Hacker News Reader

Comment by awesome_dude | Hacker News Reader

So, we believe nothing?

Or, we demand evidence that what you assert about this set of statistics is accurate

Given that you can just throw money at the solution you want to engineer, and create the illusion of science, perhaps believing nothing is a better position to be in. At least you're not buying into what is essentially just another avenue of corporate or governance marketing.

And sorry for bringing information to your attention. Just wait till you hear about how corporates fund law.

How do we know that your cynicism isn't funded by corporates in an attempt to undermine the real science?

You don't. How do you know your trust in corporates isn't an understandably conditioned response, given 13+ years of education?

That's weird - where can you point to me having any such trust?

I'm presuming that is the case, because you are questioning my straightforward and obvious suggestion that funding by corporations can provide whatever statistics you like. Feel free to explain your actual position if you want.

Thank you for admitting your logic has no basis in fact - which was clearly your approach when looking at your rejection of data.

Let me know when you are actually interested in science, facts, or logic.

You are putting words in my mouth. And not answering anything.

I made a statement, have defended it, asked your position, and in order to sign off with a bad faith message you put words in my mouth (that I admitted my logic has no basis in fact).

I presumed based on your complete and utter disregard for facts, logic, and scientific data, that it was all you understood, and it appears i was correct.

"Presumed". Awesome, dude.

"I'm presuming that is the case" - Veri lami

Reply on news.ycombinator.com