Babbling moron.

[Solving Tornadoes]

On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 10:01:11 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 9:01:08 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 8:31:09 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> >> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> > On Saturday, January 22, 2022 at 7:46:10 AM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> >> >> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> > On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 7:36:38 PM UTC-8, pnal...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >> On Friday, January 21, 2022 at 10:52:05 AM UTC-8, claudi...@gmail.com wrote:
> >> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> >> > LOL!!! So, let me get this straight. Your whole argument can be parsed down to: Orthodox theories are correct by default. Right?
> >> >> >> >> No, not right. Orthodox theories are considered to be the best model until evidence shows a different model is superior.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Wrong. Only a nonscientist would make such an obviously non-scientific
> >> >> >> > assertion. The best model is the one that best matches the evidence.
> >> >> >> And that best model is called the orthodox model, blithering idiot.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> <snip remaining reposted babble>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This is how retards do science. Orthodoxy is not a sign of anything
> >> >> > other than orthodoxy. Orthodoxy IS NOT A CRITERIA OF SCEINTIFIC
> >> >> > VALIDITY, YOU MOTHER FUCKING STUPID SON OF A BITCH.
> >> >> As usual the delusional twit shows his illiteracy in not knowing the
> >> >> definition of orthodox.
> >> >>
> >> >> Scientific validity is the criterion for calling something orthodox.
> >> >>
> >> >> Something is not called orthodox until it has been shown to be the best
> >> >> explaination that matches the evidence.
> >> >
> >> > No, you are describing the problem that scientific methods were
> >> > created IN ORDER TO PREVENT.
> >> Nope, you are just showing once again that you are illiterate and do not
> >> understand the definition of the word orthodox as used in science.
> >>
> >> By definition "orthodox science" means that science that has been
> >> validated by the scientific method and has been shown to be the current
> >> best possible explaination of the evidence.
> >
> > Fucking moron. There is a huge difference between saying a
> > model/theory is orthodox and saying it is scientifically
> > correct BECAUSE it is orthodox.
> No one but you is saying that.
>
> Yet again, orthodox science means that science that has been shown to be
> scientifically correct.
>
> Note the phrase "has been shown" which means that the correctness must
> be shown BEFORE the science can be called orthodox.
>
> <snip remaining babble>

Babbling moron.

[Jim Pennino]

And yet again as McGinn is a very slow learner...

FIRST science is determined to be correct.

THEN AND ONLY THEN is the science described as orthodox.

[Michael Moroney]

On 1/22/2022 1:10 PM, Solving Tornadoes wrote:

> Babbling moron.

That's what you are, McFly. Nice sig.

[James McGinn]

[James McGinn]

On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:16:08 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:

> > On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 2:31:11 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> > On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 2:01:08 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> >> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:

> >> >> > On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 12:01:17 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
> >> >> >> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> <snip old crap>
> >> >> >> > All models use the same data, moron.
> >> >> >> This at the top of the list of most insane things you have posted.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Fuck you. You aren't a scientists. You are just a nose picker than owns a computer.
> >> >> So once again McGinn/Denk, the delusional half wit with multiple
> >> >> personality disorder, is backed into a corner by facts threatening
> >> >> his delusions and has no response other than a childish attempt at
> >> >> an insult for a provider of facts.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Models are verified by independently generating new data sets
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Some models are. But so what.
> >> >> All models accepted by people other than delusional half wits are
> >> >> independently verified.
> >> >
> >> > What a stupid argument.
> >> Which just goes to show you have no clue how the scientific method works
> >
> > You science groupie morons think doing a google search is an experiment.
>
> So once again McGinn/Denk, the delusional half wit with multiple
> personality disorder, is backed into a corner by facts threatening
> his delusions and has no response other than a childish attempt at
> an insult for a provider of facts.
> The fact that you do not understand that independent verification is an
> integral and required part of the scientific method shows that you have
> no understanding of how science works whatsoever.

Babbling moron.

[Carl]

On 1/31/2022 6:16 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 4:16:08 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
>> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 2:31:11 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
>>>> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 2:01:08 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
>>>>>> James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On Monday, January 31, 2022 at 12:01:17 PM UTC-8, Jim Pennino wrote:
>>>>>>>> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:

Shut up idiots.

[Jim Pennino]

Yes, you are.

[James McGinn]

[Solving Tornadoes]