Do you use stevia? - Page 2 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

1010011010 · 07-11-2008, 07:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by thingstodo

I said I'm not willing to waste time researching this subject for you!

He isn't asking you to. He's quite clearly doing the research for you and showing you that the studies you cite in summary or anecdote do not support your claims.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thingstodo

They don't support these opinions with peer reviewed research and links

The comments you've made are not matters of opinion... they are verifiable/falsifiable statements about reality. It's the difference between making a claim and expressing an opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by thingstodo

That's like taking blogging as real news.

The ad hoc editorial policy of blogs as a collective is superior to that of "real news", IMO. Probably because they don't get uncritical acceptance as "real news", so what becomes popular to blog about are things that really are news worthy.

If you find a good social news aggregator, watching "real news" becomes slightly surreal. It's all fluffy noise from Hollywood or stuff you already read (with more depth and detail) in a blog.

Anyway, to return from our irregularly scheduled hijack, my plants grew big enough to survive having some leaves pulled off and are delicious.

thingstodo · 07-12-2008, 07:37 AM

[QUOTE=1010011010]The comments you've made are not matters of opinion... they are verifiable/falsifiable statements about reality. It's the difference between making a claim and expressing an opinion.The ad hoc editorial policy of blogs as a collective is superior to that of "real news", IMO. Probably because they don't get uncritical acceptance as "real news", so what becomes popular to blog about are things that really are news worthy.

If you find a good social news aggregator, watching "real news" becomes slightly surreal. It's all fluffy noise from Hollywood or stuff you already read (with more depth and detail) in a blog.

QUOTE]
I beg to differ. I was expressing MY opinion. And the poster accused me of providing no support so he did want me to do his research. I am the only judge of what is my opinion. Secondly, the rest of your post is your opinion. And yes, I know you state that as a caveat to one statement; however, the rest of what you said is also your opinion with no support. And that is fine with me. You have that right and I have the personal responsibility to come to my own conclusions.

One other poster said I should have peer reviewed, supported documentation for what I share on this board, especially if someone may change the way they do things. Well - let's take a look at statement in the context of religion.

Religion has prompted many people to change the way they do things yet it is strictly an opinion-based subject since the entire basis of religion is faith. The only peer reviewed documentation are the various "bibles" of the different religions. Hardly peer reviewed, verifiable or factual documentation. Moreover, even individual religions cannot agree of what they should believe - christianity, for example. But you won't hear me calling their beliefs outrageous even though there is plenty of evidence to disprove or explain away most fantastical versions of "bible stories."

And yet so many people rely on religion to influence what they do every day. In fact, christians usually try to convert everyone one the world to their way of thinking. Crusades were fought over hundreds of years. Much of the terrorism going on is founded in religious principles. Even our political system argues around religion and the religious right attempts - successfully - to influence politics. All in the name of faith.

According to Webster: b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust

So, you will never convince me to stray from sharing opinions. And if many other people share those opinions than they surely can't be labeled outrageous. Apparently not since the oldest book still in print is full of contradictory, unverifiable, faith based stories arbitrarily (1. Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle 2. Based on or subject to individual judgment or preference) assembled by a bunch of politicians.

07-12-2008, 07:37 AM	#42 (permalink)
thingstodo A Storm Is Coming Location: The Great White North	[QUOTE=1010011010]The comments you've made are not matters of opinion... they are verifiable/falsifiable statements about reality. It's the difference between making a claim and expressing an opinion.The ad hoc editorial policy of blogs as a collective is superior to that of "real news", IMO. Probably because they don't get uncritical acceptance as "real news", so what becomes popular to blog about are things that really are news worthy. If you find a good social news aggregator, watching "real news" becomes slightly surreal. It's all fluffy noise from Hollywood or stuff you already read (with more depth and detail) in a blog. QUOTE] I beg to differ. I was expressing MY opinion. And the poster accused me of providing no support so he did want me to do his research. I am the only judge of what is my opinion. Secondly, the rest of your post is your opinion. And yes, I know you state that as a caveat to one statement; however, the rest of what you said is also your opinion with no support. And that is fine with me. You have that right and I have the personal responsibility to come to my own conclusions. One other poster said I should have peer reviewed, supported documentation for what I share on this board, especially if someone may change the way they do things. Well - let's take a look at statement in the context of religion. Religion has prompted many people to change the way they do things yet it is strictly an opinion-based subject since the entire basis of religion is faith. The only peer reviewed documentation are the various "bibles" of the different religions. Hardly peer reviewed, verifiable or factual documentation. Moreover, even individual religions cannot agree of what they should believe - christianity, for example. But you won't hear me calling their beliefs outrageous even though there is plenty of evidence to disprove or explain away most fantastical versions of "bible stories." And yet so many people rely on religion to influence what they do every day. In fact, christians usually try to convert everyone one the world to their way of thinking. Crusades were fought over hundreds of years. Much of the terrorism going on is founded in religious principles. Even our political system argues around religion and the religious right attempts - successfully - to influence politics. All in the name of faith. According to Webster: b (1): firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2): complete trust So, you will never convince me to stray from sharing opinions. And if many other people share those opinions than they surely can't be labeled outrageous. Apparently not since the oldest book still in print is full of contradictory, unverifiable, faith based stories arbitrarily (1. Determined by chance, whim, or impulse, and not by necessity, reason, or principle 2. Based on or subject to individual judgment or preference) assembled by a bunch of politicians. __________________ If you're wringing your hands you can't roll up your shirt sleeves. Stangers have the best candy.