Making Sciforums more Successful.!!!

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by cluelusshusbund, Jun 26, 2014.

  1. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    can you post 1 or 2 examples of this?

    actually i'm curious as to what you consider "crackpot".
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534
    100% dinky di spot on Russ.
    I don't know if you have ever been to "Cosmoquest" but there system, let's the Alternative hypothesis pushers, put there stuff, with the proviso of answering all questions.
    If this isn't done satisfactorily.....The thread is closed after 1 month.
    A great system, and is needed here.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534


    I can name 5 off the top of my head.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    But I'm also a big rubbery softy at heart!

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Probably. If I feel like it, I'll go look.
    http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
     
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534

    I love point 20...It really cracked me up....

    20: 20 points for emailing me and complaining about the crackpot index. (E.g., saying that it "suppresses original thinkers" or saying that I misspelled "Einstein" in item 8.)


    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!



    oh, and these three....

    34: 40 points for claiming that the "scientific establishment" is engaged in a "conspiracy" to prevent your work from gaining its well-deserved fame, or suchlike.

    35: 40 points for comparing yourself to Galileo, suggesting that a modern-day Inquisition is hard at work on your case, and so on.

    36: 40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is. (30 more points for fantasizing about show trials in which scientists who mocked your theories will be forced to recant
     
  9. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534
    Apologies, the most releveant point

    37: 50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions.
     
  10. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534
    We have 37 points re crackpots to discuss.
     
  12. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    Not necessary.
     
  13. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    11,585
    Here is one example of anti-science crackpottery but there are literally hundreds of such examples on the forum:

     
  14. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    i suppose lewin lied about THAT as well.
    this stuff was printed in a well respected source origin.
    oh wait, he lied about everything printed in that piece, right?
    get a grip origin.

    BTW, i noticed you didn't mention WHY i said what you quoted.
    what's up? "respected source" scare you?
     
  15. Russ_Watters Not a Trump supporter... Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,051
    It was just an example, not a continuation of the debate: this isn't the place to continue the debate.

    Another potential reasons people have for why crackpottery should be allowed is the potential to reform them. But that virtually never happens: crackpottery is a religion and believers can't have their minds changed by anyone but themselves. A forum's time and effort is better spent on people who actually want help.
     
  16. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    8,310
    Every time I read the title to this thread
    I think
    "Gee, you seem to be missing a 'g'."

    I have plenty to spare.
    May I offer you one or some?
    g
    g g g g g
     
  17. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    i don't know.
    kwil believed in telepathy over 1000s of miles.
    he apparently devoted a large amount of his time to it.
    do you really think someone like that can be reformed?
    "close proximity" telepathy might be possible, but 1000s of miles???
    all you can do is keep throwing stuff out there and hope one of them bangs their gong.
    this is especially true in the science sections of the board.
     
  18. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,373
    You mean, you have faith in me?


    (Was also thinking of watching the first Harry Potter movie.)
     
  19. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    37,189
    leopold:

    Are you pedalling that Lewin article from 1980 in this thread as well?

    Is your entire understanding of evolution based on one article from a non-expert about a conference of biologists dating back to 1980?
     
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,534
    Grasping at straws????

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. leopold Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    17,455
    origin brought it up.

    no.
    i think you can say lewin was a professional science writer.
    respected sources published his stuff.
    i also believe lewin knew science very well.
    the conference included paleontologists and geologists as well, among others.
     
  22. Trippy ALEA IACTA EST Staff Member

    Messages:
    10,890
    Some of whom wrote their own reports that contradict your interpretation of Lewin's news editorial.
     
  23. Beer w/Straw Transcendental Ignorance! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,373
    OK. Here's a suggestion to make the forum more successful.

    Allow members to post threads and or make posts in cesspool.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!




    Venting of frustration would be good and keep it out of a science (or whatever) discussion.
     

Share This Page