(11-07-2022, 08:24 AM)TomK Wrote:

(11-06-2022, 04:16 PM)kander Wrote: Considering how tainted the science has been over the past couple years, I dont see any harm in promoting his paper. At least nobody will die from it. And its quite well written. So its certainly convincing from that standpoint.
I didnt see the part in it where Hawaiians were navigating interstellar space in it though. That part must have not been included outside this forum.

For crying out loud, read his original post:

https://punaweb.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=22864

The paper he or she claims to have written has nothing to do with Hawaiian wayfinding but whines about it anyway. And he doesn't say Hawaiians navigated interstellar space, he claims that Hawaiians invented a way to navigate it. Please get your facts right.

Finally, if it's well-written it must be OK? What kind of logic is that? I could write a well-written sentence and claim something that's entirely untrue, but in your eyes that is convincing?

(11-05-2022, 07:18 AM)Rob Tucker Wrote:   Communication does not require a winner.

(11-07-2022, 08:34 PM)kander Wrote:

(11-07-2022, 08:24 AM)TomK Wrote:

(11-06-2022, 04:16 PM)kander Wrote: Considering how tainted the science has been over the past couple years, I dont see any harm in promoting his paper. At least nobody will die from it. And its quite well written. So its certainly convincing from that standpoint.
I didnt see the part in it where Hawaiians were navigating interstellar space in it though. That part must have not been included outside this forum.

For crying out loud, read his original post:

https://punaweb.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=22864

The paper he or she claims to have written has nothing to do with Hawaiian wayfinding but whines about it anyway. And he doesn't say Hawaiians navigated interstellar space, he claims that Hawaiians invented a way to navigate it. Please get your facts right.

Finally, if it's well-written it must be OK? What kind of logic is that? I could write a well-written sentence and claim something that's entirely untrue, but in your eyes that is convincing?

Seems you find sarcasm a difficult subject to master.

(11-07-2022, 05:54 PM)MyManao Wrote: Tell you what? I am here, I see you whine, but man I said my piece, succinctly. I do not see any reason to explain.

(11-08-2022, 08:42 AM)TomK Wrote: There would certainly be harm in promoting the paper, it would mean pseudo-science would become acceptable, and promoting such a paper would be unethical if it were done by a scientist.

---

(11-07-2022, 08:34 PM)kander Wrote:

(11-07-2022, 08:24 AM)TomK Wrote:

(11-06-2022, 04:16 PM)kander Wrote: Considering how tainted the science has been over the past couple years, I dont see any harm in promoting his paper. At least nobody will die from it. And its quite well written. So its certainly convincing from that standpoint.
I didnt see the part in it where Hawaiians were navigating interstellar space in it though. That part must have not been included outside this forum.

For crying out loud, read his original post:

https://punaweb.org/forum/showthread.php?tid=22864

The paper he or she claims to have written has nothing to do with Hawaiian wayfinding but whines about it anyway. And he doesn't say Hawaiians navigated interstellar space, he claims that Hawaiians invented a way to navigate it. Please get your facts right.

Finally, if it's well-written it must be OK? What kind of logic is that? I could write a well-written sentence and claim something that's entirely untrue, but in your eyes that is convincing?

Seems you find sarcasm a difficult subject to master.

(11-08-2022, 03:22 AM)terracore Wrote:

(11-05-2022, 07:18 AM)Rob Tucker Wrote:   Communication does not require a winner.

Debating is communication, but communication doesn't require debating.  And frankly the goal of a debate is to win it.  I liked debating when it was civil and the purpose wasn't to win or lose, but to just present the best argument one could without arguing from authority.  A debate that ends in a tie isn't a loss for either side. 

Many people on PW (the few that are left) either debate nonsense or they debate with emotions, or they argue from authority.  I can't debate emotions, won't engage with nonsense, and I question authority.  

Just the opinion of somebody who has been frequenting the forum with decreasing frequency over the years:  some users do want to win their communication and the only way to do that is to turn everything into a debate.

(11-08-2022, 03:19 PM)kander Wrote: is that British sarcasm while explaining the sarcastic points of my post while interjecting a dig at my mastery of English? Psst, here's an idea.

(11-09-2022, 08:31 AM)TomK Wrote:

(11-08-2022, 03:19 PM)kander Wrote: is that British sarcasm while explaining the sarcastic points of my post while interjecting a dig at my mastery of English? Psst, here's an idea.

What? I didn't explain the sarcasm in your post;  there wasn't any. And seriously, are you claiming to have mastery of the English language? The quote above shows you haven't.