Just a tiny little error I want to point out that doesn't really mean too much:  "Is it absolute fact? No."  The answer shouldn't be no, but that we don't know.  Saying "no" to this means that you know it isn't a fact.  I know what you meant, though.

Really wish I got to read the original post. This seemed really interested based on the comments.

Nah, just wait a day.  The OP will be back then.  The posts being gone is something unreleated.

I'd also point out, the main problem with people who consider themselves intellectuals or rather, use the term... tend to have a tendency to never think they are wrong, despite later contrary evidence.  More often then not, people who consider themselves "intellectuals" actually tend to be mainstream adopters, who don't pay any attention to the actual science going on.

For example, Global Warming was mentioned, and it's a GREAT example of how following the science actually would cause your opinion to shift quite a bit.

We started out with gobal cooling, then ended up with global warming... but then.  Something weird happened.   We learned how to measure temperatures by sattelite, and then something weird happened.  Essentially global temperature remained completely unchanged.

Of which, the average person and some scientsits said "Well, the models say there should be warming, so it must all be deep in the oceans."

The trick being, the deep oceans are the only place we can't measure reliably with sattelites.  Sattelites being superior to the previous ground temperature measuring because it can measure much wider swaths of land, and the atomosphere, which, the atomosphere has less confounding variables, and is supposed to heat quicker then the ground does.

Either way, the "Oceans must be doing it" arguement was awful science... well not even science.  It was ignoring reality in place of the model, which was based off different less accurate data.  It was basically saying "A wizard did it.  Ocean Wizard."

However THEN a new study came out, that argued, quite convincingly, that the reason there has been basically zero climate change in the last 10 years is China.

Or more percisely, China and their coal.    With China's big resources boom, mining coal and buying coal from other places, the coal dust was released into the atmosphere, which, while coal is a global warmer.   The dust released by it's mining is actually a global cooling particle, that gets in the air and therefore cools both the air and the land.

In reality, it seems global warming effects are being blocked out by said coal in the short term... and we have no idea how much or how bad global warming has been.   Which is problematic, considering it COULD mean, earlier global warming models were correct.

In which case, the phrase "Global Warming must be addressed" is patently false, because it's already gotten to the point of where global warming CAN'T be addressed.

Which in general is the opinion I think someone who looks at the would based on the fact would take anyway when looking at the world... as there is no way to achieve massive enough global warming prevention, outside giant world dictatorship.

Though in general, someone who followed the science, would of logically questioned the validity of global warming for quite a while, due to the most accurate data just not matching up.

Just press quote on the original post.

Here, did it for you:

Runa216 said:

It's always hard to debate with people online because it's becoming increasingly clear that there's no such thing as right or wrong, just opinions. Debating online really is like the special olympics, even if you win...well, you know how it ends. The point is, there seems to be an increasingly prevalent belief that you should respect someone's opinions, no matter how outlandish or nonsensical they are. Of course, this all started with Religion, in my mind (sorry, it makes no sense, and to date nobody has been able to present compelling evidence to the contrary), but it has spread to pretty much every debate point or hot topic on the internet, even ones that have conclusive scientific proof supporting one side and completely destroying the other.

Don't get me wrong, on some hot button topics there legitimately ARE two sides to the coin. Stuff like Abortion and Euthanasia certainly have compelling arguments on either side of the coin that should be discussed at length, I even think that religion has its place in a philosophy class, but there are plenty of things that have right answers and wrong answers, and no longer need to be discussed. There are such things as truths, and frankly they need to be addressed, and those who disagree with them can be conveniently ignored and disregarded.

Circumcision is a barbaric act and has no medical benefits.

Your sexuality is not a choice.

Forcing yourself to do or be something that is against your nature is harmful.

Your skin color does not dictate your actions.

Evolution is conclusively proven and has been witnessed.

Climate Change is most certainly a thing and needs to be addressed.

Guns are tools that are specifically designed to kill.

I could go on, but those are some of the more immediate hot spots that are on my mind a lot lately, things I've actually argued with people over. There are people out there so mentally deprived that they actually think you can chose your sexuality, or that people are 'pretending to be gay to piss us off.' There are actually people out there who honestly think that a biological phenomenon that's been studied, documented, and recreated in a lab is just a liberal conspiracy. There are people out there that honestly believe that circumcision is healthier for the baby in spite of it being proven to not be the case (in addition to permanently desensitizing the dude's junk). Some of these things aren't well known facts, and it often finds some digging to show it,but there's no reason that, when presented with conclusive evidence, people should dismiss it just because it doesn't coincide with their beliefs or perceptions.

There was a time in my life where I'd go on 5000 word rants filled with logically explained viewpoints, plenty of supporting evidence, and compelling arguments every time I encountered someone saying something stupid, but the more I did it, the more futile it became. As time went on, and as my effort to cleanse the world of ignorance continued, I kind of gave up. I still like pointing out flaws in people's logic from time to time, but I don't bother with the well researched retorts or the cited examples anymore because the collective stupidity of the internet has ruined my hope for humanity. It's becoming increasingly clear that knowledge and enlightenment scares some people, and they will combat it with all their might when an opposing viewpoint is presented.

Some people say I'm sociopathic, that I'm dangerous or hateful or spiteful...well, you would be too if you were surrounded by idiots that outnumbered you and had more control over the world than you. The problem isn't that these people are stupid, or that the ignorant are aggressive in their desire to remain ignorant, it's that the smart, civilized people have pretty much thrown up their hands and collectively given up, conceding that “We all are entitled to our opinions”, like it would be a crime to try and beat the stupid out of the masses.

Well, I have a problem with this. I mean, I don't WANT to be confrontational, I don't WANT to be that guy who thinks he knows everything all the time and I certainly don't want to be the kind of person who seems to get a glint in his eye when he proves someone wrong or shoves his opinion down the throats of others, but I'm finding it harder and harder to live in a world where the ignorant thrive and the intelligent are expected to keep to themselves. I know Sheldon Cooper is a fictional character in a sitcom, but I feel more and more like him every day; there's nothing worse than just wanting to share your knowledge with others and having them dismiss you or basically tell you they don't want to hear it. Is there anything in this world more disappointing than people who don't want to learn?

It's not a matter of malice or arrogance to me, it's a simple matter of right and wrong; it's not a matter of opinion, sometimes a fact is a fact, and there's nothing you can do to argue it. When someone tells me “Evolution is a myth”, that's not a matter of opinion, that's a factual error. I know everyone hates the guy who corrects you or assumes himself superior for whatever reason, but when you're wrong you're wrong; it's not fair to be treated like shit just because you want to help make the world a better place by sharing knowledge.

This is precisely why I've taken to simply dismissing those who are wrong. I recently got into a pretty heated argument (It's not a debate, it stopped being a debate before I even showed up) about whether homosexuality was a choice or if it was harmful, and after a few pages of interacting with the various people in the thread, getting an idea of what people thought or where people stood, I basically stood up on the soap box and publicly informed those who felt that homosexuality was a choice and that it was harmful that they were wrong, they were bigoted, they were ignorant, and they had no right discussing a matter they clearly had no knowledge about. Naturally, I was turned into the target, and ALL of the people in the thread turned on me because I dared to assume the mantle of superiority, like my 'opinion' was worth more than theirs, and that I had no right to be judgemental.

If this was a matter of opinion, I would be an arrogant, rude, horrible person for assuming my side was right and theirs was wrong. If we were discussing music and someone said “Justin Bieber is awesome, Queen sucks”, I'd disagree with them, but I certainly wouldn't tell them they were wrong. Well, I might, but if I did, I'd substantiate my claim with proof, but I certainly wouldn't be bothered by people not liking Queen and liking Justin Bieber, as we are all entitled to our own opinions. However, when it comes to important, socially poignant fodder like gender roles and scientific progress, I certainly don't think it's acceptable to push an ignorant belief as fact, or passing it off as opinion and crying 'censorship' or 'persecution' when you're told you're wrong.

I used to be great at debating and discussing hot topics, but now I don't bother. I'd love to take the time to explain to each one of these people why they're wrong and sit them down to have an intellectual intervention, but all I'd get is aggression and continued ignorance. The art of the debate is dead, stupidity reigns supreme, and we now live in a world where any ill-conceived theory or stance can be masked as an opinion and shielded by the guise of free speech. Well I'm sorry people, but there often are clearly defined rights and wrongs, and sometimes the truth needs to be told even if a few people can't handle it or are offended by it.

This is why I've taken such a strong stance against religion in the past few years. While I do certainly feel that the idea at its core is rather silly and completely without scientific merit, if people wish to believe in a God or Gods, I truly do think everyone has a right to do that. However, the second that belief starts to invade places it doesn't belong such as our senate houses or classrooms, it should be the job of the intellectually responsible to ensure that those viewpoints that are not substantiated or adequately supported by evidence are squashed and thrown to the curb to rot with the rest of the trash.

Sometimes, aggression is necessary. Sadly, the ones smart enough to know better are also the ones civilized enough to not cause a riot. Well, my friends, sometimes you gotta fight for what's right, passivity does not breed progression.  

You are also a burden on intellectuals.

 Circumcision - I'm not even going to get into that.

Your sexuality is not a choice - I do not disagree with this statement.

Forcing yourself to do something against your nature is harmful - I have no opinion.

Skin color does not dictate actions - I'm not quite sure I understand what is being said here. please explain.

Evolution - I believe in evolution, but don't try to convert people. I don't see anyone trying to convert me into a Christian, so don't try to convert us.

Climate Change is being addressed. We are seeing many businesses, people, products, and other things become more energy efficient and environmentally friendly. We will be running out of oil within probably the next 150 years. I think that is currently more important. It is being slightly addressed, but we still use too much fuel every day.

Guns - it is true that most guns are designed to kill. Except for the ones that aren't designed to kill (bean bag guns, non-lethal guns etc.) I believe there should be stricter gun laws.

I don't mean to be nitpicky, but your response to kain was rather redundant and I believe the term used was Climate Change and in part to do with this whole "is it getting warmer, cooler, or what?" question people were having.  

edit: Oh, and there is something I'd like to address that a lot of people have been misinterpreting.  The last point about the "guns" was mostly about guns such as "handguns" which are very specifically made to kill another human being.  Other firearms have been made for other purposes, such as shotguns (I doubt a shotgun would have been very practical for this) or certain types of rifles.  However, the issue surrounding this is actually much more complex that it appears to be on the surface.

I fully agree with your post kasz. Alot is claimed hastily in the name of science, but I believe it's important for people not to jump on the latest breakthroughs like gospel.

Alot of people make absurd claims or self-assign themselves a right to some kind of higher order in the name of science or intellectualism. Most of these are charlatans with little commitment to actual discovery of truth, even scientific truth. As ironic as it is, it's my experience on the matter.

A good example of this would be the studies and results people have come out with about the IQ dispairity across certain "races" (which I do not believe exists within humans for a multitude of reasons) that have popped up in the not-too-distant past.