Hot August.....idiocy? The August Stundie Finals

[Travis]

Those Hot August nights are over and it's time to select, through a non-Diebold interfered with democratic vote, the most truly stunidilicious example of Conspiracy Theorist attempts at articulation in, what somewhat resembles, the English Language.


1) Ever hear about those quick erecting trampolines and landing mats that are good from 100 stories in the air? Neither has the FDNY.....but apparently Brainstormer has. Source (http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showpost.php?p=441831&postcount=3).

It's also interesting to note the services didn't use inflatable landing mats. Which should have been out as soon as they realised people were jumping.
.
2) Remember kids, any allusion to Aluminum is referring to the refined free state industrial product, referring to the natural stuff, you know the stuff that's atomic number 13 in the period table and is found in over 270 minerals, would just be silly. Source (http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message577284/pg7#8887921)

Ever wonder why they describe "Lunar" meteorites as having AL in them?...AL is the symbol for Aluminum,And? youre probably wondering wtf am i talking about?You only get Aluminum after you Process it in an electric arc furnace which subjects the "Aluminum Bauxite" too tremendous amounts of Electricity to make it into "Aluminum". There is no :"free Aluminum" running around in nature...on this planet or anywhere else.
.
3) Sdemetri has interesting ideas on how to let engineers know they are wrong.......I'm guessing he/she uses semaphore to communicate with the blind too.

I am afraid I have to point out, again, as much as that perturbs you, that engineering is not my specialty. Why should I presume to try to convince engineers in their own language (especially in as merciless a place as this forum) why they are incorrect in that calculation?
.
4) If we had a true Free Market system Alex Libman wouldn't be thinking the real world is like Superman III.....Hackers.....Swordfish......24.....Live Free or Die Hard.

In the case of 9/11, one super-hacker could have been enough to pull the strings.
.
5) Why actually crash the plane that's supposed to crash when you can needlessly complicate things? I'm guessing that if this guy was in charge you'd have to fill a out a long form with an essay at the end to prove you are illiterate. Source (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1606622&posted=1#post1606622)

Maybe the plane that hit the Pentagon was big enough to load them on and fly them into the Pentagon. That actually would be quite good as their would be a randomness to where they settle that would be consistent with the official story. Also that way there is no chance of them being discovered or moved before the event.
.
6) Wanted: Two 110 story or one 47 story steel office building/s for violent destruction, that will cause great damage to neighbors property, in order to prove the blindingly obvious.

So if all the demolition experts in the world agree with the official story, then there should be at least some who are able to demolish a steel-frame high-rise with fire and impact damage. Where can I see an example of this?
.
7) Good news! We need not worry any longer as it seems all we need to do to keep things from collapsing is to have them be held up by the ground.

The builduing was pretty tall. The palne hit at a high pioint. Everything above that impact would collapse. Nothing below it would because it is still being held up by the ground.
.
8) Apparently Ranke didn't learn about clarity and concision in school.....probably too busy investigating the north of the water fountain spitwad flyover hypothesis. Source (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/single/4822297.html)

You are over analyzing the unclear specifics while ignoring the clear generalites such as general timing and general altitude and generally a commercial airliner with jet engines.
.
9) So we faked going to the moon. Why? Because there's already millions of people there. Similarly all trips to Australia are faked as well. Source (http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=theories&action=display&thread=2112&page=7#62468)

The gravity on the moon is probably more than 64%. This accounts for its breathable but thin atmosphere.

Millions of people live up there Bob and they gotta breathe something. That something is air similar to ours here on earth.

Incidentally if you ever plan on visiting the moon you will need about a weeks worth of decompression.
.
10) TheLoneBedouin wants to help the math retards figure out what 0.001% of three hundred million is by......testing them with a deliberate mistake I'm sure.

Is the Jref Math-retarded?

The current population of the U.S. is 301,139,947.

301,139,947 x .001= 301,139.947

301,139 ~= 3,000

*~= means does not equal
.
11) Before 2008 it was simply called Heat-Make-Thing-Bigger.

The evidence was that convincing that a CD didn't occur - notice I didn't say Controlled Explosion - that NIST didn't even bother to look for means in which it could be done, instead relying on a recently invented concept named "Thermal Expansion" to explain the events of WTC7.
.
12) Inertia wants to apply the principles of Fideism to Science.....Epistemology will never be the same.

The whole point that you need evidence is enough for me to understand, that you people have absolutely no common sense. :rolleyes:
.
13) Heiwa is from Planet X where the soil is liquid noble gases and the atmosphere is electromagnetically suspended carbon fibers.

So soil is now a collection of rather small solids? So you build houses on a collection of rather small solids?!?! You must be joking.
.
14) Besides enable the use of some Tron knock-off avatar what has science ever done for JihadJane? Not enough.....apparently.

In my opinion political literacy is far more important to understanding 911 than scientific literacy.

There you all are. Because of the splendid quality of some of these I will enable multi-voting so that people aren't so torn over which to choose.

[Hokulele]

I like the multiple-choice voting!

[Dave Rogers]

I felt that Heiwa and Ranke stood out here, Heiwa because it shows how little he interacts with reality, and Ranke because his quote shows a complete absence of rational thought processes. I wish I could give Ranke two votes.

Dave

[Travis]

I like the multiple-choice voting!

Glad it meets with your approval.

[timhau]

12. Stupidity is at its best when expressed bluntly.

And FWIW, I preferred the old single-choice voting. We're looking for one winner, so we should be forced to pick one. Multple-choice voting just reeks of this modern "oh, we don't want to hurt your self-esteem, everybody's just as stupid as everyone else" wussyism.

[Tippit]

12. Stupidity is at its best when expressed bluntly.

And FWIW, I preferred the old single-choice voting. We're looking for one winner, so we should be forced to pick one. Multple-choice voting just reeks of this modern "oh, we don't want to hurt your self-esteem, everybody's just as stupid as everyone else" wussyism.

Sometimes I get the impression from posts on the JREF forum that many of its members are vain and intellectually insecure, by the way they mock and belittle their forum opposition. The fact that they have these "contests" in an effort to humiliate others by demonstrating their (relative?) superiority proves this. Is JREF about skepticism? It seems like it's all about ego, much like MENSA meetings.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I went with Ranke and Heiwa. I probably shouldn't have voted for Heiwa, though, because I'm beginning to think that his lunacy is very much due to a severe mental illness.

Sometimes I get the impression from posts on the JREF forum that many of its members are vain and intellectually insecure, by the way they mock and belittle their forum opposition. The fact that they have these "contests" in an effort to humiliate others by demonstrating their (relative?) superiority proves this. Is JREF about skepticism? It seems like it's all about ego, much like MENSA meetings.


Meh.

[CptColumbo]

14. to me is such a perfect example of a CT mind set that I voted for it.

[Inertia]

Sometimes I always get the impression from posts on the JREF forum that many of its members are vain and intellectually insecure, by the way they mock and belittle their forum opposition. The fact that they have these "contests" in an effort to humiliate others by demonstrating their (relative?) superiority proves this. Is JREF about skepticism? It seems like it's all about ego, much like MENSA meetings.

Too true! :)

[Elizabeth I]

I also like the multiple-voting option, and I voted for 3, 6 and 12, although the concept of building another WTC just like the first one so we could fly a jet plane into it to see if it falls down again is almost too sublime.

[...and to those complaining about the "elitism" of these contests, may I suggest that you simply stop saying stupid stuff?]

[Brainache]

I went for #5. The needless complication, the sheer stupidity of the whole scenario seemed to sum up the whole ridiculous Truther experience.

And yes Tippit the reason the Stundies exist is because Truthers consistently produce champagne comedy. It's time you guys just woke up and smelled the greasepaint. Clowns.

[1337m4n]

Morison, Lear, Ragnarok, and Heiwa. It's a 4-way tie.

[Travis]

Sometimes I get the impression from posts on the JREF forum that many of its members are vain and intellectually insecure, by the way they mock and belittle their forum opposition. The fact that they have these "contests" in an effort to humiliate others by demonstrating their (relative?) superiority proves this. Is JREF about skepticism? It seems like it's all about ego, much like MENSA meetings.

Nothing is stopping a counter contest from CT's.

[dudalb]

14. to me is such a perfect example of a CT mind set that I voted for it.

That is why I nominated it. Seldom has the whole CT mentality been displayed on one single sentence like that.

[dudalb]

I think that John Lear is the craziest of the lot, but it is not quite CT specific enough.
But for sheer insane, it is hard to top.

[zaphod2016]

re: multiple-choice voting

Glad it meets with your approval.

This is great; I didn't realize you could do this on JREF. I will be sure to use multiple-choice for my next poll.

[zaphod2016]

Nothing is stopping a counter contest from CT's.

This is actually a great idea. Note to my fellow lunatics: I suggest we hold a "best fallacy of September '08" poll this month. At the end of the month we will vote on which skeptic (or other poster) used obscene logical fallacies in their debunking.

Of course, when it comes to ad hominem, everyone (including myself) has been guilty in one post or another. Perhaps we will determine who uses the ole' ad hom most frequently.

Anyone else think this is a good/interesting experiment?

[Hokulele]

This is actually a great idea. Note to my fellow lunatics: I suggest we hold a "best fallacy of September '08" poll this month. At the end of the month we will vote on which skeptic (or other poster) used obscene logical fallacies in their debunking.

Of course, when it comes to ad hominem, everyone (including myself) has been guilty in one post or another. Perhaps we will determine who uses the ole' ad hom most frequently.

Anyone else think this is a good/interesting experiment?


Only if the arguments presented are argumentum ad hominem or other fallacies and not simply insults. Otherwise, expect people to laugh at your poll.

Do a search on William Rea's threads for examples.

[Bobert]

Oh wow who to vote for?
Its tough!

[Horatius]

Anyone else think this is a good/interesting experiment?



I'd love to see it happen. If some truthers should show they actually had enough of a sense of humour to see what was actually funny, I'd have more hope for the future of mankind.




Do a search on William Rea's threads for examples.


Alas, as Hokulele's advice will show you, should you choose to follow it, all previous such attempts have been dismal failures.

But please, do try. The epic fail I anticipate might very well produce a mother lode of Stundies.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I'd love to see it happen. If some truthers should show they actually had enough of a sense of humour to see what was actually funny, I'd have more hope for the future of mankind.


I'd like to see it happen, but I'm afraid it would just make the truthers' lack of ability in recognizing fallacies more prominent.

[IMST]

Of course, when it comes to ad hominem, everyone (including myself) has been guilty in one post or another.
Given your choice to post twice in a row, this statement is stupid and wrong.
am I nominated yet?

[Kthulhut Fhtagn]

Sometimes I get the impression from posts on the JREF forum that many of its members are vain and intellectually insecure, by the way they mock and belittle their forum opposition.

There's a word I added extra-emphasis on that might answer your question as to why these things are here.

The fact that they have these "contests" in an effort to humiliate others by demonstrating their (relative?) superiority proves this. Is JREF about skepticism? It seems like it's all about ego, much like MENSA meetings.

So you've never ridiculed someone for making a stupid claim? Anywho, some might be so inclined to say that this comment is simlpy whining...taking things on the forums a tad too seriously. ;)

ETA: In honor of Tippit's bravery; I've voted for every person here. If only to further raise my over-bloated sense of superiority over the untermensch here.

[zaphod2016]

Given your choice to post twice in a row, this statement is stupid and wrong.
am I nominated yet?

:confused: I'm pretty sure there is a joke here, but I'm not smart enough to get it.

[Dave Rogers]

This is actually a great idea. Note to my fellow lunatics: I suggest we hold a "best fallacy of September '08" poll this month. At the end of the month we will vote on which skeptic (or other poster) used obscene logical fallacies in their debunking.

Alternatively, you could simply nominate posts by debunkers for the Stundies. It's been done before, though rarely. The point of the Stundies is to highlight poor analytical skills and muddled thinking, and there's no fundamental reason why these should be limited to those who espouse theories that circumvent, rather than conform to, the available evidence.

Dave

[Cuddles]

This is actually a great idea. Note to my fellow lunatics: I suggest we hold a "best fallacy of September '08" poll this month. At the end of the month we will vote on which skeptic (or other poster) used obscene logical fallacies in their debunking.

What does being a skeptic have to do with anything? The Stundies are not limited to any particular group, they are open to any stupid statements made related to conspiracies. The fact that 9/11 truthers make up the vast majority of Stundies simply reflects the fact that they are prone to making utterly ridiculous statements.

I also find it very interesting how you refer to skeptics and debunking. Skepticism is simply the process of only coming to a conclusion based on evidence. By implying that you are not one, you are simply saying that you don't care about reality and are happy to believe anything that you, or someone else, makes up. As for debunking, it is not possible to debunk something unless it is bunk. By admitting that people here debunk the various claims made about 9/11, you are admitting that the claims are in fact bunk. I would worry about the language skills and general understanding of truthers, if it weren't for the painfully obvious fact that most of them are utterly insane or just plain stupid.

[IMST]

:confused: I'm pretty sure there is a joke here, but I'm not smart enough to get it.

um...wow.
You'd think someone that's spending so many posts deriding us for using ad hominum logical fallacies (even commiting a signiture line to it) would recognize the structure of one. Though it's clearly ineligible due to length, I think Ima nominate this whole exchange for September stundies.

[Drudgewire]

I'm amazed it's so far behind, TheLoneBedouin's seemed like a candidate for the Stundie hall of fame.

[TjW]

:confused: I'm pretty sure there is a joke here, but I'm not smart enough to get it.
True on both counts.

[Travis]

I'm amazed it's so far behind, TheLoneBedouin's seemed like a candidate for the Stundie hall of fame.

There's something about someone who claims to be an engineer not knowing the composition of soil that is just so darned funny though.

[Drudgewire]

There's something about someone who claims to be an engineer not knowing the composition of soil that is just so darned funny though.


Touché. :)

[TheLoneBedouin]

The Stundies are not limited to any particular group, they are open to any stupid statements made related to conspiracies.
Lie- my error had nothing to do with 9/11. Furthermore, the error was repeated by several JREFers multiple times and though I was the only one who admitted my mistake, only I was stundied. There is a clear bias present.
The fact that 9/11 truthers make up the vast majority of Stundies simply reflects the fact that they are prone to making utterly ridiculous statements.
As shown above, this is a blatent lie. However, I will accept your word and will nominate JREFers for this month's stundies. If, as I suspect, none of my nominations appear in the September stundies we will be having our first ever monthly Parkys (named after Parky76) which will be an equal institution under JREF forum laws. If this is in fact what happens, I expect it to stay in the Conspiricy sub-forum on equal footing with the Stundies.

@Zaphod
I like the idea of sticking strictly to logical fallacies- there are certainly plenty on the various debunking sites.

[Horatius]

Furthermore, the error was repeated by several JREFers multiple times and though I was the only one who admitted my mistake, only I was stundied. There is a clear bias present.




The Stundieness wasn't in making an error; it was the arrogant presumption that you referred to us as being "math-retarded" while making that error that was the Stundieness. It's the math equivalent of complaining about somebody else's "baad speeling".

Of course, this was noted at the time, but subsequently ignored by you, not that that surprises me.

[Drudgewire]

the error was repeated by several JREFers multiple times and though I was the only one who admitted my mistake, only I was stundied. There is a clear bias present.


While technically bwinwright (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=3996174&postcount=171) is indeed a JREFer, I don't think he counts as "several."

[TheLoneBedouin]

While technically bwinwright is indeed a JREFer, I don't think he counts as "several."
Also Damien in another thread and Parky76. In fact, Parky made two simple errors and has yet to admit them.

[Dave Rogers]

Lie- my error had nothing to do with 9/11.

It was posted to a forum discussing 9/11 conspiracy theories in a thread about how many people supported an alternative interpretation of 9/11, and was contesting an estimate of how many people supported an alternative interpretation of 9/11. In that respect, it qualifies.

Furthermore, the error was repeated by several JREFers multiple times and though I was the only one who admitted my mistake, only I was stundied. There is a clear bias present.

Then please post links to posts by at least three (a minimal definition of "several") forum members in which the mistake was repeated, including at least two posts (a minimal definition of "multiple") by at least one of these forum members. If you can't do so, please admit that the above statement is "a blatent lie" (sic).

Of course, you'll do neither. Backing up assertions with evidence isn't something truthers do.

Dave

[Drudgewire]

Also Damien in another thread and Parky76. In fact, Parky made two simple errors and has yet to admit them.


Parky pulled a number out of his buttocks. While sort of silly, if we judged Stundies on that standard 97.28% (guess where that number came from) of all twoofer posts would be eligible for the award.

Did you nominate Damien's post? I don't see it in the August nominations thread (or anywhere for that matter, but let's give you the benefit of the doubt for a change), just complaints about Parky and a wiki quote about that brand new internet phenomenon known as /b/. :rolleyes:

[kookbreaker]

I'd love to see it happen. If some truthers should show they actually had enough of a sense of humour to see what was actually funny, I'd have more hope for the future of mankind.


I can see this already


Its time for the duhbunkies! Cast your vote for your favorite debunker quote of the month!

1) NotACrazytroother demonstrates his inability to grasp the lack of planes hitting the tower.


So when two planes hit the towers the damage was extensive


2) TheEngineer still hasn't grasped the subtle rules of our physics and metallurgy yet


You see, when steel is heated it weakens, by the time it reaches 600 degrees it can be down to half its strength


3) StructureGuy once again shows that we just plain old know more than he does with his Engineering degree vs. our dropouts.


I'm sorry, but the towers did not have 100,000% load handling redundancy


4) Remember folks, some people don't understand that there are cameras, everywhere! Everywhere! And that we know more about defending a hardened building next to soft targets and an airport that he does!


Why would we have cameras pointed at a blank wall? And why would gas station cameras be pointed somewhere besides the gas station pumps? And why do you keep babbling about a 'Pentagon missile system that would shoot down anything within 100 miles'! Don't you realize shooting a jetliner down would kill lots more people and that there's an airport right next to the Pentacon!

5) What part of 'Boxcutters? HAHAHAHA!' don't you get, Tourboy? If we see you we will beat you to death with our luggage


Box cutters are very nasty wepaons and used in a lot of crimes.


6) SHUT UP!!! SHUT UP!!! SHUT UP!!!!! I'm NOT LISTENING!!!!


Several times, directly and indirectly the truth movement has implied that the FDNY was 'in on it' or is too cowardly to be angry at the deliberate murder of 300+ of their brothers


7) Obviously, Pilotguy has a little problem understanding how to fly a plane. Unlike us.


Uhh, having a Commercial pilot's license would make one very qualified to fly an airliner


8) BWAHAHAHA! This guys still thinks people jumped because the oxygen-starved, almost cold fires were actually HOT!!! BWAHAHAHA!


Smoke inhalation does not make you jump out of a 100 story building. Dying fires do not make you jump out of a 100 stoy building. Fear of burning to death does.


9) CandoMath still thinks that we are an unpopular movement because nobody will show up at our protests or sign our online petitions. Doesn't she understand that 84% of the population agrees with us?


You guys managed to get three people to show up, at someone else's protest. Can't you get more than that?!

[Horatius]

Did you nominate Damien's post? I don't see it in the August nominations thread (or anywhere for that matter, but let's give you the benefit of the doubt for a change),



He was probably referring to these posts:



Here's an amusing faceplant of a Stundie. In response to this post:




TLB teaches those of us who are "math-retarded" to calculate:





I leave it as an exercise for the amused to determine who may be "math-retarded" around here.


ETA: His notion of how to write "does not equal" also seems to be at odds with my experience.

Hang on, Isn't TLB actually right?

His simple multiplication is correct, but he's multiplying the wrong things. The original post said that 0.001% of the US population were truthers, meaning about 3000. TLB multiplied the US population by 0.001, which actually gives you 100 times the percentage that he meant to calculate.


Faceplant!!



Not exactly "making the same error", but I don't expect you'll be surprised by that.


Also note, the complete lack of terms like "Math-retarded" in Damien's post. Errors are expected; Having an arrogant and insulting attitude while making the exact sort of error you accuse others of making is hilarious.

[Bobert]

Lie- my error had nothing to do with 9/11. Furthermore, the error was repeated by several JREFers multiple times and though I was the only one who admitted my mistake, only I was stundied. There is a clear bias present.

As shown above, this is a blatent lie. However, I will accept your word and will nominate JREFers for this month's stundies. If, as I suspect, none of my nominations appear in the September stundies we will be having our first ever monthly Parkys (named after Parky76) which will be an equal institution under JREF forum laws. If this is in fact what happens, I expect it to stay in the Conspiricy sub-forum on equal footing with the Stundies.

@Zaphod
I like the idea of sticking strictly to logical fallacies- there are certainly plenty on the various debunking sites.

The NWO JREF Forum Managing Committee has voted this down.
I am sorry but you WILL NOT be allowed to post the "The Parkys".

It is noted though that recently Parky has violated SEVERAL NWO laws HOWEVER as of today he is still considered a highly evolved member.

You should strive to have a highly evolved member!

Also the NWO would like to offer our apologies that you were lied to or that lies were spread about you.
We will be sending you a thank you card along with 2 tickets to the Blue Man Group.

[Drudgewire]

We will be sending you a thank you card along with 2 tickets to the Blue Man Group.


Hasn't he been punished enough already. :(

[Travis]

I can see this already

HA, great.

I also expect some of these:

Travis uses yet another Ad Hominem when YAK proposes a dirty bomb in WTC7

I'm pretty sure a dirty bomb would leave lots of radiation behind.

Kookbreaker engages in yet another Strawman attack When XAX lets him know what the Pentagon is really made of.

No the Pentagon was not made out of Tiberium Crystals.

[Elizabeth I]

Also the NWO would like to offer our apologies that you were lied to or that lies were spread about you.
We will be sending you a thank you card along with 2 tickets to the Blue Man Group.

Hasn't he been punished enough already. :(


Blue Man Group is scary.

[patchbunny]

As much as I wanted to vote for JihadJane, Heiwa's comment:

So soil is now a collection of rather small solids? So you build houses on a collection of rather small solids?!?! You must be joking.


is a whole new level of stupidity that this engineer cannot ignore.

[zaphod2016]

True on both counts.

*rimshot* (http://www.instantrimshot.com/)

I foresee a few problems with a monthly vote based on logical fallacies. Most notably, it would be dreadfully boring. It seems to me that a quality stundie requires a humorous element, and most fallacies really aren't very funny (IMO).

Cuddles: have you had a chance to see my reply to you in this thread (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=119964&page=4) yet?

[Hokulele]

I foresee a few problems with a monthly vote based on logical fallacies. Most notably, it would be dreadfully boring. It seems to me that a quality stundie requires a humorous element, and most fallacies really aren't very funny (IMO).


Although the Stundies do involve humor, it isn't always required. Polls on posts have somewhat of a tradition on this forum. Long before the Stundies started, the Language Award began to honor those who made contributions to the forum that were insightful, well-written, or made evocative use of language. A second poll to spotlight more light-hearted (and certainly, briefer) uses of language was instituted recently for those with shorter attention spans. People from the CT sub-forum regularly make the finals of each. This is what the Nominate button at the bottom left of every post is used for.

Links to the current list of nominees:

The Language Award August Finalists (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3995945#post3995945)

The Pith Award August Finalists (http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?postid=3996474#post3996474)

The JREF is mostly about education, although entertainment does play a role. If you really think a poll of fallacies would advance the cause of education, boring or not, go for it.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

There is soooo much quality stoopid up there that it was difficult to decide.

Despite being waaaayyy behind, I was the guy who nominated him and his comment was exceptionally retarded so I went with Alex libmans "super hacker".

I voted only once on principle.

[Cuddles]

Lie- my error had nothing to do with 9/11.

And since I never said it did, how exactly am I lying? In fact, I didn't mention 9/11 at all in the part you replied to here.

Furthermore, the error was repeated by several JREFers multiple times and though I was the only one who admitted my mistake, only I was stundied. There is a clear bias present.

You are a JREFer. Did you nominate any of these other mistakes? No? Then stop whining. Of course, even if you can provide evidence that these other mistakes actually exist, as Horatius points out, merely making a mistake is not worthy of a Stundie. Making a mistake in incredibly simple maths at the same time as calling other people retarded is. If you can find an example of someone other than yourself doing so, feel free to nominate it. And, of course, the fact that other people may have made the same mistake does not make it any less stupid of you to have done so.

As shown above, this is a blatent lie.

You haven't shown anything. You have stated that something is a lie, but since the part you claim is a lie doesn't actually exist anywhere in my post, that doesn't really mean anything. In addition, the part you are replying to here says something completely different from the part you replied to above, so claiming that you showed it was a lie above is utterly nonsensical.

However, I will accept your word and will nominate JREFers for this month's stundies.

Go for it. Since the majority of nominations come from this forum already, I really don't see why you think this will prove anything.

If, as I suspect, none of my nominations appear in the September stundies we will be having our first ever monthly Parkys (named after Parky76) which will be an equal institution under JREF forum laws. If this is in fact what happens, I expect it to stay in the Conspiricy sub-forum on equal footing with the Stundies.

Expect all you like, I really doubt anything you expect will actually happen.

@Zaphod
I like the idea of sticking strictly to logical fallacies- there are certainly plenty on the various debunking sites.

There sure are. Unfortunately for you, the majority of them are quotes from nuts being pointed out as logical fallacies. For example, this post I am replying to contains some lovely examples of straw men, non sequiturs and tu quoquoe. Will you be nominating yourself for your award?

[Almo]

I can see this already duhbunkies stuff removed

Wow. That is REALLY funny!!! Did they really think they were making fun of skeptics by highlighting these posts?

[kookbreaker]

Wow. That is REALLY funny!!! Did they really think they were making fun of skeptics by highlighting these posts?

Well, they've never made a 'debunkies', but yes they have demonstrated a combination of arrogance and ignorance by making similar comments about those who would explain simple science concepts to them.

My favorite was in the early LCF days when they were saying "Stupid debunkers, don't they realize it would only take a couple of hours to set WTC7 to blow up!!!!???"

Arrogance & Ignorance, the truther's strength.

[Travis]

Arrogance & Ignorance, the truther's strength.

.....not to mention the primary reason the Stundies can exist and be so funny.

[Rolfe]

Why on earth is ronpaulblogsdotcom last, even with my only vote?

That one takes lunacy to an entirely new level.

Rolfe.

[Travis]

Why on earth is ronpaulblogsdotcom last, even with my only vote?

That one takes lunacy to an entirely new level.

Rolfe.

It's plenty crazy and funny.....but so are so many of the others. It does have the advantage of proudly demonstrating just how convoluted the thought process of some people can be.

[blobru]

Always worth braving the CT Forum at least once a month for the Stundies. That was quite a roster -- nice job on the intros too -- ended up voting for half of them. If I'd had to pick one, though: Innocentwolf15! Such bravado: "...youre probably wondering wtf am i talking about?... There is no :"free Aluminum" running around in nature...on this planet or anywhere else." :tinfoilhey, where'd all the free aluminum go? :wolf:

[Travis]

Always worth braving the CT Forum at least once a month for the Stundies. That was quite a roster -- nice job on the intros too -- ended up voting for half of them. If I'd had to pick one, though: Innocentwolf15! Such bravado: "...youre probably wondering wtf am i talking about?... There is no :"free Aluminum" running around in nature...on this planet or anywhere else." :tinfoilhey, where'd all the free aluminum go? :wolf:

Yes, that was one that I voted for too. I just love arrogance mixed with ignorance.

[Baby Nemesis]

Is this thread an attack of these? (http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/bigdogmetoo.htm) Why are you trying to show people up like this? I've never visited the threads in the conspiracy theory section (apart from the bits that end up in the Abandon All Hope forum) so I don't know if those people's arguments really are stupid, but even if they are, isn't it just malicious to try to publicly humiliate them? Is it some kind of religious ritual-type frustration-venting session?

And it sounds to me, albeit just from reading the original post in this thread, that some of what the people nominated said has been twisted a bit or taken out of context, at least some of it deliberately. I mean, for instance, surely the person who said, "I am afraid I have to point out, again, as much as that perturbs you, that engineering is not my specialty. Why should I presume to try to convince engineers in their own language (especially in as merciless a place as this forum) why they are incorrect in that calculation?" wasn't meant that literally, as if they were saying they didn't expect engineers to understand them but they would have to respect their views anyway! It seems obvious that the person must have been saying they can't talk the technical jargon of engineers but still believed they had something of importance to communicate, albeit they could only do it in layman's language. Why set up a whole thread just to single people out for mockery? Why take things they said out of context and give the impression they were far more stupid statements than they probably were?

And why don't the moderators mind? It seems quite paradoxical that if anyone ridicules someone like this in most threads, what they say might well be moved to the Abandon All Hope forum, and yet the moderators don't mind an entire thread being set up to mock people. Is the simple fact that people are going off-topic and making things personal considered worse than the things they actually say? Is that the offence their posts are moved for, not what they said? If not, then why is saying something like, "You're an idiot with no grasp of logic" considered worse than a whole thread being started up to try and prove such a thing?

And why is this award just for conspiracy theorists, not for everyone?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

And why is this award just for conspiracy theorists, not for everyone?


Because 1) it was born in the Conspiracy Theories subforum, and 2) the person whom these awards are named after is a conspiracy theorist/truther.

Also, your... "curiosity" about why the mods allow these awards to live belongs in Forum Management (http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=19), not here.

[Baby Nemesis]

So I have to start a whole new thread to ask the question, instead of just hoping someone can give me a quick answer here?

Why did the person/people who started this award feel so venomous about someone that they named a whole idiocy award after him?

[LashL]

Ha! There are so many excellent contenders this month. Thank goodness for the multiple-choice option!

I went with Heiwa, Ranke, and TheLoneBedouin.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

So I have to start a whole new thread to ask the question, instead of just hoping someone can give me a quick answer here?


For your specific inquiry as to why the mods allow these award threads to exist, yes. It is, after all, a forum management issue, wouldn't you agree?

[LashL]

Its time for the duhbunkies! <snipped for brevity>


Hilarious stuff, kookbreaker!

:dl: :dl: :dl: :dl:

[Travis]

Is this thread an attack of these? (http://www.flamewarriors.com/warriorshtm/bigdogmetoo.htm) Why are you trying to show people up like this?

This isn't about showing anyone up. If it was we would be rubbing the quoted posters nose in it by inviting them here to explain themselves but since that isn't the point we don't.

I've never visited the threads in the conspiracy theory section (apart from the bits that end up in the Abandon All Hope forum) so I don't know if those people's arguments really are stupid, but even if they are, isn't it just malicious to try to publicly humiliate them? Is it some kind of religious ritual-type frustration-venting session?

People should think before they post things and the hope is that maybe this can serve both as entertainment and as a way to illustrate illogical, and sometimes just plain stupid, thinking.

And it sounds to me, albeit just from reading the original post in this thread, that some of what the people nominated said has been twisted a bit or taken out of context, at least some of it deliberately. I mean, for instance, surely the person who said, "I am afraid I have to point out, again, as much as that perturbs you, that engineering is not my specialty. Why should I presume to try to convince engineers in their own language (especially in as merciless a place as this forum) why they are incorrect in that calculation?" wasn't meant that literally, as if they were saying they didn't expect engineers to understand them but they would have to respect their views anyway! It seems obvious that the person must have been saying they can't talk the technical jargon of engineers but still believed they had something of importance to communicate, albeit they could only do it in layman's language. Why set up a whole thread just to single people out for mockery? Why take things they said out of context and give the impression they were far more stupid statements than they probably were?

You will note that I always include a link to the source material, and providing the source is a requirement for a nomination to make the finals, as a way to mitigate against exactly what you are proposing. If you think something is being twisted contextually research the source and bring it up. We have redone Stundie votes before when it was revealed that one quote was being taken wildly out of context.

And why don't the moderators mind? It seems quite paradoxical that if anyone ridicules someone like this in most threads, what they say might well be moved to the Abandon All Hope forum, and yet the moderators don't mind an entire thread being set up to mock people.

Since we are not modifying quotes and the majority of the quotes originate in this very subforum, or are about the subjects this subforum is about, the entire Stundie enterprise is on-topic.

Is the simple fact that people are going off-topic and making things personal considered worse than the things they actually say? Is that the offence their posts are moved for, not what they said? If not, then why is saying something like, "You're an idiot with no grasp of logic" considered worse than a whole thread being started up to try and prove such a thing?

In your example calling the person an idiot would be the infraction and not pointing out the "no grasp of logic." You'll note that I did not call any of the individuals, whose quotes made the finals, "idiots." Only in the thread title does that word appear and it is followed with a question mark.

And why is this award just for conspiracy theorists, not for everyone?

The eponymous Stundie was himself a conspiracy theorist so these awards reflect his obsession. By rule no quotes from Stundie can make the finals.

[Baby Nemesis]

People should think before they post things and the hope is that maybe this can serve both as entertainment and as a way to illustrate illogical, and sometimes just plain stupid, thinking.

But I don't suppose those people realised they were being illogical, or they probably wouldn't have said what they said. I mean, from your quotes, what they said doesn't seem overtly illogical. They might have been lacking the specialised knowledge to make the statements they made, but that would mean they were being misguided, not illogical, something they wouldn't have been able to help. They might have got their information from websites that misinformed them and not searched around for opposing views, but it seems a bit unkind to ridicule them for that.

Since we are not modifying quotes and the majority of the quotes originate in this very subforum, or are about the subjects this subforum is about, the entire Stundie enterprise is on-topic.

But it still seems like victimisation. I came here when I followed a link to this place from a post in the Abandon All Hope forum (possibly the most amusing forum on the board). This thread seems a lot worse than the things in there. It more-or-less seems to be a long string of posts ridiculing people, and set up to publicly humiliate people. It seems a lot worse than the Abandon All Hope forum because for one thing, posts in the AAH forum are usually an exchange of insults where each side seems as spirited as the other, rather than people being singled out for victimisation by several others and not being able to defend themselves adequately, as this thread seems to be; and for another, having a post moved to AAH is like a kind of public punishment, but it's deserved, because the people whose posts are moved there are often being insulting, but with this thread, the nominated quotes seemed to be from people who were trying to make serious points at the time, if misguided ones, maybe, so to single them out for publicity and taunt them and hold them up to ridicule doesn't seem fair. Things might not be as clear-cut as I think because I don't know how the people nominated generally behave, but that's the way it seems to me.

[TheLoneBedouin]

Only in the thread title does that word appear and it is followed with a question mark.
The old "you-can-call-people-anything-as-long-as-you-phrase-it-as-a-question" rule, huh?

JREFers.... Lying Uneducated Right Wing Authoritarians?

[Baby Nemesis]

I mean, from your quotes, what they said doesn't seem overtly illogical.

Whoops. Slightly inaccurate. Having reminded myself of what they say again, I now recall that some of them were overtly illogical. But not all of them.

[Slayhamlet]

I can see this already

Check out the September Stundies thread. TheLoneBedouin is doing his damnedest to live up down to your expectations.

[Slayhamlet]

The old "you-can-call-people-anything-as-long-as-you-phrase-it-as-a-question" rule, huh?

JREFers.... Lying Uneducated Right Wing Authoritarians?

Wonderful irony (http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4016145&postcount=146):

No he didn't. Stop lying. You called the JREF "math-retarded" because...

No, I said: Is the JREF math-retarded?

[Travis]

Baby Nemesis, if you have a problem with the Stundies why don't you open a thread in Forum Management and we can debate that there in the proper place.

[kookbreaker]

Check out the September Stundies thread. TheLoneBedouin is doing his damnedest to live up down to your expectations.

Troof is dumber than fiction.

[Baby Nemesis]

Baby Nemesis, if you have a problem with the Stundies why don't you open a thread in Forum Management and we can debate that there in the proper place.

OK, I have now.

[dudalb]

The old "you-can-call-people-anything-as-long-as-you-phrase-it-as-a-question" rule, huh?

JREFers.... Lying Uneducated Right Wing Authoritarians?

Nope. Some of us are Lying Uneducated Left Wing Authoritarians.

And considering the Extreme Right politics of a number of the leaders of the Truth Movement (Alec Jones comes to mind) It is sort of stupid for a Twoofer to throw around the term Right Wing as an insult.

One of the remarkable things about the Truth movement is how it can bring together the kooks from all over the political spectrum.

[Travis]

Just two more days to get in your votes. Is it going to be the mysterious non-solid soil that wins????

[Hokulele]

Just two more days to get in your votes. Is it going to be the mysterious non-solid soil that wins????


Woo hoo! I nominated a winnah!

[Travis]

We have a winner.

Heiwa's magical non-solid soil wins the 28th Annual Stundie of August 2008.

So soil is now a collection of rather small solids? So you build houses on a collection of rather small solids?!?! You must be joking.

No, we're not joking. We are gathered here today to honor Heiwa, who has brought a great amount of laughter into our lives. Through dedicated research, into everything except soil, Heiwa has provided yet another example of an object denser than a singularity.

http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/1110746a2433fc6d0e.gif

Way to go! We gather tonight to award The Stundie. The Stundie is the sister award to the Darwin: for those who refuse to remove themselves from the gene pool by accident, but will make it their lifetime goal to poison it.

To receive The Stundie is one of the most profound honours offered by the members of the JREF Conspiracy Theory Subforum, and one which in your case is well earned. Many attempt The Stundie, few attain it. You, Heiwa, have marked yourself as one deserving such an award.

Congratulations and Mazel Tov!

[Inertia]

Are you kidding me? :rolleyes:

[Travis]

Are you kidding me? :rolleyes:

Hey, third place ain't so bad.

[CptColumbo]

Are you kidding me? :rolleyes:Unfortunately, you didn't campaign as hard as the second place finisher.