yetineti

Member
  • Content count

    396
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About yetineti

  • Rank
    - - -

Personal Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,693 profile views
  1. I noticed ‘plant based diet’ mentioned in the fundamentals portion of the site. Where do you stand on that? Do you eat meat?
  2. Basically allows you to remove any aspect of YouTube, in a browser, that you do not wish to see. I have mine set up so it’s just the video I’m watching and a search bar. Theres no sidebar, ads, recommendations-anything. I have to search for what I want or I can browse specific channels. Thats my method. Try it out: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/untrap-for-youtube/id1637438059
  3. Would a mod or Leo like to tell me off here? I was told I was ‘fighting windmills,’ however my points were ignored as well. If I am fighting windmills, I’ll stop and leave. But it seems although nobody has rebutted me other than facepalming and saying bad science just needs more rigor.
  4. @undeather Why ignore me? I understand you are open to criticism. But you’ve shown zero willing to express its integration. At one point in this conversation, physics was a ‘hard’ science to you but you’ll so cavalierly also agree how untestable and abused something like ST is? But that’s physics? Isn’t that supposed to be a hard science? Can you clarify your position and rebut the substance I gave you, that you asked for?
  5. @Extreme Z7 I wouldn’t do it. I don’t even kill spiders. I put them outside.
  6. @Extreme Z7 Subjectively. Subjectively, inhumane. If the nazis thought it to be, they wouldn’t have stomached it.
  7. @Extreme Z7 It’s not anti-human; it’s anti-Jew. It’s pro-nazi. Nazis are human.
  8. It’s silly we need to toss studies back and forth at all. This isn’t about that at all. The lenses of ‘science is a gun. Science is a weapon. Science is dangerous’ needs to be taken on 100%. This is dangerous for someone who doesn’t already understand science. But, for those who do, it is paramount. Science is a responsibility - and most who practice it just idolize. Criticism or not. I’d find a critque or two, probably even good ones, if I didn’t think much would change and I could keep paying my bills. But then, again, everything would change and paying the bills could get hard. How could you continue doing science- at all- at least for some time? Assuming I have anything to say here at all.
  9. Yes you do. That’s what makes ChatGPT ironically so powerful it handles every bias and it doesn’t bitch. But it takes it rationally. It is not rational to ignore any bias.
  10. @undeather It’s your turn to rebut. You asked for substance and you got it. It doesn’t matter it came from AI; rebut it. This is not a rebuttal. Nor is a facepalm meme. You don’t get to answer the problem of science with ‘do better science.’ That’s what you did. Also, no one has said Stop! Science. But if you’re going to come here, with your post signature listing your credentials, your, yes, bias, and ‘evidence based….’- Perhaps you hold a greater responsibility to prove you’ve had these experiences in ‘8+ years.’ But how do you prove yourself without evidence? This forum shouldn’t have authoritative figures, with credentials like you, swaying people. I am not saying you should leave- but it’s really not a good look to dismiss my case because- what? ChatGPT? What else? Again you asked for substance and you got it.
  11. @undeather This isn’t about your point and you have too much attachment and bias to the topic at hand to even be respected here. Come from a place of wonder. Do not claim to understand and then defend science like your child.
  12. @undeather You talk too much. You've completely missed the point. Your argumentation is circular. I am going to tell you what you have and have not realized, and your reaction makes it apparent I am correct. Your words make no sense to your claims, and coming here saying you are awakened and using these authoritative arguments is again abysmal, childish, and not going to help you in any sense of the way, despite me coming across as harsh or not.
  13. I've read this whole thread again, and I understand that I am being harsh, but nonetheless, I see a bunch of folly, and a bunch of pointing, without a lot of understanding. The sort of thing you see on cable news networks when they want to talk like it's one way, but then it's the other way, and at the end of the day, it's like I fall somewhere in between. Well, I'm not going to get stuck in between anything. Maybe that's just me.
  14. The irony, if you guys were to use ChatGPT against me here, is that we'll just be throwing into the endless swirl science already has you guys in. The ability to argue and rationalize any point from any side, irregardless of what's actually ethical, productive, or necessary, and above all else, true.