Major University demands students reject science, perpetuate lies

[P@triot]

If you had bothered to read, you'd KNOW that the link wasn't about science, but the law...

the 'law' doesn't change facts.

But...sadly....that’s exactly what the left is aiming for. They want law to alter reality for them (since conservatives rely so heavily on facts/science/data/etc.).

 

[P@triot]

No, reality cannot be changed by opinion.

Yes, it is a reality that gender can be changed.

Transgender rights in the United States - Wikipedia

A majority of states permit the name and sex to be changed on a birth certificate, either through amending the existing birth certificate or by issuing a new one. Many states, however, require medical proof of sex reassignment surgery in order to warrant agender marker change.

Man Seawytch, you’ve said some stupid stuff before but this might be a new low for you. Legally altering one’s birth certificate does not alter reality. If Joey is born a male and 30 years later the state prints out a new birth certificate with a new name and marks it “female”, it does not change the fact that Joey is still a male.

 

[Slyhunter]

No, reality cannot be changed by opinion.

Yes, it is a reality that gender can be changed.

Transgender rights in the United States - Wikipedia

A majority of states permit the name and sex to be changed on a birth certificate, either through amending the existing birth certificate or by issuing a new one. Many states, however, require medical proof of sex reassignment surgery in order to warrant agender marker change.

And if it's on Wikipedia, you KNOW it's settled science, right up there with the Laws of Thermodynamics.

If you had bothered to read, you'd KNOW that the link wasn't about science, but the law...

I never bother to read Wikipedia links in here, because only a complete dumbass thinks Wikipedia an unimpeachable source, especially on politicized social issues.

So honestly, I don't give a fuck what kind of point you were trying to make, science or law or comedy relief. You cited Wikipedia, which makes it bullshit.

Don’t you realize that Wikipedia simply summarizes OTHER sources?
Too fucking stupid to realize that?
Why don’t you try having an open mind and check out the References section of every Wikipedia article that has MANY citations.
Geez!

wikki is a liberal editable source.

 

[Two Thumbs]

If you had bothered to read, you'd KNOW that the link wasn't about science, but the law...

the 'law' doesn't change facts.

But...sadly....that’s exactly what the left is aiming for. They want law to alter reality for them (since conservatives rely so heavily on facts/science/data/etc.).

they want to force us to refer to them as they choose.

basically openly and proudly, shitting on the First

 

[PK1]

I can go with your hierarchy of science EXCEPT cut the “spirituality” and place math and logic (philosophy) PRIOR to science, as in Philosophy of Physics, etc.

It's nonsense what you say here. Take a look at Göbekli Tepe. First was spirituality then came suddenly culture and civilization. After the temples learned people to be farmers to found cities and to make philosophy, mathematics and science. But the logos started not with philosophy, mathematics and science.

First of all, in philosophy & science, you need a rational conceptual definition of that you think is real.

Then in science, you need to expand on that conceptual definition to focus on a tightly related operational definition.

How do you define “spirituality”?

In natural science mathematics is for example the spirituality of physics. And in case of history in Göbekli Tepe hunters and gatherers created the civilized world. The way to do so was to build temples. The reason to do so was their spirituality.

Do you understand what a definition is?

Yes, that's why I never define what's real. Counter question: Do you know why you are senseless aggressive?

Can you not define “spirituality” in one or two sentences, maybe three if it’s that hard?

You never read in your life any better and shorter explanation about what spirituality is. I gave you a bridge from the very first steps of civilization to the current situation of the queen of natural science. Perhaps it's good for you to try to learn to dance over such bridges.

I may be a bit demanding when debating issues & concepts, but aggressive usually reflects my responses to others who are agressive & esp abusive.

Apparently, you can’t define “spirituality” in a few sentences ... in context of PHILOSOPHY or SCIENCE.
If i were to meet you and ask you what you mean when you use that word, what would you say?

 

[PK1]

Yes, it is a reality that gender can be changed.

Transgender rights in the United States - Wikipedia

A majority of states permit the name and sex to be changed on a birth certificate, either through amending the existing birth certificate or by issuing a new one. Many states, however, require medical proof of sex reassignment surgery in order to warrant agender marker change.

And if it's on Wikipedia, you KNOW it's settled science, right up there with the Laws of Thermodynamics.

If you had bothered to read, you'd KNOW that the link wasn't about science, but the law...

I never bother to read Wikipedia links in here, because only a complete dumbass thinks Wikipedia an unimpeachable source, especially on politicized social issues.

So honestly, I don't give a fuck what kind of point you were trying to make, science or law or comedy relief. You cited Wikipedia, which makes it bullshit.

Don’t you realize that Wikipedia simply summarizes OTHER sources?
Too fucking stupid to realize that?
Why don’t you try having an open mind and check out the References section of every Wikipedia article that has MANY citations.
Geez!

wikki is a liberal editable source.

By “liberal” you mean an academic source that provides citations and is OPEN for dispute & contrary thoughts w/ citations? You bet!

 

[zaangalewa]

It's nonsense what you say here. Take a look at Göbekli Tepe. First was spirituality then came suddenly culture and civilization. After the temples learned people to be farmers to found cities and to make philosophy, mathematics and science. But the logos started not with philosophy, mathematics and science.

First of all, in philosophy & science, you need a rational conceptual definition of that you think is real.

Then in science, you need to expand on that conceptual definition to focus on a tightly related operational definition.

How do you define “spirituality”?

In natural science mathematics is for example the spirituality of physics. And in case of history in Göbekli Tepe hunters and gatherers created the civilized world. The way to do so was to build temples. The reason to do so was their spirituality.

Do you understand what a definition is?

Yes, that's why I never define what's real. Counter question: Do you know why you are senseless aggressive?

Can you not define “spirituality” in one or two sentences, maybe three if it’s that hard?

You never read in your life any better and shorter explanation about what spirituality is. I gave you a bridge from the very first steps of civilization to the current situation of the queen of natural science. Perhaps it's good for you to try to learn to dance over such bridges.

I may be a bit demanding when debating issues & concepts, but aggressive usually reflects my responses to others who are agressive & esp abusive.

Apparently, you can’t define “spirituality” in a few sentences ... in context of PHILOSOPHY or SCIENCE.
If i were to meet you and ask you what you mean when you use that word, what would you say?

I remember in such a context always a Russian General of the Soviets who said once to members of the politbureau: "Sure you are able to define a brush is a hedgehog. Nevertheless it will get no babies."

With other words: If I would be you, then I would not try to manipulate others with such stupid methods. Instead I say: "You don't have a big idea about epistemology".



Michel, warum weinest du?

"Michel, warum weinest du, weinest du so sehr?"
"Weil es mir nicht mag behagen, daß ich soll den Maulkorb tragen;
Darum weine ich, weine ich so sehr."

"Michel, warum weinest du, weinest du so sehr?"
"Weil sie mir mein Recht stibitzen und sie mir mein Blut verspritzen.
Darum weine ich, weine ich so sehr."

"Michel, warum weinest du, weinest du so sehr?"
"Weil sie mir mein Geld verprassen und nicht sagen, wo sie's lassen.
Darum weine ich, weine ich so sehr."

"Michel, warum weinest du, weinest du so sehr?"
"Weil ich für die ungeheuren Heere steuern muß und steuern.
Darum weine ich, weine ich so sehr."

"Darum Michel, weine nun, weine nun nicht mehr!
Wenn du einsiehst deine Schwächen, können sie dich nicht zerbrechen.
Darum weine nun, weine nun nicht mehr!"

 

[PK1]

First of all, in philosophy & science, you need a rational conceptual definition of that you think is real.

Then in science, you need to expand on that conceptual definition to focus on a tightly related operational definition.

How do you define “spirituality”?

In natural science mathematics is for example the spirituality of physics. And in case of history in Göbekli Tepe hunters and gatherers created the civilized world. The way to do so was to build temples. The reason to do so was their spirituality.

Do you understand what a definition is?

Yes, that's why I never define what's real. Counter question: Do you know why you are senseless aggressive?

Can you not define “spirituality” in one or two sentences, maybe three if it’s that hard?

You never read in your life any better and shorter explanation about what spirituality is. I gave you a bridge from the very first steps of civilization to the current situation of the queen of natural science. Perhaps it's good for you to try to learn to dance over such bridges.

I may be a bit demanding when debating issues & concepts, but aggressive usually reflects my responses to others who are agressive & esp abusive.

Apparently, you can’t define “spirituality” in a few sentences ... in context of PHILOSOPHY or SCIENCE.
If i were to meet you and ask you what you mean when you use that word, what would you say?

I remember in such a context always a Russian General of the Soviets who said once to members of the politbureau: "Sure you are able to define a brush is a hedgehog. Nevertheless it will get no babies." With other words: If I would be you, then I would not try to manipulate others with such stupid methods. Instead I say: "You don't have a big idea about epistemolopgy".

You speak like a guru who tries to be persuasive with his mystical persona and irrelevant quotes.
That does not work in academic settings with philosophy & science.
Epistemology is a domain in academic philosophy. It seems to me that you never took such a course of study.

 

[evenflow1969]

Left-wing ideology always ends in the collapse of civilization. Here we have a large university demanding that their students reject the scientific fact of a person's actual gender and instead perpetuate the lie of an alternate gender/reality.

Calling someone by wrong pronoun might get you fired or expelled, college’s gender policy draft says

Exactly what percent of the left is going to get behind this policy .0000000000001% if actually any body!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! That policy is about as bright as the people who voted for Trump!

 

[zaangalewa]

In natural science mathematics is for example the spirituality of physics. And in case of history in Göbekli Tepe hunters and gatherers created the civilized world. The way to do so was to build temples. The reason to do so was their spirituality.

Do you understand what a definition is?

Yes, that's why I never define what's real. Counter question: Do you know why you are senseless aggressive?

Can you not define “spirituality” in one or two sentences, maybe three if it’s that hard?

You never read in your life any better and shorter explanation about what spirituality is. I gave you a bridge from the very first steps of civilization to the current situation of the queen of natural science. Perhaps it's good for you to try to learn to dance over such bridges.

I may be a bit demanding when debating issues & concepts, but aggressive usually reflects my responses to others who are agressive & esp abusive.

Apparently, you can’t define “spirituality” in a few sentences ... in context of PHILOSOPHY or SCIENCE.
If i were to meet you and ask you what you mean when you use that word, what would you say?

I remember in such a context always a Russian General of the Soviets who said once to members of the politbureau: "Sure you are able to define a brush is a hedgehog. Nevertheless it will get no babies." With other words: If I would be you, then I would not try to manipulate others with such stupid methods. Instead I say: "You don't have a big idea about epistemolopgy".

You speak like a guru who tries to be persuasive with his mystical persona and irrelevant quotes.
That does not work in academic settings with philosophy & science.
Epistemology is a domain in academic philosophy. It seems to me that you never took such a course of study.

no comment

 

[P@triot]

You speak like a guru who tries to be persuasive with his mystical persona and irrelevant quotes.

That does not work in academic settings with philosophy & science.

Sadly, that’s exactly what “works” in academia today thanks to the left completely collapsing that sector. A bunch of imbeciles rejecting science, reason, facts, and reality to bloviate over “Queer Feminist theory”.

 

[PK1]

You speak like a guru who tries to be persuasive with his mystical persona and irrelevant quotes.

That does not work in academic settings with philosophy & science.

Sadly, that’s exactly what “works” in academia today thanks to the left completely collapsing that sector. A bunch of imbeciles rejecting science, reason, facts, and reality to bloviate over “Queer Feminist theory”.

Wow, what a meaningless GENERALIZATION about the educated “left” and academia.
Obviously, you are not educated with those stupid claims that you don’t specify any details for. That’s not how it works with science/reason/facts that is the domain of the educated.

 

[Soupnazi630]

The point is to prevent someone from deliberately and continuously calling a person something that offends them

Sorry...my 1st Amendment right to accurately refer to you as “she” trumps your butthurt little feelings. Idiot.

Lol, there are limits you know. Ever heard of hate speech?

I don't know what Trump's butthurt little feeling have to do with this though.

BTW ma'am, while I appreciate your consideration, I am and always have been a man. Unlike you whiney little pussies who get bent outta shape at the drop of a hat.

Hate speech is not a limit it is protected speech

 

[ptbw forever]

And your average liberal intellectual will actually dare to argue from 'higher' moral ground against our President. This denial of human fact is of course sponsored by the radical Left cultural revolution.

Yes how terrible that people are educated. Loons

Boys are girls, girls are boys, up is down and down is up.

Education.

And if you've got a problem with it you're fucking fired.

Why do you care what people call themselves. It’s none of your business

It is when I'm REQUIRED by a college campus to OBLIGE their fantasies. That's the point.

You are required to keep your bigotry in your own home and not Jim Crow others.

Trumpkins are the whiniest people on the planet.

Tell that to the anti-white racists who run your party.

 

[Soupnazi630]

The point is to prevent someone from deliberately and continuously calling a person something that offends them

Only a left-wing statist tool like yourself would be more concerned with the feelings of a fellow mentally ill tool than scientific fact and reality. Idiot.

I bet you are a climate denier aren't you. And you probably want creationism taught in schools too.

The irony involved in a tRumpanzee rwnj accusing someone else of denying "science" probably escapes you though.

It is true that both left and right wingers have people denying science but the left is far worse hence the irony actually comes from you guys.

No one is harmed by some right wingers preaching creationism or intelligent design. Their biggest victory was to place a sticker in some text books which no one read. Many right wingers may be climate change deniers but I have yet to see a scientist lose his or her job due to such people.

On the other hand some left wingers vehemently oppose GMOs which have the potential to end world hunger. Never mind feeding people many left wingers are willing to let people die of famine. Left wingers were responsible for ending the use of DDTs which led to the spread of malaria which killed hundreds of thousands if not millions.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Left-wing ideology always ends in the collapse of civilization. Here we have a large university demanding that their students reject the scientific fact of a person's actual gender and instead perpetuate the lie of an alternate gender/reality.

Calling someone by wrong pronoun might get you fired or expelled, college’s gender policy draft says

You pussies need to quit yer whining. The point is to prevent someone from deliberately and continuously calling a person something that offends them, not to fire people for making a mistake. It's no more out of the ordinary than rules against racial epithets. Now out on your big girl panties and deal with it.

Yeah, but what about when some snowflakey little bitch starts getting pushy with a professor over it to the point the professor is simply tired of dealing with his/her/it/shits nonsense? Also, expelling other students? Maybe they should just ban use of gender pronouns all together.

People are able to think for themselves you know. Effort will be made to limit abuse of the rule.

Obviously not in this university.

The proposed law is an abuse and an effort to impose thought control.

 

[ptbw forever]

You speak like a guru who tries to be persuasive with his mystical persona and irrelevant quotes.

That does not work in academic settings with philosophy & science.

Sadly, that’s exactly what “works” in academia today thanks to the left completely collapsing that sector. A bunch of imbeciles rejecting science, reason, facts, and reality to bloviate over “Queer Feminist theory”.

Wow, what a meaningless GENERALIZATION about the educated “left” and academia.
Obviously, you are not educated with those stupid claims that you don’t specify any details for. That’s not how it works with science/reason/facts that is the domain of the educated.

Philosophy and science at their core are very anti-left, but the vast majority of philosophers and scientists are leftists and divert the attention of those fields to what most fulfills their agenda and validates their beliefs.

 

[Cecilie1200]

You speak like a guru who tries to be persuasive with his mystical persona and irrelevant quotes.

That does not work in academic settings with philosophy & science.

Sadly, that’s exactly what “works” in academia today thanks to the left completely collapsing that sector. A bunch of imbeciles rejecting science, reason, facts, and reality to bloviate over “Queer Feminist theory”.

Wow, what a meaningless GENERALIZATION about the educated “left” and academia.
Obviously, you are not educated with those stupid claims that you don’t specify any details for. That’s not how it works with science/reason/facts that is the domain of the educated.

"Don't specify any details for." Ummm, have you actually READ the thread you're posting in?

 

[PK1]

You speak like a guru who tries to be persuasive with his mystical persona and irrelevant quotes.

That does not work in academic settings with philosophy & science.

Sadly, that’s exactly what “works” in academia today thanks to the left completely collapsing that sector. A bunch of imbeciles rejecting science, reason, facts, and reality to bloviate over “Queer Feminist theory”.

Wow, what a meaningless GENERALIZATION about the educated “left” and academia.
Obviously, you are not educated with those stupid claims that you don’t specify any details for. That’s not how it works with science/reason/facts that is the domain of the educated.

Philosophy and science at their core are very anti-left, but the vast majority of philosophers and scientists are leftists and divert the attention of those fields to what most fulfills their agenda and validates their beliefs.

Your gibberish sounds like a stupid conspiracy “theory”.
The leading academic philosophers & scientists (WORLD WIDE professions) would be laughed at if they published according to any political agenda, but you are too ignorant to know that! Did you graduate from high school? Geez!

 

[PK1]

You speak like a guru who tries to be persuasive with his mystical persona and irrelevant quotes.

That does not work in academic settings with philosophy & science.

Sadly, that’s exactly what “works” in academia today thanks to the left completely collapsing that sector. A bunch of imbeciles rejecting science, reason, facts, and reality to bloviate over “Queer Feminist theory”.

Wow, what a meaningless GENERALIZATION about the educated “left” and academia.
Obviously, you are not educated with those stupid claims that you don’t specify any details for. That’s not how it works with science/reason/facts that is the domain of the educated.

"Don't specify any details for." Ummm, have you actually READ the thread you're posting in?

Yes i have. Which RELEVANT details are you referring to?