Ever Notice How Amarel Just Slinks Off When He Realises He's Said Something Stupid?
I Noticed
Side Score: 17
|
 |
I'm Blind
Side Score: 9
|
|
|
|
|
When you try to sum up, with one sentence, the general attitude of a country as large and diverse as the US, you can't possibly present an accurate summary. Furthermore, your summary was specifically negative, and implied that Americans generally do the wrong thing and repeat their error. This is the kind of attitude that, if it were generally true, could not produce a country that is consistently a top achiever in studies concerning innovation, whether it's defined narrowly in terms of patents produced or more broadly, covering a more general swath of the population, such as in the source I presented. Innovation leader is just one way to look at American attitudes. We are also consistently the most generous people on Earth by a wide margin. Work ethic is another way we could talk about American attitudes. While we pride ourselves on our world topping work ethic, our lazier European friends love to talk about how aweful that is for us. Simultaneously, they complain about how rich and decadent America is, as if input and output are unrelated. Amusingly, "lazy American" is the picture many try to paint of the country that works longer average hours than even Japan. The US is consistently on the short list for most technologically advanced country min the world. The countries that top this list correlate to the countries at the top of the supposedly arbitrary innovation list. Top technological advancement, like innovation, is another example situation that Americans could not achieve if Noms ridiculous were anywhere close to fitting. Now that I'm done with this response, will my bitches please search for the sources I used? Thank you. Side: I Noticed
1
point
The US is consistently on the short list for most technologically advanced country min the world. Thank you Captain Obvious. The US is the wealthiest country on Earth, so of course it is to be expected that it will have good technology. But just like your other red herring where you referred me to an arbitrary definition of "innovation", this has absolutely no relationship to the general attitude of Americans. It is entirely irrelevant to the conversation. You are referencing things happening in places where there are large, concentrated amounts of capital and expertise, and of course this is a total misrepresentation of the life of the average American. Side: I'm Blind
1
point
When the prospect of someone being important to the people in their life appears to you as an example of a delusion of grandeur, you should talk to someone. Literally anyone. Otherwise you may never acquire social connections enough to distinguish between regular life and delusion. You may be at risk for suicide. Good thing you don't live in the US, because you would be successful. Though that would require a bit more work than you're used to. Side: I Noticed
|
What do you do for a living? I put all the smart things in bold and I left the ignorant shit in plain text: Infinity is an abstract concept On what basis are you drawing that conclusion? Black holes are regions of infinite density and black holes demonstrably exist. Therefore your conclusion would appear to be wrong. and is, by definition, greater than any conceivable number. Yes, but that tells us nothing about why you believe it to be an abstract concept. However big the universe is at any given future point, it will have an assignable number that represents that distance. Yes, this had occurred to me. I agree. At least in theory. However large that number is, we will always be able to conceive of a number that is larger. That's because numbers themselves are infinite you bozo. If you change the question and ask how large the universe can expand, the answer may be that it can expand infinitely If it can expand infinitely (which the latest data suggests it can and will) then it is infinite, because remember we are also measuring across time as well as space. Side: I'm Blind
For this one, I put all the stupid ignorant shit in bold, just to be consistent with the original: Black holes are regions of infinite density and black holes demonstrably exist. Therefore your conclusion would appear to be wrong. "A singularity is a point in space where there is a mass with infinite density." "In the real universe, no black holes contain singularities. In general, singularities are the non-physical mathematical result of a flawed physical theory. When scientists talk about black hole singularities, they are talking about the errors that appear in our current theories and not about objects that actually exist. When scientists and non-scientists talk about singularities as if they really exist, they are simply displaying their ignorance." https://wtamu. If it can expand infinitely (which the latest data suggests it can and will) then it is infinite, because remember we are also measuring across time as well as space. An infinitely expanding universe expands unendingly. That does not mean that its existent size is infinite. The infinity refers to an endless potential, not an actuality. Infinity is not a coherent concept as an actuality (see above). Side: I'm Blind
1
point
For this one, I put all the stupid ignorant shit in bold, just to be consistent with the original Oh, you found someone on the internet who disagrees that singularities really exist? That's amazing, Amarel. Yes, that discovery certainly warrants you calling me a "stupid, ignorant, shit". Definitely. Only let's look slightly deeper:- When scientists talk about black hole singularities Oh wait. It's the scientists who are wrong? Oh, OK. So that clearly leaves us a large clue that you have not linked us to anything which could be mistaken for science. You've linked us to somebody's personal opinion which is not supported by any physical evidence. As scientists have understood for some time now, when any object collapses under the force of its own gravity, it must necessarily result in a real world singularity. Look, I'll be honest pal. You are really boring me because you are just profoundly intellectually dishonest. You discover one page on the internet where somebody (relatively) qualified disputes the existence of real world singularities, but instead of conducting a balanced investigation to determine what the general consensus opinion might be, and if it matches your one lone source, you instead use that as a springboard for a wild personal attack. It's so ridiculous it is essentially farcical. You need to learn to grow up, Amarel. Our current theory of spacetime, general relativity, not only allows for singularities, but tells us that they are unavoidable in some real-world circumstances Side: I Noticed
1
point
"For this one, I put all the stupid ignorant shit in bold, just to be consistent with the original":- In the real universe, no black holes contain singularities. Only, wait a minute... Those "stupid, ignorant" guys over at Stanford don't appear to agree with that conclusion:- Our current theory of spacetime, general relativity, not only allows for singularities, but tells us that they are unavoidable in some real-world circumstances https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/ General relativity, huh? I think I've heard of that. Must have been invented by another "stupid, ignorant shit". 😆 Side: I Noticed
|
