News:

MysticWicks endorsement: "I've always, always regarded the Discordians as being people who chose to be Discordians because they can't be arsed to actually do any work to develop a relationship with a specific deity, they were too wishy-washy to choose just one path, and they just want to be a mishmash of everything and not have to work at learning about rituals or traditions or any such thing as that."

Main Menu

Aya

Started by Dildo Argentino, November 26, 2014, 11:33:24 AM

Previous topic - Next topic

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:44:19 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:43:19 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:37:26 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:35:03 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:24:21 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on December 22, 2014, 03:57:37 PM
I'm vaguely curious who he thinks enjoys his presence here as well.

I hope it isn't me.

Rest easy.

It is apparently someone who will remain unnamed, and who does not care to publicly state that they enjoy Holist's posts. The classic "I have supporters who are totally real people and not my imagination, but I can't reveal their names because they fear retribution". :lol:

The really funny thing is that his hero Sheldrake used the exact same line on his blog, claiming to have received letters of support from prominent mainstream scientists, but he dare not speak their names because they fear shunning.

Given the way he was shunned after a great early career for proposing a testable hypothesis, that's not all that unreasonable. He is not my hero though.

Please, O Science Master, acquaint me with this testable hypothesis of your guru's.  :lol:

Read the book.

Translation: "I don't know what I'm talking about so I'm not going to try to summarize it, because I know that will make me look like the ignorant fool I am."
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Dildo Argentino

Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:44:21 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:43:17 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:41:03 PM
Are you drunk, Holist?

Nope. Somewhat overfed,but not drunk. Are you?

Not yet, but I have two weeks off and I might get that way if I go to the store this afternoon.

Your grasp of English is great for a Hungarian, but still not that good. BTW.

Yours is not bad for an American, but it could be improved. BTW.
Not too keen on rigor, myself - reminds me of mortis

Dildo Argentino

Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:45:17 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:44:19 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:43:19 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:37:26 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:35:03 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:24:21 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on December 22, 2014, 03:57:37 PM
I'm vaguely curious who he thinks enjoys his presence here as well.

I hope it isn't me.

Rest easy.

It is apparently someone who will remain unnamed, and who does not care to publicly state that they enjoy Holist's posts. The classic "I have supporters who are totally real people and not my imagination, but I can't reveal their names because they fear retribution". :lol:

The really funny thing is that his hero Sheldrake used the exact same line on his blog, claiming to have received letters of support from prominent mainstream scientists, but he dare not speak their names because they fear shunning.

Given the way he was shunned after a great early career for proposing a testable hypothesis, that's not all that unreasonable. He is not my hero though.

Please, O Science Master, acquaint me with this testable hypothesis of your guru's.  :lol:

Read the book.

Translation: "I don't know what I'm talking about so I'm not going to try to summarize it, because I know that will make me look like the ignorant fool I am."

Sorry, correction, that comment I made about your English? I take it back. It is pretty bad, even for an American.
Not too keen on rigor, myself - reminds me of mortis

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:42:30 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:39:25 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:25:43 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 22, 2014, 05:04:38 PM
A little background: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake

He claims, among other things, that telepathy is real, that the speed of light is decreasing, and that species are not defined by their DNA but by a type of cosmic vibrations. I believe he is also a fan of the "water has memory" ideas that homeopathy is based on, and that there is a huge global science conspiracy to conceal evidence of all of these things.

He's about one step away from reptilian shapeshifter overlords.

And now I know where Holist gets his ideas. :lulz:

This is what is called "ad hominem" argument. Don't get me started on Isaac Newton's bizarre views.

It's the core of his proposition about the nature of the world. The man's ideas are fundamentally wrong, and he believes that there is a conspiracy in the scientific community to discredit him. How is that ad hominem? I think that perhaps once again you are using words you don't understand.  :lol:

I present a roughly 20-minute lecture by a man. The lecture is about very specific things. You don't bother to discuss those, you just give a general gloss of what you think that person is generally about, and use that to discredit anything he might have said in that, specific lecture. Ad hominem.

As for being a backwater rube: we Hungarians robbed the land we now live on from other folks over a thousand years ago. We let most of them live and in fact genetic research shows we interbred with them a great deal. When did you steal the land you currently occupy, and how many of the previous occupiers survived the job?

I'm mostly Native American, you blithering moron.  :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: Jesus, do they teach you anything in your communist schools?
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:46:26 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:45:17 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:44:19 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:43:19 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:37:26 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:35:03 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:24:21 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on December 22, 2014, 03:57:37 PM
I'm vaguely curious who he thinks enjoys his presence here as well.

I hope it isn't me.

Rest easy.

It is apparently someone who will remain unnamed, and who does not care to publicly state that they enjoy Holist's posts. The classic "I have supporters who are totally real people and not my imagination, but I can't reveal their names because they fear retribution". :lol:

The really funny thing is that his hero Sheldrake used the exact same line on his blog, claiming to have received letters of support from prominent mainstream scientists, but he dare not speak their names because they fear shunning.

Given the way he was shunned after a great early career for proposing a testable hypothesis, that's not all that unreasonable. He is not my hero though.

Please, O Science Master, acquaint me with this testable hypothesis of your guru's.  :lol:

Read the book.

Translation: "I don't know what I'm talking about so I'm not going to try to summarize it, because I know that will make me look like the ignorant fool I am."

Sorry, correction, that comment I made about your English? I take it back. It is pretty bad, even for an American.

:lulz: :lulz: :lulz: :lulz: Comedy gold.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

I watched your fundraising video, so now I'm hearing everything you type in that halting stilted accent.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Holist is like a Dunning-Kruger case study. I almost feel guilty, it's like the intellectual equivalent of getting into a fistfight with a 3-year-old.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


LMNO

His fundamental thesis is "morphogenic fields."  That is to say, memory exists in nature, and telepathy is possible. And he DID design and carry out experiments. And so did others, which is exactly the opposite of what you just posted. 
QuoteFollowing the publication of A New Science of Life, New Scientist sponsored a competition to devise empirical tests for morphic resonance.[57] The winning idea involved learning Turkish nursery rhymes, with psychologist and broadcaster Sue Blackmore's entry involving babies' behaviour coming second.[22] Blackmore found the results did not support the theory.

Do you do ANY source-checking before you post?

Nephew Twiddleton

Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:25:43 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 22, 2014, 05:04:38 PM
A little background: http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Rupert_Sheldrake

He claims, among other things, that telepathy is real, that the speed of light is decreasing, and that species are not defined by their DNA but by a type of cosmic vibrations. I believe he is also a fan of the "water has memory" ideas that homeopathy is based on, and that there is a huge global science conspiracy to conceal evidence of all of these things.

He's about one step away from reptilian shapeshifter overlords.

And now I know where Holist gets his ideas. :lulz:

This is what is called "ad hominem" argument. Don't get me started on Isaac Newton's bizarre views.

Newton had incorrect views about a lot of things, and we do laugh about that now.

There's still a unit of force named after him though, because he wasn't incorrect about that.
Strange and Terrible Organ Laminator of Yesterday's Heavy Scene
Sentence or sentence fragment pending

Soy El Vaquero Peludo de Oro

TIM AM I, PRIMARY OF THE EXTRA-ATMOSPHERIC SIMIANS

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:37:26 PM
Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:35:03 PM
Quote from: Dildo Argentino on December 24, 2014, 07:24:21 PM
Quote from: Demolition Squid on December 22, 2014, 03:57:37 PM
I'm vaguely curious who he thinks enjoys his presence here as well.

I hope it isn't me.

Rest easy.

It is apparently someone who will remain unnamed, and who does not care to publicly state that they enjoy Holist's posts. The classic "I have supporters who are totally real people and not my imagination, but I can't reveal their names because they fear retribution". :lol:

The really funny thing is that his hero Sheldrake used the exact same line on his blog, claiming to have received letters of support from prominent mainstream scientists, but he dare not speak their names because they fear shunning.

Given the way he was shunned after a great early career for proposing a testable hypothesis, that's not all that unreasonable. He is not my hero though.

Oh man, you're talking about morphic resonance, aren't you?  :lol: Wow.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/ruperts-resonance/
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

I would have to say that it's not so much that he "was shunned" as that he chose to marginalize himself by relentlessly promoting pseudoscience as science. Many scientists have wacky personal views with no harm done to their careers, but insisting that they're science is usually not well-received.

This brings me back to the question Holist refuses to answer; if he wants to be religious, why doesn't he just go ahead and be religious? Why must he insist on distorting science to accommodate his religious views?
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: Mesozoic Mister Nigel on December 24, 2014, 07:49:07 PM
I watched your fundraising video, so now I'm hearing everything you type in that halting stilted accent.

FYI Holist, THIS is ad-hominem.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Quote from: LMNO, PhD (life continues) on December 24, 2014, 08:08:25 PM
His fundamental thesis is "morphogenic fields."  That is to say, memory exists in nature, and telepathy is possible. And he DID design and carry out experiments. And so did others, which is exactly the opposite of what you just posted. 
QuoteFollowing the publication of A New Science of Life, New Scientist sponsored a competition to devise empirical tests for morphic resonance.[57] The winning idea involved learning Turkish nursery rhymes, with psychologist and broadcaster Sue Blackmore's entry involving babies' behaviour coming second.[22] Blackmore found the results did not support the theory.

Do you do ANY source-checking before you post?

I think we all know the answer to that.  :lol:
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."


LMNO

Yeah, Morphic Resonance.

And by the way, in case you didn't feel like reading that SA article (because you apparently shun source material),

QuoteThird, in 2000 John Colwell of Middlesex University in London conducted a formal test using Sheldrake's experimental protocol. Twelve volunteers participated in 12 sequences of 20 stare or no-stare trials each and received accuracy feedback for the final nine sessions. Results: subjects could detect being stared at only when accuracy feedback was provided, which Colwell attributed to the subjects learning what was, in fact, a nonrandom presentation of the trials. When University of Hertfordshire psychologist Richard Wiseman also attempted to replicate Sheldrake's research, he found that subjects detected stares at rates no better than chance.

So, again, he designed a test, and a scientist conducted it, and found no evidence for morphic fields.

Unlike what you said.

Mesozoic Mister Nigel

Scientists are supposed to change their hypotheses to reflect the evidence, not shoehorn the evidence to fit the hypotheses.
"I'm guessing it was January 2007, a meeting in Bethesda, we got a bag of bees and just started smashing them on the desk," Charles Wick said. "It was very complicated."