Incorrect. He was a largely talentless moron and fraud. He never contributed a single thing of value to science whatsoever. He also stole a lot of money and time from a lot of people, and so was a common thief to boot.
Change my mind (by supplying something of value to science that he did contribute)!
Nope. We've contributed exactly the same, which is to say - nothing!
based on nothing more than your unwavering belief
As I said, I'm not like the others. I identify and destroy belief where it does not belong, like in knowledge, especially scientific. Like your belief in your guru bearden, for instance. I can't destroy it for you, but perhaps I can help you to identify it!
You are in fact the moron and fraud
Try to avoid ad hominem if you can. It is the last resort of the intellectually feeble. Attack the thought! Never the thinker!
as the models are provable incomplete
Models aren't science. As I said, I am not like the others.
I won't waste energy on trying to change your mind, as it's clear that your mind is made up
My mind is made up because of my research into bearden and his egregious fraud. Maybe I'm wrong? Maybe I've been misinformed? Maybe you have scientific proof that he's not a fraud? I have been wrong many times before, it will not be a new experience for me. Let me have it! Change my mind!
I am an earnest student, and not the strawman caricature that you initially lumped me into by mistake.
Sure thing buddy. You're feel that you're special and not like everyone else.
You misunderstand, I'm not like the other people you are mistaking me for. There are lots of others like me!
Your actions speak louder than your words.
This is a conversation. There are only words here. This is a perplexing statement in this context. Speaking of actions, why aren't you just supplying the science that bearden has contributed?
If you gain a complete understanding of something, you no longer have to resort to bind belief, as the knowledge speaks for itself.
If only it were so simple! So then you completely understand bearden's "science" and can replicate and explain it thoroughly? Lay it on me, brother or sister!
It's literally your ad hom that I threw back at you.
You misunderstand. We are having a conversation. There has been no attack against you, just your guru. And that "attack" was merely a fair representation of the facts and a conclusion of my research into their repeated and egregious fraud. As I said, I may be wrong! Help me see the error of my ways! I am sincere and earnest, and will not spit meaningless insult at you as you have done.
You've given me more than enough reason not to.
Just for insulting your guru? Why not clear his name! It shouldn't be too hard. Just provide this "science" you've been going on about!
If you want to know the truth, you can take the time to learn for yourself.
I have! I have listened to and evaluated the fraud beardon's "work"/"science". But as I said, perhaps I made a mistake! Perhaps I was in a bad mood! Maybe I didn't know enough about science at the time I made the determination! Help me out!
I don't really want you to change my mind (that's not something anyone can do), I want you - assuming you are interested - to share this "science" so we can evaluate it earnestly!
Bro I wouldn't bother arguing with jack. I've debated this guy before and all he does is pretend like hes some genius with more knowledge than you and never actually talks about his facts or even sources anything. Its just pilpul all the way down, and he's great at it too. He tries to "win" the argument by pissing you off and thats it, he doesn't care about the facts or imparting knowledge to others, just claims he does. All he does is character defame.
I'm sure he'll comment and try to trick me into a debate too but the only way to win is to not play.
I pictured him with purple hair right from the start.
Honestly his tongue is more silver than some retard leftists would be. Literally mossad? Who knows. But I don't exactly just want to sit around and talk about shills all day, you know? They don't deserve that much thought.
That's true. Argument is for idiots. I only engage in rational discourse. If you think you are debating or in an argument when speaking with me, you are confused and pissing in the wind.
He tries to "win" the argument by pissing you off and thats it
It saddens me that you may actually believe that. I have only the intention to share and to discuss, the "inflaming" happens organically. Take this thread for instance. The "insults" (actually valid criticisms and conclusions bore of research) were directed at beardon, but "TheScience" mistook that for personal attack against them :( Misunderstandings are easy, and communication is hard.
You can't "win" a discussion, but you can lose the plot and the point of it. I seek to discuss, not "win"! As I've said to you before, there is no judge and no audience - it is just us, struggling to communicate!
Incorrect. He was a largely talentless moron and fraud. He never contributed a single thing of value to science whatsoever. He also stole a lot of money and time from a lot of people, and so was a common thief to boot.
Change my mind (by supplying something of value to science that he did contribute)!
Nope. We've contributed exactly the same, which is to say - nothing!
As I said, I'm not like the others. I identify and destroy belief where it does not belong, like in knowledge, especially scientific. Like your belief in your guru bearden, for instance. I can't destroy it for you, but perhaps I can help you to identify it!
Try to avoid ad hominem if you can. It is the last resort of the intellectually feeble. Attack the thought! Never the thinker!
Models aren't science. As I said, I am not like the others.
My mind is made up because of my research into bearden and his egregious fraud. Maybe I'm wrong? Maybe I've been misinformed? Maybe you have scientific proof that he's not a fraud? I have been wrong many times before, it will not be a new experience for me. Let me have it! Change my mind!
I am an earnest student, and not the strawman caricature that you initially lumped me into by mistake.
'Buddy' the slang of the lost argumenter.....
You misunderstand, I'm not like the other people you are mistaking me for. There are lots of others like me!
This is a conversation. There are only words here. This is a perplexing statement in this context. Speaking of actions, why aren't you just supplying the science that bearden has contributed?
If only it were so simple! So then you completely understand bearden's "science" and can replicate and explain it thoroughly? Lay it on me, brother or sister!
You misunderstand. We are having a conversation. There has been no attack against you, just your guru. And that "attack" was merely a fair representation of the facts and a conclusion of my research into their repeated and egregious fraud. As I said, I may be wrong! Help me see the error of my ways! I am sincere and earnest, and will not spit meaningless insult at you as you have done.
Just for insulting your guru? Why not clear his name! It shouldn't be too hard. Just provide this "science" you've been going on about!
I have! I have listened to and evaluated the fraud beardon's "work"/"science". But as I said, perhaps I made a mistake! Perhaps I was in a bad mood! Maybe I didn't know enough about science at the time I made the determination! Help me out!
I don't really want you to change my mind (that's not something anyone can do), I want you - assuming you are interested - to share this "science" so we can evaluate it earnestly!
Bro I wouldn't bother arguing with jack. I've debated this guy before and all he does is pretend like hes some genius with more knowledge than you and never actually talks about his facts or even sources anything. Its just pilpul all the way down, and he's great at it too. He tries to "win" the argument by pissing you off and thats it, he doesn't care about the facts or imparting knowledge to others, just claims he does. All he does is character defame.
I'm sure he'll comment and try to trick me into a debate too but the only way to win is to not play.
Honestly, I insulted (not really, but from your perspective) beardon! NOT you! I have not, nor will I start, insulting you!
Factual statements that hurt your feelings, so you run away like a child.
Honestly his tongue is more silver than some retard leftists would be. Literally mossad? Who knows. But I don't exactly just want to sit around and talk about shills all day, you know? They don't deserve that much thought.
You have a good one, though!
He makes you feel stupid?
That's true. Argument is for idiots. I only engage in rational discourse. If you think you are debating or in an argument when speaking with me, you are confused and pissing in the wind.
It saddens me that you may actually believe that. I have only the intention to share and to discuss, the "inflaming" happens organically. Take this thread for instance. The "insults" (actually valid criticisms and conclusions bore of research) were directed at beardon, but "TheScience" mistook that for personal attack against them :( Misunderstandings are easy, and communication is hard.
You can't "win" a discussion, but you can lose the plot and the point of it. I seek to discuss, not "win"! As I've said to you before, there is no judge and no audience - it is just us, struggling to communicate!