If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir
General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
We don't have a labour day parade in my neck of the woods, we have a picnic and I'll probably go because there will be a lot of nice friendly people there.
I'm sure that Garioni will stay at home and stew in his bitterness, though.
No parade. Too bad. Here in Toronto they always had the labour day parade which ended at the CNE grounds. I went a couple of times as I recall. Got into the CNE free. I don't know what happened to the union. The utility was publically traded and not government owned. It was bought out by another company and split into pieces which were then sold off. Lots of people lost their jobs and much was contracted out. I'd retired by that time. I get a pensioners newsletter most month except July and August. A pleasant phone call every couple of years so they can write me up. You know what it's like when you get older. A lot of my friends are gone.
I hope you can remember how to get to your picnic. You sure can't remember how to spell my simple 4 letter name. I can understand someone not being able to recall how to spell "Seedmouse" but "Gary" is pretty simple.
No parade. Too bad. Here in Toronto they always had the labour day parade which ended at the CNE grounds. I went a couple of times as I recall. Got into the CNE free. I don't know what happened to the union. The utility was publically traded and not government owned. It was bought out by another company and split into pieces which were then sold off. Lots of people lost their jobs and much was contracted out. I'd retired by that time. I get a pensioners newsletter most month except July and August. A pleasant phone call every couple of years so they can write me up. You know what it's like when you get older. A lot of my friends are gone.
I hope you can remember how to get to your picnic. You sure can't remember how to spell my simple 4 letter name. I can understand someone not being able to recall how to spell "Seedmouse" but "Gary" is pretty simple.
Hey, Gary since you live in Toronto did you get to witness the G20 riots firsthand? OR did you stay away from the action?
You sure can't remember how to spell my simple 4 letter name. I can understand someone not being able to recall how to spell "Seedmouse" but "Gary" is pretty simple.
Gary misunderstands, as usual.
Now that he's complained twice about it I shall have to do it more often.
Last edited by Ed Seedhouse; Saturday, 4th September, 2010, 07:09 PM.
Actually AGW is a fact recognized by the National Academy of Sciences. It is not erroneous at all to claim AGW is a fact. Given that all other hypotheses to date have been exhaustively ruled out, it has been demonstrated that man causes global warming.
“It is a fact that humans cause global warming.” The real question is how much, 100%-1% we do not know the exact amount, that is where the word theory would be applied(or maybe hypotheses).
Why don't you just leave? You are becoming just as annoying as your arch-nemesis Jean Hebert. You haven't really done any research on AGW at all, you are completely ignorant about the entirety of the subject, go read another Slyvia Browne book and continue to reject reality because of some psychic lunatic.
Paul Beckwith has given massive amounts of evidence in the past that you and other deniers continue to ignore and the more links we put up the more you ask to see the evidence, it is logically fallacious. Trying reading some of the links and maybe you'll realize why we are posting them in the first place.
97% of climatologists have gone through the evidence and come to the conclusion that global warming is real, man-made and a problem and Paul Beckwith has given some of their peer-reviewed articles in the past.
Penn Jillette is not convinced that is your winning argument, except when I say stuff about critics disagreeing with reincarnation as a fact you get all offended, wow, you are a complete hypocrite.
Now you are just being stupid, lets compare reincarnation to AGW
AGW
-recognized by the majority of the scientific community
-stated as a fact by the National Academy of Sciences
-exact % of man-made influence is a theory/hypotheses
Reincarnation
-NOT recognized by the scientific community
-stated as pseudoscience
-not even a hypotheses let alone a theory exists for reincarnation in the scientific community
They are on complete opposite ends of the spectrum, AGW doesn't take faith, it's not a religion, it is a fact!
While the critics of AGW are diminishing as more and more evidence piles up against them, the critics of reincarnation are not going away,if the scientific community rejects reincarnation then it is really a pointless subject until you obtain more of your 'irrefutable' evidence.
The conclusion of the National Academy of Sciences on the topic of climate change couldn't be more clear,
"Climate change is occurring, is caused largely by human activities, and poses significant risks for—and in many cases is already affecting—a broad range of human and natural systems".
Again you are completely ignorant about climate change and I suggest you try to educate yourself instead of looking like a complete idiot.
AGW=Fact
Reincarnation=bullshit/pseudoscience
I thought I'd better lay off you for a few days, you are starting to sound unstable. Your rantings and constant repetition about AGW=fact, it sounds like you have really gotten unnerved about the holes in your arguments and have to keep repeating your mantra to convince yourself.
For all I know, I could be causing you to go to school and bully the kids that go to church on Sundays.
You fall back to the National Academy of Sciences as your safety net. Well, an organization like that is not even going to bother with a topic like reincarnation, which if stated as proven would (1) insult religions that don't accept it, and (2) possibly cause world societies to embrace spirituality and shun partisanship and conflict. So instead, this organization is investigating such things as use of lasers as weapons and implanting computer chips in humans. Their ties to the military-industrial complex appear close indeed. I would actually classify their stand on climate change to be tepid indeed, their statement makes no mention of impending doom or a need to take de-industrialization action. Their "warning" about significant risks almost sounds like it's meant for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
At any rate, it concerns me not at all that this organization does not investigate reincarnation. You can bluster all you want that it's pseudoscience, all this does is demonstrate your predisposed beliefs, which amount to nothing at all.
Oh, and it was YOU that brought up Penn Jillette, as if his show could possibly decide for all of us what is BS and what isn't. Then when I demonstrate how fallible he and his show are, you backpedal and accuse ME of thinking highly of his opinion. You're a mess!
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
I thought I'd better lay off you for a few days, you are starting to sound unstable. Your rantings and constant repetition about AGW=fact, it sounds like you have really gotten unnerved about the holes in your arguments and have to keep repeating your mantra to convince yourself.
For all I know, I could be causing you to go to school and bully the kids that go to church on Sundays.
You fall back to the National Academy of Sciences as your safety net. Well, an organization like that is not even going to bother with a topic like reincarnation, which if stated as proven would (1) insult religions that don't accept it, and (2) possibly cause world societies to embrace spirituality and shun partisanship and conflict. So instead, this organization is investigating such things as use of lasers as weapons and implanting computer chips in humans. Their ties to the military-industrial complex appear close indeed. I would actually classify their stand on climate change to be tepid indeed, their statement makes no mention of impending doom or a need to take de-industrialization action. Their "warning" about significant risks almost sounds like it's meant for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
At any rate, it concerns me not at all that this organization does not investigate reincarnation. You can bluster all you want that it's pseudoscience, all this does is demonstrate your predisposed beliefs, which amount to nothing at all.
Oh, and it was YOU that brought up Penn Jillette, as if his show could possibly decide for all of us what is BS and what isn't. Then when I demonstrate how fallible he and his show are, you backpedal and accuse ME of thinking highly of his opinion. You're a mess!
it isn't just the NAS but also the Royal Society which is the British equivalent basically that support AGW as fact and reincarnation as pseudo-science.
Two of the largest scientific foundations in the world reject reincarnation as pseudoscience and accept AGW as fact, but they are all wrong right? The Royal Society has some of the greatest minds in the world involved with it, but Slyvia Browne and yourself are much more intelligent. Do you see how absurd your position is, even if you are fully convinced into Slyvia Browne's teaching is it too hard to imagine how the rest of the scientific world views your beliefs?
You don't make any sense, how would your beliefs cause me to bully the Christians at my school, I go to a Roman Catholic school. First of all Roman Catholics have one of the lowest % percentage of fundamentalism among their members. The Vatican accepts evolution(theistic variation),the old age of the Earth, are open to the problem of AGW, reject reincarnation, etc. I obviously have different problems with the Roman Catholic Church but that is based more on their hierarchy then the members themselves.
"Significant risks" and "caused largely by human activity" are the most important points in their statement about global warming. They have reviewed the evidence and found AGW to be correct, I'm pretty sure all major scientific organizations that deal with climate change accept it to be caused by human activity.
NAS did investigate the claim by the few researchers who support reincarnation and found it to be nothing more then pseudoscience.
All it does is demonstrate my pro-science views, and my anti-pseudoscience ones, if the evidence for reincarnation was as compelling as you believe it to be, it would be accepted despite the religious backlash against the NAS(the Christian right is already assaulting everything science so it can't get much worse)
The so-called facts of reincarnation are what amounts to nothing.
Actually if you go back to my original post I brought up Penn Jillette's show BULLSHIT, but the point was he had neuroscientists doing the talking about NDE(and it's irrelevance) and he had experts on the subject of cold reading come in to explain it and show how psychics do it.
Penn Jillette is not an expert on anything scientific, he is a magician. Normally the show is very good because he brings in experts to explain things, his opinions on global warming are just as useful/important as yours to a scientist.
Penn Jillette is fallible like any human, but his show is almost always based on what the experts say, sadly he took it upon himself in the global warming episode to ridicule Al Gore, instead of looking at the facts of the matter.
A show I'd recommend you to watch is Darren Brown's special "Messiah", where he shows how easy it is to fall for one of these scams and how easy it is too trick even the "experts"(on pseudoscience nothing more) into all this complete garbage.
you have proven nothing except your extreme devotion to Slyvia Browne...
Last edited by Adam Cormier; Sunday, 5th September, 2010, 03:49 PM.
Reason: spelling error/added a couple words
Penn Jillette is not an expert on anything he is a magician normally the show is very good because he brings in experts to explain things, his opinions on global warming are just as useful/important as yours to a scientist.
Penn is certainly an expert in show magic, which is a high art that requires many years of intense study to master, though it involves no "paranormal" phenomina. If he tells me that some effect produced by some shyster claiming to by "psychic" can easily be done by a "magician" then I will certainly believe him. He is an expert in that area beyond doubt.
But expertise in one area does not convey expertise in others, and his opinions about global warming or economics are irrelevant.
Penn is certainly an expert in show magic, which is a high art that requires many years of intense study to master, though it involves no "paranormal" phenomina. If he tells me that some effect produced by some shyster claiming to by "psychic" can easily be done by a "magician" then I will certainly believe him. He is an expert in that area beyond doubt.
But expertise in one area does not convey expertise in others, and his opinions about global warming or economics are irrelevant.
I meant to say he is not an expert on anything scientific, his expertise begins and ends with magic.
it isn't just the NAS but also the Royal Society which is the British equivalent basically that support AGW as fact and reincarnation as pseudo-science.
Two of the largest scientific foundations in the world reject reincarnation as pseudoscience and accept AGW as fact, but they are all wrong right?
A search for "reincarnation" on both the NAS and the Royal Society's sites gives 0 results. Nice try, amateur. Like I wrote, those scientists aren't even inclined to do any research into a topic like reincarnation.
You don't make any sense, how would your beliefs cause me to bully the Christians at my school, I go to a Roman Catholic school.
Not my beliefs, rather the destruction of the myth of Adam Cormier as objective logician. Your revelations in this thread alone will follow you the rest of your life, thanks to the internet age.
The destruction of the ego can cause many kinds of violent reactions. You have been sounding quite unstable lately, I would even use the word panicked. Repeating your mantra over and over, and wrapping yourself in the cocoon of scientific organizations, using insults against your detractors, your ego is unravelling before our very eyes.
NAS did investigate the claim by the few researchers who support reincarnation and found it to be nothing more then pseudoscience.
Back that up with a link. I'd like to see what their "investigation", if there ever was one, consisted of. And even if they did conclude pseudoscience, that conclusion doesn't mean reincarnation is necessarily untrue.
you have proven nothing except your extreme devotion to Slyvia Browne...
Again, total mischaracterization in the name of casting disrepute. Where in my posts do you get this characterization of "devotion"? I believe in her teachings, that does not connotate devotion. I don't happen to like her being a psychic, because as I already wrote, this world is not meant to see a perfect or even near-perfect psychic, so she is just opening herself up to ridicule. But she does comfort a lot of people, perhaps that would be her justification. Still, it does harm to her teachings, which are basically the same as that of others in her field, John Edward to name one.
You try too hard, Adam. The result only comes back upon you: showing your amateurish tricks is easy for me.
Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.
A search for "reincarnation" on both the NAS and the Royal Society's sites gives 0 results. Nice try, amateur. Like I wrote, those scientists aren't even inclined to do any research into a topic like reincarnation.
Not my beliefs, rather the destruction of the myth of Adam Cormier as objective logician. Your revelations in this thread alone will follow you the rest of your life, thanks to the internet age.
The destruction of the ego can cause many kinds of violent reactions. You have been sounding quite unstable lately, I would even use the word panicked. Repeating your mantra over and over, and wrapping yourself in the cocoon of scientific organizations, using insults against your detractors, your ego is unravelling before our very eyes.
Back that up with a link. I'd like to see what their "investigation", if there ever was one, consisted of. And even if they did conclude pseudoscience, that conclusion doesn't mean reincarnation is necessarily untrue.
Again, total mischaracterization in the name of casting disrepute. Where in my posts do you get this characterization of "devotion"? I believe in her teachings, that does not connotate devotion. I don't happen to like her being a psychic, because as I already wrote, this world is not meant to see a perfect or even near-perfect psychic, so she is just opening herself up to ridicule. But she does comfort a lot of people, perhaps that would be her justification. Still, it does harm to her teachings, which are basically the same as that of others in her field, John Edward to name one.
You try too hard, Adam. The result only comes back upon you: showing your amateurish tricks is easy for me.
Actually yes scientists have analyzed reincarnation and plenty of other pseudo-science claims and other garbage.
Here are some examples that show your delusion in it's true light,
Look up The Skeptic encyclopedia of pseudoscience By Dr. Michael Shermer(founding publisher of Skeptic Magazine)- it has a small bit in it about reincarnation, and another book of his is "why people believe weird thing" which focused on pseudoscience, superstitions and other general confusions.
Pseudoscience and Extraordinary Claims of the Paranormal: A Critical Thinker
By Dr. Jonathan C. Smith(university professor in psychology) talks about how to think critically about crazy claims.
Reincarnation: A critical examination by Dr. Paul Edwards, he goes over all the evidence for reincarnation and completely debunks it.
Read this book! It should completely free you from your delusion!
Look up some of the skeptical works by Joe Nickell, Ph.D., (Senior Research Fellow of the Committee for Skeptical Inquiry (CSI))
Just because I complete disagree with reincarnation and your beliefs and I'm backed by almost all scientists I automatically lose my reputation of being an objective logician, what ever you say. My ego is just the same as it started I don't take anything you say seriously(why should I?) so you really have no effect on my life at all, but I will uphold science against your pseudoscientific beliefs any day.
The only revelation that has been revealed is I can't stand pseudoscience, which could have probably been guessed because of my pro-science views.
You are right this is the internet age you should be careful what you say before you wind up in a psyche-ward.
I am content with all my posts, and if these posts follow me for the rest of my life I can't see them having any negative effects on my life. I am going to be a university professor in one of 4 subjects(pure/applied mathematics, biology or physics), I will immerse myself in academia where reincarnation and all of your other beliefs are pseudoscience at best.
I have presented the book, reincarnation: A critical examination by: Dr. Paul Edwards as a scientific investigation into the pseudoscience reincarnation. Please refute this book...and then I might give your beliefs some credibility this book really just slaughters all the evidence for reincarnation effectively and efficiently.
define devotion: commitment to some purpose(unless you have some alternative definition), you seem completely committed to Sylvia Browne's teaching and if you can't see that your posts support this there is clearly no way to help you.
John Edwards=Slyvia Browne(they are both frauds), if you watched Messiah by Derren Brown you would see how easy it is to be a psychic.
The scientific results are all on my side while you are left exactly where you started holding an empty sack, devoid of all logic, reasoning and evidence.
Last edited by Adam Cormier; Sunday, 5th September, 2010, 10:35 PM.
Tweet
Comment