June 3rd, 2011, 02:45 AM
The atmosphere her is stifling. No wonder so few people post.
The purpose of this thread is to show the narrowmindedness of the status quo here, not serve as a soapbox for their insults.( sound familiar?)
Everybody that disagrees with the sacred cows here is called an idiot no matter how much more science they apply.
Post here, I will get your back.
I have challenged and defeated these smug rude narrowminded loudmouths.
Yea, I never post here, because I'm scared too.
No really, terribly frightened.
See, I'm shaking.
Part of learning is being wrong, never be afraid to ask a question or query. I ask a few questions now and again to learn. If you feel an idiot or are intimidated by some members in the know it might be best to reflect on what you want to get out of a post.
Granted some people are rude on here but look at it from their point of view, they reply to many people with their own claptrap ideas thinking to know better than people who have degrees or higher when it comes to science.
People are rude; that's life. The best thing is to learn what you can and be tactful with certain people.
Ego often plays a lot in a man's mind, there is no such thing as 'defeat', you can't 'win' a conversation, only look a fool for trying. If you go around life with that attitude you aren't going to get anywhere and most people will think of you as an ass and as a result treat you rudely.I have challenged and defeated these smug rude narrowminded loudmouths.
What ye sew, so shall ye reap. It's really quite simple. Evaluate why you feel that you are intimidated or have to challenge others in life as it probably stems from some psychological opinion, or thought process that is unchallenged in your own mind, reflect on what it is and adjust it, for your own good.
And here I am not intending to be rude, so if I come across as that bare in mind I am not meaning to, merley sharing advice. Perhaps this is what other members are doing for you, they just have their own way of doing it.
Anyway good luck with changing it and flushing that ego away, or at least trimming it down a little
June 3rd, 2011, 07:57 AM
I find the atmosphere very open and invigorating. A very diverse range of individuals post: eleven year old kids with an interest in science to amateur philosophers in their seventies; car mechanics to retired university lecturers; tree hugging, left wing, bleeding heart liberals to died in the wool Republicans who make Ghengis Khan look left wing; rampant, hostile atheists to committed Christian fundamentalists.Originally Posted by Eleven
And this wonderful range of members brings with it an equally eclectic mix of experience, knowledge and opinions. I concede that if one is troubled by diversity, uncomfortable with contrary viewpoints, discomfited by free wheeling arguments, that then one might find the atmosphere stifling. Otherwise I am at a loss as to why you would think so.
I believe, as I pointed out above, the status quo is a rather dynamic beast. I fail to see how, given the diverse nature of the membership you can call it narrow minded.The purpose of this thread is to show the narrowmindedness of the status quo here
Let's cut to the chase. Of course, in truth, I can see why you call it narrowminded: your ideas have been vigorously opposed. So is the vigorous opposition to novel ideas proof of narrowmindedness? I can see where an individual unschooled in the methodology of science would think so, but they would be totally wrong.
Any novel idea proposed in science is subject to intense scrutiny at every and all levels, for an extended period of time until it is either accepted or abandoned. That scrutiny should begin with the indivdual themselves, ruthlessly querying every aspect of their speculation. Then perhaps open discussion with colleagues where they will - if they have any respect for the proposer at all - attempt to utterly dismantle the idea. If it survives intact perhaps a paper in a peer reviewed journal - more deeply critical analysis. Then, with the hypothesis public, a torrent of contrary evidence, probing questions, criticisms of experimental techniques, etc. And on and on and on until the hypothesis is validated or discarded. And then it begins again until the hypothesis is admitted to the ranks of the "provisionally accepted as quite possibly true and damn sight better than anything else we have at the moment".
So what is it that makes you think you should be immune to that process?
No. You have been called an idiot because your attacks have been ill conceived, unsubstantiated, poorly argued, technical flawed, logically bankrupt will-o-the wisps.Everybody that disagrees with the sacred cows here is called an idiot no matter how much more science they apply.
Post here, I will get your back.
Do you also write in English?
In your dreams.I have challenged and defeated these smug rude narrowminded loudmouths.
Rather than posting a pathetic whine about how you have been treated, if you were serious about your speculations you would be investing the time in strengthening your arguments, building an evidential case, and countering the substantive criticisms made to date.
June 3rd, 2011, 09:16 AM
Ah... Sweet delicious irony, how you do bring such welcomed smiles to my face.
I wonder if perhaps you are not familiar with this particular idiom, or if it's specific to the US maybe? In case there is any confusion for any reason, in essence he was saying, "If you feel similar to me on this topic, then post here and dive forward into battle... Do not fear. When you do, I will stand with you and fight by your side against our common foe."Post here, I will get your back.
Do you also write in English?
Or, in short, "I've got your back."
Well said. Enter now the obligatory peer review cartoon image:
BTW - @Quantime - It's called an inferiority complex.
June 3rd, 2011, 09:35 AM
I haven't run across it before. I spend quite a lot of time in the US so I should have heard it. Perhaps it's a generational thing? Thanks anyway for the clarification and my apologies to Eleven, on that particular point.I wonder if perhaps you are not familiar with this particular idiom, or if it's specific to the US maybe?Post here, I will get your back.
Do you also write in English?
June 3rd, 2011, 12:28 PM
Your idea will only be called idiotic if it is based on a misconception about the theory you are arguing against, which is often the case.
funny that - i've never been afraid to post here
then again, sticks and stones etc.
after all this is just a forum, not life or death
If noone disagreed with me, it would be pointless for me to be here.
I'm looking for scientific statements, not conclusion based statements
or personal digs.
You are allowed to agree with the status quo?funny that - i've never been afraid to post here
then again, sticks and stones etc
Freedom!
It doesn't matter what you see
Or into it what you read.
You can do it your own way
If it's done just how I say!
Science arguements at this level are subject to interpretation, and can be denied ad infinitum.
In math there is one answer, not due to interpretation. Subject to denial, yes....
In math, the easiest formula that will solve a problem is the used formula.
Ergo in a competition there is a clear, tangible winner. This time it was me.
Earth-centric theory could predict the positions of the stars, but it required more (unneccesary) math (epicycles).
My ego doesn't depend on this, I don't even consider myself a mathemetician, After so much denial and insults I chose math as the battleground because the winner is obvious, not voted on based on popularity or politics.
I used my brain (philosophy mostly) and algebra to battle a mathemetician (David VS Goliath)
I won.
Don't call it a "battle" if that bothers you.
Call it "I was right and he was wrong" if you prefer.
Detractors to this point have thrown their credibility in the trash as far as I'm concerned.
Just like high school. I was unpopular and the teachers tried to pencil whip me as much as possible.
They tried to mark my correct math answers as wrong, until i went to the principle.
Then all they could do is take of twenty points for using a pen.(no scratch-outs or errors).
The only non-perfect score I made in math or science.
There are somen nice people here.
I noticed the Big Bang rant has been removed and the disclaimer of the GR as well.
I appreciate these changes, they will go far in creating a more fair environment.
If you think you've won any argument here, you are completely delusional.
I smell a hint of the Galileo Gambit (well, that and a huge amount of inability to grasp themes and central points).
Seriously, Eleven. You're just making things worse by carrying on like this. Focus on the merit of your arguments. You will only convince people by focusing on and sharing that, and by addressing specific criticisms and counter arguments without whining like a 3 year old that you're being oppressed.
I don't want to "convince" anybody.You will only convince people
I just successfully argue individual points.
I'm sorry if egos get hurt here.
I don't have an EGO so I don't always know how to act around egotists.
catch22:
A. Talk all science, while people are throwing rocks at your head.
Insults and distortions go unchallenged and are assumed to have truth.
B. Address insults and distortions and you are now the bad guy who doesn't talk ALL science.
If they say they hate you, don't quote them, you will get in trouble.
---
Poor sports can only win by twisting the rules and the truth.
I only enjoy winning when rules are fair and the opponent is worthy.
I'm not sure either will happen here...
June 3rd, 2011, 04:11 PM
I don't really want to give 'my friend, this is the internet' speech. Forum members are nothing more than disembodied typists who may or may not be a scientist. Would you believe it if someone at the other end claimed they were God. You have to dive in thinking that no one here is a scientist. It's like conversing with God, there's absolutely no proof of authenticity. This is a forum for Christ's sake.
People have no idea who you really are. Oh yes, they would want you to believe in their vocation and yet it is painfully obvious that it can't be proven. You can put up a recent photo, list any number of degrees, indicate that you work in Silicon Valley or whatever and there's no way for you to verify it unless you actually knew the person. Even then you cannot communicate that knowledge to forum members with absolute assurance.
I learned long ago that it doesn't require a whole lot of science expertise to sound knowledgeable. Hell, everyone has information at their fingertips anyway. I take the whole science forum thing with a grain of salt and do not put much emphasis on people here being scientists. Shit, no one knows what I do except me. Tell me how I could convince everyone 100% that I am a scientist?
You worry too much and are way too sensitive for forum banter. Relax and maybe think of everyone in their underwear or something.
Well, to be perfectly frank, right now you're doing neither.
Thank you. I will try to take your sound advise.You worry too much and are way too sensitive for forum banter. Relax and maybe think of everyone in their underwear or something.
They are not scientists, are they? I feel silly, now.
Specific critcisms or arguements?You will only convince people by focusing on and sharing that, and by addressing specific criticisms and counter arguments.
Thats exactly what I want.
I'm merely saying that its like being on trial for a crime, if there is no proof then there is doubt, if there is doubt then there's no conviction...... You know, I think I might use that when the God argument comes up again.
11..... another piece of advice: it shouldn't ever be possible for anyone to be insulted on the internet. Of course if you're good at returning fire then by all means do so...it's entertaining.
not exactly - i never felt i had to hold back to voice my opinion
provided you can make a decent case for your arguments, you'll have a discussion, where all the tools for a debate are at the debaters disposal, including the infinite list of fallacies - there's no point getting too upset when someone tries one below the belt or tries to claim a position of authority, these tools are sometimes appropriate, and sometimes not
Started me thinking on what a person should look for when trying to determine whether the poster is a genuine scientist or not. Surely there must be some subtle things in their style or language that might tip the scales of believability.
One thing that makes me dubious is the poster who delivers excessive knowledge. Many times this results in lengthy boring posts. So trying to impress me does not impress me. I could be wrong, this isn't an exact science.
Scientists are first humans, and all humans are different. You seem to be searching for a scientist archetype or mold... a perfect one size fits all version of "scientist"... something which you can gather from a few words online, and that's simply not going to happen. You can no more tell whether I have brown hair or blond from my posts than you can tell whether or not I'm a scientist by profession or just someone interested.
The beauty is, it doesn't matter. You could be 7 years old or 70, self-educated, ivy league, or completely blind to the world of information around us, born in zimbabwe or in boston... on the internet, all that matters is the merit of your position, the quality of your argument, and the skills you show in expressing them and responding to criticisms from others. In short, all this talk about whether people are "real scientists" or not COMPLETELY misses the point.
You haven't successfully argued any point on any thread. If you believe you have then you are deluded. That is not a personal attack, but an objective observation.
So far you have offered nothing in any of your posts that is significant. You have failed to impress me in any way with either your intellect, education, knowledge or insight. Consequently nothing you could say could possibly impact on my ego. You can therefore proceed without fear of giving offence.
The science content of your posts has been close to zero or a hodge podge of undigested misinterpretation and misunderstanding. Perhaps this is due to your poor communication skills. Write more lucidly, bring more focus to your work and clarify when required. Then we may appreciate that you do have some grasp of science and some interesting contributions to make. Until then, when someone posts what looks like garbage they should expect a hostile response.
See the paragraph above: start saying something sensible and reasonable and you will get sensible and reasonable responses.
The rules are simple: if you make a unconventional claim it is your responsibility to provide the justification for the claim. You don't seem to feel this rule need apply to you. Don't you think, despite your protest, that that is somewhat egotistical?
Let's take your opening sentence and try and analyze it. I don't think anybody would argue with your words. Those words are the ultimate understatement as they blatantly state the obvious. In short it doesn't bode well towards you being a scientist at first glance. Any member could say something like that, IOW you don't need a scientific background in order to state it.
It could be you're condescending for some reason but if I were to notice similar statements from you over time I might be inclined to think you are not a scientist. I wouldn't consider such a statement as good scientific fodder for argumentative purposes.
It would be something I'd look for but again, it isn't a critical issue. I'm simply forming opinion for whatever it's worth. As I said previously, this is not an exact science nor do I think it a science. However I am entitled to form an opinion just as we all eventually do.
Do you take pride in this fact?
I would. There are arguably a small number of scientists in whom the characteristics of a scientist take precedence of over the characteristics of a human. Consider Maslow's heirarchy, then think of those instances where the scientist ignores the lower levels of the pyramid and focuses on the Self Actualisation, to his benefit as a scientist (in the short term) but to his detriement as a human being.Let's take your opening sentence and try and analyze it. I don't think anybody would argue with your words.
As a general statement inow's comment is valid, as an asolute it is false.
It appears to be an affront to semantics and lexicology English to conflate understatement and blatantly obvious.
Equally it is a statement that could also be readily made by a scientist. Since it is, as a generality, a truthful statement there is nothing unscientific about a scientist saying it. Thus you can make no determination at all about inow's status in regard to scientist/not scientist.
That would appear to reflect more on you than on inow.
Really?
Hey!! This is my personal stereotypical view, not his. I wasn't forming anyone's opinion but my own. :-D Glad you picked up on the redundancy of my third sentence. You wouldn't know if I did it deliberately or not. Could be I was testing the waters,. Fact is the internet cannot tell you. If you had immediately read my post when I submitted it you will notice that I've edited that one particular sentence twice prior to this post of yours. Deliberate or not, doesn't matter. We should all be considered amateurs just because over the internet it is impossible to be 100% correct about anyone's science credentials.I would. There are arguably a small number of scientists in whom the characteristics of a scientist take precedence of over the characteristics of a human. Consider Maslow's heirarchy, then think of those instances where the scientist ignores the lower levels of the pyramid and focuses on the Self Actualisation, to his benefit as a scientist (in the short term) but to his detriement as a human being.Let's take your opening sentence and try and analyze it. I don't think anybody would argue with your words.
As a general statement inow's comment is valid, as an asolute it is false.
It appears to be an affront to semantics and lexicology English to conflate understatement and blatantly obvious.
Equally it is a statement that could also be readily made by a scientist. Since it is, as a generality, a truthful statement there is nothing unscientific about a scientist saying it. Thus you can make no determination at all about inow's status in regard to scientist/not scientist.
That would appear to reflect more on you than on inow.
Really?
Ophi does one thing that I like. Not many posts of his go by without him giving credit where credit is due. If Plato was the first to say the Sun is a burning ball of gas then he will usually acknowledge this fact before stating his view. I think that is something a good scientist will do.
Ophi, you're still one of my favorites.
I really don't think the credentials matter all that much. What is important is the quality of the argument and the extent to which it is supported by good data. When I attack the likes of Eleven or galexander I do so not because I suspect they lack qualifications (which as you rightly say we cannot readily determine over the internet), but I attack them because their arguments are self evidently poor and their supporting data and research are absent, trivial, or contradictory.
This isn't high school you know, hopefully none of us feel the need to fit in to an online science forum where, as zinjanthropos pointed out, you could be arguing with someone double or half your age. Do you feel the need to get on the good side of a 13 year old? A 95 year old? I don't think anyone else does, I sure don't, and I'm at the age where you're supposed to try to fit in. Judging by the way you referred to your high school years in the passed tense, you are passed that age.
Just let it be. Don't take it personally if someone else thinks your ideas are sh*t, even if they are.
Someone being an actual scientist doesn't really make them trustworthy either, inow is completely right that it is the content of the argument that matters. After all, Michael Behe is an actual biochemist, but Intelligent Design is bunk science.
I just thought I would take a moment, Eleven, to point out to you part of the reason why it's so hard to take you seriously. Besides the fact that you lace nearly every post with comments stating that insults are not productive yet simultaneously lob several insults yourself toward others, your comments are not even internally consistent, and this is why your logic is continually challenged.
Let me give you an example from this very thread. Earlier, you said this:
It doesn't take an advanced degree in hyperbolic topography or computational neuroscience or logical structures to see that you've just openly stipulated that you do, in fact, have an ego. You are the one who put forth this claim. You are the one who conceded that. You said, "My ego," and then further continued to make a statement about what it does and does not depend on.
Then, in the VERY NEXT POST you made, you said:
Even though this is one small example, and doesn't really matter in relation to your several other challenges with posting something which isn't utter bollocks, it WAS found within this very thread... a thread where you are lamenting about people criticizing you for use of poor logic, engaging in fallacies, and failing to communicate coherently. Additionally, even if we disregard this one example, there are countless other examples of you showing poor logic and making ignorant baseless assertions to be found throughout the site.
Further, you frequently talk about engaging in these discussions and how you are "winning." Does it not strike you as a bit ironic and hypocritical that a person who self-proclaims not to have an ego would so frequently mention their "winning" a debate? Personally, I find it in direct contradiction to your claim of having no ego, and I'm saying this calmly, kindly, and objectively.
The challenge, Eleven, is that you make fallacious and easily refuted claims of this nature fairly regularly, and instead of offering valid rebuttals you offer personal attack and whine about how people treat you.
My central point from the previous post seems to need repeating. It matters not one iota whether or not someone is a practicing scientist or the painter of 3-legged one eared crop-tailed dogs with only 2 colors on his palette and a bundle of cut corn husks for a brush. What matters is the way ideas are presented, supported, and defended. What matters is merit and clarity, not title and training.
I'm going to have to steal that :P.
I have had enough in my life to feel good about.
I don't need to have everybody accept my theory to make me feel some accomplishment.
I do believe profoundly that I have made an important breakthrough, leapfrogging science into the next chapter.
It would be a real loss for it to be buried with me.
Address arguements. Thats how it's supposed to work.When I attack the likes of Eleven or galexander I do so not because I suspect they lack qualifications (which as you rightly say we cannot readily determine over the internet), but I attack them because their arguments are self evidently poor and their supporting data and research are absent, trivial, or contradictory.
Not "attack the likes of".....
An ego depending on something is a visual concept for me that I didn't express verbally correctly.
I don't have ego needs because I have no ego; is that better?
Too many threads here are being corrupted by attacks on me, and my rude counters....
Can we limit these "discussions" to this thread and my gravity solved by a layman thread?
REMEMBER ME??????????????/
Now Keep Your Silly Posts To yourself or else I request other forum members to ignore you......... shall i ?????
Well Mr. Ophi's grandkid, I think this is exactly what the thread starter was intimating in his thread title, insult combined with intimidation. However you may feel justified since eleven does exactly the same thing in his OP. So are you bellowing from your own high standards and only temporarily feeling it necessary to lower them or are they always on par with the rampant vitriol that the OP suggests exists between members of the forum?REMEMBER ME??????????????/
Now Keep Your Silly Posts To yourself or else I request other forum members to ignore you......... shall i ?????
You have used no maths in this forum so far. Please show us that you have a mathematical background.
Not really, no. It's still quite obviously false.
Lol! You're the one who opened this thread. Jebus, you're a ridiculous jackass... and your "solution to gravity" has been shown flawed and inadequate. That's not personal, it just means you don't have the solution you think you do.
inow
Want A Permanent Solution to the "Eleven" problem........................................... .................................................. ...............................
ANS...
"LETS START IGNORING ELEVEN AND HIS POSTS...."
Thanks for the tip, but I kindly request you focus on your own behavior instead of mine.inow
oh come on i did not mean to hurt your feelings okay...Thanks for the tip, but I kindly request you focus on your own behavior instead of mine.inow
i was just talking in relation to eleven...........
and by the way ihave improved my behaviour enough at least i give no bad words........
Yes Alex, you look rather foolish yourself posting in bold and in huge fontsThanks for the tip, but I kindly request you focus on your own behavior instead of mine.inow
Why? As If You Dont Use Fonts????Yes Alex, you look rather foolish yourself posting in bold and in huge fontsThanks for the tip, but I kindly request you focus on your own behavior instead of mine.inow
So Unrealistic Of You
Anyways i always
Can't we all just..get along?
Rodney King
In other threads, I will endeaver to stay on subject.
I am not rerquired to respond to "statements" in other threads.
Arguing, corruption will be on your heads.
Lets respect the other folks here.
Back to topic "intimidated...."
Senior members who flame the threads of others want to post a thread, but don't want the same rules to apply to them.
They can make a dummy ask about his idea. Then his statements aren't subject to scrutiny. No proof, math, references or question answering neccessary.
THE PERFECT SOAPBOX..............
The dummy/s are there to agree and wow them at every turn.
If you disagree, the dummy acts like he is a corrolary victim, making the scrutinizer the enemy.
Setup another user, if you don't have a friend, to start a thread for you. But act normal from there, don't use the dummy for agreements, or multplicity.
It would greatly eliminate the flaming and make the playing field level for all.
....Justice and the American Way.
Apparently you don't even understand what the word font means. Perhaps you should look it up!Why? As If You Dont Use Fonts????
So Unrealistic Of You
Anyways i always
Again there is no reason to be intimidated. Shit, I've taken more abuse than a lot of folk but I just remember where I am and don't worry about it. Helps to recognize subtlety because when you show you can take direct criticism in its varying forms then all that's left is indirect. There are days when I'm tempted to hit back but who the hell cares. People can say anything they want about me and it means nothing. Try learning to appreciate sarcasm as an art form, more palatable that way. I understand the nuances of posting because respondents are people first and all people are different.
Yes I agree that I think there are people who try to appear the intellectual type, not everyone can do it, but a world of information at their fingertips can help immensely. I agree that sycophants are present in the forum but what does sucking up do for anyone....a pat on the back from someone who could in reality be a complete charlatan.
Stay steady and keep an even keel. It doesn't hurt to admit when you've screwed up either. Remember it's impossible to be embarrassed when no one knows who you are. The people responsible for putting this forum on the internet would be the first to admit any thoughts they had about only scientists posting here were completely delusional.
I'm actually on your side here because I think a forum should always encourage posting, as long as it is acceptable to a moderator. All those members and yet so few post. By the way I don't really care about your gravity theory and I'm not even sure I've even looked at it. I hope it's in pseudo or new hypotheses, places where threads should be flame retardant.
Eleven - I have to say, we've seen the persecuted swan act from several members long before you, will see it from many members after you, and you're really no different in that regard.
I do have to ask you, though... If you hate it so much at this site and have such disgust for the members, why do you continue to hang around? You're under no obligation to stay.
I agree with you, and I am challenging myself to be on subject.Eleven - I have to say, we've seen the persecuted swan act from several members long before you, will see it from many members after you, and you're really no different in that regard.
I do have to ask you, though... If you hate it so much at this site and have such disgust for the members, why do you continue to hang around? You're under no obligation to stay.
I am likely not special or treated worse than any other non-status quo poster.
I hate noone here.
I am frustrated with some here, their approaches to debating topics...I hate, the feeling of injustice.
Often, clear disprovable statements are not scientifically disproven, but met with mockery and grandstanding.
Questions are asked, but the answers I give are not researched or responded to.
The "credibilty" game is also a fallacious method in discrediting OT'ers.
Good scientists don't do that. They are intelligent, impartial, and can debug bad science easily.
A good scientist will figure the math for you, and tell you if it works....
I see it happen a lot here. Keep it up.
Edited to clarify
sounds like a "true scotsman" definition to me - that's what we would all scientists to be like, but tbh scientists are human and subject to the frailties of any other human being
i think marinx that you that we should probably stop this thread........
for certain UNCERTAIN reasons
for certain UNCERTAIN reasonsI was so sure you'd be the first."LETS START IGNORING ELEVEN AND HIS POSTS...."
for certain UNCERTAIN reasonsI was so sure you'd be the first."LETS START IGNORING ELEVEN AND HIS POSTS...."
You're going to have to figure that out yourself.
for certain UNCERTAIN reasonsI was so sure you'd be the first."LETS START IGNORING ELEVEN AND HIS POSTS...."
NO I'M NOT............. :xYou're going to have to figure that out yourself.
for certain UNCERTAIN reasonsI was so sure you'd be the first."LETS START IGNORING ELEVEN AND HIS POSTS...."
I meant without help from somebody elseNO I'M NOT............. :xYou're going to have to figure that out yourself.
for certain UNCERTAIN reasonsI was so sure you'd be the first."LETS START IGNORING ELEVEN AND HIS POSTS...."
"Blessed are the cheesemakers".
what ? you mean, like you and me stop posting ?
or do you know of any other way to kill threads that don't involve killing all contributors ?
The crazy thing is, that in this time and space, I see contextual legitimacy to this statement.
your getting me wrong .... i mean stopping any more contributions to the thread and closing this silly and really inapropriate thread of urging people to oppose eleven ..........who he himself started and then says people on TSF insult him..............He is intimidating us all :xwhat ? you mean, like you and me stop posting ?
or do you know of any other way to kill threads that don't involve killing all contributors ?
ahem, for starters, i have no moderator rights in this part of the forum, and secondly i like silly threads, it brings out my inner troll
oh ya so as to bring out your inner toll and vent it out in the directioin of eleven and making the atmosphere of the science forum .......UNINTERESTING,INTIMIDATING AND ABUSIVE with people like eleven having inferiority complexes all around???????????????????..... :x
having a laugh is abusive ? if you or anyone else wants to play the victim, be my guest, but you're no victim of mine
ok....ill join the bandwagon
Well I just spent 4 hours the other day checking something, posted a correction/update and got accused of bumping the thread even though it was already right near the top.
Moderators ->
:wink:
I think you will find that eleven doesn't have an inferiority complex.....he's just inferior.
Now that may seem like a trite and even cruel comment, but look at the evidence. Eleven has demonstrated four decidedly negative features in his posts on this forum. (I assume eleven is male - women just aren't that dumb.)
1. There are multiple instances where eleven has shown they have no understanding of current scientific understanding. I am not stating that he should agree with current positions, but if he is going to disagree it behoves him to have such an understanding.
2. In a parallel manner eleven has shown no understanding of the scientific method. He seems wholly unaware of the processes that foster new discoveries, unaware of the drive to be novel within the academic community, unaware of the power of critical examination of new hypotheses to weed out those that are deficient.
3. He has shown zero willingness to entertain alternative views and explanations offered by other forum members. His mind is closed, his posts agenda ridden, his entire attitude biased in the extreme.
4. The cohesiveness and logic of his posts have been sorely lacking.
So, yes - eleven is inferior in those ways relating to the application, understanding and discussion of science. He may be great at baseball and a terrific drinking buddy, but that's not what we are about here.
Alex-The Great
Do you feel better now?
My behaviour sank to a bad level, but my science has STILL gone undisproven, any of it.
You will never admit anything non-status quo to be correct under any circumstance.
I know that. If other readers knew that I would be OK.
You can't disprove me with science, so attacks on my credibility is all you have.
There is exciting new information about galaxies I speak of elesewhere in pseudoscience.
I deserve to self promote after the VOLUMINOUS rants against me
forgot to say edit for content
Would that be that thread with 6 posts, of which 4 are yours, 1 is someone else and 1 is me warning you to stop talking to yourself?Well I just spent 4 hours the other day checking something, posted a correction/update and got accused of bumping the thread even though it was already right near the top.
Moderators ->
:wink:
If you have a complaint about that, by all means PM me, post it in Feeback or PM an admin. This is not the place for snippy little jabs at the mean ol' moderators.
You have posted no science, just babble...
*Yawn* Are you children still bickering? Grow up. Eleven if you're intimidated to post that's because its a behaviour you have developed from other members not taking you seriously or displaying a certain amount of knowledge that you happened not to have. That's all, there is nothing more to it. The ego, the fear and the 'attacking posts' of others... it's all in your head. So let it go and stop defending yourself at every single opportunity, if others don't want to listen to you, or insist on 'attacking' you at every turn change your behaviour. I've learned that in life often its not what the hell is wrong with other people but what the hell is wrong with yourself. You think others are to blame when in fact it is you who are causing their behaviour around you.
The only ones I've seen grown up in this entire conversation is the old buggers. Need I say their names? Follow their example and make yourself seem mature and coherent and maybe you won't get an inferiority complex or feel the need to start whining to each other.
So? What purpose in posting that does that serve? This is general discussion, no science is needed.You have posted no science, just babble...
If I were mod of general discussion I would have moved this entire thread into the trash by now, because it blatently is garbage. And eleven, that's an opinion, not an attack.
I'm sorry.
I will probably take a break from making wild science statements for awhile.....
edit I didn't see the previous post.
We're arguing ABOUT arguing at this point.
I am ready to bury the GDMF hatchet.
Don't apologise, stand up and grow tall. Just make sure that when you do you learn gracefully. Do what you want, just remember that it will go down differently with different people when you start sharing some of your wild science statements.
Hell you could publish the mother of them, as long as they are credible and understandable and actually have mathematical formulae that works behind them. Work on learning some science or at least learn to better explain your science in a way people can understand.
Interesting thread. It brings out the best and worse of human diversity, or as I like to put it "programming differences". Proof that world peace will never occur exists right here in this very thread. I've yet to drive to or from work without finding some idiot on the road, the others are saying the same about me. Yet I feel I'm in the right. Nuff said.
[quote="Eleven"]Alex-The Great
Do you feel better now?
My behaviour sank to a bad level, but my science has STILL gone undisproven, any of it.
You will never admit anything non-status quo to be correct under any circumstance.
I know that. If other readers knew that I would be OK.
You can't disprove me with science, so attacks on my credibility is all you have.
There is exciting new information about galaxies I speak of elesewhere in pseudoscience.
I deserve to self promote after the VOLUMINOUS rants against me
forgot to say edit for content[/quote ]
WHEN YOUR THEORIES DON'T HAVE CONSIDERABLE PROOFS THEN THEY ARE CONSIDERED DISPROVEN..............
Perhaps your arguments would be stronger with the addition of another smilie and a few more words in ALL CAPS. Just a thought.
Is this the sarcasm thread of zijnanthropus?
inow 8)
Now inow is your man....... tomorrow if i say something in acceptance to what you say and inow regrets it then you would say Alex is my man ..........
But i asure you this would never happen as long as i'm on the forum
edited and replaced:Simmer down, now....
I was just playing, I'm smiling, see 8) :-D
You be da man the next time
second edit: (after following response)
Turn off your evil smiley. I can't take it, staring at me the way it does.
You know what it's thinking. It knows what YOU are thinking....
Note:I Apologize profusely for such an edit, it was not intended as a ruse.
I should have left the first part in when I edited.
Ok...we are friends from now on
You Cheat! You edited the post and me look like a damn silly guy requesting friendship with you when you edited your post!I vow that from now on 'I ' Alex-THE GREAT Wages a word war with you on THE SCIENCE FORUM'...opposing every statement..every word said by you............... :x
Yes and one more thing the time starts now,the WAR begins NOW......................
I didn't see your post, I was on page 5.
I was trying to make light and be funny, I still meant it friendly.
People skills is not my FORTE. Meaning well, I still can't express myself clearly.
By making fun of the smiley, I was taking the focus away from the people.
Attacking it, and not YOU.
Damn, I need to quit editing so much.
You have things to say that I want to hear. Lets bury the hatchet.
BTW See, those emoticons ARE evil...
No. you need to quit editing period. You should only edit to correct typographical errors, or possibly to add - - clarifying material, making it very clear what is an addition. Anything else is confusing and rude.
I will comply.
{When I write in notepad, and edit, and edit, then cut and paste here, it adds spaces.
It has something to do with the width of the notepad window and word wrap, maybe?
Any tips on how to correct that?}
EDIT: problem corrected by narrowing window..
June 9th, 2011, 05:05 PM
There is a three day waiting period for handguns.
There should be a thirty minute wait for posts.
After all, impulsive responses are often "not thoughtful", but the sit back and think answers are more reliable.
June 9th, 2011, 08:00 PM
I contest that there should not be handguns at all.
June 9th, 2011, 09:29 PM
Nor posts at all, for a select few.I contest that there should not be handguns at all.
LOL
Its ok eleven i've started following the policy of appeasement and according to it i will spare you from my wrath and take my words back
ok friends again.....are we? :-D
BFF, Sophomore.
June 10th, 2011, 07:42 PM
Seconded and Tripled. Fuck it, GoogolplexedNor posts at all, for a select few.I contest that there should not be handguns at all.
Hahahaha
Just like high school. I was unpopular and the teachers tried to pencil whip me as much as possible.
They tried to mark my correct math answers as wrong, until i went to the principle.
principle? or principal? I do not mean to be adroit and yet I suppose both meanings could apply depending on the mental direction you intend.
| « September 11th, Media Event | How do I shape a picture to exactly the size of an avatar? » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
