Post-Game Talk: #76 | FLYERS at Penguins | Sun., Mar. 25, 2018

[Beef Invictus]

Haha. Good point. I think you know what I meant, though -- the Earth orbiting the Sun. Not sure why I wrote flat Earth; must have read too many articles on Kyrie Irving lately.

Fun fact, the real opposition to Galileo wasn't heliocentrism; that wasn't anything new at that point.


It was the fact that he is potentially the biggest dickhead in science history, rivaled only by the Pharma Bro.

 

[JojoTheWhale]

Fun fact, the real opposition to Galileo wasn't heliocentrism; that wasn't anything new at that point.

It was the fact that he is potentially the biggest ******** in science history, rivaled only by the Pharma Bro.

Right? All the dope had to do was include the heretical disclaimer and then not be an ass. Copernicus was never brought before an Inquisition.

*Edit* I don't believe they ever Inquisitioned a penguin either. Post is officially on topic.

 

[The Rage Kage]

Totally unrelated to anything in this thread but how long can someone break the rules by continuously trolling before they just get banned? Purposefully ignoring every explanation and echoing the same thing over and over seems likr trolling to me.

It was obvious you were referring to me (you've said the same things about me previously, speaking of repeating arguments). And I'd say defensive is a great way to explain why you want people banned simply because they have different views than your own (particularly, in thinking that some criticisms against Hakstol, such as his comment, "A little bit of both," are undeserved and/or overblown). I mean, it's a sports message board; you have to expect when you sign up that people are going to have different opinions.

It fits more and more every minute funnily enough. As you can see I wasn't talking about you specifically, just the many people on here who some think are trolls. There have been a few discussions about it, I was just wondering when the mods would decide that it is in breach of the rules (again, not you specifically, but anyone who appears to just be trolling) and actually put a stop to it.

I really couldn't care less if you were banned or not, if anything it would make the board more boring, but if I did want you banned it wouldn't be for you disagreeing with me but because I thought you were purposefully going against the grain for the sole purpose of getting a rise out of people and not because you actually believe the things you say.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

Fun fact, the real opposition to Galileo wasn't heliocentrism; that wasn't anything new at that point.


It was the fact that he is potentially the biggest ******** in science history, rivaled only by the Pharma Bro.

I’m not a history expert; I was just making the general point that popular opinion is not always the right one. My understanding was that Galileo faced significant opposition from the church, which, somewhat like this board, tends to be a clique of like-minded individuals who share the same beliefs. Wikipedia backs that up, not that it can’t be wrong. If I was taught incorrectly about Galileo & the church, feel free to scratch it as an example, but I still stand by my general point. It’s dangerous to disregard alternate viewpoints & only accept those views that are the same as your own. It’s sort of like a boss who only listens to “yes” men.

And to think I’m trolling just because I don’t always agree with the company line, as I said before, is incredible hubris. Hell, people got upset because I pointed out that Patrick was slow in the preseason. Well, he was. You could see his mobility progression as the season went on. My alleged “contrarianism” has turned out correct plenty of times, & I always try to give reasons for my opinions. You’d swear, though, that some people believe their opinions are infallible & impossible to not agree with 100%, to the point some complain to moderators & want dissenting opinions banned because they can’t interpret different thoughts as anything other than “trolling.”

This type of thought happens in politics all the time; there have been plenty of psychological studies on the phenomenon — people in party affiliations can’t tolerate anything done by the other party & consider them evil. Here’s an article on one of many such studies: "Motivated ignorance" is ruining our political discourse

The funny thing is my position on Hakstol is moderate — I don’t love him, don’t hate him, I’ve criticized his decisions plenty of times — but because I’m not willing to blame him for almost everything, & am willing to say when I think the general hate is over-the-top, people label me as an all-out “Hakstol defender” (Goody Goode’s a witch!)

There’s comfort in group think, & in shouting down opposing opinions so you aren’t threatened with the possibility you are wrong. Most people fight for their viewpoints, but to ban opposing views is insane, IMO. It helped me come around on Wade Allison, for example.

 

[Beef Invictus]

I’m not a history expert; I was just making the general point that popular opinion is not always the right one. My understanding was that Galileo faced significant opposition from the church, which, somewhat like this board, tends to be a clique of like-minded individuals who share the same beliefs. Wikipedia backs that up, not that it can’t be wrong. If I was taught incorrectly about Galileo & the church, feel free to scratch it as an example, but I still stand by my general point. It’s dangerous to disregard alternate viewpoints & only accept those views that are the same as your own. It’s sort of like a boss who only listens to “yes” men.

And to think I’m trolling just because I don’t always agree with the company line, as I said before, is incredible hubris. Hell, people got upset because I pointed out that Patrick was slow in the preseason. Well, he was. You could see his mobility progression as the season went on. My alleged “contrarianism” has turned out correct plenty of times, & I always try to give reasons for my opinions. You’d swear, though, that some people believe their opinions are infallible & impossible to not agree with 100%, to the point some complain to moderators & want dissenting opinions banned because they can’t interpret different thoughts as anything other than “trolling.”

This type of thought happens in politics all the time; there have been plenty of psychological studies on the phenomenon — people in party affiliations can’t tolerate anything done by the other party & consider them evil. Here’s an article on one of many such studies: "Motivated ignorance" is ruining our political discourse

The funny thing is my position on Hakstol is moderate — I don’t love him, don’t hate him, I’ve criticized his decisions plenty of times — but because I’m not willing to blame him for almost everything, & am willing to say when I think the general hate is over-the-top, people label me as an all-out “Hakstol defender” (Goody Goode’s a witch!)

There’s comfort in group think, & in shouting down opposing opinions so you aren’t threatened with the possibility you are wrong. Most people fight for their viewpoints, but to ban opposing views is insane, IMO. It helped me come around on Wade Allison, for example.

No, the Church was rather open to heliocentrism, contrary to popular belief. It was widely discussed in intellectual circles among the clergy. A famous quote on the matter, from Cardinal Baronius in Cardinal Neri's little discussion group, was that "the Bible teaches us how to go to Heaven, not how the heavens go." It was also the Pope who saved Galileo from execution once the secular authorities ruled on his case.

The problem with Galileo wasn't his ideas, it was how he presented them. In summary, He was a HUGE jerk. When people objected to him being a jerk, he was a bigger jerk. When those people happened to have the ability to put him on trial out of spite, his legal defense featured a heavy amount of insulting the living hell out of all his judges. Scientists in those days presented ideas with humility, and Galileo rejected that. It turned off everyone, even people who agreed with his conclusions.

There is a reason that people were happy to claim they counted Galileo among their correspondents via letters, but were quite reluctant to invite him to any parties. He was brilliant, but awful to actually have around.




On the latter part:


Let's all stop calling each other trolls, eh? How bout that? Maybe let's give that a shot?

 

[BackToTheBrierePatch]

Well then: people told Edison he was insane when saying Morse code (which he invented) would be useful for anything. Edison named the Morse Code after his early departed grandfather, Morse Alva Edison. But he showed them

Edison was one of many who was behind the blackballing of Tesla.
But that is a story for another day.

 

[Ghosts Beer]

No, the Church was rather open to heliocentrism, contrary to popular belief. It was widely discussed in intellectual circles among the clergy. A famous quote on the matter, from Cardinal Baronius in Cardinal Neri's little discussion group, was that "the Bible teaches us how to go to Heaven, not how the heavens go." It was also the Pope who saved Galileo from execution once the secular authorities ruled on his case.

The problem with Galileo wasn't his ideas, it was how he presented them. In summary, He was a HUGE jerk. When people objected to him being a jerk, he was a bigger jerk. When those people happened to have the ability to put him on trial out of spite, his legal defense featured a heavy amount of insulting the living hell out of all his judges. Scientists in those days presented ideas with humility, and Galileo rejected that. It turned off everyone, even people who agreed with his conclusions.

There is a reason that people were happy to claim they counted Galileo among their correspondents via letters, but were quite reluctant to invite him to any parties. He was brilliant, but awful to actually have around.




On the latter part:


Let's all stop calling each other trolls, eh? How bout that? Maybe let's give that a shot?

It’s interesting how there are varying accounts of Galileo.

Most places say the church censured him; he had to agree not to teach Copernicanism; heliocentric books were banned; & that the Inquisition deemed heliocentrism “foolish, “absurd,” and “heretical.”

I tend to think that although the church eventually came around on the science, for a long time they tried to suppress Galileo. But again, I wouldn’t bet my life on it. History often has contadictory accounts.

Anyway, I’ve never accused anyone here of being a troll, and I’m totally on board with keeping it that way.

Plus you quote Warren Zevon, so you can’t be a bad guy in my book.

 

[Beef Invictus]

That later part was directed at the forum, not you