or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by muppetry

  No - I'm afraid you are now doing the same thing as MJ - my statement that I have no arbitrary beliefs to sell cannot be extrapolated to mean that I think all the positions espoused on this forum (other than mine) are arbitrary beliefs, or that I regard those espousing them as irrational and illogical. There is some measure of that IMO, but if that were all that were here I would not waste my time posting. And my point was that I am not selling anything.   Your analogy...
  I don't disagree with the sentiment but, firstly, that comment makes me think that you don't read many of my posts and, secondly, in the context of the level and type of discussion that predominates here in PO, that's a pretty bizarre criticism. My comments, unlike many here, are almost entirely about content, not style; I don't throw labels around as if they somehow contributed to, or enhanced, an argument, as opposed to just being ad hominem pejoratives; I don't...
  No offense taken, but I'm not sure I understand what you are getting at.  MJ used the assertion that economics is a science to avoid addressing the substance of another post. I disputed that assertion. He then threw up a multitude of straw man arguments around my comment, and proceeded to make unconnected and incorrect statements to try to knock them down. That he failed even to defeat his own straw man arguments is odd, but I called him on those anyway. What is there...
  This is another argument that you are not going to win. However distasteful one might find much of Catholic doctrine to be, whether past or current, the Church can always point out that participation is optional (at least in modern times), and that expressing deeply held religious beliefs is a right and imposes no harm on others. While that argument may seem disingenuous to the point of absurdity, the first two assertions are technically correct and the third is too...
  How did you infer from my observation that social sciences are not science that I think science is the only true (strange choice of word by the way) source of knowledge and understanding? That is your inference, and a particularly silly one IMO, not my implication. And, a semantic point I know, but how can an implication be a trap? I'd normally guess from your response that a scientist just offended an economist, but it's clear from many previous posts that you are not...
  Because it does not permit application of the scientific method. In economics one can hypothesize, but one cannot test those hypotheses; it is a set of uncontrolled experiments at best. You may have noticed that your Wikipedia link describes it as a social science.  If I may infer from that that you regard social sciences as science then you have answered my original question.
  Where did you get the notion that economics is a science?
  If you feel that some of the regular posters are being dismissive, you might take a step back and look at your own posts. Many of them are really quite obnoxious - what do you expect in response?
  Just because an instrument has been certified for aviation use doesn't mean that it is immune to interference from sources that were not considered when the certification process was established. Especially when dealing with the very low signal strengths from the GPS system.   I think the unanswered question is just how freak such incidents would be if there were widespread use of PEDs. However, since many are allowed during level flight when the same navigational...
  The argument is that the aircraft is more vulnerable to navigational and control errors during the takeoff and landing phases than during level flight. Plus the quite separate risk of PEDs becoming projectiles in the cabin in the event of emergency or unanticipated maneuvers/excursions.
New Posts  All Forums: