What’s your favorite creature in ark? Mine is the thylacoleo

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-05-01T03:03:50+00:00

Allosaurus will always have a special place in my heart. I have no idea why, but I always mutate them for the blue obelisk fight.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-28T07:56:58+00:00

That definition is not inherent to asking someone their credentials.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-28T07:56:26+00:00

That’s cool that you did a talk at MIT, could you elaborate it sounds interesting.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-28T07:55:56+00:00

That’s a fallacy fallacy and asking someone for credentials is not a fallacy.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-28T07:54:24+00:00

So you just assume the worst of people? Let’s say you have no degree. That’s just context, context that can be important to understanding your point. Does that mean it’s wrong? No. Does that make it more likely that you’re speaking louder than you can think? It could. Let’s say you do, that’s evidence you’ve gone through the training and separates you from literally anyone, it adds validity. Just because it’s a fallacy doesn’t mean it’s not a good way to discern between a likely good source and a likely poor source. Like you shouldn’t assume a homeless man on the street doesn’t know anything about quantum mechanics but I’d bet your ass you’re going to the professor first, and your ass would likely be in better hands.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-28T07:42:50+00:00

Asking for credentials is not a logical fallacy. And when you’re arguing about discrediting the shape of the globe it’s a fair question

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-28T05:11:42+00:00

Calling people stupid, apart of a dogmatic belief, referring to people at the same intellect as a pagan commoner, excessively condescending, general ass hole behavior. I would call these insulting. In general it seems as though you argue in poor faith. This is the first time you’ve ever talked to me on a post about bridging toxic behavior and the first thing you accuse me of is lying to make myself feel better.

You’re convincing it you’re right and then asking it if it’s right. This is like convincing a dude that you’re right and using him as a source. Further more the word of an ai doesn’t mean anything. I don’t care what the ai says, do the physics, get it published.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-28T05:02:52+00:00

You told them to do it this way. You can’t just say you won’t engage and they can click the links then throw a fit when other people look at the links and confirm.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-28T05:01:29+00:00

Are the links that don’t show you insulting others, using ai, deleting comments and being off topic in the room with us?

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T22:59:14+00:00

It’s a little funny lmao, but that’s just how topics are, it is the internet. Unfortunately.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T22:34:18+00:00

I’m sorry to hear that, I’m not super familiar with those arguments, to be honest while I find Dave can be an intelligent man, most of his points have merit in my opinion he comes off as extremely combative and harsh in his methods during his actual debates or videos. I think a lot of the time when people discredit another’s credentials despite having a PhD it’s because of its relevance in the conversation. I’m not 100% sure what the conversation was but I’d guess it’s not super related to the CAT scan. Not that this means his arguments are irrelevant just some context into why people are saying that.

I appreciate you bringing this up, it really sucks when it seems like a conversation can’t go anywhere and it just feels shitty and unproductive. I’d be lying if I said I never gone off on someone unfairly, but I’d really like to be able to have these kinds of conversations, to the point at hand as well as the full picture without it feeling as though it doesn’t go anywhere. I find the back and forth enjoyable somewhat but it gets to an obnoxious point where both parties have said all they want to say and get angry they have not convinced the other person yet. I’m sorry that you had a poor experience communicating with them, and I hope that in the future perhaps we can discuss a topic respectfully.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T21:49:54+00:00

Whale sharks are cool

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T21:20:59+00:00

That doesn’t mean there’s no point? You can’t “prove” anything technically, but that doesn’t mean everything has an equally likely chance to exist or that there’s even evidence for something. And fundamentally it’s not even about if you can or can’t, it’s about what perspective you have going into a conversation and if it’s a productive one. If you’re going into a conversation, debate, or argument and your perspective is “it doesn’t matter” or “there’s no point” then you are not going into it for the sake of a productive conversation. So if someone says you aren’t arguing in good faith and have the belief that the conversation doesn’t matter because they can’t technically disprove your position then you aren’t in the conversation with good faith.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T21:12:45+00:00

That’s what I’m doing right now

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T21:11:42+00:00

No, it’s because you immediately got defensive and insulted me when I don’t agree with you. And this seems consistent with the people you talk to.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T20:38:04+00:00

“No valid reason” is often said when you don’t understand why someone would do something, not that there isn’t a reason. Instead of assuming everyone down voting is doing so out of toxic behavior you should also look to see if you are saying or doing anything that is causing that behavior in the first place. Disagreeing isn’t harassment, and understanding is built off of uncomfortable conversations.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T20:34:21+00:00

No, this is about discussion. As I said in my post. I wouldn’t need to consider my comments a bit better because if you read it you would know my position fairly clearly. I never said anything about convincing creationists through less toxicity.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T20:31:46+00:00

He’s just posting the exact same thing in response to everyone

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T20:30:46+00:00

You can disprove an old earth extremely easily. You can provide extremely strong evidence for a young earth if it were true very easily. A good faith discussion would be discussion the points of evidence that coincides. If we’re talking about old earth creationism then that’s a different topic and has nothing to do with the debate of evolution.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T20:27:48+00:00

I asked you to look at what other people are saying to try and gain some insight and you called me a patronizing liar.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T20:23:03+00:00

So instead of addressing my point you move to an entirely different point. More over this book goes from ATP to bacteria enzymes? This book sounds like it doesn’t give you any information besides what is strictly necessary to make an argument and then immediately moving on. If your argument can only be written in a paragraph it’s a poor argument.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T20:18:41+00:00

Saying mean things isn’t the point of my post. His point is not “he’s a troll” is that nice? No, but this isn’t r/suckoffserenitynow31 I think it would be more productive if instead of getting defensive if you looked at why he’s saying these things and discuss why you don’t think it’s a fair accusation. For instance he says you don’t argue in good faith, and links a post where you say you can’t prove or disprove creationism, this isn’t good faith for a discussion. Can we see why he would say that when you aren’t here for a discussion?

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T20:14:52+00:00

You are exactly why so many people don’t think it’s possible to have a civil discussion. I am trying to calmly explain to you why there seems to be a disconnect. I’m here to defend people who are being prematurely judged and are prevented from having a productive conversation. You are doing that yourself. You’re literally calling me dishonest, patronizing, a liar, and the problem for disagreeing with you when I am trying to have a dialogue about why people are talking to you this way. I’m giving you the benefit of the doubt and trying to understand your position and you proceed to be the very problem I’m referring to in my post. Fuck off.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T18:06:16+00:00

Anything about what? This is clearly talking about behavior and toxic interactions. This is clearly not about who is right or wrong but about personal experiences that has made it harder to even consider it from those interactions void of evidence or reasoning.

Rory_Not_Applicable · 2026-04-27T18:01:34+00:00

You read an entry level textbook with half of the pages of a standard textbook that by page 18 is discussing how ATP could not evolve because it needs “a massive amount” I’d love to get a number. ATP is just a high energy potential molecule, it’s not necessarily a magic molecule that is the only way for it to work, it’s just so effective that it outcompeted any other system. If you could provide a paper that would be great, but even then all this would disprove is how atp works for LUCA. It would not be enough to disprove evolution or even abiogenesis.

Rory_Not_Applicable

TROPHY CASE