Who misses the days when conversation here was stimulating?

[Bells]

Bingo! Couldn't agree more! And you can bet your house that Darwin still would have been pushing his "evolution hypothesis" and the evidence, to the people that matter...Mainstream science, until eventually accepted on the weight of observational evidence before becoming the accepted theory.
He would not be announcing or trying to gain favour or support on any science forum.
I have said that many times.

And how has the person in question announced or tried to gain favour or support in the science sub-forums?

You do realise that the Fringe sub-section of this website is not scientific, yes?

I don't complain about what anyone believes, including religious beliefs.
But when those same people post their IMHO, nonsense, and at the same time deride science, I'll try and show them the error of their ways.
Kitt believes in God...My Mrs is a true Christian in the true sense of the word.
Kitt does not substitute his beliefs for scenarios such as for example, "a Universe from nothing" My Mrs condones my agnostic type nature, [although she says she does pray for me] and carries on her way without my interference.
I only delve into the fringe, to try and correct errors [remembering I do it from a position of a lay person which I have never hidden]
I also believe certain parties post threads to do there best to rile the science nerds amongst us. The worst most blatant one of them I believe was MR's thread basically claiming science does not, nor has not benefitted mankind.
Do you believe that sort of nonsense and shit stirring should go unquestioned?

Of course I don't.

But there is a difference between questioning and posting as though you are being personally insulted that such posts exists. I don't see delving into Fringe to correct errors as a problem. If the person does not wish to change their minds or change their personal beliefs, is it worth getting abusive and personal? You can't provide examples of how science has benefited mankind in response? After all, that should be a fairly easy one to deal with, shouldn't it? I mean, oh no, someone insulted science! Does that mean we should all grab our pitchforks and torches and gather at the gate to burn them at the stake?

Those certain parties are posting their threads in non-science forums. If you do not want your senses to be offended, don't read those sub-forums. There are many here who only post in the sub-forums that directly interest them. There are some posters here who post solely in the science subsections and never bother scrolling down to any other sub-forums because they have no interest in it. Why can't you do the same?

For example, I have no interest in what is posted in the Eastern Philosophy, so I rarely visit that sub-forum except on a few occasions to remove spammers or review a complaint. I'm not going to go in there and correct what they are writing because I find it personally offensive that someone is being unscientific.

That's actually contradictory Bells imho. Remember a scientific theory is always a work in progress. That is what science is built on...that is the foundation stone.
When people make claims about UFO's and Aliens performing medical procedures, all mostly are in out of the way places, with no evidence other then word of mouth, or some hazy photograph. You know wthis yourself, as you have applied the blow torch yourself to those claims.

Of course I have. Doesn't mean I am going to go all up in arms because he's not changing his mind.

If he or anyone else wants to exist in a life of make believe, so what?

It doesn't affect me at all. It is contained in the appropriate sub-forum and when I don't want to read it, I don't read it. Sure, I'll point out when he or anyone else is misrepresenting articles, or posting contradictory things in the hope that he corrects it and I will challenge that and often do, sometimes even viciously. And I have pushed to close the gaps in the rules that deal with that issue. But that doesn't mean that I expect him to believe any differently. I don't expect him to change what he posts or what he believes in. I would just like that he posts it differently in that he puts in his input instead of just quoting everything and references what he posts. Certainly, I would much prefer it if people were more objective and able to apply their beliefs objectively, but I see belief in such things in the same way as I see people who have religious beliefs and pray to their deity of choice. People believe in that stuff in the same way that people believe in God.

I'll put it this way, have you ever challenged your wife to prove that God exists and to do so in a scientific manner? Or demanded that she look at all scientific evidence that counters the bible and demanded she acknowledges it and changes what she believes?

I suspect you'll find that the dinner you are making for her would end up on your head if you did.

 

[Kittamaru]

I'll put it this way, have you ever challenged your wife to prove that God exists and to do so in a scientific manner? Or demanded that she look at all scientific evidence that counters the bible and demanded she acknowledges it and changes what she believes?

I suspect you'll find that the dinner you are making for her would end up on your head if you did.

hardly an apt comparison - his wife is not going around claiming she is right and everyone else is wrong and that science is "keeping the truth from getting out" or other such nonsense. She is simply holding her personal belief.

One is entitled to their opinion... the problem is many feel they can force that opinion on others as though they were facts. Surely you can see the difference...?

now, quite obviously, a discussion on the subject would be possible only if both sides were willing to abide by a standard of behavior; demanding evidence against your claim whilst simultaneously providing nothing substantial to back your own (extraordinary claim = extraordinary evidence) AND ignoring the evidence presented to you... well, I have no word for it other than dishonesty... what would you call it?

 

[milkweed]

Viva la revolución and win by consent!

sooo... how many bags of popcorn have you munched today?

 

[Magical Realist]

One is entitled to their opinion... the problem is many feel they can force that opinion on others as though they were facts.

How is posting accounts and videos and photos of sightings of ghosts, ufos, and bigfoot "forcing my opinion" on anyone? Please explain how that brainwashing process works here, unless your beliefs are so fragile that these posts are refuting them. Is that what's happening? Does that explain your hyperdefensiveness on this issue?

 

[Daecon]

I did not agree that "needs to undergo scientific scrutiny". Posts in Religion do not NEED to undergo scientific scrutiny. Posts in UFOs Ghosts and Monsters do not NEED to undergo scientific scrutiny.

They may not NEED to be, but they're going to be.

Because whatever else this website may have started out being, it's now a science forum, and that means the arguments made will be judged according to scientific methodology.

Don't pretend that ghosts, bigfoot, flying saucers, and whatever else - are scientifically valid concepts when you refuse to acknowledge that same science, or worse, blatantly deny it whenever it contradicts you.

 

[Kittamaru]

How is posting accounts and videos and photos of sightings of ghosts, ufos, and bigfoot "forcing my opinion" on anyone? Please explain how that brainwashing process works here, unless your beliefs are so fragile that these posts are refuting them. Is that what's happening? Does that explain your hyperdefensiveness on this issue?

It isn't that you post the videos - it's that you repeatedly ignore more plausible explanations, biological basics, and simple facts, judge evidence against a double standard (remember, fuzzy pictures of Bigfoot is good enough to convince you it's real, yet close ups and even video of a unicorn you claimed was inadmissible), attempt to disregard the burden of proof, and continuously twist or outright ignore what people say... if you would actually discuss the subject instead of preaching it and claiming it as irrefutable fact, there would be no problem at all.

 

[Magical Realist]

They may not NEED to be, but they're going to be.

Because whatever else this website may have started out being, it's now a science forum, and that means the arguments made will be judged according to scientific methodology.

Oh? Are you the new administrator here? Do you now own the site? What happened to James?

 

[Magical Realist]

It isn't that you post the videos - it's that you repeatedly ignore more plausible explanations, biological basics, and simple facts, judge evidence against a double standard (remember, fuzzy pictures of Bigfoot is good enough to convince you it's real, yet close ups and even video of a unicorn you claimed was inadmissible), attempt to disregard the burden of proof, and continuously twist or outright ignore what people say... if you would actually discuss the subject instead of preaching it and claiming it as irrefutable fact, there would be no problem at all.

I never once claimed anything was irrefutable and ALWAYS address all your valid objections with sound arguments. Note I said VALID objections. What I DO claim is that they haven't been refuted by anything you people post here. And so far they haven't. Except on a few occassions, like that ufo over San Diego and the monster photographed over a hospital patient.

 

[Daecon]

I never once claimed anything was irrefutable and ALWAYS address all your valid objections with sound arguments. Note I said VALID objections. What I DO claim is that they haven't been refuted by anything you people post here. And so far they haven't.

You don't just move goalposts, you remove them.

 

[Bells]

hardly an apt comparison - his wife is not going around claiming she is right and everyone else is wrong and that science is "keeping the truth from getting out" or other such nonsense. She is simply holding her personal belief.

One is entitled to their opinion... the problem is many feel they can force that opinion on others as though they were facts. Surely you can see the difference...?

How is anyone forcing their opinion onto you because they believe UFO's are aliens?

No, really, how?

Is he holding your eyelids open and tied you down to a chair while making you watch dodgy shakey UFO videos over and over again?

Is he forcing you to acknowledge their existence? No. Is he demanding you take it seriously? No. Is he demanding you believe as he does? No. He's posting what he believes in, just as you posted what your religious beliefs are and you expect people to respect that.

What he believes in is no different to a theist scoffing that someone is an atheist or doesn't believe in God.

What he posts as his so called evidence, is no different to someone referring to the Bible as proof of their religious beliefs.

One is not only entitled to their opinion, they are also entitled to their beliefs. He isn't affecting life in general, nor does what he believes in affect how you, I or anyone else goes about their daily lives. Which is much more than can be said for the religious crowd who often go out of their way to support anti-scientific measures that do directly impact on the lives of others.

Which do you think people should be focusing their attention on more?

What he believes in, the God's people believe in, is all fluff and has zero substance. So why get so hung up on it?

What is it with the OMG HE'S NOT POSTING SCIENCE!!!1!!? Half the people protesting his unscientific beliefs don't even post in the science forums. You certainly have not in weeks.

Go to the front page and scroll up, right to the top and you will see a big banner with "Science" written on it. Just beneath that are 10 sub-forums that are all discussing "science". Enjoy! Immerse yourself in scientific discourse.

If you want scientific discourse and you are looking for it in the pseudoscience sub-forums, then you are doing it wrong.

 

[milkweed]

They may not NEED to be, but they're going to be.

Because whatever else this website may have started out being, it's now a science forum, and that means the arguments made will be judged according to scientific methodology.

Don't pretend that ghosts, bigfoot, flying saucers, and whatever else - are scientifically valid concepts when you refuse to acknowledge that same science, or worse, blatantly deny it whenever it contradicts you.

Says YOU! but the Fringe is there for all to see.
Religion is there for all to see.
Bells gave a history of this forum for you to see.

And not everyone there judges things according to your interpretation of 'scientific methodology'.

yawn. Its not about me.

 

[Daecon]

Bells, how do you feel about anti-vax advocates?

 

[paddoboy]

And how has the person in question announced or tried to gain favour or support in the science sub-forums?

At least four or five just off the top of my head, have all posted their anti mainstream science stuff in mainstream science, in the first instance, before removal.

You do realise that the Fringe sub-section of this website is not scientific, yes?

Yes. Are you saying that therefor they are exempt from scientific scrutiny?

But there is a difference between questioning and posting as though you are being personally insulted that such posts exists. I don't see delving into Fringe to correct errors as a problem. If the person does not wish to change their minds or change their personal beliefs, is it worth getting abusive and personal? You can't provide examples of how science has benefited mankind in response? After all, that should be a fairly easy one to deal with, shouldn't it? I mean, oh no, someone insulted science! Does that mean we should all grab our pitchforks and torches and gather at the gate to burn them at the stake?

I try and state my position and the scientific facts from my position as a lay person, to the best of my ability. But we do get even scientists insulted here.
Remember Professor Link Bennett? Remember Rajesh Trivedi?
It's just a shame some need to resort to outright dishonesty and misrepresentations.

Those certain parties are posting their threads in non-science forums. If you do not want your senses to be offended, don't read those sub-forums. There are many here who only post in the sub-forums that directly interest them. There are some posters here who post solely in the science subsections and never bother scrolling down to any other sub-forums because they have no interest in it. Why can't you do the same?

I'm not insulted. I could use that old cliche, think of the children but I won't.

For example, I have no interest in what is posted in the Eastern Philosophy, so I rarely visit that sub-forum except on a few occasions to remove spammers or review a complaint. I'm not going to go in there and correct what they are writing because I find it personally offensive that someone is being unscientific.

I have never visited that section at all.

Of course I have. Doesn't mean I am going to go all up in arms because he's not changing his mind.

But I'm not all up in arms. I bet you have more personal "reports" about me than from me.

If he or anyone else wants to exist in a life of make believe, so what?

Agreed. So there's nothing wrong in deriding and refuting to the best of my ability.
Remember the children!

It doesn't affect me at all. It is contained in the appropriate sub-forum and when I don't want to read it, I don't read it. Sure, I'll point out when he or anyone else is misrepresenting articles, or posting contradictory things in the hope that he corrects it and I will challenge that and often do, sometimes even viciously. And I have pushed to close the gaps in the rules that deal with that issue. But that doesn't mean that I expect him to believe any differently. I don't expect him to change what he posts or what he believes in. I would just like that he posts it differently in that he puts in his input instead of just quoting everything and references what he posts. Certainly, I would much prefer it if people were more objective and able to apply their beliefs objectively, but I see belief in such things in the same way as I see people who have religious beliefs and pray to their deity of choice. People believe in that stuff in the same way that people believe in God.

Religious beliefs are one thing. Anti science propaganda, either religious or just plain pseudoscience, is another.
Do you remember science stalwarts such as Aid, Grumpy, Phys something or other. It's rather disheartening I would imagine for scientists like the ones I mentioned, to continually see this sort of nonsense. Why do we not see tham anymore?
And I'm sure we have two or three who post their non science stuff just for that reason.

I'll put it this way, have you ever challenged your wife to prove that God exists and to do so in a scientific manner? Or demanded that she look at all scientific evidence that counters the bible and demanded she acknowledges it and changes what she believes?

Not at all. Why? Because she does not bother me about my agnostic nature. We tolerate each other. She has her singing group over once a month...no problems! [except they all tell me that they are praying for me]
But I do participate in that singing group when they start mixing and drinking kava.

I suspect you'll find that the dinner you are making for her would end up on your head if you did.

 

[Bells]

Bells, how do you feel about anti-vax advocates?

I am pretty certain I made my feelings on that subject well known.

I think they pose a direct danger to society and people do die because of what they practice.

I also believe that because of the direct danger and risk they pose to society, they should not be given a soapbox to vent their dangerous ideology.

 

[Magical Realist]

Bells, how do you feel about anti-vax advocates?

Did I ever say people shouldn't be vaccinated? Where? I only said we should wait longer before vaccinating babies with so many shots at once. Spread them out over the years to keep the mercury and aluminum levels down. What's so horrible about that?

 

[Kittamaru]

How is anyone forcing their opinion onto you because they believe UFO's are aliens?

No, really, how?

Is he holding your eyelids open and tied you down to a chair while making you watch dodgy shakey UFO videos over and over again?

Is he forcing you to acknowledge their existence? No. Is he demanding you take it seriously? No. Is he demanding you believe as he does? No. He's posting what he believes in, just as you posted what your religious beliefs are and you expect people to respect that.

What he believes in is no different to a theist scoffing that someone is an atheist or doesn't believe in God.

What he posts as his so called evidence, is no different to someone referring to the Bible as proof of their religious beliefs.

One is not only entitled to their opinion, they are also entitled to their beliefs. He isn't affecting life in general, nor does what he believes in affect how you, I or anyone else goes about their daily lives. Which is much more than can be said for the religious crowd who often go out of their way to support anti-scientific measures that do directly impact on the lives of others.

Which do you think people should be focusing their attention on more?

What he believes in, the God's people believe in, is all fluff and has zero substance. So why get so hung up on it?

What is it with the OMG HE'S NOT POSTING SCIENCE!!!1!!? Half the people protesting his unscientific beliefs don't even post in the science forums. You certainly have not in weeks.

Go to the front page and scroll up, right to the top and you will see a big banner with "Science" written on it. Just beneath that are 10 sub-forums that are all discussing "science". Enjoy! Immerse yourself in scientific discourse.

If you want scientific discourse and you are looking for it in the pseudoscience sub-forums, then you are doing it wrong.

If you wish to look at it like that... one could argue the same about such topics as anti-vax, anti-abortion, and child port fantasies (after all, they aren't forcing YOU to do it, right?)

You see why that argument doesn't hold water, right?

 

[Kittamaru]

I am pretty certain I made my feelings on that subject well known.

I think they pose a direct danger to society and people do die because of what they practice.

I also believe that because of the direct danger and risk they pose to society, they should not be given a soapbox to vent their dangerous ideology.

Oh my, so their opinion is worth less than that of a paranormal believer?

 

[paddoboy]

Did I ever say people shouldn't be vaccinated? Where? I only said we should wait longer before vaccinating babies with so many shots at once. Spread them out over the years to keep the mercury and aluminum levels down. What so horrible about that?

But the vaccination/medicine came about through science, right? And you did say science has not done anything for mankind, right again?

 

[Magical Realist]

If you wish to look at it like that... one could argue the same about such topics as anti-vax, anti-abortion, and child port fantasies (after all, they aren't forcing YOU to do it, right?)

You see why that argument doesn't hold water, right?

LOL! Now I'm being compared to a child pornographer. How low will they go?

 

[Magical Realist]

But the vaccination/medicine came about through science, right? And you did say science has not done anything for mankind, right again?

Where did I say that? Quote it please..