Florida plans to become first state to eliminate all childhood vaccine mandates

[Diesel]

Only about 30 years ago. After that, I learned that doing my job wasn't a popularity contest. It's good to be polite and civil, but not a "buddy" or, like MAGA morons and their Big Daddy, always pandering for being loved.

I see why you and Damo get along so well; you both have similar personalities.

Feel free to put me on ignore. Nice argumentum ad verecundiam. You and Terry have that in common too. What do you know about my 40+ year career and training? Or will you claim, like Trump, you could care less?

I don't know anything about it. I never pretended to. It's you who makes wild accusations and assumptions about people you don't know, including me. No, Damo and I are not similar, but thank you for continuing to reinforce my negative opinion about you. I'll put you on Ignore when I feel like it. There was no argumentum ad verecundiam. You're a weird and insecure person. I didn't even think about your Terry reference. Go nip at someone else's heels, chihuahua.

 

[Dutch Uncle]

I don't know anything about it. I never pretended to. It's you who makes wild accusations and assumptions about people you don't know, including me. No, Damo and I are not similar, but thank you for continuing to reinforce my negative opinion about you. I'll put you on Ignore when I feel like it. There was no argumentum ad verecundiam. You're a weird and insecure person. I didn't even think about your Terry reference. Go nip at someone else's heels, chihuahua.

No worries.

 

[IBDaMann]

I have had IBDaMoron on ignore practically since I got here, so I don't know what you guys are discussing here.

@Scott, ThatOwlCoward is just a poo-slinger, compulsive liar and consummate intellectual coward. From the very first moment she noticed that I held a differing view, she began slinging the poo. As far as I can tell, she hasn't made a single positive contribution to JPP in her existence at this site and she hasn't said anything that even indicates that she is any more intelligent than a door stop ... who is seethingly envious of all who can think independently.

Wow, who knew SockBoy Sybil (IBDaMoron) was such a tender, wilting buttercup. I have his other socks on ignore too -- gfm-something and ITN.

@Scott, she has a lot of venom for posters from whom she is fleeing. She lumps together all those who hold differing views and puts them on ignore because she is too embarrassed by her inability to carry on a discussion that requires the application of critical reasoning. She demonstrated from the first moment that she is cognitively impaired, that learning is too difficult and that she needs others to tell her what to believe and what to say. Her participation is always of the teenage-girl-gossip format, which never rises to the level of discussion at the adults' table.

None of them offer anything but stupidity, hate, bigotry, misogyny, bitterness, and bile.

@Scott, do you recognize projection when you see it?

The fact that he is still whining about a non-insult five years later

@Scott, is she blaming some stupid comment of hers from long ago for why she has fled from all discussions involving people who think independently? Is she blaming anyone but herself for her total cowardice and her wasting of this site's bandwidth?

tells you all you need to know about his manhood, or lack thereof.

@Scott, please let me know when she shows any signs of synaptic activity.

^ ^ ^ When I insult, you'll know it. lol

@Scott, ThatOwlCoward figures that her thought-masters will inform you in the thought-collective just as they inform her.

 

[IBDaMann]

I didn't even think about your Terry reference.

Is Dutch-Dutch making "Terry" references? That was my name for him. What does he say that it is supposed to mean?

 

[IBDaMann]

The pay was terrible, but the job came with some great books on teaching English grammar and that's what basically started my English teaching career.

Teachable moment. Break out one of those books and turn to the "prepositional phrases" section, then look at the following clause:

... being a native English speaker was enough to get a pass to do the job in at least the one school I started at

Prepositional phrases always begin with the preposition; they never end in one.

" ... being a native English speaker was enough to get a pass to do the job in at least the one school at which I started "


Don't be afraid to come to me with the hard stuff.

 

[Into the Night]

Sure, but to be a science theory, it must predict nature.

A theory is an explanatory argument. It doesn't predict anything. Science MUST be transcribed into a closed functional system like mathematics to gain the power of prediction.

This is why you find many theories either expressed as an equation, or by using math, creating another theory of science based on that extension of math.

Actually, no. The prediction is in the model.

A model is not a prediction. It is just a model...the noun, so to speak, for the theory. It is the EQUATION that predicts, and nothing else.

The falsifiability is in the math.

Falsifiability is not mathematics. ANY closed functional system can be used to test a theory.

Both are needed to be science.

Mathematics is not science.

 

[Into the Night]

You've defined what you believe science is in another post. As I said in that post, I may be able to work with that.

Okay.

From duckduckgo search assist:
**
A study is considered scientific if it systematically collects and evaluates data using the scientific method, which includes formulating a testable hypothesis, conducting experiments, and analyzing results to draw conclusions. It must also be based on empirical evidence and be capable of being replicated by others.
**

Sources:

Scientific study - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

What Is The Scientific Method and How Does It Work? | Definition from TechTarget

Learn about the scientific method, the process of objectively establishing facts through testing and experimentation. Explore its steps and applications.

www.techtarget.com

We may need to agree to disagree on that one. You can check out the link on the scientific method above if you'd like an idea as to why.

Science is not duckduckgo, nor a method, hypothesis, experiment, conclusion, evidence, data, website, or replication.

 

[Into the Night]

I use the term biological to differentiate biological viruses from computer viruses. I -do- believe that computer viruses are real.

Okay. It CAN be argued that a cell operates like a little computer though.
It just uses a base4 encoding scheme instead of a base2 encoding scheme.

 

[Into the Night]

My dispute wasn't with the definition of contract killing,

It it was. Don't try to deny your own posts. ANYONE can read them!

but the fact that I'd been responding to a post concerning abortions with anonymoose and IBD asked me out of the blue why I supported contract killings, which I don't.

If you support abortion for convenience, you support contract killing. It is murder. It is a contracted murder.

I initially thought that "contract killing" was his exotic way of labelling abortions, but I later realized that he'd actually switched the subject of the conversation I'd been having with anonymoose.

Not really. You are talking about abortions for convenience.

 

[Into the Night]

I decided to ask ChatGPT whether Wikipedia defines words. This was its response:

ChatGPT does not define any word (except 'ChatGPT').

 

[Into the Night]

No, I knew what a set and a subset were.

Apparently not, since the concepts seem to really confuse you.

"Proper subset", on the other hand, had me wondering. It suggested there might be improper subsets. Could that a mathematical term too? I didn't know. I decided it would be best to look up "Proper subset" to be sure I wasn't missing something.

Logical terms, but often taught in math classes as 'math'.

I personally think you can learn a lot by searching for information online. I also noted that IBD certainly didn't say that the definition of a proper subset I quoted was mistaken.

A proper subset is simply a set B contained entirely within another set A.
In other words A^B=B, and AvB=A.

An 'improper' subset is a set B that is NOT entirely contained with set A. In other words, 'Improper' is just an extraneous word. They are simply two sets that share some common elements. In other words, A^B != B and AvB != A.

However, A^B does produce a set C, where A^C = B^C = (AvB)^C (or AvB^C). Here, C is a proper subset of AvB. It is also a proper subset of A^B, which equals C to begin with.

 

[IBDaMann]

I think we might agree that vagueness and ambiguity are pretty similar.

"Similar" is insufficient. "Vagueness" implies a lack of clarity, which is not exactly the problem. "Ambiguity", on the other hand, carries a different meaning, one that poses a problem. The Latin root "ambi" means "either" or "each" (although all standard erroneous sources will erroneously tell you that it means "both", but they are all wrong) and something that is ambiguous allows you to have one not-vague meaning while I have a completely different not-vague meaning. Not only will we talk past each other, but all falsifiability is destroyed, and hence science is destroyed, along with math or other closed functional systems in which axioms must be unambiguous.

Researchers and journals can claim that they are following the scientific method in their research. This doesn't mean that they actually are, ofcourse, but I think it's good that science and the scientific method is generally respected enough that whether research or journals are using the scientific method becomes important.

No, that is not what is happening. What do you call it when law enforcement forges a judges signature to create a phony arrest warrant? What do you call the wrongful and dishonest pretense of authority? That is what is going on. People use the label "scientific" to give unwarranted authority to their bogus articles and studies.

Well, I think you know at this point that I've consulted various sources that agree that dictionaries do, in fact, provide definitions for words,

Well, I think you now realize that you are stuck in regurgitation mode because learning requires too much work.

so I suspect we may need to simply agree to disagree on this one.

Nope. We're going to recognize that you are taking the intellectual coward's approach to this topic and are preferring to flee to the hills.

 

[IBDaMann]

Logical terms, but often taught in math classes as 'math'.

Set Theory is taught as math at all levels, elementary school through post-doctoral.

An 'improper' subset is a set B that is NOT entirely contained with set A.

The term subset implies that it could be the exact same set. "Proper" subset simply means that the order (magnitude/size) of the set is strictly less than that of the superset. This is an example of when it is clearer and quicker to write in English than in unambiguous logic symbology.

 

[IBDaMann]

I will say that I'm not impressed with Wikipedia on some subjects, such as vaccines.

Of course you are dissatisfied. It is a very political topic, thus Wikipedia has the carefully crafted, Marxist narrative locked down so that no Wikipedia contributor can alter a single word.

That being said, I think that for subjects wherein a person knows little, it can generally be a good starting point

WRONG! For a person who knows little, Wikipedia is a primary Marxist indoctrination point. Let me know when that is ever good.

- as Lefty points out,

Ignored.

 

[IBDaMann]

No, I'm just generally leary of accepting a personal definition of a term that's shown no evidence of ...

Nope. This is one of the lamest excuses Ev-Ah. Your supremacy position remains unsupported. If you're good with that, so am I.

 

[Scott]

2 issues here, one more important than the other. The first, more minor issue, is that I have some doubts as to whether your definition is totally normal.

Nope. You do not.

You think I'm lying to you?

 

[Scott]

The second more important issue is that you jumped to the conclusion that I approve of contract killings. I never said that.

Sorry, you have no wiggle room. It is not merely my conclusion but a mathematical theorem. You approve of a subset of contract killings [snip]

I've already said that I disagree with your logic here.

 

[Scott]

You should only cite authoritative sources.

When I type "contract killing" into duckduckgo, the very first link that comes up after the ads is Wikipedia's page on contract killing. Perhaps that doesn't qualify as "authoritative", but it's certainly convenient to just post content from the first non ad link I see. But I tell you what, if you want to use a different source that you believe is more authorative, quote and link to it, and I'll consider using that definition instead. Alternatively, you could go for the third non add link I found on duckduckgo, which is the legal definition of contract killing:

Contract Killing: Understanding Its Legal Implications | US Legal Forms

Discover the legal definition of Contract Killing, its implications, and why such agreements are considered illegal. Learn more about this serious crime.

legal-resources.uslegalforms.com

Stop. I'm not buying your diversions and pivots. There's no need for you to be researching common knowledge.

There wouldn't be if you had done so yourself. At some point, you may want to ask yourself why you are so keen on avoiding using common definitions of terms and instead opting to use your own custom definitions.

 

[Scott]

I watched how our conversation evolved above [snip]

Nope. Diversion.

I'd say that what you're doing right now is the diversion. For the audience, here is my full statement, not the 7 word clip that IBDaMann quoted:
**
I watched how our conversation evolved above, from my starting it off by saying "I think I've made some progress with my efforts to avoid insulting posters and their beliefs" to the conversation now being about making honest points. I'm all for making honest points. I just believe we should try hard to avoid insulting posters and their beliefs with crass insults. We've gone over this terrain before- you say that you don't insult people until they insult you and then you return fire and I say that even when insulted, I refrain from returning fire (because it's insults, not actual bullets) and instead focus on how the insults are damaging any chances of productive discussion.
**

 

[Scott]

Science is a set of falsifiable theories.

Alright, so your definition of science is that it is a set of falsifiable theories. I think I can work with that.

That is part of the definition. They are falsifiable theories that predict nature. If a model/theory doesn't predict nature, it isn't science.

That sounds more complete than Into the Night's. I'd say we could perhaps go with that one, but I see that Into the Night seems to have issues with it, with the last post in that line being post #1086.