Says the random "commenter" to the Neurologist.

@Benthoven Your appeal to authority is laughable.

As is your certainty in your ignorance. I'm not "appealing" to authority. If something is right it's right. Yet EVERYTHING you said was wrong, but sure are certain in your ignorance.

An appeal to authority is an attempt to make bad science look good by appending some sort of "study," or piece of data. That’s vastly different than deferring to authority, or respecting authority, and the ways these people have dedicated their lives to a particular subject. To assume at any level that you’re somehow more knowledgeable an any subject than someone who has dedicated their lives to that subject is hubris at its worst, and profoundly arrogant.

@Benthoven Well pardon me for disagreeing and please toss you vapid tautologies and insipid ad homeniums elsewhere. I have no patience for a fool,

Well this is interesting. I just met my first science denier on this site. Fundamentalists are pretty much everywhere.

Well, it's clear you know the words, but I don't think you know what they mean.

Again: An appeal to authority is an attempt to make bad science look good by appending some sort of "study," or piece of data. That’s vastly different than deferring to authority, or respecting authority, and the ways these people have dedicated their lives to a particular subject. To assume at any level that you’re somehow more knowledgeable an any subject than someone who has dedicated their lives to that subject is hubris at its worst, and profoundly arrogant.

It probably wouldn't hurt to add a dictionary to your thesaurus, so you'll have a better understanding of what the words you're using actually mean.

@Benthoven You are only making yourself look like a bigger fool here dude. The is the Philosophy Meaning section, not the academic section, if your are going to make an assertion be prepared to defend it or don't post it.

So therefore academics are irrelevant? I would say it's pretty foolish to assume that "philosophy and meaning" means you don't have to stick to facts and data.

As far as defending, dude... A NEUROLOGIST! A NEUROLOGIST... A NEUROLOGIST. Seriously, dude. The post was a quote from a NEUROLOGIST! You know what that is, right?

You keep using that word, "fool." I do not think it means what you think it means.

@Benthoven No one has perfect knowledge especially when it comes to perception. This is the problem, you are saying that this god like creature is right not matter what he says... and I'm saying that is the logical fallacy of an appeal to authority, but feel free to blather on without me...fool.

So you’ve changed your tune? “No one has perfect knowledge especially when it comes to perception.”

And yet your opening statement was: “... all we know is what we see, all the rest is abstraction from what we see.”

So which is it? You have perfect knowledge, or you don’t? There’s a huge difference between the ramblings of a curmudgeon in Florida, and a man who has devoted his life to the study of the brain. A huge difference.

But clearly something has touched a nerve, as you went from zero to nasty in almost no time. just because you think it’s your “right” to be right, doesn’t make you right. Even if Gomer Pyle made the above statement, it would still be true, and we would know it’s true because it’s backed up by thousands of studies, gigabits worth of data, and actual facts. The only difference is, Gomer Pyle isn’t a neurologist who knows where to look, what to look for, and how scientific method works.

You keep using that word, "fool." I do not think it means what you think it means.

@Benthoven When you see something it is there even if you are delusional, and you can't be wrong about what you see in that it is what you are seeing. That does not mean you are correct, that what you are seeing is actually there, but there is no way to unsee what you see....clear.

You're telling me hallucinations are real? They're there? Optical illusions? They're there? Do parallel lines really touch each other when we're standing in the middle of them? Is there really a face on mars? A man in the moon? I saw a ghost... so there are ghosts? I saw a snake... which was actually a stick that made my mind think it was a snake... so what did I see?

I get it. You really want to have the last word here, but I'm not going to give it to you. The purpose of this site is to take on the lies and pseudoscience head on... This isn't one of those anti-science, dogmatic, Conservopedia religious sites that ignores reality because it goes against what they want to be true. This is where science-based, fact-based people come to discuss issues.

As to un-see what we see, most of the time we don't even "see" what we see. Dude, they write books about this. They teach it in grade school. People can get advanced degrees in how this works. There's no need to fear reality... even if you can't see it.

If I may add another quote... another trick your mind plays which you seem to be woefully unaware of:
We are a story our brain tells itself: and our brains are motivated, skilled, pathological liars.
~ Craig Good

@Benthoven Learn how to read.

Sigh. I never thought I'd be dealing with a science denier on this site.
Perhaps you'd be more comfortable here: [conservapedia.com]

Your (truly) blind faith in science is inane.

Your denial of science is insane.