|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
 Posted - 01/27/2006 : 14:08:43 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
OK, I've gone through the previous 2 threads to get a more accurate picture. I've take into account the stuff posted here on the third thread as I don't want to ding him on multiple of the same majors.
From First thread - 1,164
From Second thread - 3,035
From third thread thus far - 187
Total - 4,386
The first two threads allone have a combined unnecessary caps total of 760. I have included the -5 baseline in it. I have the details saved off to my hard drive.
Damn you all. Curiosity got the better of me, to date for the third thread I get 1,821 additional points. with 342 additional unnecessary all caps.
So updated totals:
Total points over three threads to date: 6,020
Total unnecessary caps: 1,102
Unnecessary caps as percentage of total score: 91.5%
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2006 : 14:34:19 [Permalink]
|
| Not that I want to rain on your mad skillz, Val, but you're not counting "TRACE" or "SOHO" and other abbreviations as unnecessary caps, are you? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2006 : 14:45:52 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.
Not that I want to rain on your mad skillz, Val, but you're not counting "TRACE" or "SOHO" and other abbreviations as unnecessary caps, are you?
I have cleverly not counted those. Specifically TRACE (a satelite IIRC), SOHO, NASA, and a few others which read in context as necessary capitalizations such as IMO, etc. Only those non-necessary capitalizations were counted. 189 in the first thread, 571 in the second, and 342 in the third.
In some extreme cases he had over 30 in a single post.
|
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
| Edited by - Valiant Dancer on 01/27/2006 14:47:20 |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2006 : 17:23:26 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
OK, I've gone through the previous 2 threads to get a more accurate picture. I've take into account the stuff posted here on the third thread as I don't want to ding him on multiple of the same majors.
From First thread - 1,164
From Second thread - 3,035
From third thread thus far - 187
Total - 4,386
The first two threads allone have a combined unnecessary caps total of 760. I have included the -5 baseline in it. I have the details saved off to my hard drive.
Damn you all. Curiosity got the better of me, to date for the third thread I get 1,821 additional points. with 342 additional unnecessary all caps.
So updated totals:
Total points over three threads to date: 6,020
Total unnecessary caps: 1,102
Unnecessary caps as percentage of total score: 91.5%
LOL! This is a very funny thread. :)
By the way, it's Birkeland's model, not mine. He beat me to the punch by 100 years or so whereas Dr. Manuel only beat me to it by three or four decades. :) |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2006 : 17:25:17 [Permalink]
|
| Can I deduct points for everyone that has failed to address the nuclear chemistry in this debate, because if so, I think I'm probably in negative point territory. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2006 : 17:35:05 [Permalink]
|
| The Crackpot Index is "A simple method for rating potentially revolutionary contributions to physics," so it doesn't matter with whom the ideas originate, it's a rating method for the proponents of the ideas. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2006 : 17:45:16 [Permalink]
|
>>40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is. (30 more points for fantasizing about show trials in which scientists who mocked your theories will be forced to recant.)
You can't give me points for that! It's not even my theory and it's based upon a scientific history of the solid surface elecrical solar model starting with Birkeland. If Galileo's gas model theory can be considered "present day" science then surely Birkeland's solar model would also have to be "present day" science, even if it's less popular at the moment.
>>50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions.
Actually, there were quite a few testable predictions in that first paper, most of which can be confirmed or falsified by STEREO, or have already been confirmed by isotope analysis.
You guys are a little overzealous if you ask me. Not that I'm bias or anything...... :) |
| Edited by - Michael Mozina on 01/27/2006 17:46:13 |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2006 : 18:17:20 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
So updated totals:
Total points over three threads to date: 6,020
Total unnecessary caps: 1,102
Unnecessary caps as percentage of total score: 91.5%
Holy smokes. If I can eliminate 91.5% of the problem just by unlearning my use of caps, I think it's worth the effort. I'll see what I can do for you, but remember, old habits die hard. :) |
|
|
|
GeeMack
SFN Regular
USA
1093 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2006 : 21:59:44 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Mozina...
You can't give me points for that! It's not even my theory and it's based upon a scientific history of the solid surface elecrical solar model starting with Birkeland. If Galileo's gas model theory can be considered "present day" science then surely Birkeland's solar model would also have to be "present day" science, even if it's less popular at the moment.
It is interesting to note that as Michael's hopes of proving his fantasy crumble like dust blowing in a plasma wind, he's all the more inclined to hand the failure to someone else. It was his when he thought it was good. Now that he's realizing just how badly the whole concept sucks he wants to bail. Nope, Michael, you don't get that luxury. You're the one who's running all over the Internet extolling your ludicrous claim. It's yours, 100%, title and deed. You own it. 
|
|
|
|
trogdor
Skeptic Friend
198 Posts |
Posted - 01/27/2006 : 22:16:59 [Permalink]
|
Well for his rather strange theory I must say you gotta respect M.M. for persistence and humor. so many people would simply snap and go crazy at thread like this.("I have thrown the pearls of truth before swine!!! Damn You all!!!")
I'm almost glad I brought him here. |
all eyes were on Ford Prefect. some of them were on stalks.
-Douglas Adams |
|
|
|
BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard
3192 Posts |
Posted - 01/28/2006 : 09:48:33 [Permalink]
|
| Well guys I dont think this is supposed to work vs. 40 pages of threads, but in a single paper presentation. Still fun though. |
"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History
"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 01/30/2006 : 07:13:05 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
OK, I've gone through the previous 2 threads to get a more accurate picture. I've take into account the stuff posted here on the third thread as I don't want to ding him on multiple of the same majors.
From First thread - 1,164
From Second thread - 3,035
From third thread thus far - 187
Total - 4,386
The first two threads allone have a combined unnecessary caps total of 760. I have included the -5 baseline in it. I have the details saved off to my hard drive.
Damn you all. Curiosity got the better of me, to date for the third thread I get 1,821 additional points. with 342 additional unnecessary all caps.
So updated totals:
Total points over three threads to date: 6,020
Total unnecessary caps: 1,102
Unnecessary caps as percentage of total score: 91.5%
Well, he's gotten better about the unnecessary all caps. He is, however, using a surrogate enclosing in asteriks for caps in some cases. After reviewing the data over then next 5 pages of the thread, he has
added another 49 unnecessary all caps words [+245 points]
added a new term, ill defined [+10 points]
This brings his all caps total for the thread to 391 [1,955 points] and his total crackpot index overall to 6,275 points all without revealing what the solid surface is made of.
Ignored points don't take away from your score. If they did, the resurrection of Christ would have serious negative numbers. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
|
Michael Mozina
SFN Regular
1647 Posts |
Posted - 01/30/2006 : 09:30:00 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Well, he's gotten better about the unnecessary all caps. He is, however, using a surrogate enclosing in asteriks for caps in some cases. After reviewing the data over then next 5 pages of the thread, he has
added another 49 unnecessary all caps words [+245 points]
added a new term, ill defined [+10 points]
This brings his all caps total for the thread to 391 [1,955 points] and his total crackpot index overall to 6,275 points all without revealing what the solid surface is made of.
Ignored points don't take away from your score. If they did, the resurrection of Christ would have serious negative numbers.
I can't even use asteriks? Damn you all...... :) |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 01/30/2006 : 10:46:13 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Originally posted by Michael Mozina
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer
Well, he's gotten better about the unnecessary all caps. He is, however, using a surrogate enclosing in asteriks for caps in some cases. After reviewing the data over then next 5 pages of the thread, he has
added another 49 unnecessary all caps words [+245 points]
added a new term, ill defined [+10 points]
This brings his all caps total for the thread to 391 [1,955 points] and his total crackpot index overall to 6,275 points all without revealing what the solid surface is made of.
Ignored points don't take away from your score. If they did, the resurrection of Christ would have serious negative numbers.
I can't even use asteriks? Damn you all...... :)
I didn't ring you up for the asteriks. It's not on the list, I'm chalking it up to legitimate stressors on verbiage. But they seem to be a surrogate for all caps. A good first step. |
Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils
Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
