FREE TAPATALK APP

Skeptic Ginger · 2nd March 2013, 07:52 PM

Originally Posted by Foolmewunz

If this is him, he's a member since 2003.

http://forums.randi.org/member.php?u=1265

That's him. He and his wife did indeed come on the Galapagos trip with us.

Is this seriously yet another Watson drama?

SezMe · 2nd March 2013, 08:49 PM

Originally Posted by Dr. Keith

Everyone who even dares to question the grand wizard is banned.

Good thing outrageous, idiotic and simply wrong hyperbole isn't against the MA here, eh? Yeah, it's largely a ain't-we-grand party over there but dissent does occur. Unless you're a doctor of ophthalmology and can self-test your own eyesight, you need to hie thyself to the nearest eye clinic.

SezMe · 2nd March 2013, 08:52 PM

Originally Posted by Graham2001

I'd rather send him a direct email... It will advise him to "Grow Up", ...

I'm hard pressed to think of any other exhortation that is more likely to get him to completely change his views. (

)^N

Methinks you need to take your own advice.

SezMe · 2nd March 2013, 08:55 PM

Originally Posted by s_pepys

hi all. i have been a keen listener for a few years but recently am saddened by their reluctance to even mention the current questions about the skeptism of one of their presenters.

i think if they dont address this they will lose a lot of their listeners. i, for one, am finding it difficult to listen with credibility these days.

i know they are all friends but surely a skeptical podcast should have critical thinking at its core and no-one should be above questioning.

lxxx

This is an extremely vague post that screams, "Look at me! I'm an insider!" Can you spell it out?

Dr. Keith · 4th March 2013, 10:06 AM

Originally Posted by SezMe

Good thing outrageous, idiotic and simply wrong hyperbole isn't against the MA here, eh?

Quite. The mods here are very generous and over time it has proven to add to the conversation.

But then, the topic of conversation is rarely a controversy involving Randi. It must be hard for PZ to make these mod decisions on his own in threads about him where he is hosting the bandwidth. One can not expect them to be entirely rational decisions, but as skeptics we expect our fellow skeptics to be a bit less . . . emotional. That isn't always fair.

Quote:

Yeah, it's largely a ain't-we-grand party over there but dissent does occur.

I did see this once when a ruckus was aroused by the following question: PZ; great skeptic or greatest skeptic?

Only a few were banned. /sarcasm

Quote:

Unless you're a doctor of ophthalmology and can self-test your own eyesight, you need to hie thyself to the nearest eye clinic.

Too true, but my reading has not yet suffered, and that is what I have based the above on.

And I'm not a medical doctor, not at all. I simply picked the name to highlight the silliness of appeals to authority: anyone can be a doctor on the internet!

s_pepys · 8th March 2013, 06:59 AM

Originally Posted by SezMe

This is an extremely vague post that screams, "Look at me! I'm an insider!" Can you spell it out?

im not understanding what you mean, sorry?

2nd March 2013, 07:52 PM	#41
Skeptic Ginger formerly skeptigirl Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Shifting through paradigms Posts: 40,799	Originally Posted by Foolmewunz If this is him, he's a member since 2003. http://forums.randi.org/member.php?u=1265 That's him. He and his wife did indeed come on the Galapagos trip with us. Is this seriously yet another Watson drama?
	__________________ (Tired of continuing to hear the "Democrat Party" repeatedly I've decided to adopt the name, ~~Pubbie Party, Repubs~~ "Republics" and Republic Party in response.) Last edited by Skeptic Ginger; 2nd March 2013 at 07:53 PM.*

2nd March 2013, 08:52 PM	#43
SezMe post-pre-born Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 16,645	Originally Posted by Graham2001 I'd rather send him a direct email... It will advise him to "Grow Up", ... I'm hard pressed to think of any other exhortation that is more likely to get him to completely change his views. ()^N Methinks you need to take your own advice.

4th March 2013, 10:06 AM	#45
Dr. Keith Not a doctor. Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Texas Posts: 3,448	Originally Posted by SezMe Good thing outrageous, idiotic and simply wrong hyperbole isn't against the MA here, eh? Quite. The mods here are very generous and over time it has proven to add to the conversation. But then, the topic of conversation is rarely a controversy involving Randi. It must be hard for PZ to make these mod decisions on his own in threads about him where he is hosting the bandwidth. One can not expect them to be entirely rational decisions, but as skeptics we expect our fellow skeptics to be a bit less . . . emotional. That isn't always fair. Quote: Yeah, it's largely a ain't-we-grand party over there but dissent does occur. I did see this once when a ruckus was aroused by the following question: PZ; great skeptic or greatest skeptic? Only a few were banned. /sarcasm Quote: Unless you're a doctor of ophthalmology and can self-test your own eyesight, you need to hie thyself to the nearest eye clinic. Too true, but my reading has not yet suffered, and that is what I have based the above on. And I'm not a medical doctor, not at all. I simply picked the name to highlight the silliness of appeals to authority: anyone can be a doctor on the internet!
	__________________ shift key currently inoperative. sorry for the inconvenience. -+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+- Jonah Baldwin: Talk to her, dad. She's a doctor. Sam Baldwin: Of what? Her first name could be Doctor. - Sleepless in Seattle

8th March 2013, 06:59 AM	#46
s_pepys Muse Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 554	Originally Posted by SezMe This is an extremely vague post that screams, "Look at me! I'm an insider!" Can you spell it out? im not understanding what you mean, sorry?
s_pepys Muse Join Date: May 2010 Posts: 554

2nd March 2013, 08:49 PM	#42
SezMe post-pre-born Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 16,645	Originally Posted by Dr. Keith Everyone who even dares to question the grand wizard is banned. Good thing outrageous, idiotic and simply wrong hyperbole isn't against the MA here, eh? Yeah, it's largely a ain't-we-grand party over there but dissent does occur. Unless you're a doctor of ophthalmology and can self-test your own eyesight, you need to hie thyself to the nearest eye clinic.

2nd March 2013, 08:55 PM	#44
SezMe post-pre-born Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Santa Barbara, CA Posts: 16,645	Originally Posted by s_pepys hi all. i have been a keen listener for a few years but recently am saddened by their reluctance to even mention the current questions about the skeptism of one of their presenters. i think if they dont address this they will lose a lot of their listeners. i, for one, am finding it difficult to listen with credibility these days. i know they are all friends but surely a skeptical podcast should have critical thinking at its core and no-one should be above questioning. lxxx This is an extremely vague post that screams, "Look at me! I'm an insider!" Can you spell it out?