How would you...

[TheOriginalJames]

There are varying degrees of colorblindness.

People who can't see red/green will see brown or different shades of black/white/grey in place of the colors.

Some people can't see purple, and some people can't do those little eye test things...

My grandpa can't see red/green, only reason he can still drive well is because the lights are all the same around here. haha

 

[Ms_Kitty]

Has anyone ever seen the movie "Mask" with Cher? Her son in the movie meets a blind girl at some camp and he tries to explain colors in the same manner some of you have said. When explaining RED, he has her hold something HOT, WHITE he gives her COTTON, BLUE something COLD, etc......

As far as being color blind, I know an older gentlemen who is color blind, some colors he sees as different from what they are and others in just a different hue or tint..........but I never thought about what James and Tim said........who is to say what color RED is, this friend that is color blind may actually be seeing RED and I'm seeing GREEN that I since birth have been taught is RED, unfortunately we can't see through someone elses eyes

 

[Ms_Kitty]

Nice James.........posting at the same time

 

[lemon]

It has no color in the absence of light.

wrong. the absence of light does not change the characteristics of the apple. the difference is what you see. which is nothing. the apple has no significant change to itself that would influence a difference of colors. i tried to explain that to my chemistry teacher, but he would not listen.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

It has no color in the absence of light.

wrong. the absence of light does not change the characteristics of the apple. the difference is what you see. which is nothing. the apple has no significant change to itself that would influence a difference of colors. i tried to explain that to my chemistry teacher, but he would not listen.

No, its not wrong. If there is no light reflecting off of it, it simply has no color.

If you asked a blind person what color an apple was, they wouldn't be able to tell you. Their eyes see no light, meaning they see no color. It's the same principle.

Since white light is all colors combined, light is the basic principle behind color. Without it, everything would be black.

 

[lemon]

It has no color in the absence of light.

wrong. the absence of light does not change the characteristics of the apple. the difference is what you see. which is nothing. the apple has no significant change to itself that would influence a difference of colors. i tried to explain that to my chemistry teacher, but he would not listen.

No, its not wrong. If there is no light reflecting off of it, it simply has no color.

If you asked a blind person what color an apple was, they wouldn't be able to tell you. Their eyes see no light, meaning they see no color. It's the same principle.

Since white light is all colors combined, light is the basic principle behind color. Without it, everything would be black.

yes i know white light is all light colors combined... except you didnt distinguish which ones. the primary light colors ( red, green, blue ) form white when combined, yet the primary pigment colors ( yellow, magenta, cyan ) form black when mixed together.

light is a form of energy. albeit, the fastest moving form, but still energy nonetheless. energy reacts with the molecules of the object you are viewing. what is absorbed, and what is reflected back, et cetera. but, see, the molecules still have their function ( the skin of the apple ) whether light hits them or not. thus, the apple never changes color, because if it did, then the molecules of the skin would change. and since they dont change with the light on or off, the apple's skin's molecules remain the same. therefore, the apple is red ( assuming its a red apple, there are green and yellow apples as well ) with the light on or off. therefore, you are wrong, in this respect.

if you can understand that... if not.. well, ill try to figure out another explanation...

 

[TheOriginalJames]

I understand your point, and I agree the apple is going to be red... but only when the light is on it.

If you go into a room with no windows at night, close the doors and turn off all the lights and look at an apple you cannot say "it's red". You cannot see it, therefore it has absolutely no color to it.

 

[lemon]

I understand your point, and I agree the apple is going to be red... but only when the light is on it.

If you go into a room with no windows at night, close the doors and turn off all the lights and look at an apple you cannot say "it's red". You cannot see it, therefore it has absolutely no color to it.

nope. it doesnt matter if there is light or not. just because you cant see it, doesnt mean that it doesnt have a color.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

So if I blind fold you and take you into a room with three different apples, you'd be able to tell me what color they are by the texture of them?

Your reasoning, although it makes sense from a nerds standpoint lol), is flawed.

You need light to see color. Doesn't matter if the color is still there when it's dark.

 

[lemon]

So if I blind fold you and take you into a room with three different apples, you'd be able to tell me what color they are by the texture of them?

Your reasoning, although it makes sense from a nerds standpoint lol), is flawed.

You need light to see color. Doesn't matter if the color is still there when it's dark.

i never said you dont need light to see color. thats the point. you do need light to see color. but that doesnt change the color of the object you are viewing.

let me put it this way ( its a good idea that you got your name changed; its a perfect example )

ok, before your name change, you were 2000si. you then got your name changed to theoriginaljames. you are still the same person behind the screen name. nothing changed except how you are viewed ( you name ).. you are still the same person.

now, apply that towards color. the apple is still red, no matter if the light is on or off. the light didnt change the apple. it changes the view of the apple.

 

[TheOriginalJames]

So if I blind fold you and take you into a room with three different apples, you'd be able to tell me what color they are by the texture of them?

Your reasoning, although it makes sense from a nerds standpoint lol), is flawed.

You need light to see color. Doesn't matter if the color is still there when it's dark.

i never said you dont need light to see color. thats the point. you do need light to see color. but that doesnt change the color of the object you are viewing.

let me put it this way ( its a good idea that you got your name changed; its a perfect example )

ok, before your name change, you were 2000si. you then got your name changed to theoriginaljames. you are still the same person behind the screen name. nothing changed except how you are viewed ( you name ).. you are still the same person.

now, apply that towards color. the apple is still red, no matter if the light is on or off. the light didnt change the apple. it changes the view of the apple.

YES, that is my entire point... I don't care if fundamentally the apple is still red, you couldn't say that it's red by looking at it in the absence of light.

 

[lemon]

So if I blind fold you and take you into a room with three different apples, you'd be able to tell me what color they are by the texture of them?

Your reasoning, although it makes sense from a nerds standpoint lol), is flawed.

You need light to see color. Doesn't matter if the color is still there when it's dark.

i never said you dont need light to see color. thats the point. you do need light to see color. but that doesnt change the color of the object you are viewing.

let me put it this way ( its a good idea that you got your name changed; its a perfect example )

ok, before your name change, you were 2000si. you then got your name changed to theoriginaljames. you are still the same person behind the screen name. nothing changed except how you are viewed ( you name ).. you are still the same person.

now, apply that towards color. the apple is still red, no matter if the light is on or off. the light didnt change the apple. it changes the view of the apple.

YES, that is my entire point... I don't care if fundamentally the apple is still red, you couldn't say that it's red by looking at it in the absence of light.

hmmm... this reminds me of something me and my brother used to do. argue about 2 different points, and we were both right. :tard

im saying the apple doesnt change colors with the presence or absence of light.

your saying the viewed color of the apple changes with the presence or absence of light.

is this a fair set of statements?

 

[TheOriginalJames]

That is a correct assessment. *pushes his glasses up and removes a pen from his pocket protector*

 

[lemon]

That is a correct assessment. *pushes his glasses up and removes a pen from his pocket protector*

:rofl :rofl :rofl :rofl


good. then shut up. because im right.

*runs*

 

[TheOriginalJames]

bitch! :lol


Damn you need a new title.

 

[lemon]

bitch! :lol


Damn you need a new title.

:lol

 

[Haus]

Lemons new title "Dickdo"

 

[lemon]

i just thought of a very bad title. so be careful to whom ever gives me one. or just be on the lookout. :rofl