i don’t even have the time anymore to keep up with reading here. 
2 Likes
What is “it” in your sentence ?
I said “he doesn’t prove […] CAN’T” which is not what you claimed. you said “doesn’t”, which is not the same as "can’t"
please read my complete sentence.
I do it all the time. What particular problem are you having?
Nothing.
Same with the derailment attempt about the label carebear, or how dumb people make up their own definitions for words and mistake everything as opinion. This thread is SJW. It contains everything, including lies, hypocrazy (intentionally spelt that way :P), attempts of censorship (see the silly talk about the word carebear, which the special snowflake doesn’t like) and lots of irrationality people keep engaging with, not understanding that that’s the wrong approach.
When you talk to someone who believes that 2+2 can be five, then explaining why that’s wrong simply isn’t going to help. That being said, people in this thread deserve an applause for their patience and willingness to talk to people who aren’t cut out for serious discussions.
My trading platform is down… can’t make money. 
2 Likes
Ive made an effort to ask proper questions but theres less interest in discussing anything and just more shouting, I agree.
Dont make me let Billy out of his box.
1 Like
Anderson, it is certainly proof that the cyanides can kill some cells. However, as you probably know, a number of organisms are immune to its effects, so it’s important to make the distinction, above.
What folks want to know (generally) is ‘If I eat this (cyanide-laced commestible), will it kill me?’ The answer is not ‘Yes’, but ‘Possibly’.
Alas, I’ve been smoking cigarettes since the age of 9. I have survived despite indisputable long-term exposure to cyanide. Lethality depends (among other things) on dose and route of exposure.
How is this related to the thread title, again?
1 Like
Sorry, i was confused by the wording of your sentence structure as well as who you were referring to as “he”.
So, if someone presents an alternative experiment that demonstrates that cyanide does not kill cells, to you , this is not a proof?
He thinks that proof exists in science, in the way that something is absolutely true and final, which almost all scientists in the world disagree with.
3 Likes
Thank you.
1 Like
Also: Recruiting people by shooting them works. it makes friends, or enemies, and both are desirable.
not sure i posted that already. CCP should check the stats of can-flipped people of the past and check the effects it had.
1 Like
I told you already the opposite
ONCE you have a theory you can PROVE something inside that theory. It does NOT prove that used theory is true - and does not need it to be proven true.
I don’t get how you come to the conclusion I think the opposite of what I say.
Jesus christ man, Proof doesnt EXIST IN SCIENCE.
Proofs have two features tha**t do not exist in science**: They are final, and they are binary.
Do you know why scientsits are against the word “Proof” in science? Because proof implies that it cannot be overturned, and there is nothing within science that cannot be overturned with evidence. It doesnt matter whether were talking about a theory, or something within a theory(Which doesnt make sense because anything within a theory is still part of the thoery), proof does not exist in science, because it goes contrary to the fundamental aspect of science.
1 Like
Neither. I just know how to play this game.
There are so many strategies that, barring an unfortunate disconnect or acute heart attack, make moving things around highsec almost perfectly safe with some effort. There are ships, like Blockade Runners, that are unlockable. There are ships like DSTs which are near impossible to tackle and thus incredibly expensive to gank. There are Jump Freighters which can instantly teleport to safety. Even jockeying a normal Freighter around can be done relatively safely with scouting and escorts.
They key to all of it though is just don’t exceed the threshold where you make yourself a profitable target that a few dozen people want to explode you. CONCORD is such an overwhelming advantage, anyone who plays the game defensively and attentively, and knows the mechanics, can make themselves an uncatchable or unprofitable target.
5 Likes
Dude. You have to prove what you are affirming.
But if you successfully prove it, then you are wrong.
If you don’t, you can’t affirm it.
That alone proves you can prove things in science.
1 Like
At least we have prove that you have no idea what you are talking about
5 Likes
I lost a prowler once while attempting to dock in Jita.
What have I done to prevent that from happening?
I thought,
I fiddled with fits,
I adapted.
I didn’t come to cry that he shouldn’t be able to shoot me or whatever. I knew the risks, and that one time cost me an empty ship.
As it sits now, that prowler would cost more than its worth to gank. Why? Because I had the option to make myself a less viable target than another prowler or another br. It didn’t happen because I came on the forums
Lastly be proactive, not reactive…
3 Likes
The meaning of the mark
’Carebear’
has changed as the social context of eve has changed over 14 years
Was always an insult, but could be a friendly insult, like my friend calling me a SJW, but you could tell by context
Now so few ‘carebears’ (basically peeps who none pew pew) come to forums except those who want to whine about nerfing game to suit their perception of what their playstyle is (not PVP)
it is now a defacto insult. But it was not always thus.
Perhaps the carebear population can change the social context (meta) and ‘reclaim’ the word
as other negative slurs have been reclaimed in the past
I do not think this will happen because of a thread ‘the cost of suicide ganking is too low’ without any proof of low cost or discussion of cost or willingness on op’s part to engage in discussion beyond complaining and insulting-
Perhaps the growth of this kind of behaviour over the years has changed the meta that one cannot proudly carebear and be seen as actively engaging in the PVP sandbox by an evil space terrorist, so one calls names on the forums but without respect.
Also, not as a direct comment on your post or anyone’s but I am sure Irony used to be a thing on these forums? And a word could be taken to have more than one meaning and people made jokes and wound each other up
in a creative way
rather than just calling them trash.
TLDR:
Meta has changed meaning of eve specific cultural terms like ganker, pirate, carebear etc
Hypothesis- behaviour of some ‘self proclaimed’ carebears on these forums, those who THINK they don’t PVP, is major contributing factor to cultural change-
along with attendant domino effect as more players who ‘get the game’ get frustrated and start to troll back to what they perceive is trolling/pointless entitled whining (usually due to uncaring delivery of ‘care’ bear).
Jesus man. 10th grade science class. Do you understand what falsifiability means? Everything in science that is supported by evidence, also has outlines that would demonstrate that it isnt accurate.
In other words, there is evidence to support a claim, but you can also discover evidence that contradicts, and therefore falsifies the claim.
And again, proof doesnt exist in science. 10th grade science man, go back to it, cause i think you failed it.
1 Like
I hosted a Wardec discussion group last fall with some of the CSM, as did Jin’taan with gankers during last summer. There are also CSM representatives from the Imperium that have brought up points for ganking in the past two years. The CSM are aware of some of the issues and concerns, but from my understanding there aren’t any commitments by CCP to making changes or improvements to Highsec PVP as of now.
As for Salvos’s comment, I don’t think that everyone agrees Highsec needs more PVP.
2 Likes
Thanks Tox; I remember that, now that you mention it. It’s clearly a thorny issue, and I’ve said elsewhere that if CCP thought it urgent enough to do something (even put out a consultation paper), they’d have done it.
Tee hee…
2 Likes