CelticsStrong
Around the League => Around the NBA => Topic started by: Ed Hollison on February 17, 2017, 05:50:20 PM
-
Just read for yourself. Holy cow.
http://sports.yahoo.com/news/hey-everyone-just-so-you-know-kyrie-irving-believes-the-earth-is-flat-222937229.html
Somehow this gives me more hope that the Celtics can win the Eastern Conference this year.
-
I don't want to hear anything more about those mythical academic standards that make it harder for schools like Duke and Notre Dame to recruit all of the top players.
I have a cousin who went through a pretty dedicated LSD phase. He sounded a lot like that.
-
Wow, that is one bizarre read. He really believes it is flat and went off on a serious tangent. I wonder if he has some sort of disorder or he is experimenting with drugs. If we meet the Cavs in game 6 or 7 at the garden, everyone should wear Earth is Flat shirts.
-
With all of the time NBA athletes spend traveling, it's amazing that Kyrie has never looked out of an airplane window.
My uncle's a flat-earther. There's actually some (confirmation-bias-based) evidence based around the curvature of the landscape in zoomed out pictures. It's pretty compelling if you completely disregard common sense and/or believe that the moon landing was faked. Let's not even get started on the International conspiracy that is the ISS.
-
ha, as if this is out of place. in a survey of americans, 26 percentage said the sun goes around the earth.
people are amazing.
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2014/02/14/277058739/1-in-4-americans-think-the-sun-goes-around-the-earth-survey-says
-
With all of the time NBA athletes spend on planes, it's amazing that they don't look out the windows.
being up in an airplane does not really show the earth is round. one could, sillily, just conclude that the flat earth is a really big plate.
but let's face it. for many people evidence means less than pre-existing emotinoal beliefs.
-
Before reading the article, I assumed he meant it as a metaphor for not believing all we are fed by the government and authorities, in general. A 'question everything' sort-of mentality.
But, nope, Kyrie really believes that the earth is flat and he couldn't have been more clear about it. Interesting...very interesting.
-
With all of the time NBA athletes spend on planes, it's amazing that they don't look out the windows.
being up in an airplane does not really show the earth is round. one could, sillily, just conclude that the flat earth is a really big plate.
But it does
(https://thumbs.dreamstime.com/z/beautiful-cloud-sky-view-aeroplane-window-40182931.jpg)
-
Another sad reflection of a Duke education.
-
Wow. No wonder Lebron is pulling his hair and begging management for more help out there in Cleveland.
That article , those quote, legendary! This stuff will be up there with Iverson's practice rant for ages.
-
Wow. No wonder Lebron is pulling his hair and begging management for more help out there in Cleveland.
That article , those quote, legendary! This stuff will be up there with Iverson's practice rant for ages.
It reminds me of Carl Everett.
http://www.si.com/vault/2000/06/19/283243/mighty-mouth-a-man-of-many-strong-opinions-boston-centerfielder-carl-everett-speaks-loudly-and-carries-a-big-stick
-
Uncle Drew: the dementia is setting in.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8DnKOc6FISU
-
Another sad reflection of a Duke education.
you mean the one semester he went there
-
Only the finest education from our public school system.
-
Nets 2018 bradley clippers pick... and fillers.. max
-
Only the finest education from our public school system.
He went to private high school then Duke
-
I saw this, laughed a little, and moved on.
I do have one question though...
If the Earth is flat, what happens when you reach the edge? Can you fall off or does it just keep going and going forever? If it does keep going how could you conclude that it is flat?
Thankfully these questions don't need to be answered, but I would love it if someone asked him similar follow up questions. The response could be gold!
-
Given the ability of our ruling party to understand science, this is not surprising. It's the age of making up your own reality.
-
In addition to the pure ignorance being displayed here, consider the thousands of kids who look up to people like Irving that hear him sharing this nonsense. It perpetuates the erroneous opinion and contradicts critical thinking, which is all part of the dumbing down that this country is experiencing. It's appalling.
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
-
More proof that one doesn't have to have brain in order to be a star NBA player.
-
I think he's kidding and having fun at everyone's expense.
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
That's a dangerous perspective. Mainstream science is all about defending the belief system that this world and everything in it was created by accident, and that what humans can see as visual light is all there is.
-
I saw this, laughed a little, and moved on.
I do have one question though...
If the Earth is flat, what happens when you reach the edge? Can you fall off or does it just keep going and going forever? If it does keep going how could you conclude that it is flat?
Thankfully these questions don't need to be answered, but I would love it if someone asked him similar follow up questions. The response could be gold!
And how could people have flown and sailed around the earth if it were flat?
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
That's a dangerous perspective. Mainstream science is all about defending the belief system that this world and everything in it was created by accident, and that what humans can see as visual light is all there is.
This is dead opposite of what "mainstream" science actually supports. This kind of image usually starts popping up in textbooks around 4th grade or so:
(http://cdn.arstechnica.net/EM_spectrum.png)
-
Given the ability of our ruling party to understand science, this is not surprising. It's the age of making up your own reality.
The damage done to Kyrie happened LONG before our ruling party took office. Probably went back to Clinton (days) who "did not have sex with that woman".
-
More proof that one doesn't have to have brain in order to be a star NBA player.
Or even president of the United States for that matter....
-
I saw this, laughed a little, and moved on.
I do have one question though...
If the Earth is flat, what happens when you reach the edge? Can you fall off or does it just keep going and going forever? If it does keep going how could you conclude that it is flat?
Thankfully these questions don't need to be answered, but I would love it if someone asked him similar follow up questions. The response could be gold!
You can just ask if he believes it is the same star that rises and sets each morning and evening.
-
When hearing this a few days ago I thought it was a gag, and payed no attention to it.
I guess just because a guy can dribble, and shoot a basketball better than most in the world, doesn't make him a bright and intelligent person.
Now you know why teams that have several "star" players struggle to win consistently. Put 3 Kyrie's on a basketball club and they'll struggle to even find the exits. No wonder why Lebron wants additional help.
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
There's an objective truth. Respecting "alternative facts" doesn't make someone more tolerant. It often makes them ignorant or an enabler.
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
Right because being childish is better than being willfully ignorant. Both are lame.
-
Only the finest education from our public school system.
He went to private high school then Duke
He did not 'go' to Duke. He played at Duke.
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
That's a dangerous perspective. Mainstream science is all about defending the belief system that this world and everything in it was created by accident, and that what humans can see as visual light is all there is.
This is dead opposite of what "mainstream" science actually supports. This kind of image usually starts popping up in textbooks around 4th grade or so:
(http://cdn.arstechnica.net/EM_spectrum.png)
Ether.
-
When hearing this a few days ago I thought it was a gag, and payed no attention to it.
I guess just because a guy can dribble, and shoot a basketball better than most in the world, doesn't make him a bright and intelligent person.
Now you know why teams that have several "star" players struggle to win consistently. Put 3 Kyrie's on a basketball club and they'll struggle to even find the exits. No wonder why Lebron wants additional help.
Turns out it was just a gag. It wont stop people from showing how much they love to put down others though. I find that more interesting than anything.
-
I tried to start a thread about how it irks me that players always cite 'God' for their success. That bothers me, in the standard way, as a rational agnostic. I was just curious to test the vibe on CB, and I remember most comments were 'doesn't bother me' or 'leave guys' beliefs alone'
To me, flat-earthers and religious text adherents are cut from the same cloth. But At least flat-earthers don't use the belief to buttress their political dogma and other fraudulent objectives. It just goes to show how incredibly willing the human mind is to accept an interpretation of reality based on substantially less evidence than an alternative interpretation. The willingness scares me more than anything in the world - more than immense violence, poverty, and even my own death.
P.s Does Kyrie revolve around LeBron, or vice versa. Think about it man, like, whoa..
-
I tried to start a thread about how it irks me that players always cite 'God' for their success. That bothers me, in the standard way, as a rational agnostic. I was just curious to test the vibe on CB, and I remember most comments were 'doesn't bother me' or 'leave guys' beliefs alone'
To me, flat-earthers and religious text adherents are cut from the same cloth. But At least flat-earthers don't use the belief to buttress their political dogma and other fraudulent objectives. It just goes to show how incredibly willing the human mind is to accept an interpretation of reality based on substantially less evidence than an alternative interpretation. The willingness scares me more than anything in the world - more than immense violence, poverty, and even my own death.
P.s Does Kyrie revolve around LeBron, or vice versa. Think about it man, like, whoa..
Your gripes sound personal my man.
-
When hearing this a few days ago I thought it was a gag, and payed no attention to it.
I guess just because a guy can dribble, and shoot a basketball better than most in the world, doesn't make him a bright and intelligent person.
Now you know why teams that have several "star" players struggle to win consistently. Put 3 Kyrie's on a basketball club and they'll struggle to even find the exits. No wonder why Lebron wants additional help.
Turns out it was just a gag. It wont stop people from showing how much they love to put down others though. I find that more interesting than anything.
It wasn't a gag.
-
I tried to start a thread about how it irks me that players always cite 'God' for their success. That bothers me, in the standard way, as a rational agnostic. I was just curious to test the vibe on CB, and I remember most comments were 'doesn't bother me' or 'leave guys' beliefs alone'
To me, flat-earthers and religious text adherents are cut from the same cloth. But At least flat-earthers don't use the belief to buttress their political dogma and other fraudulent objectives. It just goes to show how incredibly willing the human mind is to accept an interpretation of reality based on substantially less evidence than an alternative interpretation. The willingness scares me more than anything in the world - more than immense violence, poverty, and even my own death.
P.s Does Kyrie revolve around LeBron, or vice versa. Think about it man, like, whoa..
Your disdain for religious people sounds more like a "you" problem than a "them" problem.
There are both intelligent and ignorant people of all beliefs, or lack thereof.
Kyrie apparently is an ignorant person. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it, or why you bothered to unnecessarily bring it up.
I'm wondering if you might be one of the ignorant people too, possibly intolerant as well.
-
I tried to start a thread about how it irks me that players always cite 'God' for their success. That bothers me, in the standard way, as a rational agnostic. I was just curious to test the vibe on CB, and I remember most comments were 'doesn't bother me' or 'leave guys' beliefs alone'
To me, flat-earthers and religious text adherents are cut from the same cloth. But At least flat-earthers don't use the belief to buttress their political dogma and other fraudulent objectives. It just goes to show how incredibly willing the human mind is to accept an interpretation of reality based on substantially less evidence than an alternative interpretation. The willingness scares me more than anything in the world - more than immense violence, poverty, and even my own death.
P.s Does Kyrie revolve around LeBron, or vice versa. Think about it man, like, whoa..
Your gripes sound personal my man.
Not quite sure what you mean... Erm.. All gripes are personal in that the gripe feeler is usually the one sounding off..
Unless you mean that it sounds like I don't like Kyrie, which is not true at all. He seems like a good dude.
But fundamentally, my gripe is conceptual - one of competing reasoning strategies - not personal.
-
I tried to start a thread about how it irks me that players always cite 'God' for their success. That bothers me, in the standard way, as a rational agnostic. I was just curious to test the vibe on CB, and I remember most comments were 'doesn't bother me' or 'leave guys' beliefs alone'
To me, flat-earthers and religious text adherents are cut from the same cloth. But At least flat-earthers don't use the belief to buttress their political dogma and other fraudulent objectives. It just goes to show how incredibly willing the human mind is to accept an interpretation of reality based on substantially less evidence than an alternative interpretation. The willingness scares me more than anything in the world - more than immense violence, poverty, and even my own death.
P.s Does Kyrie revolve around LeBron, or vice versa. Think about it man, like, whoa..
Your disdain for religious people sounds more like a "you" problem than a "them" problem.
There are both intelligent and ignorant people of all beliefs, or lack thereof.
Kyrie apparently is an ignorant person. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it, or why you bothered to unnecessarily bring it up.
I'm wondering if you might be one of the ignorant people too, possibly intolerant as well.
You've clearly misunderstood my point.
But since you bring it up, why is Kyrie 'ignorant' and Father O'Leary not. The basis for making a distinction is unclear to me.
-
I tried to start a thread about how it irks me that players always cite 'God' for their success. That bothers me, in the standard way, as a rational agnostic. I was just curious to test the vibe on CB, and I remember most comments were 'doesn't bother me' or 'leave guys' beliefs alone'
To me, flat-earthers and religious text adherents are cut from the same cloth. But At least flat-earthers don't use the belief to buttress their political dogma and other fraudulent objectives. It just goes to show how incredibly willing the human mind is to accept an interpretation of reality based on substantially less evidence than an alternative interpretation. The willingness scares me more than anything in the world - more than immense violence, poverty, and even my own death.
P.s Does Kyrie revolve around LeBron, or vice versa. Think about it man, like, whoa..
Your disdain for religious people sounds more like a "you" problem than a "them" problem.
There are both intelligent and ignorant people of all beliefs, or lack thereof.
Kyrie apparently is an ignorant person. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it, or why you bothered to unnecessarily bring it up.
I'm wondering if you might be one of the ignorant people too, possibly intolerant as well.
You've clearly misunderstood my point.
But since you bring it up, why is Kyrie 'ignorant' and Father O'Leary not. The basis for making a distinction is unclear to me.
I can see where this line of questioning is leading...straight to a locked thread.
-
I tried to start a thread about how it irks me that players always cite 'God' for their success. That bothers me, in the standard way, as a rational agnostic. I was just curious to test the vibe on CB, and I remember most comments were 'doesn't bother me' or 'leave guys' beliefs alone'
To me, flat-earthers and religious text adherents are cut from the same cloth. But At least flat-earthers don't use the belief to buttress their political dogma and other fraudulent objectives. It just goes to show how incredibly willing the human mind is to accept an interpretation of reality based on substantially less evidence than an alternative interpretation. The willingness scares me more than anything in the world - more than immense violence, poverty, and even my own death.
P.s Does Kyrie revolve around LeBron, or vice versa. Think about it man, like, whoa..
Your disdain for religious people sounds more like a "you" problem than a "them" problem.
There are both intelligent and ignorant people of all beliefs, or lack thereof.
Kyrie apparently is an ignorant person. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it, or why you bothered to unnecessarily bring it up.
I'm wondering if you might be one of the ignorant people too, possibly intolerant as well.
You've clearly misunderstood my point.
But since you bring it up, why is Kyrie 'ignorant' and Father O'Leary not. The basis for making a distinction is unclear to me.
Okay, fine, I've misunderstood your point. I take it you didn't actually mean to disparage religious people. My mistake.
I'm assuming "Father O'Leary" is a fictional person to prove a point here.
To answer your question, even if we assume there is no proof of any God or 'creation event', a lack of evidence does not disprove something. That is very different than there being actual, irrefutable evidence to disprove something (i.e. the Earth being flat). I would think someone who understands the scientific method could appreciate this distinction.
-
I tried to start a thread about how it irks me that players always cite 'God' for their success. That bothers me, in the standard way, as a rational agnostic. I was just curious to test the vibe on CB, and I remember most comments were 'doesn't bother me' or 'leave guys' beliefs alone'
To me, flat-earthers and religious text adherents are cut from the same cloth. But At least flat-earthers don't use the belief to buttress their political dogma and other fraudulent objectives. It just goes to show how incredibly willing the human mind is to accept an interpretation of reality based on substantially less evidence than an alternative interpretation. The willingness scares me more than anything in the world - more than immense violence, poverty, and even my own death.
P.s Does Kyrie revolve around LeBron, or vice versa. Think about it man, like, whoa..
Your disdain for religious people sounds more like a "you" problem than a "them" problem.
There are both intelligent and ignorant people of all beliefs, or lack thereof.
Kyrie apparently is an ignorant person. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it, or why you bothered to unnecessarily bring it up.
I'm wondering if you might be one of the ignorant people too, possibly intolerant as well.
You've clearly misunderstood my point.
But since you bring it up, why is Kyrie 'ignorant' and Father O'Leary not. The basis for making a distinction is unclear to me.
I can see where this line of questioning is leading...straight to a locked thread.
I was just wanting to talk reasoning strategies! Not God per se!
And if someone queries whether I'm ignorant or "intolerant" (whatever that means), I feel I have the right to inquire on what basis that suspicion was aroused..
-
It feels like Kyrie is trolling everyone. I can't imagine someone actually really believing the earth is flat at this point. It isn't an issue that has multiple supportable theories. We have already proven it. It isn't a conspiracy theory. I think Kyrie is quietly having a big laugh.
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
That is not quite true. First, because prevailing scientific beliefs have been proven wrong at times in history. There exist things we currently believe to be true that will likely be proven to not be fully true 100 years from now. At best, science is true to the extent that humans have shown capable of understanding at this moment.
While thinking the Earth is flat might be objectively false, thinking the Earth is a sphere might not be objectively true. It's just the best that we are capable of understanding it right now. It very well might be a hypersphere or some higher dimensional shape that we aren't capable of understanding.
-
I tried to start a thread about how it irks me that players always cite 'God' for their success. That bothers me, in the standard way, as a rational agnostic. I was just curious to test the vibe on CB, and I remember most comments were 'doesn't bother me' or 'leave guys' beliefs alone'
To me, flat-earthers and religious text adherents are cut from the same cloth. But At least flat-earthers don't use the belief to buttress their political dogma and other fraudulent objectives. It just goes to show how incredibly willing the human mind is to accept an interpretation of reality based on substantially less evidence than an alternative interpretation. The willingness scares me more than anything in the world - more than immense violence, poverty, and even my own death.
P.s Does Kyrie revolve around LeBron, or vice versa. Think about it man, like, whoa..
Your disdain for religious people sounds more like a "you" problem than a "them" problem.
There are both intelligent and ignorant people of all beliefs, or lack thereof.
Kyrie apparently is an ignorant person. I'm not sure what religion has to do with it, or why you bothered to unnecessarily bring it up.
I'm wondering if you might be one of the ignorant people too, possibly intolerant as well.
You've clearly misunderstood my point.
But since you bring it up, why is Kyrie 'ignorant' and Father O'Leary not. The basis for making a distinction is unclear to me.
Okay, fine, I've misunderstood your point. I take it you didn't actually mean to disparage religious people. My mistake.
I'm assuming "Father O'Leary" is a fictional person to prove a point here.
To answer your question, even if we assume there is no proof of any God or 'creation event', a lack of evidence does not disprove something. That is very different than there being actual, irrefutable evidence to disprove something (i.e. the Earth being flat). I would think someone who understands the scientific method could appreciate this distinction.
Relieved that we are back to normal conversation.
Yes, absolutely meant no disrespect to the (probably hundreds!) of wonderful Father O'Learys out in the world!
Your point about reasoning is quite valid, but I wasn't talking about God. I was talking about adherence to religious texts' assumed authority on the matter (which is 99.999% of the world's religious adherent's primary basis for a belief in whichever God they've been dealt, or on the rarer occasions, chosen).
These are dogmatic notions of God, which precisely like the earth's shape, can be very easily debunked by the simplest of scientific enquiry.
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
That is not quite true. First, because prevailing scientific beliefs have been proven wrong at times in history. There exist things we currently believe to be true that will likely be proven to not be fully true 100 years from now. At best, science is true to the extent that humans have shown capable of understanding at this moment.
While thinking the Earth is flat might be objectively false, thinking the Earth is a sphere might not be objectively true. It's just the best that we are capable of understanding it right now. It very well might be a hypersphere or some higher dimensional shape that we aren't capable of understanding.
What do you mean by 'prevailing scientific beliefs' (setting aside for a moment that science requires no belief, rather it is a demonstration). One gets the sense that pythagoras' theorem will not be getting debunked anytime soon.
Have you got any good examples? I don't mean to sound dismissive by the way, genuinely curious and in search of bar chat.
-
When hearing this a few days ago I thought it was a gag, and payed no attention to it.
I guess just because a guy can dribble, and shoot a basketball better than most in the world, doesn't make him a bright and intelligent person.
Now you know why teams that have several "star" players struggle to win consistently. Put 3 Kyrie's on a basketball club and they'll struggle to even find the exits. No wonder why Lebron wants additional help.
Turns out it was just a gag. It wont stop people from showing how much they love to put down others though. I find that more interesting than anything.
It wasn't a gag.
I don't think you can say that categorically from his clarifying comments.
Kyrie's point about the media is a good one though: War in Yemen? No Cleveland's Point Guard just said something about Chemtrails!!
Although I just read an article that argued that that line was dishonest..
-
It feels like Kyrie is trolling everyone. I can't imagine someone actually really believing the earth is flat at this point. It isn't an issue that has multiple supportable theories. We have already proven it. It isn't a conspiracy theory. I think Kyrie is quietly having a big laugh.
I couldn't imagine we'd have a president that cites InfoWars as an authority on news, and yet here we are.
-
When hearing this a few days ago I thought it was a gag, and payed no attention to it.
I guess just because a guy can dribble, and shoot a basketball better than most in the world, doesn't make him a bright and intelligent person.
Now you know why teams that have several "star" players struggle to win consistently. Put 3 Kyrie's on a basketball club and they'll struggle to even find the exits. No wonder why Lebron wants additional help.
Turns out it was just a gag. It wont stop people from showing how much they love to put down others though. I find that more interesting than anything.
It wasn't a gag.
I don't think you can say that categorically from his clarifying comments.
Kyrie's point about the media is a good one though: War in Yemen? No Cleveland's Point Guard just said something about Chemtrails!!
Although I just read an article that argued that that line was dishonest..
I don't think it was a gag, since he followed it up in a subsequent with:
'"I think people should do their own research, man," Irving told ESPN. "Hopefully they'll either back my belief or they'll throw it in the water. But I think it's interesting for people to find out on their own.
"I've seen a lot of things that my educational system has said that was real that turned out to be completely fake. I don't mind going against the grain in terms of my thoughts."
-
I saw this, laughed a little, and moved on.
I do have one question though...
If the Earth is flat, what happens when you reach the edge? Can you fall off or does it just keep going and going forever? If it does keep going how could you conclude that it is flat?
Thankfully these questions don't need to be answered, but I would love it if someone asked him similar follow up questions. The response could be gold!
Apparently, we could fall off, but a combination of a 150 foot Antarctic ice wall and NASA monitors.
-
When hearing this a few days ago I thought it was a gag, and payed no attention to it.
I guess just because a guy can dribble, and shoot a basketball better than most in the world, doesn't make him a bright and intelligent person.
Now you know why teams that have several "star" players struggle to win consistently. Put 3 Kyrie's on a basketball club and they'll struggle to even find the exits. No wonder why Lebron wants additional help.
Turns out it was just a gag. It wont stop people from showing how much they love to put down others though. I find that more interesting than anything.
It wasn't a gag.
I don't think you can say that categorically from his clarifying comments.
Kyrie's point about the media is a good one though: War in Yemen? No Cleveland's Point Guard just said something about Chemtrails!!
Although I just read an article that argued that that line was dishonest..
I don't think it was a gag, since he followed it up in a subsequent with:
'"I think people should do their own research, man," Irving told ESPN. "Hopefully they'll either back my belief or they'll throw it in the water. But I think it's interesting for people to find out on their own.
"I've seen a lot of things that my educational system has said that was real that turned out to be completely fake. I don't mind going against the grain in terms of my thoughts."
Dray and Lebron backing him up makes me think this must some a little joke the all-stars have.
-
When hearing this a few days ago I thought it was a gag, and payed no attention to it.
I guess just because a guy can dribble, and shoot a basketball better than most in the world, doesn't make him a bright and intelligent person.
Now you know why teams that have several "star" players struggle to win consistently. Put 3 Kyrie's on a basketball club and they'll struggle to even find the exits. No wonder why Lebron wants additional help.
Turns out it was just a gag. It wont stop people from showing how much they love to put down others though. I find that more interesting than anything.
It wasn't a gag.
I don't think you can say that categorically from his clarifying comments.
Kyrie's point about the media is a good one though: War in Yemen? No Cleveland's Point Guard just said something about Chemtrails!!
Although I just read an article that argued that that line was dishonest..
I don't think it was a gag, since he followed it up in a subsequent with:
'"I think people should do their own research, man," Irving told ESPN. "Hopefully they'll either back my belief or they'll throw it in the water. But I think it's interesting for people to find out on their own.
"I've seen a lot of things that my educational system has said that was real that turned out to be completely fake. I don't mind going against the grain in terms of my thoughts."
Dray and Lebron backing him up makes me think this must some a little joke the all-stars have.
I think it's the case of a well-regarded player saying something really dumb, and his friends standing up for him.
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
That is not quite true. First, because prevailing scientific beliefs have been proven wrong at times in history. There exist things we currently believe to be true that will likely be proven to not be fully true 100 years from now. At best, science is true to the extent that humans have shown capable of understanding at this moment.
While thinking the Earth is flat might be objectively false, thinking the Earth is a sphere might not be objectively true. It's just the best that we are capable of understanding it right now. It very well might be a hypersphere or some higher dimensional shape that we aren't capable of understanding.
What do you mean by 'prevailing scientific beliefs' (setting aside for a moment that science requires no belief, rather it is a demonstration). One gets the sense that pythagoras' theorem will not be getting debunked anytime soon.
Have you got any good examples? I don't mean to sound dismissive by the way, genuinely curious and in search of bar chat.
Examples would be like the geocentric theory and the idea that planets traveled in circles rather than ellipses which were considered scientific "truths" until Kepler and Copernicus proved otherwise. We have scientists at CERN that could possibly be close (within decades at least) of finding holes in Einstein's relatively.
-
I wonder what shape Derrick Rose thinks the earth is.
-
That is not quite true. First, because prevailing scientific beliefs have been proven wrong at times in history. There exist things we currently believe to be true that will likely be proven to not be fully true 100 years from now. At best, science is true to the extent that humans have shown capable of understanding at this moment.
While thinking the Earth is flat might be objectively false, thinking the Earth is a sphere might not be objectively true. It's just the best that we are capable of understanding it right now. It very well might be a hypersphere or some higher dimensional shape that we aren't capable of understanding.
Then how do you account for those who have seen earth from space.
https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_329.html
Keep talking please, I need a good laugh. I get the jist of what your saying but science is not wrong in this case. We understand it just fine. Why defend lunacy?
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
That is not quite true. First, because prevailing scientific beliefs have been proven wrong at times in history. There exist things we currently believe to be true that will likely be proven to not be fully true 100 years from now. At best, science is true to the extent that humans have shown capable of understanding at this moment.
While thinking the Earth is flat might be objectively false, thinking the Earth is a sphere might not be objectively true. It's just the best that we are capable of understanding it right now. It very well might be a hypersphere or some higher dimensional shape that we aren't capable of understanding.
What do you mean by 'prevailing scientific beliefs' (setting aside for a moment that science requires no belief, rather it is a demonstration). One gets the sense that pythagoras' theorem will not be getting debunked anytime soon.
Have you got any good examples? I don't mean to sound dismissive by the way, genuinely curious and in search of bar chat.
Examples would be like the geocentric theory and the idea that planets traveled in circles rather than ellipses which were considered scientific "truths" until Kepler and Copernicus proved otherwise. We have scientists at CERN that could possibly be close (within decades at least) of finding holes in Einstein's relatively.
I think this is a slight strawman. You are claiming that there have been scientific "truths" debunked, but there really havent. That is a non-scientist conception. Science doesnt yield "truths," it yields "most likely theories based on current available evidence with likelihood of the validity of the theory depending on strength fo evidence and subject to refinement in the future."
I mean, Newton didnt discover "truths." He formulated theories that are, and have been, highly reproducible. Those theories for how the universe works have been refined, frequently. So have einstein's, and they continue to be. But they arent "truths" that are now "wrong." Its not like structures built based on newtonian physics suddenly collapsed when einstein formulated his theories. Just refinement, constantly, with each new generation.
Same for your planetary example. Its not like scientists are like "sun around earth. Done, end of discussion." Then "eartg around sun in circles. Done. End of discussion." Its more like "here are the observations i have made, here is the math i went through, these observations i think would be explained by the earth orbiting the sun in a circle." Then someone else syaing "well if the earth orbited the sun in a circle, we'd expect to see v, w, x, but im seeing w, x, y, which would be better explained by a slighy elliptical orbit."
-
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
That is not quite true. First, because prevailing scientific beliefs have been proven wrong at times in history. There exist things we currently believe to be true that will likely be proven to not be fully true 100 years from now. At best, science is true to the extent that humans have shown capable of understanding at this moment.
While thinking the Earth is flat might be objectively false, thinking the Earth is a sphere might not be objectively true. It's just the best that we are capable of understanding it right now. It very well might be a hypersphere or some higher dimensional shape that we aren't capable of understanding.
What do you mean by 'prevailing scientific beliefs' (setting aside for a moment that science requires no belief, rather it is a demonstration). One gets the sense that pythagoras' theorem will not be getting debunked anytime soon.
Have you got any good examples? I don't mean to sound dismissive by the way, genuinely curious and in search of bar chat.
Examples would be like the geocentric theory and the idea that planets traveled in circles rather than ellipses which were considered scientific "truths" until Kepler and Copernicus proved otherwise. We have scientists at CERN that could possibly be close (within decades at least) of finding holes in Einstein's relatively.
I think this is a slight strawman. You are claiming that there have been scientific "truths" debunked, but there really havent. That is a non-scientist conception. Science doesnt yield "truths," it yields "most likely theories based on current available evidence with likelihood of the validity of the theory depending on strength fo evidence and subject to refinement in the future."
I mean, Newton didnt discover "truths." He formulated theories that are, and have been, highly reproducible. Those theories for how the universe works have been refined, frequently. So have einstein's, and they continue to be. But they arent "truths" that are now "wrong." Its not like structures built based on newtonian physics suddenly collapsed when einstein formulated his theories. Just refinement, constantly, with each new generation.
Same for your planetary example. Its not like scientists are like "sun around earth. Done, end of discussion." Then "eartg around sun in circles. Done. End of discussion." Its more like "here are the observations i have made, here is the math i went through, these observations i think would be explained by the earth orbiting the sun in a circle." Then someone else syaing "well if the earth orbited the sun in a circle, we'd expect to see v, w, x, but im seeing w, x, y, which would be better explained by a slighy elliptical orbit."
And furthermore, as the theory gets more "reproducable", the confidence with which one can say they are getting closer to a truth can grow ever so slightly with each refinement of how the theory interacts with different and unexpected envrionments.
-
It feels like Kyrie is trolling everyone. I can't imagine someone actually really believing the earth is flat at this point. It isn't an issue that has multiple supportable theories. We have already proven it. It isn't a conspiracy theory. I think Kyrie is quietly having a big laugh.
Yeah I read the articles and like Edited. Profanity and masked profanity are against forum rules and may result in discipline., but then I actually heard him talking about later and it seems like he is trolling pretty hard to make a point about not believing everything you read and hear. That you should do your own investigation, etc. And you may be thinking, well why not just say that and the answer is because if he said that it wouldn't have been news all over the place, like this is.
-
That is not quite true. First, because prevailing scientific beliefs have been proven wrong at times in history. There exist things we currently believe to be true that will likely be proven to not be fully true 100 years from now. At best, science is true to the extent that humans have shown capable of understanding at this moment.
While thinking the Earth is flat might be objectively false, thinking the Earth is a sphere might not be objectively true. It's just the best that we are capable of understanding it right now. It very well might be a hypersphere or some higher dimensional shape that we aren't capable of understanding.
Then how do you account for those who have seen earth from space.
https://www.nasa.gov/multimedia/imagegallery/image_feature_329.html
Keep talking please, I need a good laugh. I get the jist of what your saying but science is not wrong in this case. We understand it just fine. Why defend lunacy?
I'm not defending him; I said that "the earth is flat is objectively false" (I really shouldn't have included the "might" in there, it is false).
How do I account for Earth not being a sphere while people have seen it as a sphere from space? Easy. Imagine someone who lives in a 2-D world (a plane) and a cube comes stumbling through their world. What do they perceive the figure being in their 2-D world? A square. We can only perceive things in 3 dimensions where in reality we might be living in a higher dimensional universe. Similarly, while we might see Earth as a sphere, it might truly be a higher dimensional figure we are incapable of understanding.
----
the only thing appalling here is that most of you need to ridicule others beliefs to validate your own "intelligence." Another sad showing of programmed minds here on CB.
But I wil say - the whole flat earth theory is puzzling. I just don't know who would benefit from lying about the earth being round. But if that is Kyries truth I respect that, and him as well for voicing it when he probably knows [dang] well this is the type of reaction he would receive.
One of the best attributes of science is that it's true whether you believe in it or not.
That is not quite true. First, because prevailing scientific beliefs have been proven wrong at times in history. There exist things we currently believe to be true that will likely be proven to not be fully true 100 years from now. At best, science is true to the extent that humans have shown capable of understanding at this moment.
While thinking the Earth is flat might be objectively false, thinking the Earth is a sphere might not be objectively true. It's just the best that we are capable of understanding it right now. It very well might be a hypersphere or some higher dimensional shape that we aren't capable of understanding.
What do you mean by 'prevailing scientific beliefs' (setting aside for a moment that science requires no belief, rather it is a demonstration). One gets the sense that pythagoras' theorem will not be getting debunked anytime soon.
Have you got any good examples? I don't mean to sound dismissive by the way, genuinely curious and in search of bar chat.
Examples would be like the geocentric theory and the idea that planets traveled in circles rather than ellipses which were considered scientific "truths" until Kepler and Copernicus proved otherwise. We have scientists at CERN that could possibly be close (within decades at least) of finding holes in Einstein's relatively.
I think this is a slight strawman. You are claiming that there have been scientific "truths" debunked, but there really havent. That is a non-scientist conception. Science doesnt yield "truths," it yields "most likely theories based on current available evidence with likelihood of the validity of the theory depending on strength fo evidence and subject to refinement in the future."
I mean, Newton didnt discover "truths." He formulated theories that are, and have been, highly reproducible. Those theories for how the universe works have been refined, frequently. So have einstein's, and they continue to be. But they arent "truths" that are now "wrong." Its not like structures built based on newtonian physics suddenly collapsed when einstein formulated his theories. Just refinement, constantly, with each new generation.
Same for your planetary example. Its not like scientists are like "sun around earth. Done, end of discussion." Then "eartg around sun in circles. Done. End of discussion." Its more like "here are the observations i have made, here is the math i went through, these observations i think would be explained by the earth orbiting the sun in a circle." Then someone else syaing "well if the earth orbited the sun in a circle, we'd expect to see v, w, x, but im seeing w, x, y, which would be better explained by a slighy elliptical orbit."
I agree with you here. Which I think goes back in support of my original argument, which is that "science being true whether you believe in it or not" is not quite true. Now I'm interpreting the word true as referring to absolute truth. I take it that you're referring the word true as in "true to the best of our understanding"? Maybe I'm just being nitpicky about my interpretation of the meaning of the word, but there is a distinction and I think one who considers science to yield absolute truths would be wrong.
-
Really great to hear Kyrie recognize that his flat earth nonsense was making teacher's lives more difficult.
100 TPs to Kyrie for admitting he got caught up in troll-culture/goop/conspiracy
-
Just saw that. Good for Kyrie
-
Found this one on /r/nba
https://cdn-b-east.streamable.com/video/mp4/4jmh3.mp4?token=2amSPx06D07x2QHOC47QDA&expires=1538481238
He "apologizes", but only because "he should not come out and say this stuff, this is just for intimate conversations".