Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Don't go wetting your pants so fast, howie. The only thing I got wrong on this one was Sagan was merely a "contributor" to the story and a co-producer; he received no credit for the screenplay, as I erroneously stated in an earlier post.

Have you ever been right about anything?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
Zemeckis recalls, "I had a great relationship with Carl through the whole project."

Zemeckis worked with Sagan on striking the balance between human interest and science.

However, although Sagan did pass away prior to the film's release in 1997 (November 9, 1934 – December 20, 1996, accoring to the Wik), therefore within months o ...[text shortened]... e always reaching erroneous conclusions based on half-baked information, don't you think?

considering these ideas taking from Sagan's writing:
Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts
Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities"😉.
Spin more than one hypothesis - don't simply run with the first idea that caught your fancy.
Try not to get overly attached to a hypothesis just because it's yours.
Quantify, wherever possible.
If there is a chain of argument every link in the chain must work.
"Occam's razor" - if there are two hypothesis that explain the data equally well choose the simpler.
Ask whether the hypothesis can, at least in principle, be falsified (shown to be false by some unambiguous test). In other words, it is testable? Can others duplicate the experiment and get the same result?
your attack on the good Doctor is really laughable.
Maybe you think Roy Hobbs hit that world series winning homerun too.

Originally posted by howardgee
Have you ever been right about anything?

If I guess this one aright, will it count toward the total?

Originally posted by frogstomp
considering these ideas taking from Sagan's writing:
Wherever possible there must be independent confirmation of the facts
Encourage substantive debate on the evidence by knowledgeable proponents of all points of view.
Arguments from authority carry little weight (in science there are no "authorities"😉.
Spin more than one hypothesis - don't sim ...[text shortened]... eally laughable.
Maybe you think Roy Hobbs hit that world series winning homerun too.

your attack on the good Doctor is really laughable.
Attack? What gave you the impression that an attack was underway? Probably the same bias that twisted the intent of that other thread regarding the infallibility of science, is my guess.

So you are conceding that you got the facts wrong relative to "the good Doctor's" death?

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]your attack on the good Doctor is really laughable.
Attack? What gave you the impression that an attack was underway? Probably the same bias that twisted the intent of that other thread regarding the infallibility of science, is my guess.

So you are conceding that you got the facts wrong relative to "the good Doctor's" death?[/b]

I never concede anything, silly boy , just remember Sagan was dead when the movie was finished, not 3 years but 7 months. the seven months it takes to reshoot scenes and do some editing.
Not that Im saying that was done, but ya never know, do you silly boy.
If you don't think you were attacking him, then you really are a turd
that writes garbage without realizing what he's writing.

Originally posted by frogstomp
I never concede anything, silly boy , just remember Sagan was dead when the movie was finished, not 3 years but 7 months. the seven months it takes to reshoot scenes and do some editing.
Not that Im saying that was done, but ya never know, do you silly boy.
If you don't think you were attacking him, then you really are a turd
that writes garbage without realizing what he's writing.

I never concede anything
Even when you're wrong. Your colors are showing and they're not so hot.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
If I guess this one aright, will it count toward the total?

What does "aright" mean?

[PS - wrong again!!!]

Originally posted by howardgee
What does "aright" mean?

[PS - wrong again!!!]

it's Allright with a jamacan accent

Originally posted by howardgee
What does "aright" mean?

[PS - wrong again!!!]

Howie, howie, howie. Have you wet your pants so quickly again? Merriam-Webster sez:

"aright
One entry found for aright.


Main Entry: aright
Pronunciation: &-'rIt
Function: adverb
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English ariht, from 1a- + riht right
: RIGHT, CORRECTLY [if I remember aright]"

Anything else you need help on, howie, just gurggle.