Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!newsfeed.xs3.de!nntp-feed.chiark.greenend.org.uk!ewrotcd!news.eyrie.org!beagle.ediacara.org!.POSTED.beagle.ediacara.org!not-for-mail
From: Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com>
Newsgroups: talk.origins
Subject: Re: Evidence v Conclusions
Date: Sat, 06 Apr 2024 17:36:45 +0100
Organization: Frantic
Sender: to%beagle.ediacara.org
Approved: moderator@beagle.ediacara.org
Message-ID: <867chao3c2.fsf@example.com>
References: <1tf21jdg30uru7c2ossq8j6ifrqdcefh0l@4ax.com>
	<86o7amocxq.fsf@example.com>
	<ecbdbe72b12496cecb6d807b77b50cd8@www.novabbs.com>
	<86frvyo80g.fsf@example.com>
	<481bea446c3d6f3930fed32d0a94e807@www.novabbs.com>
	<86bk6mo5lp.fsf@example.com>
	<86mdnZK4n5kZ6Yz7nZ2dnZfqnPqdnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Injection-Info: beagle.ediacara.org; posting-host="beagle.ediacara.org:3.132.105.89";
	logging-data="63019"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@beagle.ediacara.org"
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.2 (gnu/linux)
To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Cancel-Lock: sha1:BCopNSDxPlLSY+FXaqJimN1xrNQ= sha1:58lt58+2IDfavgmPvhKE46QhxPk=
Return-Path: <news@reader6.news.weretis.net>
X-Original-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org
Delivered-To: talk-origins@ediacara.org
	id D149D22976C; Sat,  6 Apr 2024 12:36:46 -0400 (EDT)
	by beagle.ediacara.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA739229758
	for <talk-origins@ediacara.org>; Sat,  6 Apr 2024 12:36:44 -0400 (EDT)
	id 341945DCE2; Sat,  6 Apr 2024 16:36:50 +0000 (UTC)
Delivered-To: talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
	by mod-relay-1.kamens.us (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 12ED35DCC9
	for <talk-origins@moderators.isc.org>; Sat,  6 Apr 2024 16:36:50 +0000 (UTC)
	(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
	 key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pmx.weretis.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6D7B03E87A
	for <talk-origins@moderators.isc.org>; Sat,  6 Apr 2024 18:36:46 +0200 (CEST)
	id 3CF873E866; Sat,  6 Apr 2024 18:36:46 +0200 (CEST)
X-User-ID: eJwFwQkRADAIAzBLfIVNDvSGfwlL4KnJikQGFissQuE5Nf7OIE2mKbTHV6Mhl2XSsceWfT8bqRFN
Bytes: 3829
Lines: 39

*Hemidactylus* <ecphoric@allspamis.invalid> writes:

> Richmond <dnomhcir@gmx.com> wrote:
>> j.nobel.daggett@gmail.com (LDagget) writes:
>> 
>>> Richmond wrote:
>>> 
>>>> j.nobel.daggett@gmail.com (LDagget) writes:
>>> 
>>>>> That's quite false as there exist many different independent lines
>>>>> of evidence for the existence of electrons beyond modeling the flow of
>>>>> electricity.
>>> 
>>>> Yes there are, but people often offer electricity, or worse still,
>>>> television, as evidence.
>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Are you even aware of who JJ Thomson is? If so, do you understand
>>> 
>>>> Oh it's you again. Are you even aware the standard model is a model?
>>> 
>>> Cathode ray tubes don't produce models, they produce electron beams.
>>> 
>>> The data interpretation doesn't require the standard model of particle
>>> physics. Neither do slit experiments. What it looks like is there's
>>> a lack of evidence that you understand either bit of evidence. Or have
>>> ever seen that evidence? I'm guessing you never looked. I guess as
>>> long as you play see no, hear no, speak no games, your
>>> assertion will survive your personal belief system.
>> 
>> What are you talking about you gormless fuckwit?
>> 
> And there we have it. 

The problem with this group is people argue with imaginary people. You
see at the end there he talks about my personal belief system, and yet
he has no idea what it is. I said that people interpret electricity as
evidence of electrons, and he says that is false, but I know it is true,
I have spoken to such people.