Jump to: navigation, search

User talk:Aschlafly

1,640 bytes added, 05:11, 15 February 2013
/* "Conservapedia - where intelligence goes to die" */ an emotional argument
::Of course you are right: I should be polite. And I am: Unfortunately, it's not me who is rude, but reality - anyone with a little knowledge of physics and mathematics will be at best amused by the article, and stunned by the arguments made by Andrew Schlafly on the talk-page. Dragging Hugo Shavez into a discussion on the merits of the theory of special relativity is just surreal. If Andrew Schlafly wants to stop being the laughing stock of every visiting scientist, he should allow the article to be brought out of his fantasy land where even mathematical formulas have a political leaning! --[[User:AugustO|AugustO]] 10:05, 13 February 2013 (EST)
Many people make decisions on an emotional level, based on their "comfort zone." So, this dispute can be resolved on an appeal to emotion, if the above appeals to logic fail. On one side, I am told that E=mc² is liberal claptrap. This makes me very uncomfortable at the thought that people are designing nuclear power plants, atom smashing facilities, and nuclear bombs without the slightest idea of how much energy will be given off when they are put into use. I probably should stay away from the Radiology Dept of the local hospital or the gamma knife in the operating room, because we can't know how much power is in that radiation. I would also worry about the vast conspiracy of text book editors, physicists and even postage stamp designers who are promoting E=mc² for unknown motives. On the other side, I can join with liberals and conservatives who accept E=mc² as a summary of a variety of experimental data, and trust that the people who design nuclear power plants have a good idea of what is going on inside. If I find it any beauty in E=mc², I can choose to take it as further evidence of God's work. If there is no specific Biblical reference foretelling E=mc², I still accept the Bible, because that one book is a spiritual roadmap that does not spell out every detail of every life. (When I obey the speed limit driving on U.S. 20, I accept it as a detail of life, even if it was not foretold in the Bible – E=mc² is just another detail of life.) Personally, I am more comfortable on the pro-E=mc² and can imagine the agony of the other side. [[User:Wschact|Wschact]] 00:11, 15 February 2013 (EST)
== Suspect counterexample to an Old Earth ==
I think I've spotted a simple mistake at [[Counterexamples to an Old Earth]], but the page was locked by you last year, so I can't fix it myself. Could you have a look at [[Talk:Counterexamples_to_an_Old_Earth#An_increase_in_the_frequency_of_large_earthquakes_is_not_a_counterexample_to_an_old_Earth]] and see if you agree. Thanks. --[[User:Occultations|Occultations]] 16:21, 14 February 2013 (EST)
SkipCaptcha, edit