Friday, June 22, 2012

The Rottweiller's Dog - Update

(..Or How science (doesn't) work..)

[ Update: 2012-06-22]

Rationalskeptics   Skeptics all right - well, a peculiarly obtuse way since they are jealously guarding the status quo -  but anything but rational.  It made for some fun reading - here and there.. for a bit, .. and for the pictures they sign themselves with, .. but mostly somewhat desolating for the demo of the quality of  discourse, .. and the same tone that got them moderated off Dawkins site (the lot of them - moderators and all).  I guess I was interested to see how it was getting on since earning my blue card for encouraging that wee guy with the nightie to talk dirty, .. since he did show some promise, and it did seem to be de rigeur and attract approval.  If he was going to carry on that way he might as well do it properly, .. and benefit from some instruction..

Anyway, .. seems after all even without any help from me it's now gone into lockdown (p.285) ..   Ostensibly for "multiple reports" (whatever that means), (and who's been 'reporting' - and for what? - the listed 'infringements' are laughable.)  Not on account of 'Langwidge' evidently, since it's the moderators who have mostly been using it, ..when the wee guy takes a break.

Seems to me the real reason is because the resident ex-Dawkins cabal don't know what to do with Florian.  I'd guess they've been talking to each other off-thread and agreed to shut it down.  We'll see.  It's how 'scientists' do it when the going against them gets tough.  Good on you Florian.  Two hundred and eighty five pages and virtually the only thing all these 'scientists' have been able to raise by way of argument against you is the 'no-mechanism' thing.   

Some argument. They remind me of these people in sandwich-boards who have it on their T-shirts as well for when they take a coffee break.  Probably have it tattooed up the sides of their necks too, .. in case the girlfriend asks them a hard question, .. or comes on strong.  It's one of those phrases that can be bandied around.

Then somebody asks Florian what's his credentials as a scientist anyway (to be indulging them their pet bovver of ritualistic degradation) and then when he tells them he gets slated by the Metatron for "arguing from authority", and says he (F.) has no observational data. Evidently they don't think the ocean floors - or stratigraphic sequence are anything to be considered.

" The Metatron", ..  What names these guys get for themselves ... evidently a moderator versed in expletives. I had to look it up, only to discover some regard him as the "highest of the angels serving as the celestial scribe".  Eh?  So they allow moderate language in Heaven as well?  A real forward oufit there now?  (And no, I don't have permission to quote that line either, so I guess I might have to moderate me off my own blog if I'm not careful.)

And whatever you do don't put a mountain in front of them or they'll jump at the chance to show off they actually learned something in school about "colliding crust" .. or something equally daft.

Pity about the lockdown.  It was entertainment .. for a bit.


Anonymous said...

nice posting.. thanks for sharing.

Anonymous said...

What lockdown would that be? Seems to be up running at the moment.

don findlay said...

*To Anon. questioning Lockdown*

P.285, .. as mentioned in the above post,(and repeated on p. 286).

And if you want a measure of discrimmination between rationalskeptics crew (banned from Richard Dawkins site - for exactly this sort of comment - and all seeking a home on R/S - as organised by the wee guy with the nightie), and those proposing Earth expansion, then try post #5840 on p.292, .. ... if you're into how academics behave with the gloves off, as it were. As a moderator, this guy is making the fine academic point that according to the 'rules' inflammatory comment is as determined by the receiver, not the giver (depending here of course, on who's doing the giving).In other words, if you find it inflammatory then that's your fucking rpgblem, becuz I dont[' give a flying* * fucking shit out of a pig's wet fucking arse* what you think. Just so long as you don't call him 'Poddie' instead of his real name, which could be considered inflammatory, instead of cuddly. (Got it?) :-)

Anonymous said...

Ah. So the thread was locked while multiple reports were investigated, and reopened allowing Florian to post again, which he has to this very day. Hardly a lockdown because they don't know what to do with this seditious character is it?

don findlay said...

(.. Why dogs bark, indeed.. ) Listen Mate, .. If all you have to offer here is bluff then piss off back to rationalskeptics. This unashamed, highly seditious, barking place is not for you. Florian's doing a great job there (though I don't know why he bothers) on three fronts highlighting :- 1. the hypocrisy of so called 'rationalskepticism' that defines consensus (they need to do more than just say there is one), 2. the psychotic reponse of the sanctimonious Church when it's challenged, and 3. that science is backed by data, not belief or opinion however it's camouflaged for consumption by the faithful. If you're saying the thread was locked for reasons other than "sedition" in the face of consensus solidarity, then you might like to highlight them. Call it as it is. You can even do it here if those R/S 'moderators' with the immoderate language there object to you commenting on their style. Give them some oxygen. Why not? I'll help you if you need. Do something constructive and help readers of this blog understand how the cozy cabal that has come to define the Rationalskeptics overseeing that thread grew out of the detritus that got booted off Richard Dawkins forum in the first place ('moderators' and all). Seemed at the time they were highly indignant, but they're just acting out Dawkin's justification again, though this time from the leisure of the easy chair. Certainly we get a view of how some academics behave with their slippers on, and 'taint acceptable, because it's an indication of what they intend with hobnail boots.

Rather than front up in this highly seditious place you'd be better employed in that pretend over there, telling them to straighten up. Somebody needs to tell 'em - like I did. But I don't think they liked what they saw, .. when it was presented to them as a reflection. Just as you don't seem to. I got a blue card for my trouble, while the dog got a pat on the head. Which was a further add-on to the point. Wait and see what happens with Florian. This is precisely the question that the original poster, Brainman, was interested in and I've no doubt he's taking notes and laughing up his sleeve. And have equally no doubt that nobody on the forum realises it, so ensconced are they in their mutual massage and jeering. They think it's about Florian trying to score points - and them fielding them with heckling rebuttals. It's a quite a giggle, really, except it's a measure of all that they're capable of and what, in a more formal setting, the public is paying for.

Anonymous said...

What bluff would that be? I was merely puzzled that you stated that the thread had been locked when it actually hadn't.

Question: Why is Florian and other renowned scientists of his ilk wasting time on a bunch of timewasters - if he has a serious hypothesis, shouldn't he be working on publishing his finding in serious peer-reviewed journals?
Attempting to 'pwn' trolls on a meaningless backwater website doesn't strike me as 'doing a great job'.

Post a Comment