What's new
By:
Filters

ACT [kooooN Soft] Angel Girl


Re: "Angel Girl"

JohnDoe said:
That's not what i meant, besides how and why are two completely different things, you might know how an engine works, but ignore why it works that way.

My answer was about how they work, not why they work that way. I could make wall-o-text for the why, or just link something else, but that would be extremely boring since i'm not very good at making things simple to understand.:eek:
Click to expand...

Now THAT is explicitly untrue, the word "why" doesn't even exist in most languages, and is largely without real meaning.
You must be registered to see the links


Notice that most of these are actually just the word "what" but the translator is just finding the closest word that offers similar use. The spanish word "porque" for example, is a compound word combining "for" y "what" and is often even depicted as seperate words.
You must be registered to see the links


I've also noticed that you actually R good at making things simple to understand.
 
Last edited:
Re: "Angel Girl"

Guys, guys, guys, you're forgetting the obvious reason for atoms and whatnot; A wizard did it.
 
Re: "Angel Girl"

sciencec.jpg
 
Re: "Angel Girl"

Technically, the computer sitting in front of you is nothing but an observation, you have no real proof that it exists. As for atoms, go to high school and read a book, for as far as science goes, it's all been in there for quite some time.

Now, I agree that we haven't proven much of anything in the absolutes that you, but as simple carbon-based lifeforms, observation backed by the scientific process is the best we can do. If that isn't good enough for you, well then, you're quite obviously just trying to stir up trouble.
 
Re: "Angel Girl"

JohnDoe said:
That's not what i meant, besides how and why are two completely different things, you might know how an engine works, but ignore why it works that way.

My answer was about how they work, not why they work that way. I could make wall-o-text for the why, or just link something else, but that would be extremely boring since i'm not very good at making things simple to understand.:eek:
Click to expand...

if you cant explain it so even i can understand it, you don't know what your talking about.

@Shrike7
there is a computer in front of me
how do i know one is in front of me- i see it
how do i see it- light is reflecting off of it
how is light reflecting off of it- 1 the object is there,2 there is a light source
how does one and two occur-they exist
how do they exist- they are comprised of matter and energy.
i know there is a computer in front of me because i can see its matter and energy

nuff said :D
 
Last edited:
Re: "Angel Girl"

Baking is Science for hungry people.

And is also a verb now.
 

Attachments

  • qc-baking.png
    qc-baking.png
    87.3 KB · Views: 0
  • qc-scienceverb.png
    qc-scienceverb.png
    82.7 KB · Views: 0
Re: "Angel Girl"

handofdoz said:
if you cant explain it so even i can understand it, you don't know what your talking about.
Click to expand...

Or you're just too stupid to understand it.

...I'm just sayin.

@Shrike7
there is a computer in front of me
how do i know one is in front of me- i see it
how do i see it- light is reflecting off of it
how is light reflecting off of it- 1 the object is there,2 there is a light source
how does one and two occur-they exist
how do they exist- they are comprised of matter and energy.
i know there is a computer in front of me because i can see its matter and energy

nuff said :D
Click to expand...

Wow, now I'm not just sayin. You've seriously never taken even an intro philosophy course, have you? Okay, since you obviously don't understand the fact that an observation is only an observation and is not proof of something existing, maybe this will help you make the connection: Is the Escher staircase REALLY a staircase that goes up indefinitely or is that just an observation based on a limited viewpoint?
 
Re: "Angel Girl"

Alias said:
Or you're just too stupid to understand it.

...I'm just sayin.



Wow, now I'm not just sayin. You've seriously never taken even an intro philosophy course, have you? Okay, since you obviously don't understand the fact that an observation is only an observation and is not proof of something existing, maybe this will help you make the connection: Is the Escher staircase REALLY a staircase that goes up indefinitely or is that just an observation based on a limited viewpoint?
Click to expand...

the Escher staircase is a picture that defies natural logic, what does art and philosophy have to do with science

and for the record i am trolling, i don't know how much more i can pull out of my ass :D
 
Last edited:
Re: "Angel Girl"

handofdoz said:
what does art and philosophy have to do with science
Click to expand...

Science is a philosophical form of art.

Observation is required for understanding, understanding is required for interaction, interaction is required for verification.

Athough one can't observe an electron through known means it is possible to observe the effects of it's presence, thus understanding they way it works, and interact with it to verify it's existence.

For the sake of my artisc view on the philosophy of science, i'll also say that since all of our observations are based on our perception of the world, everything can be simply a mistake based on the imperfection of the observation instrument defined as human being.
By that everything you learned and know, everything you feel and experience, the very way you think and act will always have a chance to be incorrect or completely wrong.

white_rabbit_2.jpg
 
Re: "Angel Girl"

JohnDoe said:
Science is a philosophical form of art.

Observation is required for understanding, understanding is required for interaction, interaction is required for verification.

Athough one can't observe an electron through known means it is possible to observe the effects of it's presence, thus understanding they way it works, and interact with it to verify it's existence.

For the sake of my artisc view on the philosophy of science, i'll also say that since all of our observations are based on our perception of the world, everything can be simply a mistake based on the imperfection of the observation instrument defined as human being.
By that everything you learned and know, everything you feel and experience, the very way you think and act will always have a chance to be incorrect or completely wrong.

white_rabbit_2.jpg
Click to expand...

i have nothing inteligent left to add, so ill quote my biology teacher

"everything i am teaching you is wrong, or will be proven wrong, so study it all"
 
Re: "Angel Girl"

handofdoz said:
i have nothing inteligent left to add, so ill quote my biology teacher

"everything i am teaching you is wrong, or will be proven wrong, so study it all"
Click to expand...

that seems like something my old chemistry teacher would have said
 
Re: "Angel Girl"

JohnDoe said:
Science is a philosophical form of art.
Click to expand...

i don't want to believe in this(im not satisfied with this).., could you try to justify(i don't really think justify is the word.. just enlighten me on what makes you think it this way) this?
and even if we fail to observe objects completely..

we are still bound by the laws of logic..

but it was not necessary to try to understand things we are not capable of understanding(due to lack of media(level of instrument)) in the first place,


*what "artistic view on philosophical science?"

@handofdoz - if you would call logic natural then it should mean there is another division in logic that would be not/un-natural.. or any other division..
 
Re: "Angel Girl"

handofdoz said:
"everything i am teaching you is wrong, or will be proven wrong, so study it all"
Click to expand...

Exactly what i said.;)

dragoonistix said:
i don't want to believe in this(im not satisfied with this).., could you try to justify(i don't really think justify is the word.. just enlighten me on what makes you think it this way) this?
and even if we fail to observe objects completely..

we are still bound by the laws of logic..

but it was not necessary to try to understand things we are not capable of understanding(due to lack of media(level of instrument)) in the first place,


*what "artistic view on philosophical science?"
Click to expand...

You must be registered to see the links


It ain't simple to explain.
Art is an interpretation of facts based on observation.
Science is an interpretation of facts based on observation too.
So art is a form of science as much as science is a form of art

As for the laws of logic i'll refer you to
You must be registered to see the links
, logic is the foundamental concept at the base of philosophy, everything is connected.
 
Re: "Angel Girl"

JohnDoe said:
Science is a philosophical form of art.

Observation is required for understanding, understanding is required for interaction, interaction is required for verification.

Athough one can't observe an electron through known means it is possible to observe the effects of it's presence, thus understanding they way it works, and interact with it to verify it's existence.

For the sake of my artisc view on the philosophy of science, i'll also say that since all of our observations are based on our perception of the world, everything can be simply a mistake based on the imperfection of the observation instrument defined as human being.
By that everything you learned and know, everything you feel and experience, the very way you think and act will always have a chance to be incorrect or completely wrong.

white_rabbit_2.jpg
Click to expand...

You can't actually think that you're not good at explaining complex concepts.
 
Re: "Angel Girl"

MegatronYES said:
You can't actually think that you're not good at explaining complex concepts.
Click to expand...

Well, i have been told several times that i make things more complicated when i try to make them simpler, but maybe in written form my message get's through more clear...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top