Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
76 online now:
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,147 Year: 4,259/6,534 Month: 473/900 Week: 179/150 Day: 25/8 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   A test of your common sense
Panda
Member (Idle past 2946 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 31 of 137 (665788)
06-17-2012 5:41 PM


We can be an awkward bunch of contrary bastards when we put our minds to it, can't we!

CRYSTALS!!

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 2524 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 32 of 137 (665789)
06-17-2012 7:01 PM
Reply to: Message 27 by Tangle
06-17-2012 2:40 PM


Tangle writes:

Um, what has common sense got to do with it?


It's got everything to do with it. This is an evolution vs creation debate forum. On the one side, we have honest to god scientists saying one thing and we have ordinary people saying another, using their common sense to try to stump scientists.

I'm an engineer. I see people's misconceptions all the time. Just look at any home-made project and you'll see what I mean.

I'm trying to point out that creationist usage of common sense for their argument is not only flawed in the EvC debate, it's also flawed in other areas as well.

It's an engineering question using engineering language.

Since when has this stopped christians from inserting their common sense into these things?

I've actually been hoping to see some creationists try to use common sense to solve this simple problem. After all, it hasn't stopped them from making arguments in biology, physics, geology, etc. using their common sense.

So, by looking at it, what does your feeling tell you about the point(s) of failure?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 27 by Tangle, posted 06-17-2012 2:40 PM Tangle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by jar, posted 06-17-2012 7:28 PM Taz has taken no action
 Message 34 by Tangle, posted 06-18-2012 4:15 AM Taz has taken no action

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


Message 33 of 137 (665791)
06-17-2012 7:28 PM
Reply to: Message 32 by Taz
06-17-2012 7:01 PM


So, by looking at it, what does your feeling tell you about the point(s) of failure?

Absolutely nothing. The drawing is without meaning and contains far too many ambiguities to give even a hint about the failure mode.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Taz, posted 06-17-2012 7:01 PM Taz has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by Heathen, posted 06-18-2012 10:45 AM jar has replied

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 8485
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.5


Message 34 of 137 (665808)
06-18-2012 4:15 AM
Reply to: Message 32 by Taz
06-17-2012 7:01 PM


Taz writes:

So, by looking at it, what does your feeling tell you about the point(s) of failure?

You mean look at it but don't think about it? I really don't have that kind of talent.


Life, don't talk to me about life - Marvin the Paranoid Android

This message is a reply to:
 Message 32 by Taz, posted 06-17-2012 7:01 PM Taz has taken no action

  
Jon
Inactive Member


Message 35 of 137 (665813)
06-18-2012 7:52 AM


Like the spaghetti noodle, it will just break at two random-ass points that have nothing to do with where the forces are being applied.

Love your enemies!

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 516 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


(1)
Message 36 of 137 (665814)
06-18-2012 9:10 AM


Just to jump in here.
I'm a structural/stress engineer and deal with this kind of problem regularly.
For clarity (and correct me if I'm wrong here Taz)
The triangle at point A represents a "Simple Support" [edit: a simple support allows rotation but not translation] and the circle at point B represent a support that allows a horizontal translation and prevents vertical translation [edit: and allows rotation].

The material of the beam is irrelevant to answer the question. It will not slip through the supports as it is attached to them.
As the magnitude of the load is not specified, the question is fine as there will be "A" load at which the beam "fails"

as a hint, hold your pen at the edge of the table with your thumb holding the top of the pen down and the rest of the pen hanging over the edge (in kind of a "walk the plank" style).

Push down on the free end on the pen.

Now, assuming that you had enough downforce to resist, (i.e. simulate the fixity) the end of the pen at the table wouldn't move.

Where is this pen likely to break?
where will it experience the highest stress?

Edited by Heathen, : No reason given.

Edited by Heathen, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by RAZD, posted 06-19-2012 9:05 PM Heathen has replied

  
Bolder-dash
Member (Idle past 2863 days)
Posts: 983
From: China
Joined: 11-14-2009


(1)
Message 37 of 137 (665816)
06-18-2012 10:08 AM


Here is what is actually happening:

Taz has jumped the shark, and wants to now point out how lacking in common sense scientists can be, by:

A. Making a drawing that is poorly concocted and lacking in important details.

b. Asking people to ignore all of the unexplained variables in the drawing, such as why he chose to support it with a triangle and a sphere, which may or may not be anchored.

c. Refusing to acknowledge that all of his sloppy details are relevant to the findings.

d. Badgering those who call him to task on the merit of his question.

You see, taz has had an epiphany. He woke up one day and realized that scientists are fools. And so he devised this little thought experiment to show you just how little common sense he has-and see if you all get the irony. That all of you scientists can't get that he is making fun of himself, makes his point all the more theatrical and clever. I get it, I get it.


Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by Heathen, posted 06-18-2012 10:50 AM Bolder-dash has taken no action

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 516 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


Message 38 of 137 (665820)
06-18-2012 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 33 by jar
06-17-2012 7:28 PM


the drawing is pretty clear,
but then again I'm familiar with that type of diagram.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by jar, posted 06-17-2012 7:28 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 40 by jar, posted 06-18-2012 11:02 AM Heathen has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 516 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


(2)
Message 39 of 137 (665821)
06-18-2012 10:50 AM
Reply to: Message 37 by Bolder-dash
06-18-2012 10:08 AM


Au Contraire...

He has perfectly shown how people with little or no knowledge of the subject at hand still feel they can wade in and point out what they see to be deficiencies in the diagram and therefore dismiss the question as nonsense.
When in fact to someone who knows the subject matter, the diagram is clear, consise and as has been shown in this thread, makes the point that Taz wanted to make quite well.

Edited by Heathen, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Bolder-dash, posted 06-18-2012 10:08 AM Bolder-dash has taken no action

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 40 of 137 (665823)
06-18-2012 11:02 AM
Reply to: Message 38 by Heathen
06-18-2012 10:45 AM


The drawing is not clear. Look at the left portion where the triangle and beam are superimposed. Is it a truncated polygon with a flat surface at the top supporting the beam or is it a triangle with a beam that is angled at the left most edge?

How does "this example represents normal everyday thing that most people deal with"?

Again, what is the point is Taz trying to make?


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by Heathen, posted 06-18-2012 10:45 AM Heathen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 41 by Heathen, posted 06-18-2012 11:13 AM jar has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 516 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


(2)
Message 41 of 137 (665826)
06-18-2012 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 40 by jar
06-18-2012 11:02 AM


To me, he is pointing out how people with little knowledge of a particular subject, apply their own "Common Sense" and, simply because they do not understand the subject/problem/question, declare it a nonsense.

precisely what you have done.

As a structural engineer, that triangle, in that location, in that context, can mean only one thing.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 40 by jar, posted 06-18-2012 11:02 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 42 by jar, posted 06-18-2012 11:19 AM Heathen has replied
 Message 45 by ringo, posted 06-18-2012 12:12 PM Heathen has taken no action

  
jar
Member
Posts: 33891
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 42 of 137 (665827)
06-18-2012 11:19 AM
Reply to: Message 41 by Heathen
06-18-2012 11:13 AM


But is it a triangle as shown.

As a one time technical writer who worked closely with draftsmen, that drawing would have simply not passed muster. As a "back of the napkin sketch" it would have elicited questions.

I have not declared it nonsense, but simply asked for clarification.

Taz claimed: "I'd argue that this example represents normal everyday thing that most people deal with."

I still wait for clarification.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Heathen, posted 06-18-2012 11:13 AM Heathen has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Heathen, posted 06-18-2012 11:30 AM jar has replied

  
Heathen
Member (Idle past 516 days)
Posts: 1067
From: Brizzle
Joined: 09-20-2005


(2)
Message 43 of 137 (665829)
06-18-2012 11:30 AM
Reply to: Message 42 by jar
06-18-2012 11:19 AM


As a structural engineer, that triangle, in that location, in that context, can mean only one thing.

It's clear that it's a consequesnce of MS word or whatever he created the sketch in that the beam does not rest on the point of the triangle.
the meaning is clear.
I have seen worse sketches in calculation files for major civil airliners.
A sketch is just that, a sketch. when supported by numbers or the appropriate knowledge it's meaning is clear.

You said in message 33 that

The drawing is without meaning

Pretty close to declaring it a nonsense.

It does indeed REPRESENT an every day thing that most people deal with.
Everytime you cross a bridge, sit on a bench, walk up stairs, Put your coffee on the table, (I could go on... and on), you are dealing, directly, without knowing it with similar problems/situations to the one REPRESENTED in this diagram.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by jar, posted 06-18-2012 11:19 AM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 46 by jar, posted 06-18-2012 12:15 PM Heathen has replied

  
Taz
Member (Idle past 2524 days)
Posts: 5069
From: Zerus
Joined: 07-18-2006


Message 44 of 137 (665833)
06-18-2012 11:58 AM


Haha, I find it amusing how dense some of you guys are. Yeah, took me about 30 seconds to make that drawing with paint. Didn't think I'd deal with a bunch of engineer wannabes who think real world sketches look like text book problems.

Replies to this message:
 Message 78 by Dr Adequate, posted 06-20-2012 7:05 AM Taz has taken no action

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 19521
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.8


(1)
Message 45 of 137 (665835)
06-18-2012 12:12 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Heathen
06-18-2012 11:13 AM


Heathen writes:

To me, he is pointing out how people with little knowledge of a particular subject, apply their own "Common Sense" and, simply because they do not understand the subject/problem/question, declare it a nonsense.


Whatever his intention, what he is underlining is the fact that some people, even if they are brilliant scientists or engineers, are incapable of expressing themselves in English. Neither common sense nor technical expertise are of any value if the problem isn't stated clearly.

That is, indeed, one of the major problems in the creation/evolution debate.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Heathen, posted 06-18-2012 11:13 AM Heathen has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 47 by Taz, posted 06-18-2012 12:23 PM ringo has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022