What is Kumar?

[Johnny Pneumatic]

Voice your mind.

[sickstan]

The poll should really be created with radio buttons and not checkboxes.

and

You forgot some other choices:
1. A very effective troll
2. A right frontal lobe epileptic
3. An obstinate anti-rationalist (is this redundant?)

[Jim_MDP]

It's a fictional middle east Emirate on "The West Wing".

What do i win?

[geni]

You can find him over at homeopathy home asking the same questions as he does here. So I think either:
He is trying to do some complex test to find out how woowoos and sceptic react to the same questions
He thinks he is bring the light of reason to the world

I suspect the second

[JamesM]

Originally posted by sickstan
The poll should really be created with radio buttons and not checkboxes.
And be in 'flame war'.

[DickK]

I love the smell of acetone in the morning

..it goes well with the minestrone, ha, see, I just disproved the world is round, or if not round, certainly slightly oblate, or green, or slightly furry or something...must...reach...switch...(head explodes, destiny is saved)

edited to get rid of weird HTML effect from last brackets, guess you had to be there.

[Zep]

Kumar is agur moved to Bangalore.

[davefoc]

I contemplated exactly this question.

My favorite theory, which I have mentioned previously, is that he is really AUP's sock puppet. I find the idea of AUP sitting at his computer creating this character with strange syntax and ambiguous questions very funny.

But, my best guess, is that Kumar believes in what he writes about and is a legiitimate poster. Assuming that, at the least, he's been a pretty good sport about forging ahead in an environment where no one agrees with him and where he puts up with a fair amount of less than flattering comments.

[Kumar]

' Biased Voting or Polling or Discussions among Same Family Members of one House makes no Sense. Evident from the voting points, no scope for good points ' :p

Results: Measured/seen the lobes/brain alike the earth.

[BillyJoe]

I have a friend called Maxwell.

BillyJoe

[Kumar]

Results analysis:-

Total View =164

Unfavour votes = 34
--------
Balance = 130 .........(looks favourable as not voted )
---------
:D :D :D

[MRC_Hans]

Kumar is a real poster. He, is a believer type. Nothing wrong in this, but he is a bit obstinate in trying to have his beliefs vindicated in scientific terms, an dkeeps posting various theses to support this. In normal believer fashion, he then twists and sorts the comments to hold on to his thesis. All being complicated by a less than excellent command of English.

Apart from this, he is a nice and friendly type of person.

The above is my impression from extensive communication with Kumar on this and other sites (not always under the Kumar handle).

Hans

[Kumar]

Thanks Mr.Hans for mentioning the comments so nicely. But there is a slight mistake. I am a believer type of person but not in one system like homeopathy. I am beliver in the good points of all therapies. One member at other thread had previously mentioned that God probably not given all knowledge to one system but distributed to several systems. So there can be some /part good points in any system provided it is accepted by mass public since long. You might have felt the same in my postings. I never talk exclusevely for one system but do oppose if one opposes absolutely any existed system. I also feel we may not achieve real goal of healing unless we combine few systems which I think we are partly doing.

We should meet all with good heart because who knows if someone out of those may be ' God '.

[Rolfe]

I suspect Kumar and I might disagree over a definition of "God". However, I think he may mean (approximately) that he believes that no one system necessarily has a monopoly on TRUTH. This reveals a fundamental misunderstanding of what science is about.

Science is an attempt to describe the universe as it is. To come as close as is possible to objective truth. Thus it isn't a "system" within which proponents must work. It is infinitely malleable and infinitely adjustable, as necessary to achieve this objective. Theories can and will be changed and rewritten as often as need be to accommodate experimental results and observed fact. However, the experimental results and the facts must be real (not imaginary or artefactual) and repeatable by more than one observer.

Thus, if it were really to be found to be the case that:
- grinding or shaking substances imparts energy to them
- insulin administration causes insulin resistance
- silica is a normal part of the human body
- cancerous growths have a parasite in the middle of them
- silver is a therapeutically active substance
- organic disease is caused by pinching of the spinal nerves at the inter-vertebral joints
and I'm sure you can all add your own pet woo-woo nonsense too;

.... then these facts would be assimilated into science and become part of the accepted theories about how the universe works. They wouldn't be pseudoscience or pseudomedicine, they'd be real science or real medicine.

Kumar seems at times to understand this, as he asks us to bring these looney-tunes theories to the attention of research scientists and have them considered seriously "for the benefit of mankind".

But Kumar, the scientists have already looked very hard at all these ideas, and their reactions of everything from horror to disbelief to mirth aren't closed-mindedness or an unwillingness to alter the scientific world-view to accommodate them, they're the inevitable consequence of a realisation that these ideas have nothing whatsoever to do with how the universe really is, and are purely the products of the imaginations or delusions of their proponents.

"Science" is in this way different from the other "systems" you talk about, in that it is simply everything which has been shown to be consistent with repeated observations about how the universe actually is. Thus, by definition, it seeks to assimilate and incorporate all demonstrable truth. The fact that your "alternative" systems are still alternative is simply the inevitable result of their propositions NOT conforming to observations about what is "really" out there.

If you do have a scientific world-view, Kumar (and at the risk of being flamed, I would state categorically that this does not exclude believing in God), then BE SCIENTIFIC. Accept the observations of those who have actually LOOKED, that is the scientists, and realise the difference between delusion (and self-deception) and reality. Alternatively, if you believe in paranormal "energies" which can't be measured by scientific means, or that God changes the rules of the universe according to who is doing the experiments, then for goodness sake realise that your world-view is essentially magical and quit trying to explain your looney-tunes ideas in terms of science.

You can't have it both ways.

Rolfe.

[Johnny Pneumatic]

What is that? Oh.. its Kumar's face on the floor.

[Kumar]

It is infinitely malleable and infinitely adjustable, as necessary to achieve this objective. Theories can and will be changed and rewritten as often as need be to accommodate experimental results and observed fact. However, the experimental results and the facts must be real (not imaginary or artefactual) and repeatable by more than one observer.

Rolfee,

Thanks for explaining in plain science language. Inspite of all the factors you have mentioned, it is still existing in mass public. Personal observations can be found in homeopath's & other's clinics. People around the world are health conscious & educated but still they go to the reputed alternative treatments like homeopathy. Why these people don't belive the scientific observations? As you have mentioned in your above quote, the scientific observations,experiments & tests are changeble & infinitely malleable. We don't know, tomorrow these may come in some new form & then we may say that these works. There is a future scope of everything existing & should not be at all rejected unless it becomes an absolute fact & vanished.

[Ladewig]

Dozens of JREF polls have included the option of "planet X." Now I finally want to vote for that and it isn't there.

I'm having trouble with the sincere believer theory because Kumar displays great mastery of progressive and perfect tenses in English ¹, but misses the simplest idioms. Something is being pulled here. It's either our legs or Kumar's....





_____________

1 something tens of millions of Americans do not have.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by davefoc
I contemplated exactly this question.

My favorite theory, which I have mentioned previously, is that he is really AUP's sock puppet. I find the idea of AUP sitting at his computer creating this character with strange syntax and ambiguous questions very funny.


Curses, you have revealed my fiendish scheme to all. For this, you will pay a have price. MWAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

[MRC_Hans]

Originally posted by Ladewig
Dozens of JREF polls have included the option of "planet X." Now I finally want to vote for that and it isn't there.

I'm having trouble with the sincere believer theory because Kumar displays great mastery of progressive and perfect tenses in English ¹, but misses the simplest idioms. Something is being pulled here. It's either our legs or Kumar's....
_____________

1 something tens of millions of Americans do not have. Kumar is from India. Isispect his native language is English, but a somewhat different English.

However, it is also a creative English:Thanks Mr.Hans for mentioning the comments so nicely. But there is a slight mistake. I am a believer type of person but not in one system like homeopathy. -- which make you read not what I write, but what you expect me to write. I did not mention homepathy in my post. I have noticed that you believe not only in homeopathy, but in practically everything, ....as long as it is not modern science.

Hans

[Kumar]

I have noticed that you believe not only in homeopathy, but in practically everything, ....as long as it is not modern science.
Mr.Hans,

This is the only misunderstanding. I believe equally in good points of modren science. In the current environment no one can dare to leave modren science absolutely. However, when anyone opposes other therapies absolutely just in considerations of few observations/tests against mass practical results, I just make a base of his therapy in similar manner as he opposes the other therapy. We can mould anything in any manner which is based on observations,test or otherwise provided it is not experianced by the common public directly. If earth is experianced as flat by common public against observation of few as round, we can mould it in any way suitable to us because we have more physical proofs then few test results.

I think I made it bit clear. Thanks.

[MRC_Hans]

Clear? Mmmm.

But Rolfe explained the principle of science excelently. Obviously, no matter how many people believe something, how sincerely or for how long, it will not make it true, nor will it make it science.

Hans

[Zep]

I believe I called TROLL some time ago...

[Deetee]

Originally posted by Kumar
Results analysis:-

Total View =164

Unfavour votes = 34
--------
Balance = 130 .........(looks favourable as not voted )
---------
:D :D :D

I have visited this thread 4 times, but can only vote once.
Do not take voteless visits as a vote in your favour

[Rolfe]

Originally posted by Kumar

Rolfee,

As you have mentioned in your above quote, the scientific observations,experiments & tests are changeble & infinitely malleable.
No, I didn't. I said that scientific theory is infinitely malleable to accommodate observed facts. First find your fact. Have you one to show us? Any repeatable, definite, demonstrable observation to back up any of your bizarre speculations?

Kumar, have you ever looked down a microscope? Do you know what refraction looks like?

Rolfe.
(who must be suffering from some sort of pathological masochism still to be posting in a thread with someone who thinks that facts are changeable and infinitely malleable.)

[Dragonrock]

I vote that he is a refugee who was kicked off of Planet X by Shemp.

[Rocky]

A “fact” is something that does not change whether or not you believe in it. It doesn’t change even if EVERYONE believes something else. Occasionally a fact is discovered that is different form what everyone believes; however the fact is still the fact. Science is the effort to identify these facts and the collection of all of these facts.

Science is the study of facts.

[BillyJoe]

Democracy may be the best form of government but it sucks as far as science is concerned.