Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 224 Guests and 4 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
12/07/19 03:58 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 1
True 1
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >
Topic Options
#32599 - 11/10/09 01:56 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: Ellis]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Thanks, Ellis, but I didn't do anything.

Did I tell you that when my family lived in AK, I had two jobs?

1. I was a babysitter.

2. I picked up dog poop. People will pay you big money so they don't have to deal with it.

I've always loved dogs. Nowadays I spend about 4-6 hours every Sat or Sun at the dog park with our JRT. Everyone is expected to pick up their own dog crap - and most do. But many don't and so I always pick up extra crap. Seriously, I get some bags and just walk around the park picking up random piles. I have four hours - at least - just to think and love on my kids' ugly beast.
http://thefalliblefiend.blogspot.com/2006/10/i-like-jack-russell-terriers-my-kids.html

So that's my life, I guess. Just wandering around inside the fence line, bagging the occasional pile of excrement.

Top
.
#32601 - 11/11/09 02:58 AM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Ellis Offline
Megastar

Registered: 01/08/07
Posts: 1490
Loc: Australia
FF wrote

"Just wandering around inside the fence line, bagging the occasional pile of excrement."

....And doesn't that just about describe most of us!

Top
#32630 - 11/13/09 07:18 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: Ellis]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...

Top
#32645 - 11/15/09 07:08 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...


Edited by TheFallibleFiend (11/15/09 07:56 PM)

Top
#32676 - 11/18/09 02:27 AM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...

Anti-knowledge:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=up5jmbSjWkw&feature=PlayList&p=1DCF7497D9A88746&index=0

Amazing thing about this is that soon after it was first posted to the net, there were LOTS of "expert" videographers who gave testimony that faking this sort of thing was far beyond the current technology and they just had to therefore be legitimate!

Top
#32684 - 11/19/09 12:53 AM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...

Anti-knowledge:

http://www.wyattmuseum.com/noahs-ark-04.htm

Noah's Ark found!

By the same guy who has found the ark of the convenant!
wow!

Top
#32692 - 11/19/09 01:50 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...


The "wedge document" was authored by the Discovery Institute.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wedge_strategy

Purpose is to overthrow materialism in science, i.e. methodological materialism (as opposed to philosophical materialism).

What does that mean?

When you think "materialism" think "physical evidence" and "physical explanations."

What their ultimate goal is that want to be able to downplay the importance of actual physical evidence in science - why? Because they don't have an awful lot to support their position. Actually, they have none.

Top
#32698 - 11/20/09 11:44 AM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend
Noah's Ark found!
I'm not interested about these findings very much - but can you refute his finding in scientific way?

If yes, your opinion is greatly welcommed here.

If not, why don't you simply shut up? It's just you, who is adding noise into research, after then.

P.S. The same applies to another comments of yours (concerning Morphic Resonance, etc...)

Top
#32699 - 11/20/09 01:15 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: Zephir]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Well, then, Zeph, we've determined that you're about as interested in my posts as I am in any of the stupid crap that you have generated.

Also, *you* don't determine what's welcomed *here*.

http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CH/CH503.html

Top
#32705 - 11/21/09 09:36 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...

Here's pretty good site that differentiates science from pseudoscience.

http://www.chem1.com/acad/sci/pseudosci.html

Top
#32708 - 11/22/09 07:01 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Amaranth Rose II Offline

Superstar

Registered: 12/16/06
Posts: 962
Loc: Southeast Nebraska, USA
Well done, TFF. Thanks for sharing.
_________________________
If you don't care for reality, just wait a while; another will be along shortly. --A Rose


Top
#32712 - 11/23/09 03:56 AM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: Amaranth Rose II]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Thanks, Rose,

Back to the topic: Exposing Obscurantism

A while back I commented on the cheerleader Desiree Jennings. I'm not sure who posted the original message - it might have been me, or I might have just commented on that posting. Anyway, at that time, someone corrected me or at least informed me that it wasn't at all clear that the cheerleader's condition was caused by the vaccine. I can't recall the exact conversation.

In any case, it looks like it might have been caused by the vaccine, but probably not for the reasons imputed by innumerable web sites. It's looking like this was probably psychogenic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Desiree_jennings

http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/11/desiree_jennings_cured.php

None of the experts on dystonia who saw the video thought it was actually dystonia. They all believed it was psychogenic. "Psychogenic" does not mean the problem is not real. What it means is that brain is playing tricks on the body.

As usual, the obscurantists are having a field day.

Top
#32733 - 11/25/09 05:05 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...

Origin of the term "obscurantism."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obscurantism


And here are definitions from M-W:

"1 : opposition to the spread of knowledge : a policy of withholding knowledge from the general public
2 a : a style (as in literature or art) characterized by deliberate vagueness or abstruseness b : an act or instance of obscurantism"

"obscurantism." Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary. 2009.
Merriam-Webster Online. 25 November 2009
<http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/obscurantism>

Top
#32752 - 11/28/09 01:26 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend
Here's pretty good site that differentiates science from pseudoscience.
Here's pretty good site that differentiates skepticism from pseudoskepticism :

http://psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Pathological_skepticism

The following are typical characteristics of pseudoskepticism :

Characteristics of Pseudoskepticism
  • The tendency to deny, rather than doubt
  • Double standards in the application of criticism
  • The making of judgments without full inquiry
  • Tendency to discredit, rather than investigate
  • Use of ridicule or ad hominem attacks
  • Presenting insufficient evidence or proof
  • Pejorative labeling of proponents as 'promoters', 'pseudo-scientists' or practitioners of 'pathological science.'
  • Assuming criticism requires no burden of proof
  • Making unsubstantiated counter-claims
  • Counter-claims based on plausibility rather than empirical evidence
  • Suggesting that unconvincing evidence is grounds for dismissing it
  • Tendency to dismiss all evidence
  • Resorting to logical fallacies in order to justify rejecting the position or argument of another.
  • Claim that science already knows everything, and since it doesn't include the evidence od subject, subject can't exist. Such stance is often referred to as scientism.
  • Assuming unverified or incorrect facts to justify a predetermined skeptical conclusion.
  • Obfuscating easily verifiable facts to justify a predetermined skeptical conclusion.
  • Instituting hurdles against new theories by "moving the goalposts".
  • Displaying a reactionary, hostile and intolerant stance regarding new ideas.
  • Judging a hypothesis or theory without investigation and insisting on ignoring the details thereafter
  • Organized Skepticism tends to become automatically pathological

Top
#32756 - 11/28/09 05:18 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: Zephir]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
"Obfuscating easily verifiable facts to justify a predetermined skeptical conclusion. "

The irony meter just broke the scale.

Interestingly, the page links to an article titled, "Unskilled and Unaware of It: How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own
Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments" The link provided doesn't work, so here's a good one:

http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf

Top
#32762 - 11/29/09 03:41 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
This is quite common stance of many skeptics. For example, they're unable to distinguish between longitudinal and transversal wave spreading in particle environment - but they're still claiming, ligth cannot spread in vacuum formed by particles in a way, which general relativity predicts.

Top
#32763 - 11/30/09 05:38 AM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: Zephir]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Yes. That's a very common problem among the physicists of the world - their inability to distinguish longitudinal and transverse waves. It's like, you know, a big mystery.

Top
#32768 - 11/30/09 04:23 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...
Check out the "fake moon landing" thread in this forum for a good example of obscurantist "thinking."

One of the "evidences" for hoax is the flag that moves when the astronaut walks past.

Here's a reconstruction showing how utterly stupid the argument is:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GbJvgqoeFSU


For a better understanding of the moon hoax, I once again refer you to:

"How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments"

http://www.apa.org/journals/features/psp7761121.pdf


Edited by TheFallibleFiend (11/30/09 04:43 PM)

Top
#32777 - 12/01/09 12:51 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: TheFallibleFiend]
Zephir Offline
Superstar

Registered: 07/01/08
Posts: 498
Originally Posted By: TheFallibleFiend
How Difficulties in Recognizing One's Own Incompetence Lead to Inflated Self-Assessments

For example, scientists know, energy is spreading in particle environment in both transversal, both longitudinal waves. It means, to refuse Aether concept, we should always check, if spreading of light through vacuum doesn't follow BOTH these variants.

Mainstream physics ignorants simply ignored one of these variants, which has lead them to bold statements about Aether nonexistence.

Top
#32789 - 12/02/09 07:07 PM Re: Anti-knowledge from the obscurantists - exampl [Re: Zephir]
TheFallibleFiend Offline
Megastar

Registered: 06/08/05
Posts: 1940
Loc: http://thefalliblefiend.blogsp...


Facilitated Communication:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34212528/ns/health-mental_health

The true believers insist they've proven it works. A controlled study showed it to be an abysmal failure. And yet ...

Top
Page 2 of 3 < 1 2 3 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.