Ridicule in Online Science Discussions

@livinglava,

I believe my post wasnt even addressed to you. As I said before, you should really go and find someone who gives a **** about your thoughts.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

I believe my post wasnt even addressed to you. As I said before, you should really go and find someone who gives a **** about your thoughts.

It's a public forum. My response had nothing to do with anything scientific. I was just pointing out that your mentor-apprentice romanticizing is a generic sentiment that could be said by anyone in any field, e.g. banking, plumbing, waste management, janitorial services, construction, etc.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

If I were a janitor , responsible fro bringing up the next generation of janitors and I had an apprentice that really studied hard at his craft and learnt the things that would make him a master, and then surpassed my own abilities (an it was mostly due to my mentoring), that too would probably be a high point of my life. Of course Im sure you didnt mean any of your comments in a "derisive manner "did you??

However, I was addressing one teacher to another something I felt was kinda private and its probably something , about which youd have no understanding , I feel sorry for you. I see that you arent only an expert in your own geological science but also pedology, thermo, mechanics, bioscience. Ive looked at a few of your posts and whether you realize it or not, you seem to have left a trail of snide comments with others with whom youve tried to mount technical discussions. Apparently youve got problems with expertise. You leave an odor of "If I dont understand it, it doesnt really exist"

Youghta work on that, I think most people here have got your number .

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

If I were a janitor , responsible fro bringing up the next generation of janitors and I had an apprentice that really studied hard at his craft and learnt the things that would make him a master, and then surpassed my own abilities (an it was mostly due to my mentoring), that too would probably be a high point of my life. Of course Im sure you didnt mean any of your comments in a "derisive manner "did you??

Only to the degree that you seem to be self-aggrandizing about your career. Mainly, however, I was pointing out that you're not talking about anything scientific.

Quote:

However, I was addressing one teacher to another something I felt was kinda private and its probably something , about which youd have no understanding , I feel sorry for you. I see that you arent only an expert in your own geological science but also pedology, thermo, mechanics, bioscience. Ive looked at a few of your posts and whether you realize it or not, you seem to have left a trail of snide comments with others with whom youve tried to mount technical discussions. Apparently youve got problems with expertise. You leave an odor of "If I dont understand it, it doesnt really exist"

This is a thread for discussing ridicule in online discussions, not perpetrating it further.

Quote:

Youghta work on that, I think most people here have got your number .

You're a witch-hunter like so many others. Go away and wait for your karma to roll around.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Quote:

Only to the degree that you seem to be self-aggrandizing about your career

Not once had I used any terms ofaggrandizment, YOU were the one who was ridiculing Max and I for being "educated and hiding truth from our ivory tower"
I said that I was a worker with experience(Just like your janitors'. I was stating facts and I gave you several , SEVERAL references. Also, I mentioned that you could recreate these understandings in by rding and actually visiting the classics sites all over th world (Theres probably several such sites near you).
You dont really seem to want to learn or even share information, you merely want validation for "Ides" that are totally whacked out. Its been almost a week of your whining and I dont see that youve even done a modicum of reading with the exception of a recent post wehere youve misused about a half dozen tech terms (including those of potential and kinetic energy -).
I have a feeling that youve got some kind of issues with authority or teachers or education in general. Ive been giving you credit for being a CReationist when all the Creationists Ive come up against are full of reasonable understandings of techy stuff, they just purposely miscast it and use it in a fraudulent way. You havent risen to their levels, you seem to be just wandering around spitting out bad information and invectives at people who dont kiss your ass.

Im not going anywhere, because we have kids who drop in and try to learn actual science (I get PMs regularly from kids whove done their magntics and gravity calcs and were seeking their own validation based on good knowledge).
I certainly dont want any kids to think that your individual thought processes are worth consideration other than to serve as bad examples. So Ill drop in and criticize some of your crap(just like others have done in related disciplines)

Jusst a thought.

1 Reply

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Quote:

Only to the degree that you seem to be self-aggrandizing about your career
Not once had I used any terms ofaggrandizment, YOU were the one who was ridiculing Max and I for being "educated and hiding truth from our ivory tower"
I said that I was a worker with experience(Just like your janitors'. I was stating facts and I gave you several , SEVERAL references. Also, I mentioned that you could recreate these understandings in by rding and actually visiting the classics sites all over th world (Theres probably several such sites near you).

You were aggrandizing about your magnificent career.

Quote:

You dont really seem to want to learn or even share information, you merely want validation for "Ides" that are totally whacked out. Its been almost a week of your whining and I dont see that youve even done a modicum of reading with the exception of a recent post wehere youve misused about a half dozen tech terms (including those of potential and kinetic energy -).

You don't discuss science. You imply that you know what you are talking about in what you say, but you never actually defend/ground them by explaining what you mean.

Quote:

I have a feeling that youve got some kind of issues with authority or teachers or education in general. Ive been giving you credit for being a CReationist when all the Creationists Ive come up against are full of reasonable understandings of techy stuff, they just purposely miscast it and use it in a fraudulent way. You havent risen to their levels, you seem to be just wandering around spitting out bad information and invectives at people who dont kiss your ass.

This is just a rhetorical tactic to insult religion people by telling them there are other religious people who are better than them. I've already noticed a pattern in internet-ridicule that use this tactic, as you are doing here.

Quote:

Im not going anywhere, because we have kids who drop in and try to learn actual science (I get PMs regularly from kids whove done their magntics and gravity calcs and were seeking their own validation based on good knowledge).
I certainly dont want any kids to think that your individual thought processes are worth consideration other than to serve as bad examples. So Ill drop in and criticize some of your crap(just like others have done in related disciplines)

You haven't posted any explanations of anything scientific. You have implied you are right by dropping evidence that you are a career academician, but you just expect people to bow to your career and accept things you say because you say so.

I don't know whether you're incapable of explaining/grounding science claims you make or you just don't want to, but all your ridicule is no substitute for proving claims, and it seems your ridicule is mostly a distraction to prevent others from seeing through your failure to explain why you make the claims you do, such as that my use of 'kinetic' and 'potential' energy are misused.

You claim that I am misusing these terms, but then you don't explain how, so you might as well just be some idiot who knows how to bluff in poker, which is what I suspect you ultimately are.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

Ive been giving you information and slurces, if youre too damned dumb to pick up on it, that's more a problem you should discuss with your common ancestors, not the education system.

1 Reply

@livinglava,

I took my first physics class in 1958 and even then arguments were settled by insults and social rejection.So don't blame it on the internet.

2 Replies

@Jewels Vern,

Nailed it

0 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

Ive been giving you information and slurces, if youre too damned dumb to pick up on it, that's more a problem you should discuss with your common ancestors, not the education system.

I think that if you really understood what you were posting, you would explain it. You must just know a lot of facts and recite them as part of a hand-waving strategy to get readers to believe whatever you say.

1 Reply

@Jewels Vern,

Jewels Vern wrote:

I took my first physics class in 1958 and even then arguments were settled by insults and social rejection.So don't blame it on the internet.

Maybe they weren't settled so much as people just got tired of the insults and social rejection and thus gave up arguing.

I'm sure that didn't stop the 'winners' from believing they were right, though.

0 Replies

@livinglava,

You just fail to WANT to understand the evidence Ive presented. (Id say more from ignorance predicated on religious beliefs). So, I now know that I'll never make a dent in your denialist thinking. (anyone who believes in the inerrancy of NOAH's Flood has very little space in their brain for actual "Science discussions"

2 Replies

@farmerman,

farmerman wrote:

You just fail to WANT to understand the evidence Ive presented. (Id say more from ignorance predicated on religious beliefs).

Of course I want to. Why else would I be searching so hard for explanatory reasoning amidst your tapestries of facts and information.

Let me help you a little with yet another example:

The water cycle:
1) explaning: sunlight warms land, warm convection currents evaporate water and raise it to higher altitude, water vapor cools as it rises, precipitation happens and falls down

2) tapestry of facts: evaporation, condensation, and precipitation occur.

What you do is deploy the tapestry and then ridicule your reader for not already understanding how the pieces fit together prior to you explaining them.

You have to explain things if you want people to understand them. If all you do is ridicule them for not understanding, they will probably just pretend to understand in order to avoid ridicule.

Quote:

So, I now know that I'll never make a dent in your denialist thinking. (anyone who believes in the inerrancy of NOAH's Flood has very little space in their brain for actual "Science discussions"

You don't understand how to listen to different POVs without already judging them right or wrong, do you?

I'll help you again with this: 1) yes things are right or wrong; 2) listening to something that's wrong doesn't make it right, even if you don't immediately reject it as being wrong.

In other words, you can listen to different POVs and think about them without accepting or rejecting them by doing so.

It's called tentative acceptance and it's central to scientific thinking because scientific theories are never proven right, only established as not yet having been proven wrong. We have to accept things tentatively in order to maintain scientific skepticism about the possibility that they are wrong, whether they are about Noah's Flood or Darwinian Evolution or Quantum Mechanics or whatever.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Quote:

You just fail to WANT to understand the evidence Ive presented.

I sympathize with your frustration at times,
but the image that flashed through my head as I read that was the scene from “1984” where Winston has his head in the rat cage and screams “Do it to her!”

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

woooeee

I hvent read 1984 since , like, uhhhh, 1984. Ive forgotten most of it except a few phrases.
Where was that scene and what was it about??

2 Replies

@farmerman,

I haven't read 1984 since...ever. Read reviews and parts of it here and there. I don't recall if it was ever given as assigned reading.

0 Replies

@farmerman,

Long time for me too but here’s what my sieve like brain remembers.

Winston, our hero, is having a hard time fully accepting Ingsoc, the only socially accepted way of thinking and speaking. It included the concepts of doublespeak (War is Peace, etc.).

When Winston's doubts are found out, he is conditioned to WANT to accept Ingsoc theory by being faced by his worst fear and the only way out by asking that it be done to who you loved instead.

It was dark stuff and strangely applicable to today’s times.

1 Reply

@Leadfoot,

Ill get an audio book download and listen to it. It all a blur to me. I remember Winston and his babe. But everything else I get mixed up with Brave New World and Mustapha Mond..

1 Reply

@farmerman,

BTW we are already there Heres the Va Tech "logo" Ingsoc;d up

https://tse2.mm.bing.net/th/id/OIP.o9eXIJaSs4taE1tVsp3UVAHaLH?w=173&h=160&c=7&o=5&dpr=1.5&pid=1.7

1 Reply

@farmerman,

Holy ****! That is scary

1 Reply

Ridicule in Online Science Discussions

Quick Links

My Account

able2know