Who the hell understands women?

[Andromida806]

How dare you waste all those words for a simple statement....

[Anonymouse]

While women do possess intuition, that never made them above men. MUAHAHAHAHAHAHHA!

[Chichu]

Too often my desire to be diplomatic is intercepted like this. I just love language and would not dare to put those tender creatures - words - to waste. I dont always feel comfortable with sounding too serious and rather inadequate, but that for me is less of a problem than not being able to express exactly whats on my mind, fit thoughts into a grammatical structure. Making simple statements always allows a lot more room for misunderstanding and incomplete understanding.

When I was a kid, we used to fix our own bikes. When the wheel of the bike goes from side to side as it moves forvard (instead of being perpendicular with the ground all the time), the easiest way to fix that is to stick little weights on the inside of the edge of the wheel. At first you put a relatively big weight somewhere, after estimating where the wheel is leaning towards more and how big is the problem. If you're really good and lucky (luck plays a role, because there are things that cant be controled even by a "pro"), you'll be able to fix it with that one weight. But most of the time you continue putting smaller weights and constantly testing the wheel until finally you get it aligned. This example just popped in my head and I think fits pretty well. In the same manner as with the weights, a simple statement most often can't solve the problem completely. Even an exceptional writer can't predict the reaction of a big audience; luck plays a role. But a good writer can usually at least come close to what exactly he is trying to say by "molding" it.

P.S. I've gone pretty far from your easy-going reply, Andromida806, thus this shouldn't in any way be considered a counter-reply, but rather a separate "random" thought.
To create at least a little link with the original topic, I'll conclude by "simplifying" my previous comment to: women are bad for smart men! ;P (Now, I dont think it is true, but I havent seen any proof of the opposite. And then again, absence of evidence is not an evidence of absence!)

[Anonymouse]

The absence of evidence is evidence itself, that is the logic that pervades evolutionary theory.

[Chichu]

Absence of evidence can certainly pose as evidnce, but can very rarely be a credible evidence of absence. The Logicians' favorite example is: there is no proof that God exists (absence of evidence...), but this does not prove that it does not exist (...is not an evidence of absence).

This way the logicians calm down the creationists who accuse them of atheism. :twisted:

[Anonymouse]

In any event, regarding evolution, I simply cannot comprehend how lack of evidence is translated as evidence for evolution.

[Chichu]

Everyone wants to believe in something. And it is one small step from believing to being in love with an idea. Once the person is almost entirely consumed cherishing the nobility of that idea, argueing with him becomes as tricky as with a "rightful Christian" (or any other faithful member of a particular pop-religion), because he is ready to reinterpret and accept as evidence of his rightfulness anything doesnt explicitly state the opposite (If I believed that my neighbor is The Spiderman, spiderwebs next to his door would be relevant evidence to me). Another common reaction of an "idea lover" is to discard the arguement with an unbased, unexplained, usually short statement.
I want to explain just a little why I choose not to argue extensively with such people. The logical part of it have been described above and comes down to simply being uninteresting to have a discussion where one constantly has to clearify the clear and point out the irrelevant. The moral part is pretty simple too: the people in love with an idea are essentially "happy" and satisfied at least in that aspect, and trying to change it (even out of good intentions, if there is a substantial disagrement with your position, or the "true" position) is not always as productive as it seems.

"My good intentions are completely lethal."
Margaret Atwood

[Anonymouse]

The reason I raise is is because evolutionists are the people who traditionally discard the supernatural existence of a God or Gods because you can't "prove it" or there exists a lack of evidence and/or verification, yet these are the same people who adhere to evolution which itself is lacking empirical verification.

As I've stated before, the only thing evolution has going for itself is microevolution, now how that leads to macroevolution is yet to be proven.

I find this issue of interest since prior to exposing this theory to scrutiny I was a bio major and in light of the puzzle not fitting and the constant reshaping of the contents of the theory to holdfast to an immutable theory was discomforting to me.

[joint1]

Understand!!what's that

The Question is HOW!!!

[HyeJinx1984]

Am I the only man who's never had this "I don't understand women!!!" problem? Every guy feels like women speak a different language or something... I for one have never had the problem of "understanding women"... I can usually read them like a book. Probably why I choose to date so little...