The mythology of dismissive skeptics and the JREF

BravesFan · 26th April 2012, 06:33 PM

I see it all the time on here where noobs pop in with their latest take on woo (bleevers in said woo or not ) and then when they receive the usual"yeah that's just a load of crap" response we so often give, they get defensive and angry and say we aren't being proper skeptics.

Let me tell you who think this, you are wrong.

i understand, however, how it might seem this way to you though. You have just arrived fresh and clean to this new and exciting forum where there's discussion of all these weird and interesting things and you have some beliefs and/or information you are ready to share and!...... you kinda get the hand wave. So you think that we just do that to everyone. We don't.

The difference is that many of us have been here for a long time (i myself only a a member for a few months but I lurked here for 2 years) others have been here for a reallly long time, so they have seen and heard it all before.

What seems as a new and interesting subject to you (say demons ) to the board regulars may seem like so old hat as to not be really worthy of discussion. They have debunked it, gone through the "evidence" and squashed it flat. now if you have something NEW to share, well by all means put it out there! But don't expect everyone to buy into your theories if you can't back them up with a bit of science.

So, I would suggest to not make a bunch of new threads about these sorts of things but rather do a search and bring an old dead thread on the topic back to life. It will pop up on the old posters page and remind them, might get you more responses too.

Unless you are here peddling more 9/11 nonsense, then I reckon it's free reign... sorry

Baloney · 26th April 2012, 07:13 PM

You wouldn't say all that if you saw my evidence for a Flat Earth!

FSM · 26th April 2012, 07:23 PM

But I can dowse!!!

BravesFan · 26th April 2012, 07:38 PM

Originally Posted by Baloney

You wouldn't say all that if you saw my evidence for a Flat Earth!

LOL!!! you a-holes!!!! hahahahaha

I didn't even consider this would turn out this way (but I should have known)

I had the idea that this could be almost a sticky to newbies to read before they got their feelings hurt.... but, yeah, it's pretty much funnier this way!

Baloney · 26th April 2012, 08:00 PM

Sorry! You have my permission to ask the mods to delete my incendiary comment.

Kid Eager · 26th April 2012, 08:02 PM

Originally Posted by Baloney

Sorry! You have my permission to ask the mods to delete my incendiary comment.

reported for being conciliatory. My stars for the day told me to do it.

pakeha · 27th April 2012, 03:51 AM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

What seems as a new and interesting subject to you (say demons ) to the board regulars may seem like so old hat as to not be really worthy of discussion. They have debunked it, gone through the "evidence" and squashed it flat. now if you have something NEW to share, well by all means put it out there! But don't expect everyone to buy into your theories if you can't back them up with a bit of science.

So, I would suggest to not make a bunch of new threads about these sorts of things but rather do a search and bring an old dead thread on the topic back to life. It will pop up on the old posters page and remind them, might get you more responses too.

Unless you are here peddling more 9/11 nonsense, then I reckon it's free reign... sorry

Rather than necro-ing an old thread, maybe it's better to link to it in your OP. Along with that fresh, interesting and sourced opinion.
I learned this the hard way.

Dancing David · 27th April 2012, 04:00 AM

It does seem to come in a number of flavors:

- the individual who has an idea but really hasn't thought about it much. These are people who seem to be just here to test the water, some get very defensive but often not.

-those who come with an agenda, this would cover many of the more seasoned ones who visit the forum. Be they creationists, physics kooks or homeopaths. They come in with a preprepared statement of some sort, and have their secondary argument ready for a set piece. They can usually be spotted because of certain cliches they use:
--comparing scepticism and science to religion
--conspiracy theories about the suppression of the truth
--accusations that it is not their burden to provide evidence but that forums members are lazy and should do their own research
These posters usually seem to get worn out and very defensive, and some seem to make periodic visits back to the forum

BravesFan · 27th April 2012, 04:13 AM

If I had one criticism of this forum, it's that sometimes people here go a little "evidence" overboard in areas that don't require evidence.

If I say "I can turn my head 360 degrees like The exorcist movie" for you to buy this, I would be required to provide evidence. I have made a statement of fact.

If i say " I'm not a big fan of women in the infantry" I have stated an opinion, but then I get bombarded with claims of evidence. When the only evidence is ,"I'm not a fan"....

I also think that plenty of members seem to forget critical thinking when it comes to their political beliefs and go into "support the party at all costs" mode. (like when discussing election stuff and political methods like only one side is guilty of doing it....when we all know this stuff is older than Caesar)

FSM · 27th April 2012, 05:27 AM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

If I had one criticism of this forum, it's that sometimes people here go a little "evidence" overboard in areas that don't require evidence.

If I say "I can turn my head 360 degrees like The exorcist movie" for you to buy this, I would be required to provide evidence. I have made a statement of fact.

If i say " I'm not a big fan of women in the infantry" I have stated an opinion, but then I get bombarded with claims of evidence. When the only evidence is ,"I'm not a fan"....

I also think that plenty of members seem to forget critical thinking when it comes to their political beliefs and go into "support the party at all costs" mode. (like when discussing election stuff and political methods like only one side is guilty of doing it....when we all know this stuff is older than Caesar)

Evidence that it's older than Caesar?

FSM · 27th April 2012, 05:28 AM

teehee.

Cuddles · 27th April 2012, 07:03 AM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

If i say " I'm not a big fan of women in the infantry" I have stated an opinion, but then I get bombarded with claims of evidence. When the only evidence is ,"I'm not a fan"....

There are two problems here. Firstly, it's usually instead "I'm not a big fan of women in the infantry because of X". At which point it's entirely fair to ask for evidence supporting X. Opinions are not immune from criticism, and if you give any reasoning at all for holding that opinion rather than just flatly stating it, that reasoning is open to criticism.

And secondly, even just a flat opinion is not immune from criticism. If you say you don't think women should be in the infantry without giving any reason or evidence to support that opinion, it would be perfectly fair for people to call you a sexist, since you'd be discriminating based solely on gender for no supported reason. An unsupported opinion can be criticised just as much as a supported one, it's just that the specific criticisms will tend to differ.

So yeah, yours is not an uncommon complaint at all. People often complain that others here are too anal about asking people to provide support for their posts. Such complaints come almost exclusively from people who are either unable or unwilling to support what they've said. Remember, this is a forum where people who tend to doubt unsupported statements come specifically to argue about things. If you just want to post opinions without having anyone argue with them or ask you to back them up, you're probably in the wrong place.

rcfieldz · 27th April 2012, 10:00 AM

This should be in the athletic topic thread...

BravesFan · 27th April 2012, 11:59 AM

Originally Posted by FSM

teehee.

*using Moe Howard voice* "Why I oughta..."

BravesFan · 27th April 2012, 12:02 PM

Originally Posted by Cuddles

There are two problems here. Firstly, it's usually instead "I'm not a big fan of women in the infantry because of X". At which point it's entirely fair to ask for evidence supporting X. Opinions are not immune from criticism, and if you give any reasoning at all for holding that opinion rather than just flatly stating it, that reasoning is open to criticism.

And secondly, even just a flat opinion is not immune from criticism. If you say you don't think women should be in the infantry without giving any reason or evidence to support that opinion, it would be perfectly fair for people to call you a sexist, since you'd be discriminating based solely on gender for no supported reason. An unsupported opinion can be criticised just as much as a supported one, it's just that the specific criticisms will tend to differ.

So yeah, yours is not an uncommon complaint at all. People often complain that others here are too anal about asking people to provide support for their posts. Such complaints come almost exclusively from people who are either unable or unwilling to support what they've said. Remember, this is a forum where people who tend to doubt unsupported statements come specifically to argue about things. If you just want to post opinions without having anyone argue with them or ask you to back them up, you're probably in the wrong place.

i get that to an extent, but sometimes, I would like to have a discussion on here that is just about ideas and opinions rather than a bloody peer reviewed paper. In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV. (or our friends would kick us in the balls or wouldn't be our friends for very long). But one here, some people seem to be able to have normal conversations.

Sideroxylon · 27th April 2012, 12:07 PM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

i get that to an extent, but sometimes, I would like to have a discussion on here that is just about ideas and opinions rather than a bloody peer reviewed paper. In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV. (or our friends would kick us in the balls or wouldn't be our friends for very long). But one here, some people seem to be able to have normal conversations.

I do if they are talking bollocks.

Careyp74 · 27th April 2012, 12:08 PM

other forums have a much simpler response that gets to the point.

Lurkmoar

ETA:

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

I do if they are talking bollocks.

My wife and I went around saying "State your source" for a while after it became popular from CSI

Elizabeth I · 27th April 2012, 12:46 PM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

i get that to an extent, but sometimes, I would like to have a discussion on here that is just about ideas and opinions rather than a bloody peer reviewed paper. In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV. (or our friends would kick us in the balls or wouldn't be our friends for very long). But one here, some people seem to be able to have normal conversations.

Nobody would kick me in the balls.

BravesFan · 27th April 2012, 12:49 PM

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

I do if they are talking bollocks.

No I get that (I have a friend who is a believer that psychic activity exists, so I always ask him for proof). But sometimes it seems we can't just have a normal conversation on here without somebody freaking out and asking for evidence.

BTW, I'm not referring to a normal debate on an issue, but sometimes we just want to be able to discuss something without googling it .

KateHL · 27th April 2012, 12:59 PM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV. (or our friends would kick us in the balls or wouldn't be our friends for very long).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X53ksjejmns

Sideroxylon · 27th April 2012, 01:01 PM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

No I get that (I have a friend who is a believer that psychic activity exists, so I always ask him for proof). But sometimes it seems we can't just have a normal conversation on here without somebody freaking out and asking for evidence.

BTW, I'm not referring to a normal debate on an issue, but sometimes we just want to be able to discuss something without googling it .

It depends on the subject, but if it is about psychics, alternative medicine, homosexuality as a mental illness, a young earth or similar rubbish, I cant really discuss it without taking a skeptical position. I haven't gotten too many kicks in the balls from friends as they have come to expect it from me.

People don't need Google, do they. There is always the good old "scientists say ..." Still, quite often we exchange documented evidence via email or on paper and continue the discussion. I think it is good that people examine their beliefs and challenging can get people doing that.

BravesFan · 27th April 2012, 01:11 PM

Originally Posted by Sideroxylon

It depends on the subject, but if it is about psychics, alternative medicine, homosexuality as a mental illness, a young earth or similar rubbish, I cant really discuss it without taking a skeptical position. I haven't gotten too many kicks in the balls from friends as they have come to expect it from me.

People don't need Google, do they. There is always the good old "scientists say ..." Still, quite often we exchange documented evidence via email or on paper and continue the discussion. I think it is good that people examine their beliefs and challenging can get people doing that.

That's what i was saying. That when we are debunking "woo" or other things, it's fine to do that. But sometimes it gets tedious.

Like in the threads that involve a bit of prediction , like say anything involving the different doomsday scenarios. (super volcano, gamma ray burst, overpopulation..etc) I stated an opinion that i found it unlikely we could effect any sort of population control via non-invasive policy or horrible event by the predicted peak population date of 2050. Then was asked for evidence.
(then was given evidence that wasn't evidence but guesses). When I replied it was all just guesswork and that there is no way to accurately predict how the actual population will be affected. Well I just got yelled at. I don't believe in psychics nor fortune tellers, so I tend to try and avoid playing at it myself. yet it seems acceptable for people to attempt to do the thing with "models" or "estimates".

I live on the Gulf Coast and have been through 5 or 6 (or more) hurricanes, i know the accuracy of computer models is very sketchy and often quick to change as new variables emerge. Why is it that "I don't know" can be so hard for people to say?

kerikiwi · 27th April 2012, 01:16 PM

Originally Posted by Elizabeth I

Nobody would kick me in the balls.

Nobody could kick me in the balls

kerikiwi · 27th April 2012, 01:20 PM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

i get that to an extent, but sometimes, I would like to have a discussion on here that is just about ideas and opinions rather than a bloody peer reviewed paper. In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV. (or our friends would kick us in the balls or wouldn't be our friends for very long). But one here, some people seem to be able to have normal conversations.

Such a conversation will be very short, or very, very repetitive. Either way, it will be boring.
1. A states opinion.
2. B agrees.
3. /End, or return to 1.

1 A states opinion
2. B disagrees
3. /End, or return to 1.

BravesFan · 27th April 2012, 01:31 PM

once again, I am not saying ALL THE TIME , but all conversations in the real world aren't like this either.

i don't even kno what I'm blabbering about, I joined to make of fun of Bigfooters and attempt to straighten out truthers and holocaust deniers. In the long run, the former still crack me up , while the latter two made my life worse by listening to them so I quit.

At least there are still footers out there!!

George152 · 27th April 2012, 01:34 PM

Originally Posted by kerikiwi

Nobody could kick me in the balls

You don't have dances in Kerikeri ?

Correa Neto · 27th April 2012, 01:51 PM

As I wrote before, while reading many a post from woos, quite often I feel like an old whore.

Client enters room and say "Here's something you've never saw before" or "I bet you never did this position before" and similar stuff. Yeah yeah yeah... Or its the same client with the same request for the umptieth time. Nowadays usually I don't even bother answering.

Nothing new under the sun, yes, must be professional and provided you've got the coin make believe its indeed new or big. Or just be silent. But quite often is hard to avoid saying something like "Oh, Kama Sutra position 12, variation 7... 10th time this week and its still Tuesday..." or "Sorry baby, its actually quite tiny."

mike3 · 27th April 2012, 05:28 PM

(rm)

Baloney · 27th April 2012, 10:25 PM

Originally Posted by KateHL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X53ksjejmns

Perfect!

BravesFan · 28th April 2012, 01:02 AM

Originally Posted by KateHL

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X53ksjejmns

HAHAHAHA!!!! that was so great, never had seen it!!

Cuddles · 30th April 2012, 09:20 AM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

once again, I am not saying ALL THE TIME , but all conversations in the real world aren't like this either.

Like I said, you appear to be in the wrong place. Sure, all conversations in the real world aren't like this, but conversations in certain places absolutely are. Firstly, this is a discussion forum. People come here specifically to have this sort of discussion. Secondly, the forum is split up into different parts for different purposes. Some of those parts are for general chatting, while others are specifically for arguing about various topics. What you seem to be doing is posting in the latter, but expecting everyone to act as though it's the former.

It's like going to a physics conference, standing up in the middle of a seminar on higher order instabilities in medium energy circular electron colliders and complaining that no-one is talking about football, then telling everyone that they're doing it wrong and that normal people don't spend all their time talking about physics. Sure, normal people don't. And neither to the physicists in the conference. But when they're in the place specifically set up to talk about physics, that's what they're going to talk about. The talk about football and the like will happen during breaks, or in the pub afterwards.

If you want to just have a general friendly chat, you should post in Community, Humour, or one of the other sections set up for doing exactly that. But you can't post potentially controversial political opinions in a section that exists specifically to argue about political opinions and expect people not to start arguing about it. It doesn't say anything about them, it's just that people in a physics conference are going to discuss physics, and wait until they get to the sports bar to discuss sports.

BravesFan · 30th April 2012, 12:26 PM

I'm not in the wrong place. I enjoy many in depth discussions on here. i do think that there are certain Aspergeresque posters who latch onto discussions here as if their position isn't affirmed a puppy is going to get shot though.

Careyp74 · 30th April 2012, 12:34 PM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

I'm not in the wrong place. I enjoy many in depth discussions on here. i do think that there are certain Aspergeresque posters who latch onto discussions here as if their position isn't affirmed a puppy is going to get shot though.

Like who, and when? (in other words, link)

You might find this thread turn into the same, if you don't provide any evidence. IT isn't fair to argue a point that isn't substantiated, and expect anyone to agree without the evidence. To go a bit further, there is the possibility that the people you have in mind are extreme CT believers and you are only attributing their characteristics on everyone.

BravesFan · 30th April 2012, 12:42 PM

Number one, I am not going to start a war with someone by listing their posts here as evidence for someone being a bit ...excessive. I hope you can understand that.

Number two, sweet Jesus i had no intention of this turning into a discussion like this. This was intended to point out to noobs who come here that when people casually dismiss their woo it isn't because they aren't proper skeptics, it's because they've seen it all before.

Number three, my above scenario happens very infrequently, but it has happened. I have also been attacked by the "mob" as it were for having an OPINION on a moral issue that differed from theirs, when asked why, I gave sufficient reasons, but instead of agreeing to disagree It turned into a torches and pitchforks session, with made up conclusions based on my posts (which weren't true) and it got nasty. (if you are interested enough you can PM me and i will discuss it there, it's not right to discuss other's posts in a negative light in a different thread IMO)

I have a lot of fun here, i learn a lot of stuff here, I have seen the craziest ideas created in the world in the CT threads here. That doesn't mean that sometimes folks shouldn't lighten up a bit.

Careyp74 · 30th April 2012, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

Number one, I am not going to start a war with someone by listing their posts here as evidence for someone being a bit ...excessive. I hope you can understand that.

Number two, sweet Jesus i had no intention of this turning into a discussion like this. This was intended to point out to noobs who come here that when people casually dismiss their woo it isn't because they aren't proper skeptics, it's because they've seen it all before.

Number three, my above scenario happens very infrequently, but it has happened. I have also been attacked by the "mob" as it were for having an OPINION on a moral issue that differed from theirs, when asked why, I gave sufficient reasons, but instead of agreeing to disagree It turned into a torches and pitchforks session, with made up conclusions based on my posts (which weren't true) and it got nasty. (if you are interested enough you can PM me and i will discuss it there, it's not right to discuss other's posts in a negative light in a different thread IMO)

I have a lot of fun here, i learn a lot of stuff here, I have seen the craziest ideas created in the world in the CT threads here. That doesn't mean that sometimes folks shouldn't lighten up a bit.

Ha! I totally understood the intentions back when you started this thread! Who the heck turned it around on you?

ETA: I still think you are a little lax though in backing up your assessment of others, like the aspergers comment. You start with a warning for newbies to understand what is going on before posting, and end with name calling. Sure, that is cool not starting a thread about them, but then by bringing it up here it is like you are hoping to get away with it (not that you are)

Listen, I don't want to start a fight here or anything, and don't want to name any names, but I have seen some Atlanta Braves fans posting the stupidest comments on this forum. See what I did there?

BravesFan · 30th April 2012, 01:12 PM

Wait...I'm the only Braves fan I've seen posting!!!!

lol, no I get your point, but as I said, it's one thing to post a "stundie" or something similar, but I don't think it's right to drag another persons post into this thread and fire up the war machine again.

It's not that big of a deal, it's just something I brought up (and now wish I hadn't) :-)

Dinwar · 30th April 2012, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV.

Speak for yourself. There are some people I know who demand I define particular words I use, each and every time I have a conversation. When I refuse, in a non-insignificant number of cases I've come away bleeding. And if I say something about paleontology I'm expected and often contractually obligated to provide my evidence prior to anyone asking--I can give the conclusion and then support it, or give the conclusion first and then provide my reasoning, but the reasoning must be there.

When I first started dating my wife we had an argument. We both pulled out references (both citing them in the argument and physically presenting the references to the other person). In the end, my wife demonstrated that I could not, if I accepted the principles of logic, be right. It's one of the reasons I fell in love with her: she DOES ask me for evidence every time I mention an opinion, which forces me to really make sure my ducks are in a row before I say something, which makes me understand my own position better.

Quote:

Like in the threads that involve a bit of prediction , like say anything involving the different doomsday scenarios. (super volcano, gamma ray burst, overpopulation..etc) I stated an opinion that i found it unlikely we could effect any sort of population control via non-invasive policy or horrible event by the predicted peak population date of 2050. Then was asked for evidence.

Well, see, here's the thing: predictions are hypotheses, and hypotheses require evidence. Even computer models have evidence, and are frequently "ground-truthed" prior to publication. It's actually quite silly to expect people to accept a prediction without evidence, for precisely the same reason that it's quite silly to expect people to accept a hypothesis without evidence.

Quote:

Number three, my above scenario happens very infrequently, but it has happened. I have also been attacked by the "mob" as it were for having an OPINION on a moral issue that differed from theirs, when asked why, I gave sufficient reasons, but instead of agreeing to disagree It turned into a torches and pitchforks session, with made up conclusions based on my posts (which weren't true) and it got nasty.

In paleontology there was an event known as the Bone Wars. Two paleontologists decided they hated each other, and sabatoged each other's field work. And by "sabatoge" I mean "blew the things sky-high with TNT". Physicists have had duels, been arrested, etc. for their theories. People have invaded the home of at least one experimental biologist. A few years ago a guy disagreed with me about black holes and assaulted me, choaking me until I was near to passing out (the fact that I simply didn't give a rat's behind and kept arguing with what little breath I had scared him enough to get him to let go, and our conversation was much more reasonable once he realized that violence wouldn't work). In contrast, some people wrote some harsh things about you here. I don't mean to belittle what you experienced, and it's certainly not a great tactic on their part, but as long as no laws were violated and no weapons were involved it doesn't rank up there with "harsh criticism" as far as science is concerned.

Quote:

ber two, sweet Jesus i had no intention of this turning into a discussion like this. This was intended to point out to noobs who come here that when people casually dismiss their woo it isn't because they aren't proper skeptics, it's because they've seen it all before.

Welcome to JREF.

Conversations flow, and as anyone who's tried to control a river can tell you, things flow where they want to and you can only do so much to stop it.

BravesFan · 30th April 2012, 01:22 PM

I read a book about the bone wars!!! Great stuff, and boy did they hate each other!! (saw the PBS Documentary too)

Honestly, most of my friends aren't what I would call 'science" people. They are mostly musicians and photographers. the few that are , well we tend to agree on most things and avoid the stuff we don't (politics). I have a friend who is wayy too into woo, but he has such unprovable comebacks to us when we point out the problems with ancient aliens and psychics (like that it's untestable now...really? ) that we just stopped discussing it.

No kidding about the conversational meanderings , but that's many forums really.

Dinwar · 30th April 2012, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

Honestly, most of my friends aren't what I would call 'science" people. They are mostly musicians and photographers.

A lot of what surprises people on these forums is likely culture shock. Many (most?) of my friends are scientists, so I'm used to the idea that everything I say is going to be sifted through a fine-toothed comb. Once spent an evening disecting a chupacabra photo posted on Facebook with my brother-in-law (he was on my side; the other side consisted of an accountant). So I'm more used to the demands for evidence than most. If you come from a group of friends that's NOT like that, it can seem an unreasonable demand, and outright hostile, because you're not used to it. It's often not meant to be hostile, however. It's just that that's the way some of us communicate.

Dancing David · 1st May 2012, 04:23 AM

Originally Posted by BravesFan

Number three, my above scenario happens very infrequently, but it has happened. I have also been attacked by the "mob" as it were for having an OPINION on a moral issue that differed from theirs, when asked why, I gave sufficient reasons, but instead of agreeing to disagree It turned into a torches and pitchforks session, with made up conclusions based on my posts (which weren't true) and it got nasty. (if you are interested enough you can PM me and i will discuss it there, it's not right to discuss other's posts in a negative light in a different thread IMO)

I think if you are here long enough this happens, but it is human nature, not this forum.

Seriously look at the comment on Yahoo news sometime, and then take a bath.

I once pointed out that often the crappy action of religion are often done for political reasons outside the religious structure itself, this was termed all sorts of goofy things.

26th April 2012, 06:33 PM	#1
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	The mythology of dismissive skeptics and the JREF I see it all the time on here where noobs pop in with their latest take on woo (bleevers in said woo or not ) and then when they receive the usual"yeah that's just a load of crap" response we so often give, they get defensive and angry and say we aren't being proper skeptics. Let me tell you who think this, you are wrong. i understand, however, how it might seem this way to you though. You have just arrived fresh and clean to this new and exciting forum where there's discussion of all these weird and interesting things and you have some beliefs and/or information you are ready to share and!...... you kinda get the hand wave. So you think that we just do that to everyone. We don't. The difference is that many of us have been here for a long time (i myself only a a member for a few months but I lurked here for 2 years) others have been here for a reallly long time, so they have seen and heard it all before. What seems as a new and interesting subject to you (say demons ) to the board regulars may seem like so old hat as to not be really worthy of discussion. They have debunked it, gone through the "evidence" and squashed it flat. now if you have something NEW to share, well by all means put it out there! But don't expect everyone to buy into your theories if you can't back them up with a bit of science. So, I would suggest to not make a bunch of new threads about these sorts of things but rather do a search and bring an old dead thread on the topic back to life. It will pop up on the old posters page and remind them, might get you more responses too. Unless you are here peddling more 9/11 nonsense, then I reckon it's free reign... sorry
	Last edited by BravesFan; 26th April 2012 at 06:35 PM.

26th April 2012, 07:13 PM	#2
Baloney Muse Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: America! (F, yeah!) Posts: 666	You wouldn't say all that if you saw my evidence for a Flat Earth!
	__________________ _{When I think about woo, I detect myself.}

26th April 2012, 07:23 PM	#3
FSM god Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sandpit...looking for strokes Posts: 2,305	But I can dowse!!!
	__________________ Woman.

26th April 2012, 08:00 PM	#5
Baloney Muse Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: America! (F, yeah!) Posts: 666	Sorry! You have my permission to ask the mods to delete my incendiary comment.
	__________________ _{When I think about woo, I detect myself.}

26th April 2012, 08:02 PM	#6
Kid Eager Illuminator Join Date: Nov 2010 Location: Australia Posts: 3,503	Originally Posted by Baloney Sorry! You have my permission to ask the mods to delete my incendiary comment. reported for being conciliatory. My stars for the day told me to do it.
	__________________ What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....

26th April 2012, 07:38 PM	#4
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	Originally Posted by Baloney You wouldn't say all that if you saw my evidence for a Flat Earth! LOL!!! you a-holes!!!! hahahahaha I didn't even consider this would turn out this way (but I should have known) I had the idea that this could be almost a sticky to newbies to read before they got their feelings hurt.... but, yeah, it's pretty much funnier this way!

27th April 2012, 03:51 AM	#7
pakeha Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 7,994	Originally Posted by BravesFan What seems as a new and interesting subject to you (say demons ) to the board regulars may seem like so old hat as to not be really worthy of discussion. They have debunked it, gone through the "evidence" and squashed it flat. now if you have something NEW to share, well by all means put it out there! But don't expect everyone to buy into your theories if you can't back them up with a bit of science. So, I would suggest to not make a bunch of new threads about these sorts of things but rather do a search and bring an old dead thread on the topic back to life. It will pop up on the old posters page and remind them, might get you more responses too. Unless you are here peddling more 9/11 nonsense, then I reckon it's free reign... sorry Rather than necro-ing an old thread, maybe it's better to link to it in your OP. Along with that fresh, interesting and sourced opinion. I learned this the hard way.
pakeha Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2009 Posts: 7,994	__________________ To a conspiracy theorist, having double standards just means that they have twice as many standards. carlitos

27th April 2012, 04:00 AM	#8
Dancing David Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Central Illinois Posts: 34,716	It does seem to come in a number of flavors: - the individual who has an idea but really hasn't thought about it much. These are people who seem to be just here to test the water, some get very defensive but often not. -those who come with an agenda, this would cover many of the more seasoned ones who visit the forum. Be they creationists, physics kooks or homeopaths. They come in with a preprepared statement of some sort, and have their secondary argument ready for a set piece. They can usually be spotted because of certain cliches they use: --comparing scepticism and science to religion --conspiracy theories about the suppression of the truth --accusations that it is not their burden to provide evidence but that forums members are lazy and should do their own research These posters usually seem to get worn out and very defensive, and some seem to make periodic visits back to the forum
	__________________ Hell, dynamiting fish in a barrel is more challenging. - Ladewig I suspect you are a sandwich, metaphorically speaking. -Donn And a shot rang out. Now Space is doing time... -Ben Burch You built the toilet - don't complain when people crap in it. _Kid Eager

27th April 2012, 04:13 AM	#9
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	If I had one criticism of this forum, it's that sometimes people here go a little "evidence" overboard in areas that don't require evidence. If I say "I can turn my head 360 degrees like The exorcist movie" for you to buy this, I would be required to provide evidence. I have made a statement of fact. If i say " I'm not a big fan of women in the infantry" I have stated an opinion, but then I get bombarded with claims of evidence. When the only evidence is ,"I'm not a fan".... I also think that plenty of members seem to forget critical thinking when it comes to their political beliefs and go into "support the party at all costs" mode. (like when discussing election stuff and political methods like only one side is guilty of doing it....when we all know this stuff is older than Caesar)
	Last edited by BravesFan; 27th April 2012 at 04:14 AM.

27th April 2012, 05:27 AM	#10
FSM god Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sandpit...looking for strokes Posts: 2,305	Originally Posted by BravesFan If I had one criticism of this forum, it's that sometimes people here go a little "evidence" overboard in areas that don't require evidence. If I say "I can turn my head 360 degrees like The exorcist movie" for you to buy this, I would be required to provide evidence. I have made a statement of fact. If i say " I'm not a big fan of women in the infantry" I have stated an opinion, but then I get bombarded with claims of evidence. When the only evidence is ,"I'm not a fan".... I also think that plenty of members seem to forget critical thinking when it comes to their political beliefs and go into "support the party at all costs" mode. (like when discussing election stuff and political methods like only one side is guilty of doing it....when we all know this stuff is older than Caesar) Evidence that it's older than Caesar?
	__________________ Woman.

27th April 2012, 05:28 AM	#11
FSM god Join Date: Jun 2007 Location: Sandpit...looking for strokes Posts: 2,305	teehee.
	__________________ Woman.

27th April 2012, 07:03 AM	#12
Cuddles Decoy Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: A magical land full of pink fluffy sheeps and bunnies Posts: 16,586	Originally Posted by BravesFan If i say " I'm not a big fan of women in the infantry" I have stated an opinion, but then I get bombarded with claims of evidence. When the only evidence is ,"I'm not a fan".... There are two problems here. Firstly, it's usually instead "I'm not a big fan of women in the infantry because of X". At which point it's entirely fair to ask for evidence supporting X. Opinions are not immune from criticism, and if you give any reasoning at all for holding that opinion rather than just flatly stating it, that reasoning is open to criticism. And secondly, even just a flat opinion is not immune from criticism. If you say you don't think women should be in the infantry without giving any reason or evidence to support that opinion, it would be perfectly fair for people to call you a sexist, since you'd be discriminating based solely on gender for no supported reason. An unsupported opinion can be criticised just as much as a supported one, it's just that the specific criticisms will tend to differ. So yeah, yours is not an uncommon complaint at all. People often complain that others here are too anal about asking people to provide support for their posts. Such complaints come almost exclusively from people who are either unable or unwilling to support what they've said. Remember, this is a forum where people who tend to doubt unsupported statements come specifically to argue about things. If you just want to post opinions without having anyone argue with them or ask you to back them up, you're probably in the wrong place.
	__________________ I am not a little teapot.

27th April 2012, 10:00 AM	#13
rcfieldz Muse Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 819	pinch hitter This should be in the athletic topic thread...
	__________________ http://www.mynvfi.org/

27th April 2012, 11:59 AM	#14
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	Originally Posted by FSM teehee. using Moe Howard voice "Why I oughta..."

27th April 2012, 12:02 PM	#15
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	Originally Posted by Cuddles There are two problems here. Firstly, it's usually instead "I'm not a big fan of women in the infantry because of X". At which point it's entirely fair to ask for evidence supporting X. Opinions are not immune from criticism, and if you give any reasoning at all for holding that opinion rather than just flatly stating it, that reasoning is open to criticism. And secondly, even just a flat opinion is not immune from criticism. If you say you don't think women should be in the infantry without giving any reason or evidence to support that opinion, it would be perfectly fair for people to call you a sexist, since you'd be discriminating based solely on gender for no supported reason. An unsupported opinion can be criticised just as much as a supported one, it's just that the specific criticisms will tend to differ. So yeah, yours is not an uncommon complaint at all. People often complain that others here are too anal about asking people to provide support for their posts. Such complaints come almost exclusively from people who are either unable or unwilling to support what they've said. Remember, this is a forum where people who tend to doubt unsupported statements come specifically to argue about things. If you just want to post opinions without having anyone argue with them or ask you to back them up, you're probably in the wrong place. i get that to an extent, but sometimes, I would like to have a discussion on here that is just about ideas and opinions rather than a bloody peer reviewed paper. In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV. (or our friends would kick us in the balls or wouldn't be our friends for very long). But one here, some people seem to be able to have normal conversations.

27th April 2012, 12:07 PM	#16
Sideroxylon Gavagai! Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Turkey Posts: 10,628	Originally Posted by BravesFan i get that to an extent, but sometimes, I would like to have a discussion on here that is just about ideas and opinions rather than a bloody peer reviewed paper. In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV. (or our friends would kick us in the balls or wouldn't be our friends for very long). But one here, some people seem to be able to have normal conversations. I do if they are talking bollocks.
	__________________ 'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman

27th April 2012, 12:08 PM	#17
Careyp74 Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Trevose, PA Posts: 3,407	other forums have a much simpler response that gets to the point. Lurkmoar ETA: Originally Posted by Sideroxylon I do if they are talking bollocks. My wife and I went around saying "State your source" for a while after it became popular from CSI
	Last edited by Careyp74; 27th April 2012 at 12:09 PM.

27th April 2012, 12:46 PM	#18
Elizabeth I Olympic Equestrian Wannabe Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Defending the Alamo Posts: 9,267	Originally Posted by BravesFan i get that to an extent, but sometimes, I would like to have a discussion on here that is just about ideas and opinions rather than a bloody peer reviewed paper. In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV. (or our friends would kick us in the balls or wouldn't be our friends for very long). But one here, some people seem to be able to have normal conversations. Nobody would kick me in the balls.
	__________________ • There is something about the outside of a horse that is good for the inside of a man. - Winston Churchill • Never wrestle with a pig - you just get dirty and the pig enjoys it. • My blog: Pardon me, may I ask...

27th April 2012, 12:49 PM	#19
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	Originally Posted by Sideroxylon I do if they are talking bollocks. No I get that (I have a friend who is a believer that psychic activity exists, so I always ask him for proof). But sometimes it seems we can't just have a normal conversation on here without somebody freaking out and asking for evidence. BTW, I'm not referring to a normal debate on an issue, but sometimes we just want to be able to discuss something without googling it .

27th April 2012, 12:59 PM	#20
KateHL Alleged Skeptic Join Date: Nov 2007 Location: climbing Mount Cleverest Posts: 1,697	Originally Posted by BravesFan In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV. (or our friends would kick us in the balls or wouldn't be our friends for very long). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X53ksjejmns
	__________________ "Every good woman needs a good man. A great woman, however, can get by with the Marquis." - Marquis de Carabas

27th April 2012, 01:01 PM	#21
Sideroxylon Gavagai! Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Turkey Posts: 10,628	Originally Posted by BravesFan No I get that (I have a friend who is a believer that psychic activity exists, so I always ask him for proof). But sometimes it seems we can't just have a normal conversation on here without somebody freaking out and asking for evidence. BTW, I'm not referring to a normal debate on an issue, but sometimes we just want to be able to discuss something without googling it . It depends on the subject, but if it is about psychics, alternative medicine, homosexuality as a mental illness, a young earth or similar rubbish, I cant really discuss it without taking a skeptical position. I haven't gotten too many kicks in the balls from friends as they have come to expect it from me. People don't need Google, do they. There is always the good old "scientists say ..." Still, quite often we exchange documented evidence via email or on paper and continue the discussion. I think it is good that people examine their beliefs and challenging can get people doing that.
	__________________ 'The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool.' - Richard Feynman

27th April 2012, 01:11 PM	#22
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	Originally Posted by Sideroxylon It depends on the subject, but if it is about psychics, alternative medicine, homosexuality as a mental illness, a young earth or similar rubbish, I cant really discuss it without taking a skeptical position. I haven't gotten too many kicks in the balls from friends as they have come to expect it from me. People don't need Google, do they. There is always the good old "scientists say ..." Still, quite often we exchange documented evidence via email or on paper and continue the discussion. I think it is good that people examine their beliefs and challenging can get people doing that. That's what i was saying. That when we are debunking "woo" or other things, it's fine to do that. But sometimes it gets tedious. Like in the threads that involve a bit of prediction , like say anything involving the different doomsday scenarios. (super volcano, gamma ray burst, overpopulation..etc) I stated an opinion that i found it unlikely we could effect any sort of population control via non-invasive policy or horrible event by the predicted peak population date of 2050. Then was asked for evidence. (then was given evidence that wasn't evidence but guesses). When I replied it was all just guesswork and that there is no way to accurately predict how the actual population will be affected. Well I just got yelled at. I don't believe in psychics nor fortune tellers, so I tend to try and avoid playing at it myself. yet it seems acceptable for people to attempt to do the thing with "models" or "estimates". I live on the Gulf Coast and have been through 5 or 6 (or more) hurricanes, i know the accuracy of computer models is very sketchy and often quick to change as new variables emerge. Why is it that "I don't know" can be so hard for people to say?

27th April 2012, 01:16 PM	#23
kerikiwi Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Bay of Islands NZ Posts: 5,846	Originally Posted by Elizabeth I Nobody would kick me in the balls. Nobody could kick me in the balls

27th April 2012, 01:20 PM	#24
kerikiwi Philosopher Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: Bay of Islands NZ Posts: 5,846	Originally Posted by BravesFan i get that to an extent, but sometimes, I would like to have a discussion on here that is just about ideas and opinions rather than a bloody peer reviewed paper. In real life we don't run around asking our friends for evidence everytime they bring up an opinion or POV. (or our friends would kick us in the balls or wouldn't be our friends for very long). But one here, some people seem to be able to have normal conversations. Such a conversation will be very short, or very, very repetitive. Either way, it will be boring. 1. A states opinion. 2. B agrees. 3. /End, or return to 1. 1 A states opinion 2. B disagrees 3. /End, or return to 1.

27th April 2012, 01:31 PM	#25
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	once again, I am not saying ALL THE TIME , but all conversations in the real world aren't like this either. i don't even kno what I'm blabbering about, I joined to make of fun of Bigfooters and attempt to straighten out truthers and holocaust deniers. In the long run, the former still crack me up , while the latter two made my life worse by listening to them so I quit. At least there are still footers out there!!

27th April 2012, 01:34 PM	#26
George152 Master Poster Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Hamilton New Zealand Posts: 2,043	Originally Posted by kerikiwi Nobody could kick me in the balls You don't have dances in Kerikeri ?
	__________________ Unemployment isn't working

27th April 2012, 01:51 PM	#27
Correa Neto Philosopher Join Date: Aug 2003 Location: Hunting rocks somewhere in Brazil Posts: 7,176	As I wrote before, while reading many a post from woos, quite often I feel like an old whore. Client enters room and say "Here's something you've never saw before" or "I bet you never did this position before" and similar stuff. Yeah yeah yeah... Or its the same client with the same request for the umptieth time. Nowadays usually I don't even bother answering. Nothing new under the sun, yes, must be professional and provided you've got the coin make believe its indeed new or big. Or just be silent. But quite often is hard to avoid saying something like "Oh, Kama Sutra position 12, variation 7... 10th time this week and its still Tuesday..." or "Sorry baby, its actually quite tiny."
	__________________ Racism, sexism, ignorance, homophobia, intolerance, extremism, authoritarianism, environmental disasters, politically correct crap, violence at sport stadiums, slavery, poverty, wars, people who disagree with me: Together we can find the cure Oh, and together we can find a cure to religion too…

27th April 2012, 05:28 PM	#28
mike3 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,944	(rm)
mike3 Graduate Poster Join Date: Aug 2009 Posts: 1,944	__________________ “Ego is subversive and devolutionary, truly destructive and terrible; ego is the generator of privilege, established institutions, and comfortable habit. Ego is the fire that burns within the pit of hell, devouring and cosuming everything that enters and leaving utterly nothing behind. Ego is horrible, cruel, and restraining, the darkness of the world, and the doom and bane of man.” – a reaction to that famous Bertrand Russell quote. Last edited by mike3; 27th April 2012 at 05:30 PM.

27th April 2012, 10:25 PM	#29
Baloney Muse Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: America! (F, yeah!) Posts: 666	Originally Posted by KateHL http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X53ksjejmns Perfect!
	__________________ _{When I think about woo, I detect myself.}

28th April 2012, 01:02 AM	#30
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	Originally Posted by KateHL http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X53ksjejmns HAHAHAHA!!!! that was so great, never had seen it!!

30th April 2012, 09:20 AM	#31
Cuddles Decoy Moderator Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: A magical land full of pink fluffy sheeps and bunnies Posts: 16,586	Originally Posted by BravesFan once again, I am not saying ALL THE TIME , but all conversations in the real world aren't like this either. Like I said, you appear to be in the wrong place. Sure, all conversations in the real world aren't like this, but conversations in certain places absolutely are. Firstly, this is a discussion forum. People come here specifically to have this sort of discussion. Secondly, the forum is split up into different parts for different purposes. Some of those parts are for general chatting, while others are specifically for arguing about various topics. What you seem to be doing is posting in the latter, but expecting everyone to act as though it's the former. It's like going to a physics conference, standing up in the middle of a seminar on higher order instabilities in medium energy circular electron colliders and complaining that no-one is talking about football, then telling everyone that they're doing it wrong and that normal people don't spend all their time talking about physics. Sure, normal people don't. And neither to the physicists in the conference. But when they're in the place specifically set up to talk about physics, that's what they're going to talk about. The talk about football and the like will happen during breaks, or in the pub afterwards. If you want to just have a general friendly chat, you should post in Community, Humour, or one of the other sections set up for doing exactly that. But you can't post potentially controversial political opinions in a section that exists specifically to argue about political opinions and expect people not to start arguing about it. It doesn't say anything about them, it's just that people in a physics conference are going to discuss physics, and wait until they get to the sports bar to discuss sports.
	__________________ I am not a little teapot.

30th April 2012, 12:26 PM	#32
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	I'm not in the wrong place. I enjoy many in depth discussions on here. i do think that there are certain Aspergeresque posters who latch onto discussions here as if their position isn't affirmed a puppy is going to get shot though.

30th April 2012, 12:34 PM	#33
Careyp74 Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Trevose, PA Posts: 3,407	Originally Posted by BravesFan I'm not in the wrong place. I enjoy many in depth discussions on here. i do think that there are certain Aspergeresque posters who latch onto discussions here as if their position isn't affirmed a puppy is going to get shot though. Like who, and when? (in other words, link) You might find this thread turn into the same, if you don't provide any evidence. IT isn't fair to argue a point that isn't substantiated, and expect anyone to agree without the evidence. To go a bit further, there is the possibility that the people you have in mind are extreme CT believers and you are only attributing their characteristics on everyone.

30th April 2012, 12:42 PM	#34
BravesFan Banned Join Date: Dec 2011 Location: Ocean Springs, Ms Posts: 1,784	Number one, I am not going to start a war with someone by listing their posts here as evidence for someone being a bit ...excessive. I hope you can understand that. Number two, sweet Jesus i had no intention of this turning into a discussion like this. This was intended to point out to noobs who come here that when people casually dismiss their woo it isn't because they aren't proper skeptics, it's because they've seen it all before. Number three, my above scenario happens very infrequently, but it has happened. I have also been attacked by the "mob" as it were for having an OPINION on a moral issue that differed from theirs, when asked why, I gave sufficient reasons, but instead of agreeing to disagree It turned into a torches and pitchforks session, with made up conclusions based on my posts (which weren't true) and it got nasty. (if you are interested enough you can PM me and i will discuss it there, it's not right to discuss other's posts in a negative light in a different thread IMO) I have a lot of fun here, i learn a lot of stuff here, I have seen the craziest ideas created in the world in the CT threads here. That doesn't mean that sometimes folks shouldn't lighten up a bit.

30th April 2012, 12:45 PM	#35
Careyp74 Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2008 Location: Trevose, PA Posts: 3,407	Originally Posted by BravesFan Number one, I am not going to start a war with someone by listing their posts here as evidence for someone being a bit ...excessive. I hope you can understand that. Number two, sweet Jesus i had no intention of this turning into a discussion like this. This was intended to point out to noobs who come here that when people casually dismiss their woo it isn't because they aren't proper skeptics, it's because they've seen it all before. Number three, my above scenario happens very infrequently, but it has happened. I have also been attacked by the "mob" as it were for having an OPINION on a moral issue that differed from theirs, when asked why, I gave sufficient reasons, but instead of agreeing to disagree It turned into a torches and pitchforks session, with made up conclusions based on my posts (which weren't true) and it got nasty. (if you are interested enough you can PM me and i will discuss it there, it's not right to discuss other's posts in a negative light in a different thread IMO) I have a lot of fun here, i learn a lot of stuff here, I have seen the craziest ideas created in the world in the CT threads here. That doesn't mean that sometimes folks shouldn't lighten up a bit. Ha! I totally understood the intentions back when you started this thread! Who the heck turned it around on you? ETA: I still think you are a little lax though in backing up your assessment of others, like the aspergers comment. You start with a warning for newbies to understand what is going on before posting, and end with name calling. Sure, that is cool not starting a thread about them, but then by bringing it up here it is like you are hoping to get away with it (not that you are) Listen, I don't want to start a fight here or anything, and don't want to name any names, but I have seen some Atlanta Braves fans posting the stupidest comments on this forum. See what I did there?
	Last edited by Careyp74; 30th April 2012 at 12:58 PM.