Naked Science Forum
General Discussion & Feedback => Guest Book => Topic started by: Gneiss on 11/02/2004 09:51:40
-
After barging in last night, I feel I should introduce myself….
I discovered your gem of a site last night whilst searching for something totally unrelated. As others here have already said, there are very few places on the net where those with an interest in science can indulge themselves and put forward their own theories for all things great and small, so I thought I would join you.
As some of you may already have worked out from the username I studied geology for a while, and discovering I was absolutely hopeless at it I moved on to complete a degree in physics and maths [8)]
At 45 I have a nasty feeling that I may well be the eldest person here – anyway my real name is Chris, I work in Electronics/IT on a freelance basis and live with my gf Emma who has absolutely no interest in science whatsoever! [:)]
-
Hi Chris, welcome to the forum! Sorry to pop your bubble, but I'm older than you and so is Bezoar. I suspect there are a few others in the same age corral.
You'd be right in sync with my bf who has an electronics/IT business and a photography business. Exodus is the geologist here (unless I've missed someone else's credentials). And I'm sure you've already noticed that many people are well versed in physics and math.
-
Hi Chris, sorry to put even more holes in your bubble. I also have a couple of years on you.
-
quote:
Originally posted by roberth
sorry to put even more holes in your bubble. I also have a couple of years on you.
I'll try not to let it get me down [;)]
-
That's why I like this place. I needed a peer group where I wasn't the old man.
This message brought to you by The Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People
-
I'm not older than you are Gneiss, but I'm certainly a contemporary. I'm 40. Welcome to the forum!
----
John
-
Welcome Gneiss, from another one of the senior citizens here.
-
Hey, we're not "old", we're nicely aged!
----
John
-
The older the fiddle, the sweeter the tune.
-
ALthough im new also, ive noticed how friendly and polite this site is, unlike many other unnamed sites (totse) its somwhat as a relief speaking my mind without having to worry about grammar nazis or flamers. Just my 2 cents.
-
for startes you used a capital L at the beginning of Although... i'm sure this was a typo but is also bad grammar... somewhat has an E but apart from that... it will do fine... ONLY KIDDING MATE, WELCOME ON BOARD! Get into the thick of it and speak that mind of yours! [;)][:D]
Richard.
The Naked Scientists
-
Hahaha I come hear to spell freely, and yet I still get persecuted for my way I'm typing. What a world, what a world.....I wonder if I screwed up anywhere in there.
-
You know what's funny, is on sites like Slashdot, the spelling and grammar nazis spell something wrong or use incorrect grammar half the time themselves. I delight in pointing that out to them.
This message brought to you by The Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People
-
I try to be correct, but I figure the message is more important than the grammar. We aren't laying down some rich legacy here - just talking. Anyone who spends more time on grammar and punctuation than on the subject is probably just ignornant of the real substance.
----
John
-
Wow I didn't know everyone was so darn old !!! Am I the youngest? I'm 17 ...
Am I dead? Am I alive? I'm both!
(https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stupid-boy.com%2Fsmilies%2Fkao%2Fotn%2Fcat.gif&hash=e4b91a72c020cc1c5d28487fff5428f1)
-
QC,
Don't worry about it. You are more mature than a lot of people in their 40's. We are all as old (or young) as we feel. Somewhere around 25 (give or take) our perspective changes and we want to pull back on the reigns of time rather than push forward.
----
John
-
Quantum,
I'm just slightly younger than you. I'm 16 at the moment, 17 in March.
Tom
-
I'm 18. Tom is the youngest in this forum.
Jay, how old are you? I'm guessing you are in your 20s.
Angel
-
Hi Chris, I'm....old enough !!!...well,ok, Im 39 then....about the same as my IQ !!.but I want to say that my credentials are in no shape or form on a par with you guys and gals. I never went to University and left school at 17 to live life a little (I'm not saying you guys and gals have not lived life a little by the way !!)and then later become involved in a number of business's. I tend to post more questions than answers at the moment and it's a tribute to everybody here that I have felt most welcome and certainly have not received any patronization of any sort.................yet ! *cheeky grin*
'Men are the same as women...just inside out !'
-
Hey Neil, there's more than one way to learn. Some get an education in school and some get an education in life. The really lucky ones get both.
-
Hi Neil
don't neglect to realise the importance of someone who asks a lot of questions - if no one asks anything, we'd have nothing to answer ! Thanks for your input.
Chris
"I never forget a face, but in your case I'll make an exception"
- Groucho Marx
-
Hi Donnah, thanks for that....I suppose I should have phrased it as Academic credentials eh ?....and thanks too Chris....I soon realised after posting my comment the very thing you mentioned and I appreciate your comment.
'Men are the same as women...just inside out !'
-
Well hi don't feel old everyone is welcome here[:)]
Almighty most holy GOD faithful to the ages, almighty most holy Lord, you are faithful faithful(song)
-
In France it's against the law to show any religous or political signs. Your signature makes me shudder a tiny bit everytime I read it, lol
Am I dead? Am I alive? I'm both!
(https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stupid-boy.com%2Fsmilies%2Fkao%2Fotn%2Fcat.gif&hash=e4b91a72c020cc1c5d28487fff5428f1)
-
...I agree with Erin, and besides...Im not too sure about the tone of your red font !!!! , but I'll defend your right to display it so.
'Men are the same as women...just inside out !'
-
Yeah, you have every right to have your sig like that, it just makes some people feel a few negative feelings towards you.
Am I dead? Am I alive? I'm both!
(https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stupid-boy.com%2Fsmilies%2Fkao%2Fotn%2Fcat.gif&hash=e4b91a72c020cc1c5d28487fff5428f1)
-
It is a little provocative on a site like this, it's like you're throwing the cat amongst the pigeons. You must know that a sig like that would generate a particular type of response, it's like me saying 'God does not exist, Science is the way, God is irrational, illogical and invented by the insecure' on a site devoted to God, it's gonna generate a whole lot of flack, and with respect, would probably not be as accepted as you are here.
'Men are the same as women...just inside out !'
-
I disagree neil. This is a scientific forum not an anti-christian forum, and I think its been all but decided on a different thread that the two are not mutually exclusive. So for your example to be relevant you have to say you'd be putting that sig on HERE not a christian site. In that case you are right that your two signatures would be equally provocative (because they show a strong point of view about an unrelated issue).
However, I see one key difference in a "God-loving" display and a "God-bashing" display. C-chick's intentions in putting her signature up are purely for your good. Whether you view them as hostile twards your beliefs SHE is doing it because SHE believes it is the best thing for you to see. When you counter her you are doing it to hurt those that would be offended by your message. You could make the agruement that you are spreading that message for other people's good, but I have a really hard time believeing that those are your true intentions.
Yar, the flies be everywhere!!!
-
....Justin, we're just gonna have to agree to disagree .......I have mentioned previously that I would defend anybodys right (including christianchick of course)to put their point of view over and I concur that christianchick feels that she is promoting her beliefs because she believes it's best for me. I wonder how many other circumstances (good or bad) have been created because someone felt they were doing/promoting a belief due to the fact that they felt it was for our best. We can't always use 'good intentions' as a defence every time.
And I'm not 'god bashing' either.......sometimes such 'in your face' displays can be provocative.
I have found far more flexibility and openeness in mind in the scientific commnunity than ever could be found in the fundamental judgemental beliefs of the religious.......but that's MY opinion, based on discussion and historical experience.
'Men are the same as women...just inside out !'
-
mmmmm..... I am fine with disagreeing to agree (whoops got that backwards, but I'll leav it in cause I like it). But I actually agree with everything you just said there, so I might need you to clarify where exactly our disagreement comes in.
I'm glad you put in the part about good intentions (something I meant to mention in my post but forgot). I will definately say that good intentions are quite possibly the most dangerous thing in the world. However (and this might be one of those areas that lots of peopel disagree with me) to me, intentions are still very important. I have a lot easier time sympathizing with someone who does wrong with good intentions, than someone who does good with malicious initentions. But then again I got THAT from my own personal belief system, and thats the whole thing we are trying to dispute here. So... yeah... I dunno.
I always have a hard time debating on this issue, because while I disgree with the actions of "pushy religious people, I do know why they do it, and it pains me to see people jump all over them about it.
Yar, the flies be everywhere maty....save yerselves!!!
-
we're not disputing, we're not even having a heated debate, I would call it a discussion. As far as agreeable dissagreements......I can't begin to fathom it.....you disagreed with my original post...therefore the fact that you disagree means that I also disagree too....!!! 'Y'know what Justin ?..I'm gonna stop there about the agree/disagree thing.It's 'done me head in Guvna' !!....[:D]
I don't see how we could get anything done at all without intentions, we need them, where is the challenge without them ? I agree...(uh oh..agree/dissagree mode) at least people who do wrong with good intentions are in general good people, while the other with bad intentions would indicate that a positive outcome from an action done by a person with bad intentions must be an accident yes ? just a happenstance.
I see your point about jumping on 'pushy religious people' I really do....it's just that albeit with good intentions(in their opinion)....the inflexibility for religious people to yield ,at the very least accept that they might be wrong can be frustrating. I suppose what I think I'm trying to say is that from a scientist point of view it's irritating when you believe you have complete empirical data and facts, that someone continues to deny those findings by using supernatural excuses......
Is that what I'm trying to say ?....i havent got a clue.....!! I think I've taken a stroll down Tangent Avenue or something.[:o)][:I]
'Men are the same as women...just inside out !'
-
I'll agree to agree with that. [8D]
One more pooint that I just thought of though. One reason why "religious people" seem so inflexible on their views. Comes from the fact that to them what they believe is an absoule undisputed (well I guess not undisputed, but you know what I'm getting at) truth. And the person with the best faith is the person that has absolutly no doubts about this. Where as in science, the best scientist is the one that is ever aware that in essence we know nothing. Even our best supported theories, and even things that we acll "laws" are only theories (often with a great deal of empirical evidence to support them), but that they can be proven wrong at any time. I think that the lack of understanding of this core difference in though is what drives a lot of the frustration between the two groups.
OOPS I just made a big no no in my book, but I'll leave it in there so everyone can see it. I hate it when people put science and religion as competing opposites as I just did by saying "these two groups". The true opposite of religion is anti-religous groups. The true opposite of science is....hmmm.... theres a good question what would be the term (is there one?) for a person who is against science?? Anyways, I have never once in my life encountered anyting in science counterdicts anything that I believe in because of my religious faith, so I am a firm believer that the two aren't mutaully exclusice.
Wow! this post was orriginally going to be 6 words long! [:p]
Yar, the flies be everywhere maty....save yerselves!!!
-
Intent is powerful.
-
"powerful it is indeed, mmmmhmmhmmm" *in Yoda voice*
Cut me some slack I'm new around here!
-
"powerful it is indeed, mmmmhmmhmmm" *in Yoda voice*
Cut me some slack I'm new around here!
OK...consider your slack cut !! [;D]
-
YAyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
Hello Chris, welcome to the forum! [:)]
Sorry, I may have missed this thread..
-
YAyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
Hello Chris, welcome to the forum! [:)]
Sorry, I may have missed this thread..
Ewe missed it chum because it was started in 2004 !! [;D]
-
...and the thread starter only posted 14 posts ! [;D]...I guess he must be a very slow typist !! [:)]
-
who's Chris.... in this thread?