=
×

Julian Cope presents Head Heritage

Head To Head
Log In
Register
U-Know! Forum »
Lying for Columbine
Log In to post a reply
91 messages
Topic View: Flat | Threaded
stray
stray
2057 posts

Re: Lying for Columbine
Oct 08, 2003, 20:03
cunt twat etc, hey you accused me of chasing demons, you started the immaturity mate not me.

erm.. yeah. They are equivalents. A system is a system, and none are perfect. A system is correct within it's own terms of reference, as it's method of analysis of a given set of observations creates its functionality. If it works, it's valid, yeah ? maybe. You cannot say however that its results must be right simply because it's self fulfilling. There are plenty of incompatible theories in the world that function after all.

The science/religion argument is kinda childish though. Especially when you look at quantum physics, remember, even the particles are theoretical constructs based on observation, not definite as in these-are-particles-ok? . So, as I said, there is only approximations within the range of an acceptable tolerance. We do however change our levels of tolerance, our acceptable levels of accuracy, religion --> science. But fundamentally nowts changed in terms of understanding. I mean, as Science now talks about a field of probability at the root of creation they may as well be talking about a god tbh.

Also, this was a discussion of somebodies cod philosophical theories on political polemics. Which is very different to the road you're taking this. But I see where and why based on what I said. Analysis, abstraction, nothing definite, blah, blah, how did what you posted in reply challenge this ?

R u Grufty Jim btw ? Just wondering.
In reply to:
Re: Lying for Columbine (Dog 3000)		 Replies:
Re: Lying for Columbine (stray)
Re: Lying for Columbine (Dog 3000)
Re: Lying for Columbine (Dog 3000)
Topic Outline:
U-Know! Forum Index