Chris_R

True to an extent, I can understand a study without re-doing the maths. I read a lot of science that I appreciate the outcome of but haven't walked their path to get there so don't fully, truly understand it but I can cosmetically understand it when the concepts are explained to me.. But to dispute it, you do need to become pretty close to (or even greater than) the equal of the person who wrote it and it course that can be done by a lay person in any field. You do need to re-do their maths, find errors in their methodology, have your own work challenging the outcome peer reviewed by the community and come out intact. You can't just go "nah, I don't think it works like that" - at least not with an ounce of credibility. Of course that can be your starting point for investigation, but you've got to put in the hard yards to validate that opinion and you should do so with an open mind, that if your own work vindicates the original and you can find no error in your own work, you adopt that original outcome as your default standpoint too. Anyway, enough from me.

That's like saying neuroscience or car mechanics or plumbing or electrics is open for debate by the general public - it isn't Every professional discipline is 'gatekept' by the study, work, and understanding of the experts and we have to accept that. Doesn't matter if you like it or not. I don't tell my plumber I disagree with how he's going to do the work unless I've got a fucking good reason, certainly not that I just don't believe in pipes. He's the expert.

Science frequently changes it's standpoint based on new discoveries or experiments, but can only be disproven by better science, not by opinion. Do better science and get back to me.

If you read the Bible you'd know God killed 2,821,364 people, numbered in the bible, excluding events not numbered like the flood, Soddom and Gomorrah etc so the real total was much higher. https://dwindlinginunbelief.blogspot.com/2010/04/drunk-with-blood-gods-killings-in-bible.html?m=1 Satan killed just 10 - the seven sons and three daughters of Job, and God only allowed it as part of a bet. Maybe you've picked the wrong side?

I repeat: I've researched this academically. I can do the maths. I've studied this. You don't get to "not believe" science (at least not without ridicule) unless you can offer up better science to disprove it. Until you can, the scientific consensus is what I posted. Not just from my research, but that of countless others. Science isn't up for debate - Disprove it or accept it if you want to be taken seriously. As for a flat earth, fuck my life. We've literally been into space and flown round it. You can live stream the ISS camera feeds right now. I work in aviation now, look up great circles. Just no.

Oh my fucking god. I'll absolutely judge you. Sorry I can't debate anything with you anymore, I'm out. You're clearly either a troll, or completely incapable of rational thought and discourse. Have a nice day.

Of course you can't disprove me, because I can literally prove the big bang happened. I can do the maths. I can talk you through any aspect you disagree with. I've actually researched this as part of my physics degree. You've picked the wrong example I'm afraid. The big bang happened. It happened 13.8 billion years ago. We can even still hear it (Google Penzias and Wilson). It is beyond any scientific doubt. All you can possibly argue is "well maybe God started it?" but that's genuinely all you've got.

There is an absolute mountain of evidence for the big bang. I did my dissertation on it. Come at me. Red shifts, cosmic microwave background radiation. Inflation theory. There's been mountains of science done on it, each validating the previous work. If you want to dispute the big bang, do you own science to disprove it, don't just yell "indoctrination" like some tin-hat wearing loon.

That's in his book, so it only applies to him. I don't have to live by someone else's made up nonsense.

Well, yes. If he believes an entirely fictitious magic sky man from an ancient fairytale has told him to deny actual, real human beings their fundamental rights then yes, he can and absolutely should be judged on this. In my opinion it reflects poorly on him as a human being on several levels, and whilst he's free to have his opinions, I'm equally free to judge him on them. In return, of course you're all free to judge me on that. Edit: I've just read he didn't refuse to wear the armband, just wrote something secular on it. So maybe he doesn't want to deny anyone any rights at all, I don't know. But my point stands that everyone has the right to judge the actions of everyone else, that's the consequence of using your right to free speech to say it do something negative.

Absolutely. But they should be judged on that stance. Freedom of speech is not freedom from consequences.

This country voted for Brexit. America has just voted in Trump, for a second time. We gave the Tories 14 years. Forgive me for not giving a shit what a poll says.

Absolutely embarrassing lack of fret. Desperately need to sort this out because it's becoming regular.

Love Howe so I'm a long long way from calling for anything drastic but I've absolutely no interest in watching us play like this. Absolute waste of an afternoon. Think I'll watch the snooker instead.

I mean they're probably right, buying a £40m+ striker would definitely help them. All they've got to do now is identify him, find over £40m, meet his wage demands and convince him to spend the best years of his career at a backwards, racist village full of Tommy Robinson loving Neanderthals. Oh and they can't sign him until January. Aside from that it's a masterplan.

For me it's at least as much about what he can create for others. We've looked our best in previous seasons when he's been allowed to get further forward. But I'll agree to disagree, we've both made our points so I'll leave it there.

Yes but it isn't working. If we were banging the goals in then fair enough, but we're not. Something fundamental needs to change further up the pitch because we're toothless. We're one of the lowest scoring sides in the league.

He plays way deeper now. Here's his heat map from last night... I wanted to find the same one for West Ham 2 seasons ago but he didn't play that match. so I've found Chelsea at home which was around the same time of year 2 years ago instead... Much higher up. That's where he used to play all the time, mainly in the opposition half rather than mainly in our half getting the ball off the central defenders all the time. Because where he is now, all he's doing is passing it to Joelinton or Longstaff who then immediately lose it. He barely ever has a shot these days unless it's a long-range hit and hope borne out of frustration. You never see him in the box. Remember vs Leicester, him scoring a header from a cross? Just never happens now. In fact here's the heatmap from that Leicester game, barely ever in his own half: Look at his goals highlights from that season, he's never in those positions anymore. It's stifling us.

He doesn't have to be a 10 just to not be a 4. Who do you think our "10" is now? We don't have one. We have a 4 in Bruno (Or a 6 if you're younger, maybe) and two central midfielders ahead of him. I'm not proposing he plays just behind the striker, I'm suggesting he simply swaps with one of the other 2 immediately ahead of him.

As I say, I don't care. I don't want Bruno there any longer though.

This. I'm sick of seeing us play Bruno, our most creative player, as a defensive midfielder whilst Sean Longstaff, who is the polar opposite, is further forward. Joelinton too. I've no idea if Longstaff or Big Joe can play as a DM, and tbh I don't really care. But I don't want Bruno there any longer. Our best times under Howe - the season and a half after he joined - had Bruno further up the field weighing in with goals and assists. We need that back.

4-4-fucking-2?

Sick of seeing Bruno at DM, I'm desperate for him to play a bit further up the pitch where his passing will help unlock teams and he can get shots in. Just seems wasted where he is.

Not willing to write someone off so quickly but seems to have been a rancid, insipid display from him tonight. Needs to be a lot better than this if he's to offer anything at all going forward.

Yeah we will. 2nd half we have to shoot up hill.