IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 6th December 2012, 09:02 AM   #641
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
As I have patiently explained to you before, (although perhaps not, as I think of it, on this forum), I do not like to watch videos for information. Above and beyond the fact that people speak so much more slowly than I read, there is a personal consideration...with the deterioration of my hearing, I find it impractical to set the volume of my computer high enough to for me to hear it--and at that volume, it is disturbing to my partner while my partner is working...not to mention being fuzzy and distorted (the audio, not my partner).
So, no thank you; I will read Dr, Sagan's words instead. Perhaps you know of a location where the transcript of the video might be found?



The simple act of reading any of Dr., Sagan's explanations would demonstrate that the attribution of "advanced civilization" to extra-terrestrial intelligences that it would be possible for us to detect on Earth is due to the fact that a "primitive civilization" (such as Earth's) is capable of doing very little that is, in fact, detectable, or perceptible, at intergalactic distances.

We do not have "evidence" that extraterrestrial intelligences exist, which is why privately-funded organizations are looking for them. If we had hard evidence of the existence of extraterrestrial intelligences; if we knew they were there, we would not be looking for them, but trying to figure out how (and whether) to contact them.



Not having read "(all) his work" (or, for that matter, according to your own report, any of his work, how do you think you know this?
Further, developing and investigating conjecture is a real, and vital, part of the nature of this enterprise we call "science" (along with, for instance, skeptical thought).



It has been pointed out to you, patiently and repeatedly, that Dr, Sagan's interest in debunking unsupported tales of UFO visits" and "alien abductions", even coupled with his fascination with the possibility of the existence, somewhere in the universe, of intelligent life, does not constitute an "obsession". Might I ask why you persist in the straw-man characterization?
If you are of the unshakable opinion, in the face of contrary evidence, that Dr. Sagan's interest constituted an "obsession", consider phrasing it as such...an opinion. Your own opinion.
and an opinion based on total ignorance of what Carl Sagan acutally siad and did in his working life.
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:03 AM   #642
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
So few scientists are employed simply becasue very few people are scientists.
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:05 AM   #643
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
It is my opinion that if there were more scientists than say priests or looney radio hosts the world would have a chance of being a better place.
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:07 AM   #644
Andy_Ross
Penultimate Amazing
 
Andy_Ross's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 47,040
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Try to explain why so few scientists are employed.
What? That doesn't even make sense!

Scientists are employed as scientists, not everyone in the workforce is a scientist.

What percentage of the labour force are Dentists? What percentage are Lumberjacks?
Andy_Ross is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:09 AM   #645
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Try to explain why so few scientists are employed.
Do you realize the fundamental difference between the statement "Scientists and engineers make up only 5% of the labor force". and the statement, "Only 5% of scientists and engineers are employed"?

I am truly curious...
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:09 AM   #646
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
And Carl Sagan was a thorough scientist which would be proved by even a cursory reading of jsut some of his books....

oh wait justin has not read those..
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:09 AM   #647
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,266
There's nothing quite as funny as using a global computer network as a medium to criticize scientists.
__________________
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." - aggle-rithm
godless dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:12 AM   #648
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
Especailly dead ones who cannot reply to the inane comments made about them
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:18 AM   #649
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Next you will be saying my brilliant twin wrote all this. Get real.
I'll say that there does appear to be a difference between your posts in the first few pages of this thread on those on the latter pages.

Whether any of them are brilliant or not . . .
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:23 AM   #650
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
 
Foster Zygote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
I relied not only on Carl Sagan's biographies but also researched what he actually said.
But never bothered to actually read any of his books. Doing quick Google searches in order to cherry pick phrases that you think will support your prejudicial opinion isn't research.

Quote:
He had several positions on UFOs...
List some of them.

Quote:
...and offered several explanations...
Thats what smart people do. They consider every possibility that they can conceive of and then evaluate them to see how they conform to known reality. Forming quick opinions based on little evidence and then clinging obstinately to those opinions in the face of all contradictory evidence out of the belief that admitting error, or acknowledging one's own ignorance, is a sign of weakness, is what stupid people do.

Quote:
...while making sure we all understood that only the credible evidence was lacking.
So he looked at the explanations offered, offered some speculative possibilities of his own, then noted that there is no credible evidence supporting the hypothesis that UFO sightings are the result of alien visitation. Then he concluded that, while it was possible that evidence might be presented in the future, there is no logical reason to believe that UFOs are alien craft.

The fact that you think Sagan's approach was unreasonable says more about you than it does him.

Quote:
Just as his SETI project was to look for ETI. It would be the evidence that would finally prove they exist.
No, it is a test of an hypothesis. SETI researchers wondered (and still do) if other civilizations might broadcast radiation that we can detect. So they are listening to see if they can detect anything. If they can't, then SETI is not a failure, because it isn't intended to prove that alien civilizations exist. It is a test to answer a question: Can we detect broadcasts from other civilizations? Yes/No. There are no wrong answers in science. The fact that you seem to think that scientists only investigate things that they are already convinced exist only serves to establish your own profound ignorance of the scientific method.

Quote:
Michael Shermer cites only 55,000 skeptic subscribers for his Skeptics Magazine. Skeptic movement claims only 1 million skeptics.
And you think that every skeptic subscribes to Skeptic Magazine or belongs to a skeptical "movement"?

Quote:
But there are billions of rational people and billions of believers (religious) who were not convinced Carl Sagan would find ETI and were proven right.
Making up statistics again?

Quote:
Carl Sagan on advanced civilizations visting Earth (Carl Sagan at one point suggest they might even be HERE and hiding).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bOcfCkUBsdc
Again, considering all the possibilities you can think of and then evaluating them logically to determine if they are confirmed, disproved or undetermined, is what smart people do.
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone.
Foster Zygote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:29 AM   #651
justintime
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
No one has come forward with the same depth and referenceable material on Carl Sagan on this forum before me. I am not an expert on Carl Sagan. But I am a pioneer in seeking the truth behind the iconic skeptic Carl Sagan. You can challenge my claim by directing me to an OP where Carl Sagan was discussed at even greater length and depth on this forum before. All that is available are snippets of him and the largest OP discusses his religion. We know he claimed to be an agnostic.

My OP is drawing such interest that in just 3 days it has surpassed all other threads on Carl Sagan in views counted except on the subject of his religious beliefs. And that just reflects the real interest Skeptics have......RELIGION!!!!

In fact all Skeptics sites suffer the same problem. It is Skeptics struggling with religion or the obsession with refuting religion. And in doing so are neglecting so many other areas of their development.

I am the only one here highlighting these issues by using Carl Sagan as the best understood example of the dichotomy Skeptics suffer from.
justintime is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:30 AM   #652
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
 
Foster Zygote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
From his biography.
As Mashuna suggested, you should probably invest in a course on reading comprehension. It might have helped you to comprehend that, just because Sagan was best know to the general public for commenting on the possibility of extraterrestrial life, it doesn't follow that this was the focus of his career.
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone.
Foster Zygote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:30 AM   #653
Mashuna
Ovis ex Machina
 
Mashuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Sir Ddinbych
Posts: 7,001
Originally Posted by Hokulele View Post
As a correspondence course?
Yes, although the first couple of stages are picture books.
Mashuna is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:31 AM   #654
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
No one has come forward with the same depth and referenceable material on Carl Sagan on this forum before me. I am not an expert on Carl Sagan. But I am a pioneer in seeking the truth behind the iconic skeptic Carl Sagan. You can challenge my claim by directing me to an OP where Carl Sagan was discussed at even greater length and depth on this forum before. All that is available are snippets of him and the largest OP discusses his religion. We know he claimed to be an agnostic.

My OP is drawing such interest that in just 3 days it has surpassed all other threads on Carl Sagan in views counted except on the subject of his religious beliefs. And that just reflects the real interest Skeptics have......RELIGION!!!!

In fact all Skeptics sites suffer the same problem. It is Skeptics struggling with religion or the obsession with refuting religion. And in doing so are neglecting so many other areas of their development.

I am the only one here highlighting these issues by using Carl Sagan as the best understood example of the dichotomy Skeptics suffer from.
Quit capitalizing the word skeptic(s) already.

And quit diagnosing.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:31 AM   #655
Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
 
Hokulele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: The Biggest Little City in the World
Posts: 29,577
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
<snip> I am not an expert on Carl Sagan. <snip>

Really?
__________________
"Oh god...What have you done, zooterkin? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE?!?!?!" - Cleon
Hokulele is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:35 AM   #656
Noztradamus
Illuminator
 
Noztradamus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 4,680
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
So it's not just Carl Segan and 'Skeptics' you have a problem with it's all scientists?
"it was science that led my cousins into the gas chamber" - Ben Stein.
__________________
The Australian Family Association's John Morrissey was aghast when he learned Jessica Watson was bidding to become the youngest person to sail round the world alone, unaided and without stopping.
Noztradamus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:35 AM   #657
godless dave
Great Dalmuti
 
godless dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,266
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
No one has come forward with the same depth and referenceable material on Carl Sagan on this forum before me. I am not an expert on Carl Sagan. But I am a pioneer in seeking the truth behind the iconic skeptic Carl Sagan. You can challenge my claim by directing me to an OP where Carl Sagan was discussed at even greater length and depth on this forum before. All that is available are snippets of him and the largest OP discusses his religion. We know he claimed to be an agnostic.

My OP is drawing such interest that in just 3 days it has surpassed all other threads on Carl Sagan in views counted except on the subject of his religious beliefs. And that just reflects the real interest Skeptics have......RELIGION!!!!

In fact all Skeptics sites suffer the same problem. It is Skeptics struggling with religion or the obsession with refuting religion. And in doing so are neglecting so many other areas of their development.

I am the only one here highlighting these issues by using Carl Sagan as the best understood example of the dichotomy Skeptics suffer from.
In all your referencing, all you've done is confirm that Carl Sagan was, in fact, a skeptic.
__________________
"If it's real, then it gets more interesting the closer you examine it. If it's not real, just the opposite is true." - aggle-rithm
godless dave is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:35 AM   #658
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
You have been given an extensive bibliography and you are no pioneer, you ahve chosoen to ignore it.

And again you present a FALSE dichotomy, Carl Sagan was a scientist, scientists deal with hypotheses which are then tested and become theories if any credible evidence is found to support the original hypothesis. THAT is waht Carl Sagan DID, all you ahve done is misrepresent him while openly declaring you know nothing about his work becasue you have openly stated you HAVE NOT read any of his books.
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:43 AM   #659
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
A bit of a side track but the 30th Report wirtten on teh "WOW Signal"

http://www.bigear.org/Wow30th/wow30th.htm
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:44 AM   #660
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
No one has come forward with the same depth and referenceable material on Carl Sagan on this forum before me.
...you mean, no one has stooped to your level of innuendo, preferring, as is the wont of good thinkers, to use Dr. Sagan's own work to judge the man...contentious, second-hand sources do not constitute "depth". You really, really ought to read Dr. Sagan's own words.

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
I am not an expert on Carl Sagan.
Really?

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
But I am a pioneer in seeking the truth behind the iconic skeptic Carl Sagan. You can challenge my claim by directing me to an OP where Carl Sagan was discussed at even greater length and depth on this forum before. All that is available are snippets of him and the largest OP discusses his religion. We know he claimed to be an agnostic.
Or, as has been suggested repeatedly, you could read the majority of his corpus before you judge him on second-hand, contentious "analyses"...
You could even consider litening to those who have, in fact, read Dr. Sagan's work.

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
My OP is drawing such interest that in just 3 days it has surpassed all other threads on Carl Sagan in views counted except on the subject of his religious beliefs. And that just reflects the real interest Skeptics have......RELIGION!!!!
Of course, you are completely missing the groupo dynamic of the fascination with a train wreck. Consider the actions of T-cells...

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
In fact all Skeptics sites suffer the same problem. It is Skeptics struggling with religion or the obsession with refuting religion. And in doing so are neglecting so many other areas of their development.
Evidence?

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
I am the only one here highlighting these issues by using Carl Sagan as the best understood example of the dichotomy Skeptics suffer from.
Thank you for finally revealing your true agenda.

Moderators, might we get these three threads merged, perhaps in R&P, perhaps elsewhere?
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze

Last edited by Slowvehicle; 6th December 2012 at 09:45 AM.
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:47 AM   #661
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
 
Foster Zygote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
No one has come forward with the same depth and referenceable material on Carl Sagan on this forum before me.
Cherry picking search engine results on the fly hardly qualifies as a "depth of referenceable material".

Quote:
I am not an expert on Carl Sagan.
We've noticed.

Quote:
But I am a pioneer in seeking the truth behind the iconic skeptic Carl Sagan.
No, you are attempting to advance your ignorant prejudices in the face of contradictory evidence. You have made clear your willingness to ignore truth should it controvert your preconceived notions.

Quote:
You can challenge my claim by directing me to an OP where Carl Sagan was discussed at even greater length and depth on this forum before. All that is available are snippets of him and the largest OP discusses his religion. We know he claimed to be an agnostic.
What do you expect that will prove. Do you really think that an argument with more words beats any argument with fewer words? That's interesting.

Quote:
My OP is drawing such interest that in just 3 days it has surpassed all other threads on Carl Sagan...
Again, go look up DavidJayJordan. That guy's threads were very busy.

Quote:
...in views counted except on the subject of his religious beliefs. And that just reflects the real interest Skeptics have......RELIGION!!!!

In fact all Skeptics sites suffer the same problem. It is Skeptics struggling with religion or the obsession with refuting religion. And in doing so are neglecting so many other areas of their development.
Looks like that wall of inscrutability may be cracking. Might we soon find out why you're really here?

Quote:
I am the only one here highlighting these issues by using Carl Sagan as the best understood example of the dichotomy Skeptics suffer from.
What dichotomy? Seriously, what dichotomy do you believe you are highlighting? You aren't just parroting another word you've seen here without really understanding what it means, are you?
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone.

Last edited by Foster Zygote; 6th December 2012 at 09:56 AM.
Foster Zygote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:49 AM   #662
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by Squeegee Beckenheim View Post
If this thread's just going to be talking about Sagan now, then should we ask the mods to merge them both?
I have actually requested that the moderators consider merging all three threads. In R&P, or somewhere else.
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:52 AM   #663
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
 
Foster Zygote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
Originally Posted by Captain_Swoop View Post
Did Sagen kick his puppy or something?
I'm not sure, but he desperately wan't to convince everyone else of just how insecure they are compared to him.
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone.
Foster Zygote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:52 AM   #664
Akuma Tennou
Thinker
 
Akuma Tennou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 213
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Try to explain why so few scientists are employed.
Quote:
As of 2008, approximately 2-3 percent of the population is directly employed in agriculture.[6]
Agriculture in the United StatesWP

Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
Do you realize the fundamental difference between the statement "Scientists and engineers make up only 5% of the labor force". and the statement, "Only 5% of scientists and engineers are employed"?

I am truly curious...
Ouch, I really hope that's not what he meant. Though either way it's dumb and dumber.
__________________
"Karl Marx was right, socialism works, it is just that he had the wrong species" − E. O. Wilson
Akuma Tennou is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:53 AM   #665
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 16,392
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Why he constantly refers to ETI as advanced civilizations. What evidence did he have they even existed let alone they were intelligent?
You still appear to be confused.

See if you can't work it out for yourself. Why might Sagan have said SETI was a project looking for signs of "advanced civilizations"?

Here's a clue: If he had said they were looking for radio transmissions from aliens more primitive than ourselves you might have a point in criticizing him.
Jack by the hedge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:53 AM   #666
jond
Illuminator
 
jond's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 3,438
What's clear, having watched the video (it's from Cosmos), is that Justinian needs to learn to listen as well as learn to read.
jond is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:55 AM   #667
Jack by the hedge
Safely Ignored
 
Jack by the hedge's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 16,392
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
No one has come forward with the same depth and referenceable material on Carl Sagan on this forum before me.
********. When I asked you for your references you told me to Google him.


<edit> Regarding my opening remark, I hope it's not considered to be an evasion of the autocensor to recall that waggish people used to say of the Isle of Wight ferry that it is brown, it steams and it comes out of Cowes backwards.

Last edited by Jack by the hedge; 6th December 2012 at 10:01 AM.
Jack by the hedge is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:55 AM   #668
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
 
Foster Zygote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 21,371
Originally Posted by Slowvehicle View Post
I have actually requested that the moderators consider merging all three threads. In R&P, or somewhere else.
'Humor'? Or maybe 'Sports'?
__________________
Counterbalance in the little town of Ridgeview, Ohio. Two people permanently enslaved by the tyranny of fear and superstitution, facing the future with a kind of helpless dread. Two others facing the future with confidence - having escaped one of the darker places of the Twilight Zone.
Foster Zygote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 09:58 AM   #669
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Nor Flanden
Posts: 38,373
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Try to explain why so few scientists are employed.

Quote:
(February 2012) Scientists and engineers make up only about 5 percent of the U.S. labor force.

This is part of a series of PRB articles about the science and engineering workforce in the United States, funded by the Alfred P. Sloan Foundation. Data for this article are based on the Population Reference Bureau's analysis of the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey.

It might be a good idea if you don't post here again until you have read this book.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 10:01 AM   #670
justintime
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
Originally Posted by Akuma Tennou View Post
What makes you think that being insecure and sceptic is at most improbable? You seem annoyed to have found counterexamples preventing you to claim that it is impossible for those to coexist in the same person. What's your real point here? If "true" sceptics don't exist then evolution is a myth? The insecurity that makes you believe in a god is better than alleged Sagan's (which makes him believe in.... nothing)? Why?
I am trying to be as analytically correct as possible and that is why I use definitions so there is little room for semantic errors.

I said I never met skeptics outside of Skeptic forums. I met and know many insecure people who are full of doubts, uncertain and generally fearful about security, appearance or social status. But they are not self declared skeptics and admit they are just insecure.

Definition of insecure. A person who is not confident or assured; uncertain or anxious.

You can see by definition not all insecure people are skeptics. So I applied that to the members of this forum claiming to be skeptics on a Skeptic Forum.
That They might not be skeptics but just insecure individuals.

Now having analyzed a sufficient number of skeptics on several Skeptic forums. I am of discovering that Skeptics are insecure too. So it is possible for one to be both a skeptic and insecure too.

Because by definition a Skeptic is: One who instinctively or habitually doubts, questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted conclusions.

So there is little doubt that Skeptics are insecure people.

So what is Skepticism?
http://skeptoid.com/skeptic.php

Last edited by justintime; 6th December 2012 at 10:02 AM.
justintime is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 10:03 AM   #671
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
so your research is analyzing internet forums.....tells me all I need to know.

Applies baloney Detection Kit.......Baloney detected.
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 10:14 AM   #672
justintime
Banned
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 1,260
Originally Posted by Dcdrac View Post
so your research is analyzing internet forums.....tells me all I need to know.

Applies baloney Detection Kit.......Baloney detected.
It is called rational thinking. Critical thinking only invites critics who are offended by the persons critical attitude or critical comments. I try to stay on the rational side so the discussions are more civil and actually advances peoples logic.
justintime is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 10:21 AM   #673
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
As the basis of your assertisons about other people is totally based on trawling internet forums I see no credible evidential base for your views and therefore and complete lack of a rational thought out research project.
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 10:37 AM   #674
Pixel42
Schrödinger's cat
 
Pixel42's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Malmesbury, UK
Posts: 16,140
In my experience people who are insecure tend to seek security by subscribing to beliefs (especially, but not excusively, religious beliefs) which claim to be able to offer certainties where none actually exist. It takes someone who is pretty secure in most areas of their life - emotionally, professionally etc - to accept that no such certainties are possible, that everything must be questioned, and to be all right with that.
__________________
"If you trust in yourself ... and believe in your dreams ... and follow your star ... you'll still get beaten by people who spent their time working hard and learning things" - Terry Pratchett
Pixel42 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 10:37 AM   #675
Dcdrac
Philosopher
 
Dcdrac's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,141
Carl Sagan's last interview

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jod7v-m573k
Dcdrac is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 10:56 AM   #676
Slowvehicle
Membership Drive
Co-Ordinator,
Russell's Antinomy
 
Slowvehicle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: ...1888 miles from home by the shortest route without tolls...
Posts: 17,348
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
I am trying to be as analytically correct as possible and that is why I use definitions so there is little room for semantic errors.
Sigh.
Using definitions, especially current definitions, is good--particularly when you provede accurate citations for those definitions, so that your presentation of a definition can be assessed for completeness and accuracy.

Pretending that one definition in one general dictionary represents an accurate definition of the way a word is used in practice, particularly words that are jargon terms, is not so good (particularly when your error is pointed out to you). Charitably, this practice demonstrates a certain laziness; a certain disregard for reality. When it is continually and continuously repeated, this practice looks dishonest.

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
I said I never met skeptics outside of Skeptic forums. I met and know many insecure people who are full of doubts, uncertain and generally fearful about security, appearance or social status. But they are not self declared skeptics and admit they are just insecure.
So you have never met skeptics in TRW, yet you feel qualified to declare that "insecure people full of doubt" = "skeptics on this forum"?
Fascinating.
Odd, and incorrect, but fascinating.

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Definition of insecure. A person who is not confident or assured; uncertain or anxious.
What is your citation for this "definition"? It has certain characteristics that make it suspect as an accurate quote. Be so kind as to provide for me its source...

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
You can see by definition not all insecure people are skeptics. So I applied that to the members of this forum claiming to be skeptics on a Skeptic Forum.
That They might not be skeptics but just insecure individuals.
I will address "claiming to be skeptics" another time.

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Now having analyzed a sufficient number of skeptics on several Skeptic forums. I am of discovering that Skeptics are insecure too. So it is possible for one to be both a skeptic and insecure too.
In what way is your adversarial, dishonest, and contentious reaction with skeptics on this forum (not to mention other fora from which you have been banned) "analysis"?
In what way is pointing out errors in your logic, discrepancies in your claims, inconsistencies in your "facts", and the pellucid paucity of your preparation a demonstration of "insecurity"? Where did you get your certification in Psychology?

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Because by definition a Skeptic is: One who instinctively or habitually doubts, questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted conclusions.
Be so good as to provide a citation for this "definition".
I have offered you multiple actual definitions, with complete citations, from multiple sources, developed by skeptical thinkers, that refute your "definition". Be so kind as to explain why your contentious, adversarial, incorrect "definition" is supposed to be more accurate than actual definitions attested by actual skeptical thinkers.

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
So there is little doubt that Skeptics are insecure people.
1. Be so kind as to stop capitalizing "Skeptics" at least unless and until you answer my question about differences among "Skeptics", "skeptics", and "skeptical thinkers".
2. You may, in fact, have little doubt. You have done nothing to address the doubts of reasonable, rational, skeptical posters on this or any other forum. You are, quite simply, assuming your conclusion

Originally Posted by justintime View Post
So what is Skepticism?
http://skeptoid.com/skeptic.php
From your link:
"The true meaning of the word skepticism has nothing to do with doubt, disbelief, or negativity. Skepticism is the process of applying reason and critical thinking to determine validity. It's the process of finding a supported conclusion, not the justification of a preconceived conclusion."

and

"Skepticism is, or should be, an extraordinarily powerful and positive influence on the world. Skepticism is not simply about "debunking" as is commonly charged. Skepticism is about redirecting attention, influence, and funding away from worthless superstitions and toward projects and ideas that are evidenced to be beneficial to humanity and to the world."

and

"The scientific method is central to skepticism. The scientific method requires evidence, preferably derived from validated testing. Anecdotal evidence and personal testimonies generally don't meet the qualifications for scientific evidence, and thus won't often be accepted by a responsible skeptic; which often explains why skeptics get such a bad rap for being negative or disbelieving people. They're simply following the scientific method."

...there seems to be very little* there about fear, or insecurity...

This is why I always ask you for your sources.

(*for sufficiently nonexistent values of "very little")
__________________
"They want to make their molehills equal to the mountains by cutting the mountains down." -turingtest
"The universe did not come from nothing, it came from 'We don't know'." -Dancing David
"Cry, booga, booga, booga! and let slip the Hamsters of Silly!" -JFDHintze

Last edited by Slowvehicle; 6th December 2012 at 10:59 AM.
Slowvehicle is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 11:05 AM   #677
Resume
Troublesome Passenger
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 21,844
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
It is called rational thinking. Critical thinking only invites critics who are offended by the persons critical attitude or critical comments. I try to stay on the rational side so the discussions are more civil and actually advances peoples logic.
These sentences of yours . . . perhaps you could assemble them in such a manner that they express something.

Thanks in advance.
Resume is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 11:51 AM   #678
Akuma Tennou
Thinker
 
Akuma Tennou's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Posts: 213
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
I am trying to be as analytically correct as possible and that is why I use definitions so there is little room for semantic errors.

I said I never met skeptics outside of Skeptic forums. I met and know many insecure people who are full of doubts, uncertain and generally fearful about security, appearance or social status. But they are not self declared skeptics and admit they are just insecure.

Definition of insecure. A person who is not confident or assured; uncertain or anxious.

You can see by definition not all insecure people are skeptics. So I applied that to the members of this forum claiming to be skeptics on a Skeptic Forum.
That They might not be skeptics but just insecure individuals.

Now having analyzed a sufficient number of skeptics on several Skeptic forums. I am of discovering that Skeptics are insecure too. So it is possible for one to be both a skeptic and insecure too.

Because by definition a Skeptic is: One who instinctively or habitually doubts, questions, or disagrees with assertions or generally accepted conclusions.

So there is little doubt that Skeptics are insecure people.

So what is Skepticism?
http://skeptoid.com/skeptic.php
I don't get why you quoted me as you don't address any of my points. Why is your own insecurity worthier than the one you attribute to sceptics?

Highlighted part: if you don't see where the logic flaws are I recommend you take Logic 101 and then come back, for a regular discussion can't take place in such circumstances.
__________________
"Karl Marx was right, socialism works, it is just that he had the wrong species" − E. O. Wilson
Akuma Tennou is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 11:56 AM   #679
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,302
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
Yes, that only proves Carl Sagan was never sure of anything and that comes across clearly in most of his videos. If you add all the IF, POSSIBLE, MAYBE, and NOT IS and ARE. You will understand why he struggled to articulate a true position even near the conclusion of his life.

This is why people are suspicious of scientist. They have more disclaimers than actual facts in their research.
One thing you can never accuse him of is struggling to be articulate. He was the most clear and concise science presenter of his generation. IMO, that mantle has now been handed over to Professor Brian Cox.

Please do not confuse the way Sagan speaks with "not knowing" or "not understanding", because these are the positions from which ALL science proceeds; we don't understand something, and we want to, so we postulate, theorise, research, study, experiment, reassess and conclude until we do understand. The problem in science is that often, when he get an answer, it raises many more questions.

After reading the many posts you have posted here, and the many contradictions you have written, I have come to the conclusion that you are a LGM obsessed teenager with a poor grasp of language almost zero ability at comprehension and you have utterly no idea what you are talking about.
__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 6th December 2012, 12:07 PM   #680
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 25,302
Originally Posted by justintime View Post
No one has come forward with the same depth and referenceable material on Carl Sagan on this forum before me. I am not an expert on Carl Sagan. But I am a pioneer in seeking the truth behind the iconic skeptic Carl Sagan.
Now where the hell is that laughing dog?


Oh wait, here it is...

__________________
If you're not a scientist but you think you've destroyed the foundation of a vast scientific edifice with 10 minutes of Googling, you might want to consider the possibility that you're wrong.

Its TRE45ON season... convict the F45CIST!!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » General Skepticism and The Paranormal

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 11:24 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.