 1/300 left over. This goes on forever giving you an infinite stream of 3s so the recurring notation was invented as shorthand way of saying this pattern continues forever. 0.333... is just another way of saying 1/3 so you don't need to prove they are equal they just are.

This video explains why Pluto isn't considered a planet anymore.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z_2gbGXzFbs&feature=plcp

lacktheknack:

doomspore98:
I refuse to accept that a tomato is a fruit.

Fruit: "Seed bearing pod". Your argument is invalid.

Well duhh. I just don't accept it. I know I'm wrong, I just can't believe it do to moral obligations. But mostly due to the fact that I just don't want to believe that it is a fruit. Don't try and reason with me though.

Why would we mention Religeon? No sane person accepts that mythological nonsense as fact, because it simply isn't.

Mr.Philip:

DressedInRags:
Why would we mention Religeon? No sane person accepts that mythological nonsense as fact, because it simply isn't.

Come on, don't try to start something like this.

Fair play, I won't intentionally de-rail the OP's thread and instead save it for a more appropriate place. I just think it's slightly irritating that Religeon gets a free pass on this one when it constantly deserves nothing less than constant dressing-down, although I guess the OP probably just wanted to keep the thread from being too predictable.

lacktheknack:

DressedInRags:
Why would we mention Religeon? No sane person accepts that mythological nonsense as fact, because it simply isn't.

So, you read OP requests and then ignore them because you can?

Please exit.

You do realise that you don't have any authority over me, don't you? I mean fair game if you're trying to suggest I'm being innappropriate, but assuming I'm intentionally trying to subvert the thread for the hell of it and then signing off with "please exit" is more than a little confrontational.

HASTY EDIT: The way I wrote the above comment (which was already inappropriate) was fairly poor, and as a result I ended up offending someone who I would never have any problem with normally. In order to avoid something like this happening again, imma stick some qualifying statements in ehre, ripped right from the comment I made below in which I found myself in the position of having to explain myself due to my own idiocy in writing the above:

I don't think there's anything offensive about pointing out that religeon is almost exclusively non-factual, and I also don't think it's unreasonable to believe that no-one in their right mind would expect the world to accept their own non-scientific beliefs as fact. There are very clearly defined criteria dictating what qualifies as "fact" and what doesn't.

I don't consider religeous people insane, unless I see them attempt to claim that what they believe should be accepted by everyone else as objective truth when it simply isn't. To be clear, I have no problem with anyone believing whatever they want to believe, even if these beliefs religeous. It's the intolerant attempting to assert religeous claims as factual and claim not just tolerance but underserved respect for their beliefs that I should be directing my diatribes at, instead of haphazardly throwing them around public forums for all to see.

DressedInRags:
Why would we mention Religeon? No sane person accepts that mythological nonsense as fact, because it simply isn't.

Come on, don't try to start something like this.

DressedInRags:
Why would we mention Religeon? No sane person accepts that mythological nonsense as fact, because it simply isn't.

So, you read OP requests and then ignore them because you can?

Please exit.

DressedInRags:

lacktheknack:

DressedInRags:
Why would we mention Religeon? No sane person accepts that mythological nonsense as fact, because it simply isn't.

So, you read OP requests and then ignore them because you can?

Please exit.

You do realise that you don't have any authority over me, don't you? I mean fair game if you're trying to suggest I'm being innappropriate, but assuming I'm intentionally trying to subvert the thread for the hell of it and then signing off with "please exit" is more than a little confrontational.

I'm okay with being confrontational, YOU'RE the one who called me insane and dismissed my viewpoints in the most backhanded way possible.

omega 616:
That 0.9 is 1, to me that breaks numbers.

I am shit at maths, like times tables are the da vinci code to me. I was so bad at maths they never even tried to teach me trigonometry.

So when somebody tries to argue that 0.9 is 1, it makes me think "well if 0.9 is 1, then isn't 0.8 0.9, which is 1 ... so does 0.8 also = 1?"

Where does that stop? Is it like rounding? 0.5 is 1 but 0.4 is 0? does it also mean that 1.9 is 2?

Nobody try to explain it to me 'cos it doesn't matter so I wont learn it, so I wont even read your reply

Captcha: make my day ....

... Are you serious? .9 isn't 1. .99999999999999999999999999999999999999... is 1. The 9s need to repeat forever.

Mortai Gravesend:

omega 616:
That 0.9 is 1, to me that breaks numbers.

I am shit at maths, like times tables are the da vinci code to me. I was so bad at maths they never even tried to teach me trigonometry.

So when somebody tries to argue that 0.9 is 1, it makes me think "well if 0.9 is 1, then isn't 0.8 0.9, which is 1 ... so does 0.8 also = 1?"

Where does that stop? Is it like rounding? 0.5 is 1 but 0.4 is 0? does it also mean that 1.9 is 2?

Nobody try to explain it to me 'cos it doesn't matter so I wont learn it, so I wont even read your reply

Captcha: make my day ....

... Are you serious? .9 isn't 1. .99999999999999999999999999999999999999... is 1. The 9s need to repeat forever.

Ok, so you understood what I meant 'cos you "corrected" me. The difference is I didn't hold the 9 button for longer.

My point was made, I just never bothered to spam the 9 button.

I can't think of anything... I'm not being egotistical or "hey hey look at me lololol" just... I don't know, is this the result of going to law school? Wow I've gotten boring... :(

lacktheknack:

DressedInRags:

lacktheknack:

So, you read OP requests and then ignore them because you can?

Please exit.

You do realise that you don't have any authority over me, don't you? I mean fair game if you're trying to suggest I'm being innappropriate, but assuming I'm intentionally trying to subvert the thread for the hell of it and then signing off with "please exit" is more than a little confrontational.

I'm okay with being confrontational, YOU'RE the one who called me insane and dismissed my viewpoints in the most backhanded way possible.

I don't consider you insane because as far as I know, your religeon is something that you hold as a personal viewpoint, NOT something you consider 'fact'. It's one thing to believe in something which is more than a little nebulous, but It'd be anot thing entirely if you expected the world to regard it as solid fact.

I don't think there's anything offensive about pointing out that religeon is almost exclusively non-factual, and I also don't think it's unreasonable to believe that no-one in their right mind would expect the world to accept their own non-scientific beliefs as fact. There are very clearly defined criteria dictating what qualifies as "fact" and what doesn't.

I'm sorry for my extraordinarily callous manner of expressing this, however, and you're entirely right in identifying my tone as confrontational, even though I didn't intend it to be. My comment was off-topic and blunt to begin with, and for the sake of those who it concerns should have contained the kind of qualifying detail I'm now stuffing into this post in what probably looks like an underhanded attempt at backpedalling my way out of moderator wrath.

I don't consider you insane, because I haven't seen you ever try to attempt to claim that what you believe should be accepted by everyone else as objective truth when it simply isn't. To be clear, I have no problem with anyone believing whatever they want to believe, even if these beliefs religeous. It's the intolerant attempting to assert religeous claims as factual and claim not just tolerance but underserved respect for their beliefs that I should be directing my diatribes at, instead of haphazardly throwing them around public forums for all to see.

If you DO want the world to see your religeous beleifs as solid, scientific, objective, dyed-in-the-wool carved-in-obsidian undeniable ultra-solid ten-tonne fact - only THEN will I freely label you as less-than-sane.

gnihton:

Lilani:
I refuse to believe Walt Disney was an anti-Semite. There is just no evidence of it at all. He used no characters or stereotypes that other animators and entertainers weren't using at the time. As far as I've been able to discover, the very first charge of this came from the Simpsons. It just amazes me how much people take it seriously now.

An episode of Donald Duck was anti-Nazi, pro America propaganda, so there you go.

I think that cartoon would have been a bit more damning if Donald awoke and realized how much more he liked living in Nazi Germany. Also would have been more damning if they didn't make Hirohito, Hitler, etc into such caricatures. I really liked that cartoon honestly but it's all Donald's fault for being so entertaining.

omega 616:

Mortai Gravesend:

omega 616:
That 0.9 is 1, to me that breaks numbers.

I am shit at maths, like times tables are the da vinci code to me. I was so bad at maths they never even tried to teach me trigonometry.

So when somebody tries to argue that 0.9 is 1, it makes me think "well if 0.9 is 1, then isn't 0.8 0.9, which is 1 ... so does 0.8 also = 1?"

Where does that stop? Is it like rounding? 0.5 is 1 but 0.4 is 0? does it also mean that 1.9 is 2?

Nobody try to explain it to me 'cos it doesn't matter so I wont learn it, so I wont even read your reply

Captcha: make my day ....

... Are you serious? .9 isn't 1. .99999999999999999999999999999999999999... is 1. The 9s need to repeat forever.

Ok, so you understood what I meant 'cos you "corrected" me. The difference is I didn't hold the 9 button for longer.

My point was made, I just never bothered to spam the 9 button.

But the spamming the "9" and adding the "..." is critical.

...You're right, you aren't very good at math.

Fun Fact: One of the Escapist's more well-known mentions in a Cracked article was a massive poo-flinging fight we had over whether or not 0.9999... = 1.

DressedInRags:
sniiiip

Fair enough. [shakes hands, walks off]

I refuse to believe Douglas Adams wrote "Mostly Harmless" the supposed ending to the hitchhikers guide to the galaxy saga

1. The book (or should I say blasphemy) is not acknowledged by Douglas Adams in the introduction to the omnibus edition of hitchhikers guide to the galaxy

2. The writing style is only fairly similar to that of Douglas Adams

Crazycat690:
That there is a life after this, I mean, I watch many shows related to spiritual things and often think to myself, "My, what a nice fantasy that is". However, I cannot believe in an afterlife, and if there is I couldn't be happy or sad about it since emotions are produced in the brain which dies. Same goes for the mind and everything, so it's just impossible... Hearing about how people find "near death experiences" pleasant with a welcoming light and seeing relatives, science says this is just mindtricks which happens when the brain is shutting down.. I'm fine with that, I don't mind feeling calm and happy before my brain shuts down and my mind disappears permanently.

I've often wondered if I find this to be a good or a bad thing, but it's mostly good for me, who would wanna be around for an eternity? It's hard enough to live with all the bad things you do for about 40-50 years, so I choose to see it as a welcome relief.

Sorry for being so serious :P Here's a joke, two monkeys were flying over a jungle, the first one says "Why do you have a meatball in your eye??", the other one responds with "What?" and the first one repeats the question a couple of times until the second one finally shouts "I can't hear you, I got a meatball in my eye!".

I was in the same boat about not believing in life after death. Then I met a ghost. True story. (Well encountered more than met, we didn't exactly interact). I highly recommend the experience because it certainly broadened my views on life.

Pluto is a planet and you better accept it.

Damn it science...Why do you always try to ruin everything?

image

lacktheknack:

Nimzabaat:

lacktheknack:

The sound barrier myth came from natural extrapolation and urban mythology. The fact that we'll disintegrate into a spectacular fireball when we approach the speed of light and accidentally hit a cloud of atoms (read: everywhere in space that's not absolute zero) is advanced atomic theory crossed with basic physics.

The only way we'll possibly achieve "faster-than-light travel" is if we master wormholes.

Just keep in mind, one hundred years from now, our "atomic theory" and "basic physics" may be written off as urban mythology. I refuse to accept that we are the pinnacle of human development and scientific understanding.

Well, we're still not sure on quarks, if that makes you feel better.

And there's nothing "mythological" about atomic fusion - we've done it. No one had proven that moving faster than sound would cause an explosion, because they didn't have the technology to prove it. We DO have the technology to learn what happens then you transfer altogether too much energy to an atom (it deconstructs and explodes). We've already stepped past the mythology stage and gone straight to the "testing how it works" stage. There's no discovery we can make that will make fusion not happen.

This is the equivalent of us finding out that traveling faster than sound DOES make things explode and now we're finding out why.

Geez, I'M the crazy Christian here. I'M the one who's supposed to doubt advanced scientific progress. What happened?

TL:DR

Anything that's not light (since light doesn't have mass) traveling at the speed of light:

image

End of story. We've observed it. There's no way to "scientifically advance" past this unless we develop unkillable synthetic atoms (in which case everything EXCEPT the object traveling faster light will explode).

Our only hope for FTL travel:

image

Also end of story.

So you're declaring yourself the greatest scientific authority that exists and ever will exist for our race or any other? That's quite a feat. I mean real scientists come up with new theories and disprove others all the time. But i'm glad to see you've got them all beat. It's very reassuring :)

I refuse to accept the fact that America needs to have 350+ million firearms.

I refuse to believe that dark matter exists.

I do not accept the fact that Stephen King authors all of the material that's attached to his name. I find it unfathomable that one man can churn out so much content in such little time.

SomeLameStuff:
I refuse to accept that two years of conscription is supposed to be good for me.

Stupid old-fashioned government...

I think it's meant to be so that literally every healthy person can help in the (unlikely) event of a full scale invasion.

Technically, I suppose the necessary standard of fitness you're made to reach is good for you. Sucks you don't have a choice, though. Personally, I'm joining the British Royal Marines voluntarily.

OT: I refuse to believe there wasn't malevolence/a personal (potentially political) agenda behind Fox execs messing with Firefly, such as how they marketed it awfully and ran the episodes out of sequence.

Nimzabaat:
So you're declaring yourself the greatest scientific authority that exists and ever will exist for our race or any other? That's quite a feat. I mean real scientists come up with new theories and disprove others all the time. But i'm glad to see you've got them all beat. It's very reassuring :)

No, I claim to believe scientists when they say they've figured out how the Sun works. They came to a major consensus, no less.

lacktheknack:

omega 616:

Mortai Gravesend:

... Are you serious? .9 isn't 1. .99999999999999999999999999999999999999... is 1. The 9s need to repeat forever.

Ok, so you understood what I meant 'cos you "corrected" me. The difference is I didn't hold the 9 button for longer.

My point was made, I just never bothered to spam the 9 button.

But the spamming the "9" and adding the "..." is critical.

...You're right, you aren't very good at math.

Fun Fact: One of the Escapist's more well-known mentions in a Cracked article was a massive poo-flinging fight we had over whether or not 0.9999... = 1.

No, I wasn't writing the full thing I just wrote enough to make readers aware of what I was talking about.

Weather I put 1 9 or a million people would still understand what I was trying to convey, which is what my intent was ... not to be mathematically accurate.

Restating my point that I am terrible at maths is another example of adding words that aren't needed. Like calling a fat kid fat ... he knows it, calling him fat is unnecessary.

platinawolf:

Aprilgold:
*snip*
Other then the fact that this would be highly impossible since were all different people thinking different things, while a dream or being imagined only happens in one is essentially yelling "OH NOZ WERE A COMPUTER PROGRAM!" Once more.

I believe the word you are looking for is improbable... But as (almost) everything in our universe can be quantifiable (the rest can be described with somewhat simple laws), someone could recreate our universe in a computer simulation. Besides, How do you know your not the only real individual in existence? If you were the only one existing and everyone else being figments of your imagination, how would you know?

A computer program would only need to simulate the parts that affect the things relevant for the data, so if you want to know how a single human would react to a set of stimuli, you'd only need to emulate one person (including sensory input). Once you have emulated one person, you most likely have a rather firm grasp of how they react to sensory input, thus you can make more people and let them interact with eachother.

Because, in essence, it would require not only require a super advanced computer that could, essentially, create our brain, which is already highly complex, followed by a base, the issue with the arguement "OH NOZ WERE COMPUTER PROGRAM" is that, in order for us to be reliable as a computer program, would require a base.

Now how exactly would you create a base for us if you have not met something similar to us?

And no, I used the correct word, impossible. Our ENTIRE body, if it was all self imagination, would require so much calculation on many fronts that any computer that we have managed to build would brick under the pressure. Now imagine doing that on a million different fronts, with a infinite amount of different ways of being brought up and the parents and which school you went to, how your school life went, what you think every day at work, what you fap to, just... JUST THINK OF HOW MANY THOUGHTS YOU HAVE PER MINUTE, HOW MANY ACTIONS PER MINUTE FROM BREATHING TO THE SIMPLEST MOVEMENT OF THE FINGERS! NOW IMAGINE THAT TIMES SEVERAL MILLION, HELL TRY TRILLION IF YOU WANT TO!

MASTACHIEFPWN:
I refuse to believe that Sarah Jessica Parker is human.
image
-snip-

I don't get it. Why did you just post a picture of a horse...
I hope I wasn't ninja'd.

OT: Erm, I don't know. I mean if it's a fact, then refusing to believe it isn't going to change anything. Rumors or hypotheses on the other hand... Well, I don't know. But I don't trust the US government. There are just too many lobbyists. It isn't a democracy anymore, just a rethuglican corpocracy. That's all there is to it, and it's very, very wrong. I'm so glad I don't live in the USA.

omega 616:
Restating my point that I am terrible at maths is another example of adding words that aren't needed. Like calling a fat kid fat ... he knows it, calling him fat is unnecessary.

You're right. Sorry.

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 . . . 15 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked