Welcome To aBlackWeb

Register

Is Terrence Howard The Real Life Tony Stark

ChicagoFigure said:
Disagree. This isn't a competition. It's science and discussion of ideas. It doesn't have to be a me vs you, winner/loser.

Not saying ndt has to do it. He don't have to explain shit. I'd love to see it tho.

Props to him for the vid.
Click to expand...

What? lol Debates are competitions, and there are winners and losers. NDT and Howard have opposing ideas. If they debate, someone is coming out as the loser. Bro, I've been to scientific conferences and seen people from the audience make presenters cry because they found mistakes in their presentations and basically disproved their research on the spot. Shit is deeper than ya'll think.
 
The Lonious Monk said:
What? lol Debates are competitions, and there are winners and losers. NDT and Howard have opposing ideas. If they debate, someone is coming out as the loser. Bro, I've been to scientific conferences and seen people from the audience make presenters cry because they found mistakes in their presentations and basically disproved their research on the spot. Shit is deeper than ya'll think.
Click to expand...
I'm saying it doesn't have to be a debate. It can be a discussion.
 
An idea of a debate is cool, but you dont sit there and debate with words in science. Thats the issue.

Lets say I do an experiment and prove x is real. I have to publish my results and steps from my experiment. The experiment can be just solving a math problem, or some wild shit with tools and controls. Whatever the case, i need to publish my steps on how I proved x with that experiment.

Then some scientists looks at my experiment and recreates it to either prove or disprove my work. Or he runs his own experiment to prove or disprovr my work, then publishes that in response.

In science sitting there and debating with words is pointless cause its just me saying im right and you saying no im right.

Thats why debates dont happen in science
 
Last edited:
AZTG said:
An idea of a debate is cool, but you dont sit there and debate with words in science. Thats the issue.

Lets say I do an experiment and prove x is real. I have to publish my results and steps from my experiment. The experiment can be just solving s math problem, or some wild shit with tools and controls. Whatever the case, i need to publish my steps on how I proved x with that experiment.

Then some scientists looks at my experiment and recreates it to either prove or disprove my work. Or he runs his own experiment to prove or disprovr my work, then publishes that in response.

In science sitting there and debating with words is pointless cause its just me saying im right and you saying no im right.

Thats why debates dont happen in science
Click to expand...
Your first sentence is my train of thought.
 
Debates dont need winners and losers, that is not true.

And as far as the Theory of Everything it can be and does get debated/discussed. It is an unsolved mystery.
 
ChicagoFigure said:
Just a quick skim of the comments it's not sounding too good for Terrence lol
Click to expand...
I listened to it so a lot of people don’t have to.

The other guys says there may be some validity to the concept of what Howard is trying to say but without the scientific background, he doesnt know how to verbalize and explain his concepts to the scientific community well enough to get them to take him seriously

It would be like if a coaches wife knew how to stop Lamar Jackson but kept calling a blitz, a screen play or, the option, the pick and roll.

Like she may legit know how but for people who understand the game and or the psyche and make up of how men view women, cause they believe she can’t understand how to explain basic concepts, there no way she knows what the fuck she’s talking about.

So why take her seriously

So this is like if Howard was the woman and some analysts got together and the analysts explains to the woman that wha you are saying may work but we got to get you to understand what your saying

And then for some reason that point keeps going over Howards head and it’s like if the woman refused to understand how she’s wrong, cause she knows regardless of how she’s describing things , she’s right, and she may very well be, and that’s the crazy part

She just doesn’t think the description matters, even though the analysts keeps trying to get the woman to understand that she has to care about what she thinks isn’t important

For as smart as Howard is, I don’t know how he kept missing the point.
 
Last edited:
ImaInfluenza said:
I listened to it so a lot of people don’t have to.

The other guys says there may be some validity to the concept of what Howard is trying to say but without the scientific background, he doesnt know how to verbalize and explain his concepts to the scientific community well enough to get them to take him seriously

It would be like if a coaches wife knew how to stop Lamar Jackson but kept calling a blitz, a screen play or, the option, the pick and roll.

Like she may legit know how but for people who understand the game and or the psyche and make up of how men view women, cause they believe she can’t understand how to explain basic concepts, there no way she knows what the fuck she’s talking about.

So why take her seriously

So this is like if Howard was the woman and some analysts got together and the analysts explains to the woman that wha you are saying may work but we got to get you to understand what your saying

And then for some reason that point keeps going over Howards head and it’s like if the woman refused to understand how she’s wrong, cause she knows regardless of how she’s describing things , she’s right, and she may very well be, and that’s the crazy part

She just doesn’t think the description matters, even though the analysts keeps trying to get the woman to understand that she has to care about what she thinks isn’t important

For as smart as Howard is, I don’t know how he kept missing the point.
Click to expand...
It was 4 hours of just that?
 
ImaInfluenza said:
Yea, crazy right ..at one point Howard wanted to wander off track again and Rogan had to check him on time and Howard was like, we been at this for 4 hours? That was a masterclass on patience
Click to expand...
ChicagoFigure said:
In that case I'll pass and wait for whatever short clips come out of it.
Click to expand...
Yeah. I'll watch it when Howard shows up in Time Square in an Ironman suit threatening to hold the world hostage unless his work is taken seriously. Then we'll know he's legit.
 
To even discuss and hang in such a specialised discussion, shows he has a certain high level of intelligence but even more so intellectual curiosity.

Remember the guy he's talking with has a PhD in mathematical physics and has taught at MIT and Harvard.

So give Terrence a little credit here.
This the light skin nigga playing guitar behind his head from The Best Man....mayne! 😂
 
Valentinez A. Kaiser said:
To even discuss and hang in such a specialised discussion, shows he has a certain high level of intelligence but even more so intellectual curiosity.

Remember the guy he's talking with has a PhD in mathematical physics and has taught at MIT and Harvard.

So give Terrence a little credit here.
This the light skin nigga playing guitar behind his head from The Best Man....mayne! 😂
Click to expand...
For a minute all I could see was DJ from Hustle and Flow. He had that type of frustrated energy, like why isn't anyone giving his tape a chance. Neil Degrasse Tyson is his Skinny Black.
 
ImaInfluenza said:
Nah he’s smart, being able to contain and compartmentalize a lot of that takes intelligence.

It’s like the guy told him, he got a super car mind but a Volvo engine. Hes processing more than he can understand
Click to expand...
NGL you lost me with both analogies. Imma ignore the first one cuz imma get to nerdy.

As for the second one. If hes processing more than he can understand...that means hes not really processing it, and doesn't truly understand it, no?

He seems curious about certain subjects, sorta read up on it, familiarize himself and or learned certain small aspects of this broad field, then declared himself an expert/innovator.

This is like someone being into cars, sorta tinkered with them in his garage, but never did anything major like actually built a car. Then gets online and tells a podcast host, Porsche isnt really good at building race cars or engines, they're doing it all wrong and you could do it better. Sure if a Porsche lead engineer sat down with him they could have a surface level convo about cars and how they work, but ultimately that engineer is going to tell him he doesnt really know what hes talking about when they get into specifics.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top