Will’s answer to “Why are reviewers not acknowledging the fact that entire premise is utterly ridiculous? A virus th…” > Likes and Comments
23 likes · Like
I'm getting very bored with the stupid answers.
The question is perfectly reasonable.
I had the idea that people who like reading would be a bit more intelligent than you and some others are proving to be.
Your own inability to suspend your own disbelief says more about your lack of intelligence than anyone else's.
Sigh.
I've read many hundreds of fantasy and science fiction novels and short stories, and had several of my own published. I have taught creative writing. I get suspension of disbelief.
I also get the difference between an absurd but intriguing premise, and an idiotic one.
Every science fiction novel every written violates the laws of science. Are you saying this one violates them too much? Based on what? Are you a virologist?
If you think my assertion is wrong then I invite you to provide evidence to falsify it. Violate it! Where’s the black swan?
How sure are you that people won’t turn to cannibalism if meat disappears? Would you bet your life on that? History is not on your side.
“I’ve been all over the world and I’ve never seen a statue of a critic.”
Well first off I’m guessing you’ve never heard of burden of proof but sure, I’ll accept your invitation.
Andy Weir’s The Martian. Most of Arthur C. Clarke’s novels. 1984. Most of J. G. Ballard’s novels. Post apocalyptic novels such as Earth Abides, The Long Tomorrow, A Canticle for Leibowitz, Davy. Ben Bova’s solar system novels. The early Expanse novels.
That’s just off the top of my head, leaving out works which are based on solid scientific principles but which incidentally feature faster than light travel (Stephen Baxter, Larry Niven, Alastair Reynolds). But again I think you are missing the point.
I am comfortably sure cannibalism would not become government policy, even if Trump were to make a comeback. Not sure what history you’re talking about. Sure, people resort to cannibalism when they are starving, but to the best of my knowledge never because they were told to become vegetarian.
I’ve yet to see a statue of an apologist for ill conceived fiction.
Well, I'm surprised. You stumbled out of the gate with The Martian. Even the author admits to taking creative liberties with science. Mars has essentially no atmosphere and therefore a storm of the magnitude that drove them from the planet could never have occurred. But we’ll assume there is a scifi novel that disproves my assertion. And on the subject of burden of proof, where’s the proof for your assertion that you know the difference between good science fiction and garbage? My assertion is testable and falsifiable in keeping with the scientific method but yours is not. It’s pseudoscience. You have no proof and you never will. It’s only your opinion and it exists only in your head.
Straw clutching at its finest.
You are evidently going to persist in missing the point so I am going to stop talking to you.
back to top
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Paul
(new)
Apr 05, 2021 11:53PM
I'm getting very bored with the stupid answers.
reply
|
flag
The question is perfectly reasonable.I had the idea that people who like reading would be a bit more intelligent than you and some others are proving to be.
Your own inability to suspend your own disbelief says more about your lack of intelligence than anyone else's.
Sigh.I've read many hundreds of fantasy and science fiction novels and short stories, and had several of my own published. I have taught creative writing. I get suspension of disbelief.
I also get the difference between an absurd but intriguing premise, and an idiotic one.
Every science fiction novel every written violates the laws of science. Are you saying this one violates them too much? Based on what? Are you a virologist?
If you think my assertion is wrong then I invite you to provide evidence to falsify it. Violate it! Where’s the black swan? How sure are you that people won’t turn to cannibalism if meat disappears? Would you bet your life on that? History is not on your side.
“I’ve been all over the world and I’ve never seen a statue of a critic.”
Well first off I’m guessing you’ve never heard of burden of proof but sure, I’ll accept your invitation.Andy Weir’s The Martian. Most of Arthur C. Clarke’s novels. 1984. Most of J. G. Ballard’s novels. Post apocalyptic novels such as Earth Abides, The Long Tomorrow, A Canticle for Leibowitz, Davy. Ben Bova’s solar system novels. The early Expanse novels.
That’s just off the top of my head, leaving out works which are based on solid scientific principles but which incidentally feature faster than light travel (Stephen Baxter, Larry Niven, Alastair Reynolds). But again I think you are missing the point.
I am comfortably sure cannibalism would not become government policy, even if Trump were to make a comeback. Not sure what history you’re talking about. Sure, people resort to cannibalism when they are starving, but to the best of my knowledge never because they were told to become vegetarian.
I’ve yet to see a statue of an apologist for ill conceived fiction.
Well, I'm surprised. You stumbled out of the gate with The Martian. Even the author admits to taking creative liberties with science. Mars has essentially no atmosphere and therefore a storm of the magnitude that drove them from the planet could never have occurred. But we’ll assume there is a scifi novel that disproves my assertion. And on the subject of burden of proof, where’s the proof for your assertion that you know the difference between good science fiction and garbage? My assertion is testable and falsifiable in keeping with the scientific method but yours is not. It’s pseudoscience. You have no proof and you never will. It’s only your opinion and it exists only in your head.
Straw clutching at its finest.You are evidently going to persist in missing the point so I am going to stop talking to you.
