|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
 Posted - 08/02/2001 : 09:26:21 [Permalink]
|
quote:
No, he'll respond. He ALWAYS has to have the last post.
Normally I'd agree, Bozola...he does seem to go out of his way to always have the final word.
But those are in threads in which he can dance around the previous poster's point, picking apart the intent and word-splitting to his heart's content, using 500 words to explain ideas that require 5.
Here, though, Phil is pinning him down to one specific topic and asking point-blank for verification.
I dunno if we'll see a JW samba here or not.
|
 |
|
|
Bozola
Skeptic Friend
USA
166 Posts |
Posted - 08/02/2001 : 10:22:36 [Permalink]
|
We need to start a 'crack-pot' betting pool....;)
Bozola
- Practicing skeet for the Rapture. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 08/02/2001 : 10:45:25 [Permalink]
|
quote:
We need to start a 'crack-pot' betting pool....;)
Bozola
- Practicing skeet for the Rapture.
OK.
Jack White 100:1
JW 2:1
Sequester 1.5:1
Prion Patch (or whatever the hell it wants to call itself this week) 3:1
Chris Kincey 30:1
New Moon HB 15:1
The use of the word Astronots 10:1
The use of Hoagland as a reputable source 2:1
Face on Mars HB 10:1
All payable in VD's Hoax Bux.
(Gets you a genuine imitation Marvel No-Prize.)
|
|
|
|
Rift
Skeptic Friend
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 08/02/2001 : 15:45:49 [Permalink]
|
I don't normally read JW's posts because I'm trying to watch my blood pressure, but after TBA's challange, I decided to go back and read the ones I skipped over.
Good Grief...
Now I'm glad I skipped over them in the first place.
He keeps saying he was lied to about Piltdown and no-catastrophism.
Aren't those both triumphs of science?
I always thought that 'Catastrophism' meant the great flood and what not. I wouldn't catagorize an asteroid strike as 'Catastrophism'. Bad, but the idea that things like that might happen were never discounted by 'Non-catastrophism". We knew about the crater in Arizona (although it was thought to be volcanic at the time) We knew bad things happened. Just not a global flood.
And what the hell is his problem, we change our minds, that what makes science WORKS.
He was confused about the balloon thing a year ago and I expect we will never explain it to him. Remember his rant about Schrodinger's cat? And how it should be put in a glass box, lol. Classic.
|
|
|
|
Lisa
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 08/02/2001 : 18:12:16 [Permalink]
|
The guy over there claiming that scientists withhold information must not know too many scientists. With tremendous repect to BA, the problem isn't getting scientists to talk, the problem can be getting them to shut up. I said "hello, how are things" to a wildlife biologist the other day. I now know more about large wildlife distribution and habitat of the Black Hills than I could ever find useful. Still, I appreciated the man taking the time to talk. I've always figured if I can learn one new thing every day, the day has been put to good use.
The claim of elitism really frosts me. What did the guy do, read some posts that were over his head? Did he decided that since he didn't understand, the author and subject must be "elitist"? What a shithead!
My answer if you don't understand: learn.
Grab a dictionary, follow links, ask questions! Every question I've posted on BA has received a thoughtful, polite, and thorough reply.
Lisa
Chaos...Confusion...Destruction...My Work Here Is Done |
|
|
|
Lisa
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 08/02/2001 : 18:18:16 [Permalink]
|
quote:
But those are in threads in which he can dance around the previous poster's point, picking apart the intent and word-splitting to his heart's content, using 500 words to explain ideas that require 5.
Here, though, Phil is pinning him down to one specific topic and asking point-blank for verification.
I dunno if we'll see a JW samba here or not.
If he answers, I'll betcha he doesn't name any names. Too easy to disprove.
More likely, we'll be treated to an attack against BA and the rest of the board. Probably something reminiescent of Gauss vs the Brits. And yes, he'll use at least three paragraphs to say "I don't agree".
Lisa
Chaos...Confusion...Destruction...My Work Here Is Done |
|
|
|
James
SFN Regular
USA
754 Posts |
Posted - 08/02/2001 : 20:20:02 [Permalink]
|
Well, everyone, here's JW's response to BA's challenge: JW sucks @ BABB
His excuse? His so-called "obligation" to respond to everyone who has responded and challenged him. He needs to take alot of time to come up with his latest bullcrap.
Asshole
Anyone have a better name for this dude?
The way I see it, christians are godless too...they just don't know it yet. |
|
|
|
rubysue
Skeptic Friend
USA
199 Posts |
Posted - 08/02/2001 : 20:23:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Well, I've finally had enough of JW and replied to his weird assertions. Do a search on "what about" on the BABB index page. I wonder how he'll reply...
Just went and read your challenge, Phil, and JW's response ("take a number..."). You have always shown great patience and, dare I say, kindness in your responses to the pantheon of crazies that haunt your board. If I got this kind of rude, aggravating b*$%#@&t kind of snotty response to something that I posted in good faith, I would have to walk around the room four or five times, take several deep breaths, pour more wine, and count backwards from 100 three times so that I wouldn't flame him into the eternal abyss (kind of reminds me of a discussion I had earlier on this board about voting rights with a nameless individual who casually dismissed my careful research with two or three incomplete sentences and stinging rudeness).
Now I know why I've been keeping busy with other stuff lately - scanning through JW's posts and the "twenty questions from the historian" is quite enough to throw one off one's feed.
Congratulations to you, Bad Astronomer, on your maturity and optimism in the face of such petty nonsense. Good luck - JW's final response will be most interesting...
rubysue
If your head is wax, don't walk in the sun.
|
|
|
|
Rift
Skeptic Friend
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 08/02/2001 : 23:14:26 [Permalink]
|
I absolutely can't stand JW, and stopped posting on the board for a couple months about a year ago because of him. I try very hard NOT to read his posts, but sometimes my curiosity gets the best of me.
His main problem seems to be taking what 'scientists' (he makes it sound like it's a bad thing to be one, lol) use as examples or thought experiments way to literally. He doesn't understand that the balloon thing is an ANALOGY and that "put schrodinger's cat in a glass box" was absolutely hilarious and shows exactly what his problem is.
Add to it that he's a caustic, obnoxious crumudgeon (I'm trying to be nice here) and I just can't read his posts without getting majorily pissed.
A while back he said that scientists come up with this stuff to 'dazzle' everyone into giving them lots of money. LOL.
I think I'd rather have a hundred HBers and Hoagwashers then just one JW...
|
|
|
|
The Bad Astronomer
Skeptic Friend
137 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2001 : 00:44:49 [Permalink]
|
quote:
With tremendous repect to BA, the problem isn't getting scientists to talk, the problem can be getting them to shut up.
Hey!
Um. Okay, fine. You're right. My mom told me that a lot when I was a kid too. ;-)
rubysue:
quote:
If I got this kind of rude, aggravating b*$%#@&t kind of snotty response to something that I posted in good faith, I would have to walk around the room four or five times, take several deep breaths, pour more wine, and count backwards from 100 three times so that I wouldn't flame him into the eternal abyss
... and what makes you think I haven't? ;-) Actually, I have stopped several replies in the middle. As Head Dude of the board, I don't want to make people feel unwelcome there, and I don't want to suppress any ideas (in general). I tend to only post rather innocuous replies, but he's got me pretty het up at the moment. I can only take so much crap before I absolutely have to say something.
I am very curious as to how he'll reply. He has already posted an image which is a relatively subtle attack on me; I have already replied to it. I will not get drawn into a four-dimension argument with him. He just doesn't get it, and refuses to try. Sigh.
*****
The Bad Astronomer
badastro@badastronomy.com
http://www.badastronomy.com
|
|
|
|
The Bad Astronomer
Skeptic Friend
137 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2001 : 00:50:42 [Permalink]
|
quote:
With tremendous repect to BA, the problem isn't getting scientists to talk, the problem can be getting them to shut up.
Hmmmm. On second thought, I like this. Check out my new .sig.
*****
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
"With tremendous respect to [the] BA, the problem isn't getting scientists to talk, the problem can be getting them to shut up." |
|
|
|
Rift
Skeptic Friend
USA
333 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2001 : 05:12:50 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I am very curious as to how he'll reply. He has already posted an image which is a relatively subtle attack on me; I have already replied to it. I will not
get drawn into a four-dimension argument with him. He just doesn't get it, and refuses to try. Sigh.
I'm still trying to figure out why he put that image as a response to my very innocent and innocuous observation (and one I find fascinating) that people on this board and the BABB have started to use "HBer" to mean any crank.
I've said this before, Phil, and will probably say it many more times. You do an absolutely fantastic job keeping the morons in check over there. How you do that without going nuts, is beyond me. I know I would have just deleted the whole BB ages ago.
The reason we started this folder over here is so we could rant about those idiots over there. And we are just readers, not the "head dude" with lots of time and effort tied up in it :) How you keep so cool and calm is amazing and very admirable.
|
|
|
|
Antie
Skeptic Friend
USA
101 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2001 : 06:13:27 [Permalink]
|
quote:
I absolutely can't stand JW, and stopped posting on the board for a couple months about a year ago because of him. I try very hard NOT to read his posts, but sometimes my curiosity gets the best of me.
Wow. I was about to say something similar! He's one of the reasons why I don't post at the BABB very often.
Ian Andreas Miller. My site. |
|
|
|
Kristin
Skeptic Friend
Canada
84 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2001 : 06:47:56 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Well, everyone, here's JW's response to BA's challenge: JW sucks @ BABB
His excuse? His so-called "obligation" to respond to everyone who has responded and challenged him. He needs to take alot of time to come up with his latest bullcrap.
Asshole
Anyone have a better name for this dude?
The way I see it, christians are godless too...they just don't know it yet.
Hmm. Coward might be a better appelation ;P he's hiding behind a piece of cardboard with his beliefs written on the front, and BA's sitting on a big concrete block of scientific fact with a large aluminum baseball bat with the word 'logic' written on it. I'd be scared too.
He's got enough time to respond to all the other little quips on the board, but not to a geniune challenge.
Good judgement comes from experience: experience comes from bad judgement. |
|
|
|
Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie
USA
4826 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2001 : 11:39:17 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Well, everyone, here's JW's response to BA's challenge: JW sucks @ BABB
His excuse? His so-called "obligation" to respond to everyone who has responded and challenged him. He needs to take alot of time to come up with his latest bullcrap.
Asshole
Anyone have a better name for this dude?
The way I see it, christians are godless too...they just don't know it yet.
Ummmmm. Elitist? Knowitall? Self styled expert on everything? Crainial bowel obstruction candidate? 4th Dimention hater? Meglomaniac?
These work?
|
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
