In general anyone that actually engages with me ends up in a very productive discussion.
No, I've wasted tons of time trying to educate you on science you don't understand. You learned nothing. Completely unproductive.
At one time the Higgs boson was considered paranormal, derisively dubbed the "god particle", until it was produced and is now part of mainstream science, no?
No, it wasn't ever considered paranormal. And it was never called the "god particle" derisively. It was always a scientific theory, postulating a mechanism for elementary particles to gain their masses. Oops, you got me wasting my time trying to teach you again.
Wouldn't it be nice to tell someone with a question about the paranormal, that; "This is not really paranormal, it is part the EM spectrum or of Field Theory." And then provide a link to a relevant starting point or scientist.
Another foray into the useless. The paranormal believer won't understand or will outright deny any scientific explanation.
Was David Bohm a crackpot? Is Roger Penrose a crackpot. Was Hawking a crackpot? Are all the scientists exploring the Theoretical sciences crackpots? Most of them have been called crackpot at one time or another, until they or someone else provided proof .
Theoretical science is not the paranormal.
Show me where I have argued against mainstream and I'll concede that point. Are you proposing you are more literate in the areas of science than the scientists which I quote are doing the serious research?
Already done, and you didn't. I'm proposing that I understand what science you cite better than you do. And I've proven that in past interactions with you.
Your problem here is that you thought you could jump in here just to take a quick shot at me, never intending to engage with the thread topic in any way. But it turned out that you were so desperate to have a jab at me that didn't do your homework first. And now it turns out that you're utterly clueless as to why I would want to interact with Dennis Tate.
You really ought to try to find something better to do with your time, other than attempting to antagonise other people and establish what a big ego you have, Vociferous. I don't know who you're trying to impress, if that's the effect you're aiming for. Or is this you trying to prove to me that you have a bigger penis than I do, or something?
Nice little lecture in lieu of just telling me why you want to interact with him. Apparently, I don't have as much free time as you seem to. Sue me.
I doesn't take much time to reply to you nowadays. And if you can't/won't tell me why you enjoy crackpots so much, why should I care?
You can't even be bothered to read my direct replies to your own questions.
I am under no obligation to reply to you, Vociferous.
Absolutely. Including my post in this thread. But you felt the need to, as you imply, measure penises.
What I was referring to was where you complain about what I haven't read, including whining about things I addressed in direct response to you, but you missed.
It is quite clear that you don't understand what I have been trying to do in talking to Dennis Tate.
Nobody asked you to get involved. If you want to put people into neat boxes which you can dismiss or ignore, that's certainly your prerogative. But get off your high horse and stop trying to tell other people that they have to act like you do.
And it's clear that you'd rather waste your time lecturing than simply telling me.
Who said anyone asked me to get involved? Is this a debate thread, that requires an invite?
Again, don't be a hypocrite, talking about neat little boxes you can ignore.
Where did I say you should act like anything? It's actually you doing all the lecturing about how I should act. Quit projecting.
Consider that, just possibly, I am not trying to have fun by shooting fish in a barrel. Consider that I may have different aims to the aims you might have. I will leave my motivations a mystery for you to ponder.
Yes, aims you're all cagey about sharing. Like I said, maybe it is a challenge for you. I have no idea.
What makes you think I'm interested in trying to convert crackpots?
Seems that would be the only worthwhile challenge involved. But again, maybe you find it plenty challenging/rewarding as it is.
You seem to have developed a mistaken impression that I care what you think about me. You seem like a humourless, dour kind of person who gets his kicks from belittling other people. I think I know everything about you that I care to know, by this point.
I don't expect you to care, but then I get these little lectures anyway. But thanks for so readily verifying your projection of putting "people into neat boxes which you can dismiss or ignore".