Lots of people work in science and yet don't feel the need to be twats about it.

I do actually change the English language, I call it Zenglish.

What's that then....the language of the zombie apocalypse?

It's English with all of the mistakes taken out of it.

hahahahahaha.

ok. Well. have fun arbitrarily recoding the English language to suit your very particular needs.

Zenglish...
http://greatestminds.freeforums.net/...glish-language

Yeah....kind of garbage though I thought.

For a start: shemale doesn't work. 'She' and 'male' are not at an equivalent logical or grammatical level.

She's a male it's perfect.

Also your logic for 'gay' only referring to male homosexuality is flawed.


And finally, I'm struck by how much of your word analysis is about sexuality and gender. You seem slightly obsessed.

Because I work on Biology as well, so that needs to be precise. I'm changing words that scientifically need to be precise for my work.

So...you work on quantum physics and biology?

And by 'work on' you mean...?

I need to explain something with an example... The word pull should not exist. So Newton, and Einstein both calling Gravity attraction or pull messed them up with science. I don't want to be messed up by using the wrong words. Gravity is a push force. And just by taking the word 'pull out of the dictionary you get the correct answer.

yes, I saw that in your post about the SuperGuess.

What I am curious about is in what capacity you are 'working on' these things?

I ask because in that same piece about the super guess, you seem very disparaging of people with physics PhDs.

I'm working on the Theory Of Everything. Science from scratch, I screwed up Newton's work, and Einstein's work, and started again.

ok.

Again though, since the fact that you 'work in science' has been offered as an explanation for your attitude towards word usage, in what capacity are you working on these things?

On my own, at home with a computer. If you Google Pincho Paxton there is only me that comes up. You will see that I am banned from all of the science forums. They all banned me because you are not supposed to post your own science in science forums. You have to post Newton, and Einstein, and the Standard Model. So I work on my own.

But what did eventually happen, is that over 10 years scientists changed science, and it started to look a lot like what I posted 10 years ago. Then the things that I said were in space were found by telescopes. But now I am still 10 years ahead, because those 10 years I still worked on my theory. So I still can't post my new ideas without getting banned.

Being always 10 years ahead is like always being wrong. But I'm not wrong, I just look wrong.

Anyway, my point is that words have to be precise, and gender has to be precise. Unless you want to screw with your head. I agreed to use the word Transgender. But that does not join with straight in any way.

I take a lot of science with a large pinch of salt. Much of what we take for granted, because science tells us to, will be laughed at in a few centuries or even decades.

Once upon a time, eminent scientists told us the Earth was flat.......

However..... science is, or should be, based on the best evidence available. If it isn't, then it is guesswork.

Anyone can have lucky guesses, but it remains a guess if there is no supporting evidence.

Agreed I went right off Carol at that point, what a coward!

Again you have stored bad English. That's almost word for word what science tells you to say. It is not accurate.

It seems to me, if you are 'working in science' you are in the wrong job! Lol! :D

As I have said, I take much of what scientists say with a pinch of salt: that is hardly what I'm being told by science to say! ;)

OK. Evidence is always an Effect. The Universe works on Cause and Effect. I work on the Cause, there is never evidence of a cause. You have to deduce it like Sherlock Holmes. That's what I do. I deduce the cause, and predict the effects, and then telescopes find what I predicted. My theory is not based on the best evidence available, it is based on pure logic. Which means that I have to have a perfect brain with no lies in it.

Not really. That's a myth, I'm afraid. The idea that the world is a sphere has been accepted since late antiquity. Certainly during the middle ages scholars referred to the earth as a sphere, even as far back as Bede.

Besides, 'scientists' as we understand that term are a relatively recent thing. The scientific method as we understand it is relatively recent. And in the time that we have had such things, the notion of a flat earth has been the province of quacks and lunatics ;p

It's not what scientists tell us that needs the pinch if salt, imo, it's what gets reported of their findings. Scientists naturally try to break down their own models and caveat their findings to reflect the limitations of the known facts. It's how that then gets reported to the wider community that tends to bring in problems. We're the ones who demand that they tell us the absolute objective truth about something,whilst they hold their hands up and say, we can only tell you what happens if we do X to Y under Z conditions.

I don't think that's what he means by working in science. It's just something he does on his own on his computer.

yeah, just me. But it was just Newton, and it was just Da Vinci, now it's just me.