(a comment on a video of a discussion between Carl Sagan, Stephen Hawking, and Arthur Clarke)
how arrogant is science....THose people over there, including Mr Ventril Loquist, Mr Smith and Mr FrechFried Potatoe With Glasses seem to impose their knowledge to the rest of the human kind...This is far arrogant...as we know that they do not know how the Egyptians or Mayas managed to build up their Pyramids. In short, those Sagans, Hawkins, and whatever they are called, ignore the reality? they are living (that doesnt count for Sagan now)
46 comments
Historic science has a very good idea about the way the pyramids probably have been built. And it doesn´t include anything supernatural.
Hawking and Co don´t need to know anything about it btw. because their field ist astrophysics and not history. It is sufficient if Profs in History know about it ;)
So, Physics=Architecture? What? And how is science arrogant? How do facts based in reality show emotion? And what point do you prove in making fun of a guy in a wheelchair? And exactly how is science, based on what's real, ignore reality? And how come fundies haven't yet learned basic grammar?
Edit: I just noticed this prick's name. You ARE NOT Goku, fuckwad.
And yet, Stephen Hawking -- "Mr FrechFried Potatoe With Glasses" [sic] -- *still* manages to outsmart you!
And WTF, "potatoe"? Taking spelling lessons from Dan Quayle is a *bad* idea.
Actually, someone figured out how to leverage up huge concrete blocks with little more than wedges of wood. So, uh, that part PHAIL.
"how arrogant is science...."
It's not arrogant when you have evidence to back it up.
"THose people over there, including Mr Ventril Loquist, Mr Smith and Mr FrechFried Potatoe With Glasses seem to impose their knowledge to the rest of the human kind...This is far arrogant..."
How cute.
"as we know that they do not know how the Egyptians or Mayas managed to build up their Pyramids."
Of course we do. The Egyptians left a number of wall murals depicting how it was done. It wouldn't surprise me if the Mayans did the same, though they were a bit less obsessive about recording everything so they may not have.
"In short, those Sagans, Hawkins, and whatever they are called, ignore the reality? they are living (that doesnt count for Sagan now)"
I don't have a single fucking clue what that, er... sentence is supposed to convey.
What is it with fundie idiots? and putting question marks in the middle of? sentence?
There seems to be a system to it, but I can't get it. The question marks are not put like commas, ie where you'd expect a 'short break' in the text. They seem to be placed mostly at nouns or some 'important word' in the sentence, but beyond that, I'm at a loss.
There's so much fail in this there's so little we can say...
1. Science is not arrogant. You are arrogant; after all, who is it who insists everyone who doesn't believe what they do should?
2. They can indeed explain the pyramids. Any rational person can.
When you're in love you want to tell the whole world. This book is a reflection of my life-long love affair with science.
-- Carl Sagan
Science follows reality. Science inherently cannot be disproved; usually when somebody claims a disproval and is right, theories and principles simply change. On the other hand, the Bible does not follow reality. When somebody claims a contradiction, it doesn't change and instead a bunch of people go crazy about it.
Looks like this guy has always had a problem with other people imposing their knowledge on him, starting with his first grade teacher.
It's called education, and it's nothing to resent, you damned moron.
Your intellect, you close minded, bile-spewing, mental midget, is as an infinitesimal grain of sand compared to the towering might of the Himalayas when compared to even one of such august luminaries, let alone the three in concert.
> they do not know how the Egyptians or Mayas managed to build up their Pyramids.
I'm not an architect or archaeologist, and my scientific knowledge is surely dwarfed by Messrs. Sagan, Hawking and Clarke... but I'd hazard an educated guess by saying "the pyramids were built by quarrying big blocks of stone and hauling them one top another"?
Well none of those people are Egyptologists, so what's your point?
Do fudnies nto understand there are many different areas of science which it would be impossible to be an expert in all? Do they think there is one science and all scientists study every science there is or something?
1. You don't talk shit about Carl fucking Sagan.
2. See above.
3. You don't talk shit about Stephen Hawking and Arthur Clarke, either.
4. Don't ever talk shit about Carl Sagan.
5. Ever.
Science isn't arrogant, it's realistic.
All the intelligent of "the rest of the human kind" want these men to impose their knowledge upon them, stupid.
As none of the guys is an Egyptology scholar, why would they know how the pyramids were built? They probably have a fairly good idea of how it was done, anyway.
If they ignored reality, their science would fail completely. A hint; it doesn't.
Even before the mechanics were worked out, theories tested and concepts disproven, all three of those guys knew how those were built.
Hard work and engineering methods.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.