Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
That pretty well sums it up. Dave -Original Message- From: Craig Brown cr...@overunity.co To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Sent: Thu, Jun 6, 2013 12:11 am Subject: RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? Naval scientist Eldon Byrd put it rather succinctly when he said – “What major contribution has any sceptic made to the betterment of humankind? How many Mother Teresa’s have they produced? How many great scientific discoveries have they made? Many of them are like movie critics–useless and usually wrong.” Original Message Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com Date: Thu, June 06, 2013 2:09 pm To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Robert Park is 82 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._Park In my cabinet I have a bottle to celebrate his no longer finding a use for oxygen. Also..I will debunk his death...as will others. Ron Kita On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:06 PM, William Beaty bi...@eskimo.com wrote: On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Jed Rothwell wrote: They only reacted this way to cold fusion. I will never understand why. Well, CF is an example of traditional alchemy: transmutation of elements via basic chemistry. If CF is real, then not only does this demonstrate that modern chemistry has a huge hole in it, and the hole has been carefully maintained by hundreds of experts over centuries ...but sitting in that hole are woo-woos: crowds of Crackpot CF True Believers who've been right all along. It means that the Knigts of Scientific Purity and Rightness are shown to be bullies who were beating up innocent victims, and worse, shown to be doing it because they never bothered to read a single thing about the topic that wasn't their own propaganda. If CF is real, then you just know that all the major magazines and news outlets will focus on how the disbelief caught fire; on a certain physics meeting where the outbreak of sneering first started, and on the ones who led it. The CF-supporters will be promoted, perhaps to department heads and controllers of funding. The powerful suddenly have bosses with old grudges to satisfy. CF-deniers are suddenly seen as the symbol of everything that's wrong with the modern world. Crowds of screaming undergrads dance around bonfires made of old paper journals and magazines, each copy found to contain a column by Park. Maybe even Physics itself will fall, losing any hope of major funding for decades as everyone piles onto the CF bandwagon, and all the young students will want to emulate famous chemists (or famous crazy gold-makers.) (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
From Roger B: No, LENR and UFOs are not in the same category. LENR has lots of physical evidence. The so-called physical evidence for UFOs is very weak if not non-existent. I disagree. They are very much in the same category. In many cases trying to produce a LENR phenomenon has been damned near impossible to accomplish, even by experienced LENR researchers. Granted, lately some seem to be getting better at reproducing the LENR effect. Unfortunately, UFO investigators have had less luck. No doubt the fact that it's impossible to sequester UFO phenomenon within the confines of a laboratory has something to do with the problem. ;-) UFO phenomenon happens when it happens. The phenomenon NEVER occurs under any kind of a laboratory condition. For some to use the premise that the evidence is weak or non-existent because there is no official documented evidence is a blatant cop out. They just don't want to deal with the issue nor the potential ramifications. See the following commissioned painting I did for an individual who had an unexpected encounter of his own back in the mid 1980s: http://orionworks.com/artgal/svj/MayEncounters_m.htm How does one prove it happened. Or that it even existed. The observer certainly knows. But for the rest of us. Ah he just has a vivid imagination, or he was drinking. Blah blah blah. BTW, surely you don't think the military hasn't had a chance to accumulate some interesting gun camera footage over the past 50 years? I bet there is plenty of evidence. And those who have accumulated the best evidence aren't talking. [LENRs will help people. UFOs are just a distraction from worry about paying one's bills.] I disagree. I realizes you are probably saying this in jest, but IMO UFOs are not a distraction. Many had no choice in what it was they saw. It just happened to them - randomly so. What does that have to do with becoming a distraction from paying the bills. The so-called physical evidence for UFOs are completely out of our control. There is no way to predict when a UFO sighting will happen next. The physical evidence for LENRs is in our control, mostly. We can generally know when LENRs are going to happen. Indeed. But the fact is that both UFOs and LENR strike many as unproved phenomenon. The only thing that LENRs and UFOs have in common is that they are edgy, unexplained, out-of-the-mainstream. The UFO sighting phenomena is a legitimate arena of scientific study, but scientists are too gutless to try. Indeed, I agree with that conclusion. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
[Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
Teh Google knows all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_Sans And see: http://bancomicsans.com/main/ [mg] On Tuesday, June 4, 2013, Rich Murray wrote: uh, what is Comic Sans ? clueless in Imperial Beach, CA, Rich On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote: Might I suggest using a smaller point size and any typeface other than Comic Sans (it's a typeface that give us type nerds bad dreams). I think Comic Sans is a perfect typeface for this list, since it scares away anyone who has no stomach for fringe science. Eric
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
Steven, I meant that UFOs are merely a fascination or distraction for the rest of us. I am sure that psychology therapy was probably necessary for those who experienced it directly, especially the closer encounters. Roger From: orionwo...@charter.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 07:54:20 -0500 From Roger B: No, LENR and UFOs are not in the same category. LENR has lots of physical evidence. The so-called physical evidence for UFOs is very weak if not non-existent. I disagree. They are very much in the same category. In many cases trying to produce a LENR phenomenon has been damned near impossible to accomplish, even by experienced LENR researchers. Granted, lately some seem to be getting better at reproducing the LENR effect. Unfortunately, UFO investigators have had less luck. No doubt the fact that it's impossible to sequester UFO phenomenon within the confines of a laboratory has something to do with the problem. ;-) UFO phenomenon happens when it happens. The phenomenon NEVER occurs under any kind of a laboratory condition. For some to use the premise that the evidence is weak or non-existent because there is no official documented evidence is a blatant cop out. They just don’t want to deal with the issue nor the potential ramifications. See the following commissioned painting I did for an individual who had an unexpected encounter of his own back in the mid 1980s: http://orionworks.com/artgal/svj/MayEncounters_m.htm How does one prove it happened. Or that it even existed. The observer certainly knows. But for the rest of us. Ah he just has a vivid imagination, or he was drinking. Blah blah blah. BTW, surely you don't think the military hasn't had a chance to accumulate some interesting gun camera footage over the past 50 years? I bet there is plenty of evidence. And those who have accumulated the best evidence aren't talking. [LENRs will help people. UFOs are just a distraction from worry about paying one's bills.] I disagree. I realizes you are probably saying this in jest, but IMO UFOs are not a distraction. Many had no choice in what it was they saw. It just happened to them – randomly so. What does that have to do with becoming a distraction from paying the bills. The so-called physical evidence for UFOs are completely out of our control. There is no way to predict when a UFO sighting will happen next. The physical evidence for LENRs is in our control, mostly. We can generally know when LENRs are going to happen. Indeed. But the fact is that both UFOs and LENR strike many as unproved phenomenon. The only thing that LENRs and UFOs have in common is that they are edgy, unexplained, out-of-the-mainstream. The UFO sighting phenomena is a legitimate arena of scientific study, but scientists are too gutless to try. Indeed, I agree with that conclusion. Regards,Steven Vincent Johnsonsvjart.OrionWorks.comwww.zazzle.com/orionworkstech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
What the font is going on here!! Do you think that I am some kind of pathofont, or scripto-path. I think that it is a conspiracy of fontical correctness. Do font companies hire you guys to try to promote their fonts. You guys are all font deniers. I believe in FREEDOM OF FONTNESS. (:-) Roger Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 06:37:19 -0700 Subject: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: mgi...@gibbs.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Teh Google knows all: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comic_Sans And see: http://bancomicsans.com/main/ [mg] On Tuesday, June 4, 2013, Rich Murray wrote: uh, what is Comic Sans ? clueless in Imperial Beach, CA, Rich On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote: Might I suggest using a smaller point size and any typeface other than Comic Sans (it's a typeface that give us type nerds bad dreams). I think Comic Sans is a perfect typeface for this list, since it scares away anyone who has no stomach for fringe science. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
From: Roger B rogerbi...@hotmail.com Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 9:54:52 AM What the f o n t is going on here!! Much better ... but I know that you jest. Otherwise you would have included block and shadowed fonts.
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
I can't do block and shadowed fonts. Perhaps I should switch to my other email client and see if it has those features. Roger Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 09:59:31 -0700 From: a...@well.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: Roger B rogerbi...@hotmail.com Sent: Wednesday, June 5, 2013 9:54:52 AM What the f o n t is going on here!! Much better ... but I know that you jest. Otherwise you would have included block and shadowed fonts.
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
Here is what I don't get about these people. Suppose cold fusion is a mistake, or fraud. It is inconsequential. The worst that can happen is that a few retired professors waste their time and Rossi steals some money. I can understand why people get worked up about other scientific controversies which have large consequences, such as the fights over global warming or vaccinations. But I cannot understand why anyone who thinks that cold fusion is wrong would spend any time fretting about it or discussing it, or trying to prevent research. Science is full of mistakes, dead ends and wacky theories. But you never see *Nature* magazine calling for mockery and vituperation in opposition to these things. They only reacted this way to cold fusion. I will never understand why. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
There must be a reason, Jed, even if we don't know what it is. The only thing that I can think of is that cold fusion is a threat in some sense to people. If a BigFoot flying a saucer should land on the White House lawn and say (in broken English), Howdy, it would cause a lot of excitement, but there would be no paradigms and no funds threatened. LENR threatens paradigms, reputations and funding. And ruined reputations threaten funding. And when people start to oppose something by making pronouncements against it, they put their reputations more at risk, so it snowballs. Compare the resistance to say juicing for health and juicing to heal cancer (Gerson Therapy). No one bothers trying to prove that juicing for health is useless. But if people say that Gerson therapy heals CANCER, which is mostly and basically just juicing, the opposition goes absolutely, positively ballistic and even tries to put people in jail. All of the Gerson therapists have to practice in Mexico. (Of course, it is as easy as banana cream pie to learn how to do it from the Internet and do it at home.) This virulent opposition is because of reputations and money. If you go to some health forum you will see skeptopaths trying to oppose just about everything, including juicing. But the opposition are not real scientists, the skeptopaths are few and far between. But if Dr. Oz did a segment about how great Gerson Therapy is and how it works, well, imagine a huge pile of human excrement being dropped on a gigantic and very powerful fan that was facing up, once every hour for a week. Dr. Oz would be off the air and removed from his profession. Billions and billions of dollars are at stake with cancer therapy, and billions and billions of dollars are at stake with fusion. There is a difference. Medical doctors are more practiced at protecting their turf; fusionists are new at the game. With Respect, Roger Bird Colorado Springs Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2013 13:35:12 -0400 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: jedrothw...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Here is what I don't get about these people. Suppose cold fusion is a mistake, or fraud. It is inconsequential. The worst that can happen is that a few retired professors waste their time and Rossi steals some money. I can understand why people get worked up about other scientific controversies which have large consequences, such as the fights over global warming or vaccinations. But I cannot understand why anyone who thinks that cold fusion is wrong would spend any time fretting about it or discussing it, or trying to prevent research. Science is full of mistakes, dead ends and wacky theories. But you never see Nature magazine calling for mockery and vituperation in opposition to these things. They only reacted this way to cold fusion. I will never understand why. - Jed
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
From Roger: I meant that UFOs are merely a fascination or distraction for the rest of us. Agreed. I am sure that psychology therapy was probably necessary for those who experienced it directly, especially the closer encounters. I'd say some do need counseling from experienced professionals, particularly someone who has some background in the experiencer phenomenon. Not too many of them around however. The best therapy is probably group therapy, where experiencers can get together and share their life stories in a safe and supportive environment. Most who have the courage and fortitude to do this tend to end up in pretty good shape. It's not unusual for an experiencer to be transformed in unique ways, and often for the better. New perceptions, new outlook on life. Sometimes new abilities. It's a mixed bag of tricks. One of the best books I've found on the encounter phenomenon (of the 4th kind) is a book titled Beyond my Wildest Dreams, by Kim Carlsberg, illustrated by Darryl Anka. It's essentially Kim's personal diary documenting her efforts to come to terms with her own encounter experiences. http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-My-Wildest-Dreams-Abductee/dp/1879181258/ref=sr _1_1?s=books http://www.amazon.com/Beyond-My-Wildest-Dreams-Abductee/dp/1879181258/ref=s r_1_1?s=booksie=UTF8qid=1370475811sr=1-1keywords=beyond+my+wildest+dream s ie=UTF8qid=1370475811sr=1-1keywords=beyond+my+wildest+dreams http://tinyurl.com/mq86b5z Kim's website: http://www.kimcarlsbergbio.com/Home_Page.html My own personal opinion: I suspect this phenomenon has been around for a very long time. perhaps since we first became sentient. Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex/
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 8:01 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: I suspect this phenomenon has been around for a very long time… perhaps since we first became sentient. And maybe how we became so.
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Jed Rothwell wrote: They only reacted this way to cold fusion. I will never understand why. Well, CF is an example of traditional alchemy: transmutation of elements via basic chemistry. If CF is real, then not only does this demonstrate that modern chemistry has a huge hole in it, and the hole has been carefully maintained by hundreds of experts over centuries ...but sitting in that hole are woo-woos: crowds of Crackpot CF True Believers who've been right all along. It means that the Knigts of Scientific Purity and Rightness are shown to be bullies who were beating up innocent victims, and worse, shown to be doing it because they never bothered to read a single thing about the topic that wasn't their own propaganda. If CF is real, then you just know that all the major magazines and news outlets will focus on how the disbelief caught fire; on a certain physics meeting where the outbreak of sneering first started, and on the ones who led it. The CF-supporters will be promoted, perhaps to department heads and controllers of funding. The powerful suddenly have bosses with old grudges to satisfy. CF-deniers are suddenly seen as the symbol of everything that's wrong with the modern world. Crowds of screaming undergrads dance around bonfires made of old paper journals and magazines, each copy found to contain a column by Park. Maybe even Physics itself will fall, losing any hope of major funding for decades as everyone piles onto the CF bandwagon, and all the young students will want to emulate famous chemists (or famous crazy gold-makers.) (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
Robert Park is 82 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._Park In my cabinet I have a bottle to celebrate his no longer finding a use for oxygen. Also..I will debunk his death...as will others. Ron Kita On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:06 PM, William Beaty bi...@eskimo.com wrote: On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Jed Rothwell wrote: They only reacted this way to cold fusion. I will never understand why. Well, CF is an example of traditional alchemy: transmutation of elements via basic chemistry. If CF is real, then not only does this demonstrate that modern chemistry has a huge hole in it, and the hole has been carefully maintained by hundreds of experts over centuries ...but sitting in that hole are woo-woos: crowds of Crackpot CF True Believers who've been right all along. It means that the Knigts of Scientific Purity and Rightness are shown to be bullies who were beating up innocent victims, and worse, shown to be doing it because they never bothered to read a single thing about the topic that wasn't their own propaganda. If CF is real, then you just know that all the major magazines and news outlets will focus on how the disbelief caught fire; on a certain physics meeting where the outbreak of sneering first started, and on the ones who led it. The CF-supporters will be promoted, perhaps to department heads and controllers of funding. The powerful suddenly have bosses with old grudges to satisfy. CF-deniers are suddenly seen as the symbol of everything that's wrong with the modern world. Crowds of screaming undergrads dance around bonfires made of old paper journals and magazines, each copy found to contain a column by Park. Maybe even Physics itself will fall, losing any hope of major funding for decades as everyone piles onto the CF bandwagon, and all the young students will want to emulate famous chemists (or famous crazy gold-makers.) (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
Naval scientist Eldon Byrd put it rather succinctly when he said – “What major contribution has any sceptic made to the betterment of humankind? How many Mother Teresa’s have they produced? How many great scientific discoveries have they made? Many of them are like movie critics–useless and usually wrong.” Original Message Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com Date: Thu, June 06, 2013 2:09 pm To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Robert Park is 82http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._ParkIn my cabinet I have a bottle to celebrate his no longer finding a use for oxygen. Also..I will debunk his death...as will others.Ron KitaOn Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:06 PM, William Beaty bi...@eskimo.com wrote: On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Jed Rothwell wrote: They only reacted this way to cold fusion. I will never understand why. Well, CF is an example of traditional alchemy: transmutation of elements via basic chemistry. If CF is real, then not only does this demonstrate that modern chemistry has a huge hole in it, and the hole has been carefully maintained by hundreds of experts over centuries ...but sitting in that hole are woo-woos: crowds of Crackpot CF True Believers who've been right all along. It means that the Knigts of Scientific Purity and Rightness are shown to be bullies who were beating up innocent victims, and worse, shown to be doing it because they never bothered to read a single thing about the topic that wasn't their own propaganda. If CF is real, then you just know that all the major magazines and news outlets will focus on how the disbelief caught fire; on a certain physics meeting where the outbreak of sneering first started, and on the ones who led it. The CF-supporters will be promoted, perhaps to department heads and controllers of funding. The powerful suddenly have bosses with old grudges to satisfy. CF-deniers are suddenly seen as the symbol of everything that's wrong with the modern world. Crowds of screaming undergrads dance around bonfires made of old paper journals and magazines, each copy found to contain a column by Park. Maybe even Physics itself will fall, losing any hope of major funding for decades as everyone piles onto the CF bandwagon, and all the young students will want to emulate famous chemists (or famous crazy gold-makers.) (( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
The Bob Park of his dayRichard van der Riet Wooley (Astronomer Royal) Fellow of the Royal Society, Gold Medal of the Royal Astronomical Society “The whole procedure [of shooting rockets into space]…presents difficulties of so fundamental a nature, that we are forced to dismiss the notion as essentially impracticable, in spite of the author’s insistent appeal to put aside prejudice and to recollect the supposed impossibility of heavier-than-air flight before it was actually accomplished” link On appointment as Astronomer Royal, he reiterated his long-held view that “space travel is utter bilge”. Speaking to Time in 1956, Woolley noted “It’s utter bilge. I don’t think anybody will ever put up enough money to do such a thing . . . What good would it do us? If we spent the same amount of money on preparing first-class astronomical equipment we would learn much more about the universe . . . It is all rather rot”. Woolley’s protestations came just one year prior to the launch of Sputnik, five years before launch of the Apollo Program, and thirteen years before the first landing on the moon. Original Message Subject: RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: "Craig Brown" cr...@overunity.co Date: Thu, June 06, 2013 2:11 pm To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Naval scientist Eldon Byrd put it rather succinctly when he said – “What major contribution has any sceptic made to the betterment of humankind? How many Mother Teresa’s have they produced? How many great scientific discoveries have they made? Many of them are like movie critics–useless and usually wrong.” Original Message Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: Ron Kita chiralex.k...@gmail.com Date: Thu, June 06, 2013 2:09 pm To: vortex-l vortex-l@eskimo.com Robert Park is 82http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_L._ParkIn my cabinet I have a bottle to celebrate his no longer finding a use for oxygen. Also..I will debunk his death...as will others.Ron KitaOn Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:06 PM, William Beaty bi...@eskimo.com wrote: On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Jed Rothwell wrote: They only reacted this way to cold fusion. I will never understand why. Well, CF is an example of traditional alchemy: transmutation of elements via basic chemistry. If CF is real, then not only does this demonstrate that modern chemistry has a huge hole in it, and the hole has been carefully maintained by hundreds of experts over centuries ...but sitting in that hole are woo-woos: crowds of Crackpot CF True Believers who've been right all along. It means that the Knigts of Scientific Purity and Rightness are shown to be bullies who were beating up innocent victims, and worse, shown to be doing it because they never bothered to read a single thing about the topic that wasn't their own propaganda. If CF is real, then you just know that all the major magazines and news outlets will focus on how the disbelief caught fire; on a certain physics meeting where the outbreak of sneering first started, and on the ones who led it. The CF-supporters will be promoted, perhaps to department heads and controllers of funding. The powerful suddenly have bosses with old grudges to satisfy. CF-deniers are suddenly seen as the symbol of everything that's wrong with the modern world. Crowds of screaming undergrads dance around bonfires made of old paper journals and magazines, each copy found to contain a column by Park. Maybe even Physics itself will fall, losing any hope of major funding for decades as everyone piles onto the CF bandwagon, and all the young students will want to emulate famous chemists (or famous crazy gold-makers.) (( ( ( ( ( (O) ) ) ) ) ))) William J. Beaty SCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818 unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
If CF is real... ... and all the young students will want to emulate famous chemists (or famous crazy gold-makers). more likely engineers! After all, it may very well be an engineer who gets to market first... ;-) -Mark -Original Message- From: William Beaty [mailto:bi...@eskimo.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 05, 2013 7:07 PM To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Jed Rothwell wrote: They only reacted this way to cold fusion. I will never understand why. Well, CF is an example of traditional alchemy: transmutation of elements via basic chemistry. If CF is real, then not only does this demonstrate that modern chemistry has a huge hole in it, and the hole has been carefully maintained by hundreds of experts over centuries ...but sitting in that hole are woo-woos: crowds of Crackpot CF True Believers who've been right all along. It means that the Knigts of Scientific Purity and Rightness are shown to be bullies who were beating up innocent victims, and worse, shown to be doing it because they never bothered to read a single thing about the topic that wasn't their own propaganda. If CF is real, then you just know that all the major magazines and news outlets will focus on how the disbelief caught fire; on a certain physics meeting where the outbreak of sneering first started, and on the ones who led it. The CF-supporters will be promoted, perhaps to department heads and controllers of funding. The powerful suddenly have bosses with old grudges to satisfy. CF-deniers are suddenly seen as the symbol of everything that's wrong with the modern world. Crowds of screaming undergrads dance around bonfires made of old paper journals and magazines, each copy found to contain a column by Park. Maybe even Physics itself will fall, losing any hope of major funding for decades as everyone piles onto the CF bandwagon, and all the young students will want to emulate famous chemists (or famous crazy gold-makers.) (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
I can talk crazy too, here's my 5¢. In addition to the powerful energy lobbies, I believe CF would unlock new physics, and that means new weapons. Now that could be kind-of-OK if developing those new weapons requires nation-state-level funding for decades, but if it allows any Joe McTerrorist to assemble a 50 kton CF bomb from a few physical equations and two bags of nickel shavings then it might just be better to keep the cold fusion genie in the bottle while the New World Order figures out how to pacify the population. In other words, world peace and thus mandatory Google Glasses and QR codes tattooed on our foreheads might be prerequisites for letting CF develop. But it seems like we need cheap energy for world peace to begin with. So maybe Rossi didn't die in a car accident early in the game because his device is not readily weaponizable... -- Berke Durak
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jed Rothwell jedrothw...@gmail.com wrote: Here is what I don't get about these people. Suppose cold fusion is a mistake, or fraud. It is inconsequential. The worst that can happen is that a few retired professors waste their time and Rossi steals some money. I suspect there are two factors coming together. First, perhaps there's an impression that scientific training is in decline and that standards in science are falling. This creates a context in which you want to straighten out science grad students and the public at large and get them to aim for higher standards. But to do this they shouldn't be allowed to be confused by people peddling snake oil. That will be a waste of their time and of public money. The next factor, which lends particular urgency to the matter of cold fusion, is the level of perceived threat. Water memory, perpetual motion machines and homeopathy are not perceived as threats. Cold fusion is, by contrast. So one can snicker at water memory, but it's not as funny when grants for foundations are being provided at universities once again. If one does not act promptly and decisively, we could be back at 1989 again and have a whole new generation to educate about what science really involves. The adherents of these fads are the last people you want to worry about trying to persuade. You have to do what you have to do to ensure that the public at lage and graduate students are not beguiled by their distorted worldview. Eric
[Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. I suspect they do so because they have ironically misplaced the specific audience they are actually trying to convince. Pseudoskeptics think they are trying to convince a vast world others of the fact that their conclusions opinions are incorrect. This approach will invariably fail because they refuse to admit the possibility that the person they are really trying to convince is no one other than themselves. Unfortunately, they are incapable of admitting this because they have invested too much of their EGO in a house of cards that they must continue to support. It also helps explains why their posting predilections are often obsessively relentless. Constantly focusing all of their energy on trying to tear apart the opinions of others will obviously never address their own unrealized doubts. Therefore, the only option they feel they have left at their own disposal is to try harder. Such irony! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
Did you just say this: skeptopaths need to tear everyone else down so that they can feel superior. Or: skeptopaths are afraid of anything outside of the box, so they try to get you to come back in. Or: skeptopaths hate anything that might offer hope. Or: one skeptopath I know has severe trust issues, and does not even trust himself, and won't even look at the evidence because he does not trust himself. All of the above. Roger From: orionwo...@charter.net To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 21:24:58 -0500 Subject: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. I suspect they do so because they have ironically misplaced the specific audience they are actually trying to convince. Pseudoskeptics think they are trying to convince a vast world others of the fact that their conclusions opinions are incorrect. This approach will invariably fail because they refuse to admit the possibility that the person they are really trying to convince is no one other than themselves. Unfortunately, they are incapable of admitting this because they have invested too much of their EGO in a house of cards that they must continue to support. It also helps explains why their posting predilections are often obsessively relentless. Constantly focusing all of their energy on trying to tear apart the opinions of others will obviously never address their own unrealized doubts. Therefore, the only option they feel they have left at their own disposal is to try harder. Such irony! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
It is interesting that it is seldom the other way round. Someone who believes in something might want to share with others who are open minded, but they have little interest in converting so-called skeptics, they don't seek them out. Pseudo-skeptics are not just content in stopping people from falling for beliefs, they seek out the believers. Great insights. John
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
Often pseudosceptics have a high opinion of themselves, see themselves as elite. It is interesting that a disproportionately high number of pseudosceptics have an interest in magic.Most however, appear to suffer from Imagination Deficiency Personality IDPFictional miss-identification: Often an IDP will react to fictional representations as though they are real. For example, they may complain about how a popular fictional TV programs portrays the paranormal, or get irate if a book they are reading invokes a ghost or spirit, or has a character convert to a spiritual outlook. Some write letters of complaint to newspapers that, for example, carry an astrology column. Once again all subjects were positive on this measure with one (Subject 5) even refusing to fly on an airline whose travel magazine included an astrology column.Delusions of superiority: In many cases the IDP will believe that they have special traits or talents not shared by other people. Usually these are confined to a narrow range of human abilities, and tend to center around issues of intelligence or education. In the mildly IDP this may simply come off as immaturity, arrogance or elitism. Subject 3, however, consistently referred to others as “delusional” or made references to “Elevator[s] not going to the top floor,” and subjects 7, 8 and 9 dedicated substantial time to denigrating the works of some obscure scholars.Hyper-realistic representation: This is a tendency on the part of the imagination deficient to expect a realistic or rational representation in all aspects of life. For example, the IDP may engage in nit picking about plot lines in TV programs or books, or complain about contemporary linguistic usage which conflicts with a technical term. Eight of the 10 subjects scored positive on this measure. Subjects 8 and 9 wrote books substantially about correct usage of scientific terms. Original Message Subject: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: "OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson" orionwo...@charter.net Date: Wed, June 05, 2013 12:24 pm To: vortex-l@eskimo.com A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. I suspect they do so because they have ironically misplaced the specific audience they are actually trying to convince. Pseudoskeptics think they are trying to convince a vast world "others" of the fact that their conclusions opinions are incorrect. This approach will invariably fail because they refuse to admit the possibility that the person they are really trying to convince is no one other than themselves. Unfortunately, they are incapable of admitting this because they have invested too much of their EGO in a house of cards that they must continue to support. It also helps explains why their posting predilections are often obsessively relentless. Constantly focusing all of their energy on trying to tear apart the opinions of others will obviously never address their own unrealized doubts. Therefore, the only option they feel they have left at their own disposal is to try harder.Such irony!Regards,Steven Vincent Johnsonsvjart.OrionWorks.comwww.zazzle.com/orionworkstech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
That description gave me quite a start there for a second. I was afraid that you were talking about me. (:-) Roger From: cr...@overunity.co To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 19:59:40 -0700 Often pseudosceptics have a high opinion of themselves, see themselves as elite. It is interesting that a disproportionately high number of pseudosceptics have an interest in magic. Most however, appear to suffer from Imagination Deficiency Personality IDP Fictional miss-identification: Often an IDP will react to fictional representations as though they are real. For example, they may complain about how a popular fictional TV programs portrays the paranormal, or get irate if a book they are reading invokes a ghost or spirit, or has a character convert to a spiritual outlook. Some write letters of complaint to newspapers that, for example, carry an astrology column. Once again all subjects were positive on this measure with one (Subject 5) even refusing to fly on an airline whose travel magazine included an astrology column. Delusions of superiority: In many cases the IDP will believe that they have special traits or talents not shared by other people. Usually these are confined to a narrow range of human abilities, and tend to center around issues of intelligence or education. In the mildly IDP this may simply come off as immaturity, arrogance or elitism. Subject 3, however, consistently referred to others as “delusional” or made references to “Elevator[s] not going to the top floor,” and subjects 7, 8 and 9 dedicated substantial time to denigrating the works of some obscure scholars. Hyper-realistic representation: This is a tendency on the part of the imagination deficient to expect a realistic or rational representation in all aspects of life. For example, the IDP may engage in nit picking about plot lines in TV programs or books, or complain about contemporary linguistic usage which conflicts with a technical term. Eight of the 10 subjects scored positive on this measure. Subjects 8 and 9 wrote books substantially about correct usage of scientific terms. Original Message Subject: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net Date: Wed, June 05, 2013 12:24 pm To: vortex-l@eskimo.com A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. I suspect they do so because they have ironically misplaced the specific audience they are actually trying to convince. Pseudoskeptics think they are trying to convince a vast world others of the fact that their conclusions opinions are incorrect. This approach will invariably fail because they refuse to admit the possibility that the person they are really trying to convince is no one other than themselves. Unfortunately, they are incapable of admitting this because they have invested too much of their EGO in a house of cards that they must continue to support. It also helps explains why their posting predilections are often obsessively relentless. Constantly focusing all of their energy on trying to tear apart the opinions of others will obviously never address their own unrealized doubts. Therefore, the only option they feel they have left at their own disposal is to try harder. Such irony! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
But, seriously, that was an excellent description. Can you supply a link to it? Roger From: cr...@overunity.co To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 19:59:40 -0700 Often pseudosceptics have a high opinion of themselves, see themselves as elite. It is interesting that a disproportionately high number of pseudosceptics have an interest in magic. Most however, appear to suffer from Imagination Deficiency Personality IDP Fictional miss-identification: Often an IDP will react to fictional representations as though they are real. For example, they may complain about how a popular fictional TV programs portrays the paranormal, or get irate if a book they are reading invokes a ghost or spirit, or has a character convert to a spiritual outlook. Some write letters of complaint to newspapers that, for example, carry an astrology column. Once again all subjects were positive on this measure with one (Subject 5) even refusing to fly on an airline whose travel magazine included an astrology column. Delusions of superiority: In many cases the IDP will believe that they have special traits or talents not shared by other people. Usually these are confined to a narrow range of human abilities, and tend to center around issues of intelligence or education. In the mildly IDP this may simply come off as immaturity, arrogance or elitism. Subject 3, however, consistently referred to others as “delusional” or made references to “Elevator[s] not going to the top floor,” and subjects 7, 8 and 9 dedicated substantial time to denigrating the works of some obscure scholars. Hyper-realistic representation: This is a tendency on the part of the imagination deficient to expect a realistic or rational representation in all aspects of life. For example, the IDP may engage in nit picking about plot lines in TV programs or books, or complain about contemporary linguistic usage which conflicts with a technical term. Eight of the 10 subjects scored positive on this measure. Subjects 8 and 9 wrote books substantially about correct usage of scientific terms. Original Message Subject: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net Date: Wed, June 05, 2013 12:24 pm To: vortex-l@eskimo.com A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. I suspect they do so because they have ironically misplaced the specific audience they are actually trying to convince. Pseudoskeptics think they are trying to convince a vast world others of the fact that their conclusions opinions are incorrect. This approach will invariably fail because they refuse to admit the possibility that the person they are really trying to convince is no one other than themselves. Unfortunately, they are incapable of admitting this because they have invested too much of their EGO in a house of cards that they must continue to support. It also helps explains why their posting predilections are often obsessively relentless. Constantly focusing all of their energy on trying to tear apart the opinions of others will obviously never address their own unrealized doubts. Therefore, the only option they feel they have left at their own disposal is to try harder. Such irony! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
Are UFO and LENR in the same category? Giovanni On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 9:24 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. I suspect they do so because they have ironically misplaced the specific audience they are actually trying to convince. Pseudoskeptics think they are trying to convince a vast world others of the fact that their conclusions opinions are incorrect. This approach will invariably fail because they refuse to admit the possibility that the person they are really trying to convince is no one other than themselves. Unfortunately, they are incapable of admitting this because they have invested too much of their EGO in a house of cards that they must continue to support. It also helps explains why their posting predilections are often obsessively relentless. Constantly focusing all of their energy on trying to tear apart the opinions of others will obviously never address their own unrealized doubts. Therefore, the only option they feel they have left at their own disposal is to try harder. Such irony! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
No, LENR and UFOs are not in the same category. LENR has lots of physical evidence. The so-called physical evidence for UFOs is very weak if not non-existent. [LENRs will help people. UFOs are just a distraction from worry about paying one's bills.] The so-called physical evidence for UFOs are completely out of our control. There is no way to predict when a UFO sighting will happen next. The physical evidence for LENRs is in our control, mostly. We can generally know when LENRs are going to happen. The only thing that LENRs and UFOs have in common is that they are edgy, unexplained, out-of-the-mainstream. The UFO sighting phenomena is a legitimate arena of scientific study, but scientists are too gutless to try. Roger Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 22:06:35 -0500 Subject: Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: gsantost...@gmail.com To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Are UFO and LENR in the same category?Giovanni On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 9:24 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. I suspect they do so because they have ironically misplaced the specific audience they are actually trying to convince. Pseudoskeptics think they are trying to convince a vast world others of the fact that their conclusions opinions are incorrect. This approach will invariably fail because they refuse to admit the possibility that the person they are really trying to convince is no one other than themselves. Unfortunately, they are incapable of admitting this because they have invested too much of their EGO in a house of cards that they must continue to support. It also helps explains why their posting predilections are often obsessively relentless. Constantly focusing all of their energy on trying to tear apart the opinions of others will obviously never address their own unrealized doubts. Therefore, the only option they feel they have left at their own disposal is to try harder. Such irony! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
This link below is to my own site where I have assembled some of the major character traits of pseudos. I had plenty of real life experience of these clowns owing to the fact that they were at infestation levels on the Steorn forum before they all got banned for trolling. Mary Yugo, Pennies_Everywhere, alsetalokin (an anagram of Nikola Tesla) et al.http://truthfall.com/pseudoscepticism/Another brilliant resource is http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/One of my favourite quotes about pseudosceptics below:“They claim that their behavior is “scepticism” but in reality they know nothing about the true meaning of scepticism nor practice it since they apply no scepticism to their own beliefs or to the status quo but in fact have a total blind spot to them. Pyrrho, the founder of “Scepticism”, intended for it to be about open inquiry and suspension of judgment. I’ve never trusted sceptics, for the very reason that they are willing to accept the official version of things without a shred of proof but require unrealistic amounts of evidence to accept any other possibility.” Original Message Subject: RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: Roger B rogerbi...@hotmail.com Date: Wed, June 05, 2013 1:04 pm To: "vortex-l@eskimo.com" vortex-l@eskimo.com But, seriously, that was an excellent description. Can you supply a link to it?RogerFrom: cr...@overunity.coTo: vortex-l@eskimo.comSubject: RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 19:59:40 -0700Often pseudosceptics have a high opinion of themselves, see themselves as elite. It is interesting that a disproportionately high number of pseudosceptics have an interest in magic.Most however, appear to suffer from Imagination Deficiency Personality IDPFictional miss-identification: Often an IDP will react to fictional representations as though they are real. For example, they may complain about how a popular fictional TV programs portrays the paranormal, or get irate if a book they are reading invokes a ghost or spirit, or has a character convert to a spiritual outlook. Some write letters of complaint to newspapers that, for example, carry an astrology column. Once again all subjects were positive on this measure with one (Subject 5) even refusing to fly on an airline whose travel magazine included an astrology column.Delusions of superiority: In many cases the IDP will believe that they have special traits or talents not shared by other people. Usually these are confined to a narrow range of human abilities, and tend to center around issues of intelligence or education. In the mildly IDP this may simply come off as immaturity, arrogance or elitism. Subject 3, however, consistently referred to others as “delusional” or made references to “Elevator[s] not going to the top floor,” and subjects 7, 8 and 9 dedicated substantial time to denigrating the works of some obscure scholars.Hyper-realistic representation: This is a tendency on the part of the imagination deficient to expect a realistic or rational representation in all aspects of life. For example, the IDP may engage in nit picking about plot lines in TV programs or books, or complain about contemporary linguistic usage which conflicts with a technical term. Eight of the 10 subjects scored positive on this measure. Subjects 8 and 9 wrote books substantially about correct usage of scientific terms. Original Message Subject: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: "OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson" orionwo...@charter.net Date: Wed, June 05, 2013 12:24 pm To: vortex-l@eskimo.com A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. I suspect they do so because they have ironically misplaced the specific audience they are actually trying to convince. Pseudoskeptics think they are trying to convince a vast world "others" of the fact that their conclusions opinions are incorrect. This approach will invariably fail because they refuse to admit the possibility that the person they are really trying to convince is no one other than themselves. Unfortunately, they are incapable of admitting this because they have invested too much of their EGO in a house of cards that they must continue to support. It also helps explains why their posting predilections are often obsessively relentless. Constantly focusing all of their energy on trying to tear apart the opinions of others will obviously never address their own unrealized doubts. Therefore, the only option they feel they have left at their own disposal is to try harder.Such irony!Regards,Steven Vincent Johnsonsvjart.OrionWorks.comwww.zazzle.com/orionworkstech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
Might I suggest using a smaller point size and any typeface other than Comic Sans (it's a typeface that give us type nerds bad dreams). [mg] On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:04 PM, Roger B rogerbi...@hotmail.com wrote: But, seriously, that was an excellent description. Can you supply a link to it? Roger -- From: cr...@overunity.co To: vortex-l@eskimo.com Subject: RE: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? Date: Tue, 4 Jun 2013 19:59:40 -0700 Often pseudosceptics have a high opinion of themselves, see themselves as elite. It is interesting that a disproportionately high number of pseudosceptics have an interest in magic. Most however, appear to suffer from Imagination Deficiency Personality IDP *Fictional miss-identification:* Often an IDP will react to fictional representations as though they are real. For example, they may complain about how a popular fictional TV programs portrays the paranormal, or get irate if a book they are reading invokes a ghost or spirit, or has a character convert to a spiritual outlook. Some write letters of complaint to newspapers that, for example, carry an astrology column. Once again all subjects were positive on this measure with one (Subject 5) even refusing to fly on an airline whose travel magazine included an astrology column. *Delusions of superiority:* In many cases the IDP will believe that they have special traits or talents not shared by other people. Usually these are confined to a narrow range of human abilities, and tend to center around issues of intelligence or education. In the mildly IDP this may simply come off as immaturity, arrogance or elitism. Subject 3, however, consistently referred to others as “delusional” or made references to “Elevator[s] not going to the top floor,” and subjects 7, 8 and 9 dedicated substantial time to denigrating the works of some obscure scholars. *Hyper-realistic representation:* This is a tendency on the part of the imagination deficient to expect a realistic or rational representation in all aspects of life. For example, the IDP may engage in nit picking about plot lines in TV programs or books, or complain about contemporary linguistic usage which conflicts with a technical term. Eight of the 10 subjects scored positive on this measure. Subjects 8 and 9 wrote books substantially about correct usage of scientific terms. Original Message Subject: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk? From: OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net Date: Wed, June 05, 2013 12:24 pm To: vortex-l@eskimo.com A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. I suspect they do so because they have ironically misplaced the specific audience they are actually trying to convince. Pseudoskeptics think they are trying to convince a vast world others of the fact that their conclusions opinions are incorrect. This approach will invariably fail because they refuse to admit the possibility that the person they are really trying to convince is no one other than themselves. Unfortunately, they are incapable of admitting this because they have invested too much of their EGO in a house of cards that they must continue to support. It also helps explains why their posting predilections are often obsessively relentless. Constantly focusing all of their energy on trying to tear apart the opinions of others will obviously never address their own unrealized doubts. Therefore, the only option they feel they have left at their own disposal is to try harder. Such irony! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
Anyone sincerely think I'm a pseudoskeptic since December 1996 ? I'm keenly alert to hear exactly what folks really think... -- uh, I'm sure I'm not... both terms are prejudiced: PseudoSkeptic, TrueBeliever... just justifies closing down collaborative discussions by classifyinging the other siblings as unqualified... I suggest, Convinced Believer, Decided Skeptic -- thus hinting each side is reason and evidence based, and reasonably free of confused entrepreneurial or ego processes -- I suggest exercizing extreme reluctance about diagnosing the shoes others may be walking in -- uh, I'm really totally barefoot... The scenario that Abd, Storms, and others offer is that many DPd electrolysis runs correlate some bit of He with some excess heat -- maybe... when was last such run? If 5 out of 50 fairly similar cells produce similar correlations within the next 3 years, well, what are the statistics of that, and the statistics combined with the existing claims? This could be a question that can result in agreements among CBs and DSs prior to the runs being done... Well, meanwhile, we getting older, while all affairs evolve explosively exponentailly -- more likely fleets of black swan events will eclipse the feeble furor about cold fusion... being that we are within single hyperinfinity... I'm imagining a SF plot, yes, indeed there are UFOs, and they are zipping straight away from us as they can possibly go ! within the community of service, Rich Murray On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:06 PM, Giovanni Santostasi gsantost...@gmail.comwrote: Are UFO and LENR in the same category? Giovanni On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 9:24 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. I suspect they do so because they have ironically misplaced the specific audience they are actually trying to convince. Pseudoskeptics think they are trying to convince a vast world others of the fact that their conclusions opinions are incorrect. This approach will invariably fail because they refuse to admit the possibility that the person they are really trying to convince is no one other than themselves. Unfortunately, they are incapable of admitting this because they have invested too much of their EGO in a house of cards that they must continue to support. It also helps explains why their posting predilections are often obsessively relentless. Constantly focusing all of their energy on trying to tear apart the opinions of others will obviously never address their own unrealized doubts. Therefore, the only option they feel they have left at their own disposal is to try harder. Such irony! Regards, Steven Vincent Johnson svjart.OrionWorks.com www.zazzle.com/orionworks tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/newvortex
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote: Might I suggest using a smaller point size and any typeface other than Comic Sans (it's a typeface that give us type nerds bad dreams). I think Comic Sans is a perfect typeface for this list, since it scares away anyone who has no stomach for fringe science. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
uh, what is Comic Sans ? clueless in Imperial Beach, CA, Rich On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Eric Walker eric.wal...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Mark Gibbs mgi...@gibbs.com wrote: Might I suggest using a smaller point size and any typeface other than Comic Sans (it's a typeface that give us type nerds bad dreams). I think Comic Sans is a perfect typeface for this list, since it scares away anyone who has no stomach for fringe science. Eric
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
On Tue, 4 Jun 2013, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson wrote: A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. Another method is to query your own Skeptic side. What I find in there is something simple: the goal is not to spread correct knowledge or to teach the ignorant, nor is the goal to discover Truth or even Reality. The goal is TO WIN, to win a heroic battle against an inferior, subhuman, disgusting foe who threatens to contaminate Purity. But as you say, this is often a matter of psychological projection, and the Skeptic is actually fighting their own inner Woo-woo or spiritual believer. Perhaps they're trying to wipe out their own inner Scientist who wants to strip off the cloud of dishonest BS and drill down to the truth. (( ( ( ( ((O)) ) ) ) ))) William J. BeatySCIENCE HOBBYIST website billb at amasci com http://amasci.com EE/programmer/sci-exhibits amateur science, hobby projects, sci fair Seattle, WA 206-762-3818unusual phenomena, tesla coils, weird sci
Re: [Vo]:Why are pseudoskeptics so relentless in their mission to debunk?
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 7:24 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson orionwo...@charter.net wrote: A question that hasn't been asked is WHY many pseudoskeptics seem to pursue rabid vendettas against issues like UFOs, or CF LENR, relentlessly so. . ***It's because they're genuinely interested in the topic. They are just hyperskeptical by nature. When you get to the point where their skepticism forces them to, say... believe in something that is off by 4500 orders of magnitude, they think it's simply wrong. When you show them how wrong they are, a little fuse pops in their brain and with such cognitive dissonance they cannot function rationally any more. They don't realize it, but their thinking just jumped from (more or less rationally) hyperskeptic to it can't be true, so it isn't. That inability to self-apprehend when they have gone over a rational cliff is what differentiates the hyperskeptic (annoying) from the skeptopath (useless, hateful and dangerous).
