i have proof!

[WilbyInebriated]

ding! ding!

school is in. we are attempting to teach omnibus/troll comprehension and logic today... though it be an exercise in futility.

[Omnibus]

These are details, like I said. They are to be ironed out in the course of discussing the essence of the problems in the theory. In that course it will become known whether or not that "and" really means that the internal contradictions are not given the dominance, as it should. Because of language there are always all kinds of such points that need clarification and that's why some of the debates are so long. It's all about clarification of meaning between parties, sometimes subtle and full of nuances. For instance, regarding the essence of a scientific theory, since one Karl Popper is so confused what are we to expect from the participants in a humble forum such as this one.

[WilbyInebriated]

These are details, like I said. They are to be ironed out in the course of discussing the essence of the problems in the theory. In that course it will become known whether or not that "and" really means that the internal contradictions are not given the dominance, as it should. Because of language there are always all kinds of such points that need clarification and that's why some of the debates are so long. It's all about clarification of meaning between parties, sometimes subtle and full of nuances. For instance, regarding the essence of a scientific theory, since one Karl Popper is so confused what are we to expect from the participants in a humble forum such as this one.

please avoid cluttering up this debate between tinsel koala and myself (not you) with this kind of irrelevant talk.

[MrMag]

ding! ding!

school is in. we are attempting to teach omnibus/troll comprehension and logic today... though it be an exercise in futility.

Haha. Good luck. It's hard to teach someone who thinks they already know everything.

[Omnibus]

I, for one, think that, on the contrary, your talk is irrelevant and clutters the thread devoted to discussing a theory. I've already expressed that opinion in several different ways but you're ignoring it and continue with the irrelevances. I'm no advocate of @Tinsel Koala with whom, many are aware, I've had issues in the past. Nevertheless, as a matter of principle, it has to be understood that when a theory is being discussed and in the course of that discussion certain inexactless in the terminology is uttered (as is usually the case) that should not divert the discussion into a talk about semantics and memorized definitions but the scientific discourse should rather continue unperturbed along its main course.