Notices
Results 1 to 14 of 14
Like Tree6Likes
  • 1 Post By PhDemon
  • 2 Post By Daecon
  • 3 Post By Strange

Thread: Fair assessment of content.

  1. #1 Fair assessment of content. 
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    I have now provided a series of threads that were specifically designed to compare the approach to observational assessment I have employed to that which is applied to formulating a theory for gravity. The intention was to develop a working understanding of the subject. The response from the forum have largely been presumptive and condescending. The practice of moving these threads to areas that get no attention mocks my efforts to establish functional comprehension of established practices. The experience does not promote this forum as meaningful public service for those seeking fundamental information. Should I simply assume that this is not the intention of this forum, which seems to be to give a demographic somewhere they can play the superior being presiding over the fates of others?

    Get your act together. I've observed barely an ounce of professionalism.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,280
    Perhaps you should take the approach of someone who wants to learn rather than someone who wants to teach.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,540
    And in all of your threads we haven't seen an ounce of science but lots of incoherent nonsense :shrug: In terms of "fair assessment" I don't think you've much to complain about, pseudoscience was generous, if it was up to me it would be Trash, there is nothing of substance there, just verbiage and new nonsense definitions of standard terms.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    And in all of your threads we haven't seen an ounce of science but lots of incoherent nonsense :shrug:
    I never offered anyone "my own science"(ooger-ooger-booger-ooger-oog-ooger-nyeh). I asked very straight forward questions regarding algebraic disciplin and was presented a buch of teenage competitive drivvle that I could have found in any high school. You should be proud of yourselves.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Perhaps you should take the approach of someone who wants to learn rather than someone who wants to teach.
    Perhaps you should take the approach of someone who can answer the question addressed rather than provide an irrelevant assumption that has no bearing on my intention and only reflects your propensity for pontification.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Bullshit Intolerant PhDemon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Newcastle-upon-Tyne, UK
    Posts
    4,540
    tk421 hit the nail on the head here:

    What are the fundamental requirements for a theory of gravity?

    In light of John Galt's comments about showing new members more patience if I answered you as I normally would and pointed out what I thought I'd probably get a warning. You're not worth it. Ignore list edited.
    Last edited by PhDemon; December 18th, 2013 at 04:02 AM. Reason: typo
    Daecon likes this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Is there a source of this preference to supply answers to questions that haven't been asked on these threads? The sentence with the "?" on the end is the question. Other materials supplied are reference. If you have no familiarity with the reference, what qualifies you to assess the need to answer questions that were never asked?

    Like I said, get your act together. You come across as a bunch of snarky twits competing for who knows the most.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    tk421 hot the nail on the head here:

    What are the fundamental requirements for a theory of gravity?

    In light of John Galt's comments about showing new members more patience if I answered you as I normally would and pointed out what I thought I'd probably get a warning. You're not worth it. Ignore list edited.
    Thank you for your service to humanity. You haven't supplied me anything that required attention.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by PhDemon View Post
    tk421 hot the nail on the head here:

    What are the fundamental requirements for a theory of gravity?

    In light of John Galt's comments about showing new members more patience if I answered you as I normally would and pointed out what I thought I'd probably get a warning. You're not worth it. Ignore list edited.
    This is exactly what I am talking about. The question was very specific and in no way resembled "what do you think?". If you can only percieve your own attachment to rivalry in references I supply to provide my question with context, you have absolutely no relevance in a forum.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Forum Professor Daecon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    1,280
    Your lack of willingness to learn about where you're mistaken and why you're mistaken about it, is never a good sign for an aspiring scientist.
    PhDemon and Ximlab like this.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Your lack of willingness to learn about where you're mistaken and why you're mistaken about it, is never a good sign for an aspiring scientist.
    How do you presume to have assessed that. I asked a question that presented my comprehension of my own limitation. I supplied a reference to illustrate the exercise that is the intention of the provided question. It was not myself making massive presumptions but those who chose to answer questions that were never asked. Your contribution is noted and I hope you have used lotion and a rag to clean up the mess.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Posts
    107
    Quote Originally Posted by Daecon View Post
    Your lack of willingness to learn about where you're mistaken and why you're mistaken about it, is never a good sign for an aspiring scientist.
    I specified what I am short on information regarding. All other presumptions are entirely your own. Go back to school.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Moderator Moderator
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Washington State
    Posts
    8,322
    Found your post confusing and largely incoherent, both which are strongly discouraged in the hard science (top parts) of the forum (e.g. chemistry, physics etc.).

    We exercise considerably more leniency in the general forum, and even more in new ideas, pseudo etc.
    Meteorologist/Naturalist & Retired Soldier
    “The Holy Land is everywhere” Black Elk
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Brassica oleracea Strange's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    喫茶店
    Posts
    16,590
    Quote Originally Posted by 3SwordBunny View Post
    I asked very straight forward questions regarding algebraic disciplin
    I'm afraid I didn't see anything about algebra in any of your posts. (But perhaps "algebraic" is another of those words you are using in a non-standard way.) The problem is that your poorly worded questions are surrounded by excessive verbiage. It is hard to pick out what you are asking and then harder still to try and understand the question.

    Having attempted to answer (initially, very seriously) some of your questions I was attacked for not giving the answers you wanted. I'm still not sure if this is because I completely misunderstood what you were trying to ask (having re-read your initial questions, I still think I provided reasonable answers) or if it was because you demanded a different answer.

    Feel free to try again. My advice would be: keep questions short; avoid accompanying commentary that obscures rather than clarifies; use words with their normal English meaning.

    You are also unnecessarily aggressive and rude to people who provide answers or offer you advice. This leads to few people being willing to take the time to help you.

    My reason for asking about your first language was simply because I would be willing to put more effort into understanding and helping someone who was struggling with English as a second language. It is harder to help someone who is incompetent in their native language.
    Lynx_Fox, John Galt and Ximlab like this.
    Without wishing to overstate my case, everything in the observable universe definitely has its origins in Northamptonshire -- Alan Moore
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. IPCC Fifth Assessment
    By Lynx_Fox in forum Environmental Issues
    Replies: 32
    Last Post: October 28th, 2013, 04:33 AM
  2. Subset of R^p without Zero Content?
    By holysword in forum Mathematics
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: September 25th, 2013, 02:10 PM
  3. Does Location Matter Using VMG to Do Muscle Assessment?
    By icegirlclaire in forum Health & Medicine
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: April 14th, 2011, 05:58 AM
  4. Determination of Mg content in rocks
    By gayleegoo in forum Chemistry
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: November 19th, 2007, 08:20 PM
  5. Scientific Personality Assessment
    By natekarle in forum Biology
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: October 18th, 2005, 02:26 AM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •