RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (41) < ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 ... >   
  Topic: The Skeptical Zone, with Lizzie< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 13 2014,18:15   

Jim Wynne:
Quote
I have no dog in this fight, but this is a variation of the Gary Gaulin argument, no?


I don't know, because I pay very little attention to Gary's thread.  I think it's boring, so I generally stay away.

Clamboy and damitall have the same option.  If they choose not to stay away, they can make TSZ better by contributing good OPs and good comments.

I would encourage them to do that.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Jim_Wynne



Posts: 1208
Joined: June 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 13 2014,18:24   

Gary, when challenged, says "Show me your better theory to explain intelligence."  He can't seem to grasp the idea that a person criticizing his "theory" isn't obliged to produce a better one.

--------------
Evolution is not about laws but about randomness on happanchance.--Robert Byers, at PT

  
clamboy



Posts: 299
Joined: May 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 13 2014,18:52   

Quote (keiths @ June 13 2014,16:30)
clamboy, damitall,

TSZ actually wasn't created for your entertainment, so that is hardly a concern.

But since you are so disappointed with it, why not lead by example?  Ask for posting rights (if you don't already have them) and come up with some good OPs.  Make some scintillating comments that everyone will enjoy.

Or you can keep complaining, which is a lot easier.

keiths - my first reading of your first line was in the spirit of, "Damn it all, clamboy!" Hee, I liked that.

Okay, I take your point, but please take mine: this is NOT about what I might have to say (if anything). It is about your recent behavior at The Skeptical Zone, said behavior having made The Skeptical Zone boring. Worse still, your behavior has narrowed what that site once was and (hopefully) could still be. In order to make my point, I must introduce a new paragraph:

keiths, I am sorry to say it, but I see very little difference recently between you and William J Murray in your posting behavior. If I were to post there, that won't stop you from said behavior.

I have praised your posts once before, and meant it, dude!!! But I believe that your recent behavior has, among other things, contributed to the loss of several other posters whose work helped TSZ to rock like DRI on their first album.

Humbly letting things go once in a while could really grease the wheels there - make that engine roar again, as it were.

(And of course I know TSZ is not there for my entertainment. As the kids are wont to say, "Duh." But my fear is that you are partaking in a grey cloud that will turn "The Skeptical Zone" into "The Dead Zone".)

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 13 2014,20:22   

I have to ask, If TSZ wasn't created for the entertainment of its members,  what was it created for?

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 13 2014,20:32   

Quote (midwifetoad @ June 13 2014,18:22)
I have to ask, If TSZ wasn't created for the entertainment of its members,  what was it created for?

Discussion and debate of controversial ideas.  Hence the word "Skeptical".

It's great when it happens to be entertaining, but that is a byproduct.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 13 2014,20:40   

clamboy:
Quote
keiths - my first reading of your first line was in the spirit of, "Damn it all, clamboy!" Hee, I liked that.

Heh.
Quote
Okay, I take your point, but please take mine: this is NOT about what I might have to say (if anything). It is about your recent behavior at The Skeptical Zone, said behavior having made The Skeptical Zone boring.

TSZ is for the discussion of controversial ideas, and sometimes that can be boring, especially when people become stubborn and won't concede points. We've all seen it, all over the Internet.
Quote
I have praised your posts once before, and meant it, dude!!!

Thanks.
Quote
But I believe that your recent behavior has, among other things, contributed to the loss of several other posters whose work helped TSZ to rock like DRI on their first album.

Who do you believe that we lost due to my behavior, and what specifically do you think were the reasons?
Quote
Humbly letting things go once in a while could really grease the wheels there - make that engine roar again, as it were.

By "letting things go", what do you actually mean?  

For example, the current discussion on the Scruton thread came about, after a week of quiescence, because Alan wanted to know why I thought his views were mistaken. I didn't want to ignore him, and I wasn't going to patronize him by pretending that he was right -- especially considering what he is claiming: that the behavior of soldier ants doesn't require a genetic explanation. Are you suggesting that I should have pretended to be wrong?  Or that I should I have ignored him when he asked about his errors?  

To me, the problem is that Alan is refusing -- and has been refusing for a couple of weeks -- to admit an obvious mistake, and I don't want to lie to him merely for the sake of smoothing things over. It's been the same with petrushka/midwifetoad and Neil Rickert.  I'm not going to patronize those guys or lie to them.  So what, specifically, are you suggesting?

Also, it's interesting that I never got any flak about this when I was directing my criticisms at UDers.  Are you sure this doesn't have something to do with the fact that Alan, petrushka and Neil are on "our side" of the ID debate?  I'm not particularly "tribal", and I have no problem agreeing with the "other side" or disagreeing with "our side" when it's appropriate.

My feeling is that The Skeptical Zone is The Skeptical Zone, and that anyone's views -- including mine -- are fair game for criticism by anyone.

I do understand that some people have a very hard time admitting mistakes.  If they were relatives, or in-laws, or coworkers, then it might be worthwhile to pretend that I was wrong, just for the sake of harmony.

But we're talking about TSZ, where discussion and debate are the entire point.  I just don't see how it makes sense to coddle these guys or pretend to be wrong, any more than we coddle William and the other UDers.

An important part of maturity is being able to admit your mistakes, and I'm just not willing to tiptoe around the egos of people who haven't learned that skill  -- especially not on a site called The Skeptical Zone.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 659
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: June 14 2014,06:14   

Quote (Jim_Wynne @ June 14 2014,00:24)
Gary, when challenged, says "Show me your better theory to explain intelligence."  He can't seem to grasp the idea that a person criticizing his "theory" isn't obliged to produce a better one.

It's a mystery to me how that thread got past the first page. Dip into any random page and the same things seem to be being pursued. Matters to some, obviously.

--------------
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

  
midwifetoad



Posts: 4003
Joined: Mar. 2008

(Permalink) Posted: June 14 2014,07:52   

Letting go means making your case and letting lurkers judge.

Nothing is added to your argument by declaring victory. Such declarations are supurfluous. Redundant declarations are annoying.

But your particular style makes it impossible for people who are in basic agreement subtle or contested issues in science. You quantize everything. Turn all the gradients into black and white.

--------------
Any version of ID consistent with all the evidence is indistinguishable from evolution.

  
damitall



Posts: 331
Joined: Jan. 2009

(Permalink) Posted: June 14 2014,10:53   

Quote (keiths @ June 13 2014,22:30)
clamboy, damitall,

TSZ actually wasn't created for your entertainment, so that is hardly a concern.

But since you are so disappointed with it, why not lead by example?  Ask for posting rights (if you don't already have them) and come up with some good OPs.  Make some scintillating comments that everyone will enjoy.

Or you can keep complaining, which is a lot easier.

Nevertheless it used to be entertaining, as well as interesting - and I've never supposed it was created "for me" at all.

However, I'm sure it wasn't created to be a battle-ground for egos, either.

I'm not a serial complainer, so I'll just leave it that MY opinion is that TSZ is now boring, and stay away.

I have no beef with anyone who finds it fascinating, good luck to 'em.

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 14 2014,11:08   

Quote (damitall @ June 14 2014,08:53)
I'm not a serial complainer, so I'll just leave it that MY opinion is that TSZ is now boring, and stay away.

Fair enough.  I think it's a shame, though.  We have some really good discussions there.  Why throw the baby out with the bathwater?  You can always skip over the exchanges you find boring.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 14 2014,11:10   

petrushka/midwifetoad,

You're thinking about this too militaristically.  When someone points out a mistake, it isn't a declaration of victory. When you admit a mistake, it isn't "groveling". It just means you got something wrong, and someone else noticed.  It's a good thing, because it provides an opportunity for you to learn. Lower the hackles and allow yourself to be imperfect, like the rest of us.

Quote
You quantize everything. Turn all the gradients into black and white.

For example?

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Soapy Sam



Posts: 659
Joined: Jan. 2012

(Permalink) Posted: June 14 2014,12:17   

More science please! (yes, I know, I could write an OP).

--------------
SoapySam is a pathetic asswiper. Joe G

BTW, when you make little jabs like “I thought basic logic was one thing UDers could handle,” you come off looking especially silly when you turn out to be wrong. - Barry Arrington

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,09:36   

Quote (clamboy @ June 11 2014,19:09)
keiths's antics of late remind me of the scene in "Repo Man" when Otto and others are in a club. The Circle Jerks are doing a Vegas-style lounge lizard rendition of "When the shit hits the fan" and Otto remarks, "I remember when I used to like these guys."

William J Murray is a dick, still, and Gregory is much much worse, but keiths, please take this in the constructive spirit in which it is offered: you have committed the unforgivable sin, in that you have turned the once brilliant TSZ...

...it is so hard to say, but I must...

keiths, you have made The Skeptical Zone...

...boring.

Please, keiths, please, in the name of whatever love you still hold for that once-brilliant site, put a sock in it. At least for a few days.

I think the prolonged absence of Dr Liddle is the more significant factor in the decline in the quality and variety of posts and comments at TSZ. I hope she will find time and "head-space" to restore harmony and reinvigorate the principles by which she established it. her mission statement:

 
Quote
I started this site to be a place where people could discuss controversial positions about life, the universe and everything with minimal tribal rancour (pay no attention to the penguins….)

My motivation for starting the site has been the experience of trying to discuss religion, politics, evolution, the Mind/Brain problem, creationism, ethics, exit polls, probability, intelligent design, and many other topics in venues where positions are strongly held and feelings run high.  In most venues, one view dominates, and there is a kind of “resident prior” about the integrity, intelligence and motivation of those who differ from the majority view.


I think many of us who post there have at times lost sight of this objective and I hope the atmosphere can become more conducive to broad discussion involving a broad cross-section of views.

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,09:40   

Keiths writes;

Quote
Also, it's interesting that I never got any flak about this when I was directing my criticisms at UDers.


Hmm, you have a point. Maybe the fact you got banned so regularly at UD was not altogether due to the moderation. Perhaps there was the same element of getting under people's skin.

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,09:56   

Keiths writes:

Quote
When someone points out a mistake, it isn't a declaration of victory.


No indeed.

But when you say things like
Quote
To me, the problem is that Alan is refusing -- and has been refusing for a couple of weeks -- to admit an obvious mistake, and I don't want to lie to him merely for the sake of smoothing things over.


That reads to me like a declaration of victory; as if the alleged mistake I am supposed to have made over the germ-line/soma distinction in eusocial insects is a settled issue and it only remains for me to withdraw this "mistake". I wonder if there is anyone reading this forum that could spare a few minutes to express an opinion as to whether they can spot the "mistake"? Here's the link to the exchange at TSZ.

Any input gratefully received. If it is apparent that I am mistaken about ant biology, I shall do the decent thing and leave India. No prizes for spotting the reference :)

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,10:08   

PS Keiths

I should point out that I started being disenchanted with your posting persona when you went after Jeffrey Shallit.

Here

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,10:17   

Alan,
Quote
Maybe the fact you got banned so regularly at UD was not altogether due to the moderation. Perhaps there was the same element of getting under people's skin.

Oh, no question.  DaveScot absolutely hated to be wrong, and hated to admit it, even more than you and Neil and petrushka.  That's why most of us got banned at UD.

There's no doubt that we got under Dave's skin. Same thing with Barry.

Why follow those bad examples?  They couldn't admit mistakes, but that's no reason for you to follow suit.

Being a good skeptic means not just withholding your assent in the absence of sufficient evidence.  It also means changing your view in response to good evidence, even when that means admitting that you were mistaken.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,10:28   

Quote
It also means changing your view in response to good evidence, even when that means admitting that you were mistaken.


Show me the evidence that I'm mistaken and I'll admit that I was mistaken. All the evidence I have seen so far is your assertion. Better still get someone else to confirm that I am mistaken.

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,10:44   

Quote (Alan Fox @ June 15 2014,08:28)
Show me the evidence that I'm mistaken and I'll admit that I was mistaken.

I've been doing that for two weeks, Alan. You keep asking for the evidence, and I keep providing it.

Here's the summary.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,10:54   

Quote
Mistake #1 — You disagreed that the behavior of soldier ants requires a genetic explanation. I pointed out your mistake, and a week later you finally withdrew your statement.


I said that the genes in sterile caste workers are of no consequence genetically. Not passed on. How is this a mistake?

 
Quote
Mistake #2 — You cited the sterility of the workers and soldiers as a reason that the soldier ants’ behavior doesn’t require a genetic explanation.


See above!

Quote
Mistake #3 — You claimed that there was no feedback from the genes in a worker or soldier ant to the reproductive success of the queen. Later you added an ETA to your comment acknowledging that there is feedback.


I claim that the genes in the workers are not in the germ-line. Why you think I should think that sterile workers are not an essential element of the extended phenotpye, I don't know.

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,11:05   

keiths:
Quote
Mistake #1 — You disagreed that the behavior of soldier ants requires a genetic explanation. I pointed out your mistake, and a week later you finally withdrew your statement.

Christ, Alan.  If it wasn't a mistake, why did you withdraw your statement a week later?

Alan:
Quote
Why you think I should think that sterile workers are not an essential element of the extended phenotpye, I don't know.

Why are you putting words in my mouth?  I explained very clearly what I think your mistakes are.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Occam's Aftershave



Posts: 5287
Joined: Feb. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,11:09   

Any chance you guys could contain your pissing contest to TSZ?  

Thanks from all at AtBC.

--------------
"CO2 can't re-emit any trapped heat unless all the molecules point the right way"
"All the evidence supports Creation baraminology"
"If it required a mind, planning and design, it isn't materialistic."
"Jews and Christians are Muslims."

- Joke "Sharon" Gallien, world's dumbest YEC.

  
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,11:18   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ June 15 2014,09:09)
Any chance you guys could contain your pissing contest to TSZ?

You'll have to ask Alan.  

If he continues to make accusations here, I will continue to respond to them here.

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Alan Fox



Posts: 1556
Joined: Aug. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,11:38   

Quote (Occam's Aftershave @ June 15 2014,06:09)
Any chance you guys could contain your pissing contest to TSZ?  

Thanks from all at AtBC.

I rather would and apologise for these boring comments. I'd only note i was specifically mentioned in a comment and wished to correct the error therein.

Sorry for the disturbance.

  
Henry J



Posts: 5786
Joined: Mar. 2005

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,14:22   

Quote (Soapy Sam @ June 14 2014,11:17)
More science please! (yes, I know, I could write an OP).

E = m c squared.

Does that help?

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2723
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,14:23   

While we're on the subject (and this does seem to be the correct thread).

http://theskepticalzone.com/wp....t....t-17744

Quote
keiths: Zachriel, you’ve been sloppy, hypocritical and dishonest in this thread.

Zachriel: Maybe we’re just slow, but we remain unconvinced of your original contention. {The Skeptical Zone Rule #1:} “Assume all other posters are posting in good faith.“

Mung stood up for civility.

Alan Fox, we haven't read all your comments, but there is a subtle evolutionary relationship between worker ants and the queen. We'll post on that on the Skeptical Zone.
http://theskepticalzone.com/wp....t....t-50303


-
Edited to add link.


Edited by Zachriel on June 15 2014,14:34

--------------

You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

   
Zachriel



Posts: 2723
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,14:36   

Quote (Henry J @ June 15 2014,14:22)
Quote (Soapy Sam @ June 14 2014,11:17)
More science please! (yes, I know, I could write an OP).

E = m c squared.

Does that help?

Much better now. Thanks.

--------------

You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

   
Amadan



Posts: 1337
Joined: Jan. 2007

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,15:00   

Quote (Zachriel @ June 15 2014,20:36)
 
Quote (Henry J @ June 15 2014,14:22)
 
Quote (Soapy Sam @ June 14 2014,11:17)
More science please! (yes, I know, I could write an OP).

E = m c squared.

Does that help?

Much better now. Thanks.

Depends on your frame of reference.

--------------
"People are always looking for natural selection to generate random mutations" - Densye  4-4-2011
JoeG BTW dumbass- some variations help ensure reproductive fitness so they cannot be random wrt it.

   
keiths



Posts: 2195
Joined: Jan. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,19:03   

Quote (Zachriel @ June 15 2014,12:23)
While we're on the subject (and this does seem to be the correct thread).

http://theskepticalzone.com/wp....t....t-17744

Quote
keiths: Zachriel, you’ve been sloppy, hypocritical and dishonest in this thread.

Zachriel: Maybe we’re just slow, but we remain unconvinced of your original contention. {The Skeptical Zone Rule #1:} “Assume all other posters are posting in good faith.“


Zachriel,

I did not make that statement lightly.  I understand that those are serious criticisms, and I would never have made them without pausing and thinking things through carefully and dispassionately.

Your behavior in that thread was actually quite a shock to me, because I had (and continue to have) a very good impression of you generally.  That thread was a glaring exception.

I'm happy to have readers judge for themselves.  Our discussion began here:

http://theskepticalzone.com/wp....t....t-16988

--------------
And the set of natural numbers is also the set that starts at 0 and goes to the largest number. -- Joe G

Please stop putting words into my mouth that don't belong there and thoughts into my mind that don't belong there. -- KF

  
Zachriel



Posts: 2723
Joined: Sep. 2006

(Permalink) Posted: June 15 2014,19:52   

Quote (Amadan @ June 15 2014,15:00)
Quote (Zachriel @ June 15 2014,20:36)
 
Quote (Henry J @ June 15 2014,14:22)
   
Quote (Soapy Sam @ June 14 2014,11:17)
More science please! (yes, I know, I could write an OP).

E = m c squared.

Does that help?

Much better now. Thanks.

Depends on your frame of reference.

We was framed!

--------------

You never step on the same tard twice—for it's not the same tard and you're not the same person.

   
  1224 replies since Aug. 15 2011,22:52 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (41) < ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 ... >   


Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]