tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post9093004669675001489..comments2024-01-25T13:46:11.967-06:00Comments on The Bronze Blog: Tree MetaphorRyan Michaelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14750814560493466382noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-10865865770235233372009-04-18T02:59:00.000-05:002009-04-18T02:59:00.000-05:00Well, to be fair to the guy, two layers of depth c...Well, to be fair to the guy, two layers of depth <I>can't</I> encode the full range of pitches in a song. However, two layers of depth can encode the range of pitches to sufficiently fine granularity that listeners can't tell. That's why it's digital, not analog.Rhoadanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02375561352677522227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-2406635438027204782009-04-17T07:33:00.000-05:002009-04-17T07:33:00.000-05:00I was just going to say the exact same thing.
He ...I was just going to say the exact same thing.<br /><br />He might also be what I like to call a "psychological meatbag," who learns some tiny corner of a subject and thinks he's an expert in it, and who constantly thinks that trivia is the same as real knowledge.Donhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06661441668625677468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-52825844426065612182009-04-17T04:42:00.000-05:002009-04-17T04:42:00.000-05:00Sounds very much like he's suffering a bad case of...Sounds very much like he's suffering a bad case of the "arrogance of ignorance". Have him read the classic paper on the subject: "<A HREF="http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf" REL="nofollow">Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments</A>" [pdf] - it should be required reading for everyone.Duncnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-35447388650711294052009-04-16T17:35:00.000-05:002009-04-16T17:35:00.000-05:00As much as I like the guy, it does get like that a...As much as I like the guy, it does get like that at times. He's also convinced light guns work by detecting electrons from CRT TVs, when in fact electrons won't travel in straight paths unless in a vacuum (hence why a CRT is high vacuum) and a light gun in fact detects... light! LCD screens have issues with light guns because of timing issues, not because they don't fire electrons. Also, I had to explain that our eyes can't detect elecrons, that the electrons are "visible" only in the sense that they excite a layer of phosphors on the TV screen which then in turn emit visible light, they see the lihgt coming out of a TV, but he kept running around in circles about how that's just how they work because it's how they work.<br /><br />Also explaining that CDs consist of exactly two depth layers, a "1" and a "0", rather than a "full range" of different depths was rather exasperating, as he was convinced that just two layers of depth could never encode the full range of pitches in a song. The facts of how digital information is encoded being able to do exactly that escaped him.<br /><br />Plus he's completely obsessed with his one psychology class he took years ago and tries to wedge everyone's behavior into these outdated freudian ideals. He's completely convinced that not only are guns a phallic symbol, but they are designed AROUND the phallic symbol. It's one thing to say that they work as a symbol and another to suggest that the engineering could ever have worked any other way. You can't have a trumpet shaped barrel and expect it to fire correctly, and a longer barrel assures a more accurate shot. The symbolism may well come into play after the fact with a lot of people, but if you are going to get a gun that works, it has to be designed a certain way.<br /><br />Anyway, I've sort of hijacked the thread here so I'll get back on the topic of his weird ideas of evolution.<br /><br />I've basically looked at all of what he's recently said and have posted a long post just telling him what evidence I'd need and if he has it. I'll see where it goes from there.Dark Jaguarnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-26436182652496408392009-04-16T04:00:00.000-05:002009-04-16T04:00:00.000-05:00Actually, Dark Juagaur, it doesn't sound like your...Actually, Dark Juagaur, it doesn't sound like your acquaintance misunderstands evolution; it sounds like he is an arrogant douchebag.Valhar2000https://www.blogger.com/profile/05467019327257867276noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-38050726698748866902009-04-15T15:18:00.000-05:002009-04-15T15:18:00.000-05:00people who swim a lot have kids that swim wellPare...<B>people who swim a lot have kids that swim well</B>Parents who like to swim a lot can't <I>possibly</I> take their kids swimming more often than other parents, thus ensuring that they learn to swim well at an early age.<br /><br />So the fact that parents who like Star Wars tend to have kids who like Star Wars is also due to these spontaneous cellular changes?<br /><br />It's like for this guy culture doesn't exist <I>at all</I>. Tell him I said he's a moron.Donhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06661441668625677468noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-75867278047654608992009-04-15T14:43:00.000-05:002009-04-15T14:43:00.000-05:00It's very lamarkian. He's convinced he's right be...It's very lamarkian. He's convinced he's right because "people who swim a lot have kids that swim well". When asked for evidence, he does this thing where he insults me for just not already knowing that.Dark Jaguarnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-69301001754734457802009-04-15T07:03:00.000-05:002009-04-15T07:03:00.000-05:00Sounds like he subscribes to some kind of Lamarkia...Sounds like he subscribes to some kind of Lamarkian evolution. Or maybe he's thinking of Epigenetics?Clint Bourgeoishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12347615505624590515noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13030925.post-87329099691413462222009-04-15T04:38:00.000-05:002009-04-15T04:38:00.000-05:00I know someone at a forum I go to often who has a ...I know someone at a forum I go to often who has a very corrupted idea of evolution. It's not that the guy is a creationist or even an intelligent design person. This guy isn't even a member of any recognized religion, just generally "spiritual".<br /><br />The guy seems to think that cells willingly evolve of their own accord. That is, the cell "detects" a change in it's environment and will know that it "needs" to evolve and will then mutate itself intentionally toward whatever it needs to do. He thinks all cells do this.<br /><br />At first he apparently thought that's what evolution TAUGHT. I corrected him on this very quickly through a number of links to all sorts of biology sources online. Now he's at least aware that this is NOT what evolution says happens, but is convinced that he's still right and now the scientists are the ones that are wrong.<br /><br />This is such a unique misunderstanding of evolution that I'm hard pressed to find sources online that specifically tackle this sort of thing. At best all I can find are things tackling intelligent design.Dark Jaguarnoreply@blogger.com