Science, Criticism, and this Forum

[Golkarian]

Edit: since this thread has moved, I am talking specifically about the religion forum

K, first of all I haven't been looking around this forum for along time so if things have changed, make sure I know about it. Second, this thread is less about religion and more about this forum, so if this is inappropriate, again point it out.

Now, I've never gone through the process of getting a PhD. But I've heard stories. One has to present his/her work to a group of professors who grill and ask probing questions about the work. Now it can get pretty brutal, but that's science. But it's nothing like this forum. None of the professors will shout out "Your not a scientist", "Your not thinking like a scientist", "You're idea show how ignorant you are" because it's not personal, it's about the work, about the ideas, shouldn't that be how this forum should be? Relentless but not personal.

Yes, religion can be personal, but I think people could show some contraint. Some ideas may be unscientific, doesn't make the holders of those opinions idiots.

[Apopohis Reject]

Wow and wow and wow again.

What is going on right now? That is the second brilliant post I have read in the last couple hours, and to think I was considering dropping out just a few hours prior - due mainly to the very things you are referencing here.

Thank you my friend, for injecting a little commonsense and sanity into what seems to have become a way too nasty experience of intellectuals using their (perhaps) superiority to piss all over anyone who might consider having the temerity of asking a question or two.

May you be eternally blessed with such wisdom.

[Bishadi]

i agree with the reality that on a forum, on a scientific site especially; often the people of science, the mods, the so called 'doc's and professors' are the worst of the worst.


put it this way, a degreed individual can be as biased or worse, that any religious person you ever met.

[Harold14370]

There are two ways of asking a question. One might be:
"I don't really understand the physics behind the big bang theory. Can you explain why it is more commonly accepted than some alternative theory?"

The other way might be:
"I don't really understand the physics behind the big bang theory, but I think it is a load of horse manure anyway. Why is there a comspiracy to promote the big bang theory?"

One way is more likely to get the information you desire, while the other will probably draw some flames.

[Golkarian]

There are two ways of asking a question. One might be:
"I don't really understand the physics behind the big bang theory. Can you explain why it is more commonly accepted than some alternative theory?"

The other way might be:
"I don't really understand the physics behind the big bang theory, but I think it is a load of horse manure anyway. Why is there a comspiracy to promote the big bang theory?"

One way is more likely to get the information you desire, while the other will probably draw some flames.

I agree, sometimes the person being flamed is sometimes partly responsible, but not always. Still I think we should focus on the statement (even if we think it's crap), not the person.

[Paleoichneum]

put it this way, a degreed individual can be as biased or worse, that any religious person you ever met.

You realize the titles are taken from schooling and relate only to the number of posts an individual has made on the forum, nothing else right? They have nothing to do with knowledge of the individual, just how much they post.

[Apopohis Reject]

There are two ways of asking a question. One might be:
"I don't really understand the physics behind the big bang theory. Can you explain why it is more commonly accepted than some alternative theory?"

The other way might be:
"I don't really understand the physics behind the big bang theory, but I think it is a load of horse manure anyway. Why is there a comspiracy to promote the big bang theory?"

One way is more likely to get the information you desire, while the other will probably draw some flames.

If a six foot professor who heartily embraces such as BBT is kicked in the shins by a 2 year old girl who enjoys no concept of it, he may indeed feel like it, yet is it ok for that professor to 'flame' her - perhaps out of existence, on the basis that he has a constitutional ability to so?

I would have thought a 'superior' professor might be expected to have a little superior compassion to blend with his other superiorities over his antagonist; to rub his soreness and be on his way - yes, even with a loving pat to the head for the child. Such might be the kind of expression we might expect from any other member of humanity, so how much more, from a 'superior' component thereof?

It seems that individuals displaying such qualities may not be in as plentiful supply as we might have hoped.

[marnixR]

as paleoichneum said, the titles are purely down to post count and not the maturity of the poster
a high post count does not necessarily mean that the person in question is willing to stick to forum etiquette, just that s/he hasn't gone far enough to get him/herself banned