That pretty well sums it up.
Dave
-Original Message-
From: Craig Brown
To: vortex-l
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
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 10:35 AM, Jed Rothwell 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
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
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
nkind? 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
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.wikipe
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 wrote:
> On Wed, 5 Jun 2013, Jed Rothwell w
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 ho
On Wed, Jun 5, 2013 at 8:01 PM, OrionWorks - Steven Vincent Johnson
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.
>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 experie
e 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 t
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 wh
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
> From: "Roger B"
> 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.
.
(:->)
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, Jun
]: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
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 wrote:
>
>> On Tue, Jun
>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 ha
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 int
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
someth
uh, what is Comic Sans ?
clueless in Imperial Beach, CA, Rich
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:53 PM, Eric Walker wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Mark Gibbs wrote:
>
> Might I suggest using a smaller point size and any typeface other than
>> Comic Sans (it's a typeface that give us type ner
On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 8:42 PM, Mark Gibbs 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
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 sib
?
>
> 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 the
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 m
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: gsa
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, relentless
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
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
Of
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..
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 fal
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
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
33 matches
Mail list logo
