Apologies all round: Including some insights

[insane_alien]

yes some of the members here are taken at their word unless making some extraordinary claim, this is because they have consistently shown that they have very good knowledge of whatever it is they are talking about.

 

the reverse is also true, those that show they don't have a clue have extra scrutiny applied to them because they have shown themselves to be talking out their ass.

 

you seem to be expecting to just show up say 'I am a scientist' and have everyone believe what you say is gospel truth and worship you like a god. this is not going to be the case.

[Reaper]

Respect is earned, Tom Vose. Prove to us you deserve any, and then maybe we will start having more faith in your statements.

[iNow]

Well, trust me, that's not the truth.

I don't trust anyone in this regard. Can you please share with us a few specific examples (preferably quotes or links to specific posts) which support your assertion that people in this community who support their arguments are not respected unless they have a special user title, or that people with special user titles are only respected because of it? Anything with substance?

 

Bueller? Bueller? Ferris... Bueller?

 

 

There are residents here who make claims, without needing to make a suportive source, simply because, and this is the truth, they have earned a certain amount of respect.

Yes, many have earned a certain amount of respect, but, you know what? If ANYONE ever asked them to support a claim, they would. THAT'S the difference.

[Ophiolite]

I am rarely on this site now, so perhaps I can be forgiven for throwing together a post composed of several diaparate points, though all - I think - touch on the thread topic.

Yes, many have earned a certain amount of respect, but, you know what? If ANYONE ever asked them to support a claim, they would. THAT'S the difference.

That is a perhaps the most important point made in this thread. I have often modified what I post until I feel comfortable that it is a claim that can be backed up if I am called upon to do so. (Sometimes, to force myself into doing some reading up on a subject I'll make a statement right at the margins, with the hope of being called on it.)

 

Tom, there seems a lot of anger in your posts. I can understand you may feel frustrated by what seems to you unfair treatment, but allowing that anger to display itself is counterproductive.

 

I'm also puzzled by your claim that a scientist is someone who is taught in the scientific arena. Mokele and others have pointed out that this is certainly not the conventional definition of the word. I was taught science. I graduated with a science degree from what was then one of the better universities on the planet. I often apply scientific methodology to solve problems and generate new understanding. I don't think I have ever described myself as a scientist. I have described myself as a keen amateur geologist, as an armchair astronomer, as a laypeson with a deep interest in evolutionary biology, but never as a scientist. I too would be interested to know in what manner you are a scientist. Would you share this with us in more detail than to date.

 

Tom, again, it is not my intent to offend, but I have to say the combination of your writing style, the evident 'chip on the shoulder', and the belief that biasm might be a real word, all speak to me of someone in their late teens, or early twenties. Let me accept that you are not and therefore offer this free advice: you need to change your style of writing (and thinking?) if you wish to be treated more 'fairly'.

Edited December 20, 2008 by Ophiolite
Correct typographical error

[Pantaz]

... i have been around several posts, who's claims are either spectacular, but maybe not wrong, and yet accpeted without proof, ...

If you feel a claim demands proof or citation, just ask.

 

... never mind the posts i have seen who should have been removed to speculations long ago.

When you encounter such things, report them.

[swansont]

If you post "the moon is really made of cheese," it will be challenged. But many requests for citations are shorthand for "I didn't know this and would like to read more." There are a lot of posters who routinely include citations in their posts and do so before they are asked, just for that reason. Whether a request falls under the former scenario or the latter depends partly on the nature of the claim and partly on how much credibility one has built up.

[Tom Vose]

I give up. Just lock this thread, because it's ''obvious'' i can't be a scientist. This is all most of you have even focused on, and its ridiculous to say the least. I am currently a student of physics, (this is my job), and that to me makes me a physicist.

 

So cei la vie.

[markus.dnd]

I am sorry to stick my nose in here and start talking, but isn't "C'est la vie" thats life? I am not sure i get the meaning of cei life.

 

I know, that it is not in the topic but i just can not help it. Just shout at me when i get annoying

[YT2095]

no, it makes you a Student.

[Baby Astronaut]

I second Mokele's and Snail's definitions of "scientist".

 

yes some of the members here are taken at their word unless making some extraordinary claim...

And by the way, it seems that backing statements up, come hand-in-hand with what i said.

Hope you don't mind, but I've taken the liberty to rephrase your statement.

 

"it seems that backing statements up that are contrary to proven science, come hand-in-hand with what i said."

 

I'd wager that anyone here who makes such claims would be asked to supply proof, no matter how popular or respected.

 

If you can provide even one name of someone you think is given preferential treatment, I can likely find you post where they made a claim that seemed extraordinary, and where at least one member asked for verification. I've seen it with at least three members of influence here. But mostly, they recognize in advance if their statements would seem extraordinary in light of proven science, and provide links and/or quote sources.

 

Personally, I wouldn't take offense. It's not scientific to "just take my word for it". Science requires lots of references to other works. That's simply how it is.

Edited December 20, 2008 by Baby Astronaut
additions

[swansont]

I am sorry to stick my nose in here and start talking, but isn't "C'est la vie" thats life? I am not sure i get the meaning of cei life.

 

I know, that it is not in the topic but i just can not help it. Just shout at me when i get annoying

 

No need to apologize, IMO. I think it is germane to the discussion — we're talking about credibility, and though it's not normally considered proper etiquette to harp on spelling and grammar, the underlying truth is that habitual misuse of words, and poor spelling and grammar, are hurdles to gaining credibility. Using the wrong word undermines the trust that the poster said what they actually meant to say, and poor spelling and grammar give the impression of not being well-educated or of lower intelligence — I say impression because I know some really smart, well-educated people who can't spell worth a damn, but the reality of this is that it's a barrier to effective communication.

[Tom Vose]

I never passed french, but if i did, i would have said something else.

 

Anyway, you telling me that students in university who work in the field are not scientists?

 

I think these definitions are more or less the same.

 

I second Mokele's and Snail's definitions of "scientist".

 

 

 

Hope you don't mind, but I've taken the liberty to rephrase your statement.

 

"it seems that backing statements up that are contrary to proven science, come hand-in-hand with what i said."

 

I'd wager that anyone here who makes such claims would be asked to supply proof, no matter how popular or respected.

 

If you can provide even one name of someone you think is given preferential treatment, I can likely find you post where they made a claim that seemed extraordinary, and where at least one member asked for verification. I've seen it with at least three members of influence here. But mostly, they recognize in advance if their statements would seem extraordinary in light of proven science, and provide links and/or quote sources.

 

Personally, I wouldn't take offense. It's not scientific to "just take my word for it". Science requires lots of references to other works. That's simply how it is.

 

I would agree with this diplomatic post.

[iNow]

Anyway, you telling me that students in university who work in the field are not scientists?

Correct. They are people engaged in the practice of the scientific method. Crowning them with the label "scientist" is not only premature, but serves no useful purpose. I think the only time you see the word scientist is in a news article written by a person who knows little if anything about science or those who practice it.

[Tom Vose]

Saying they have a degree in science is premature, i would have thought, but not the label scientist, because they do engage in scientific studies, and by definition, makes them a scientist.

[Mokele]

Anyway, you telling me that students in university who work in the field are not scientists?

 

Yes, unless they're publishing papers to which they've made substantial intellectual contributions (more than just washing glassware and processing data).

 

I would agree with this diplomatic post.

 

Really? Then how about you actually take its advice and provide evidence for your claims?

[Tom Vose]

I will to my best in the future. This thread was actually intended to be an apologetic thread, not a flame war against me.

 

The problem, Mokele, is that he claims himself to be a scientist. So presumably he already knows all that

 

And yet, the real scientists on this site can't understand what the hell he's talking about...

 

By the way, i made a complaint about this post, and how does one know if something has been done?

 

I don't think freely calling people idiots is good ettiquette, but purely condescending and insultive.

[Mokele]

I don't want 'apologies', I want evidence.

 

You want to *really* make amends? Go back to every post you've made, and reply with actual evidence of your claims.

[Tom Vose]

Which ones, because i am not doing them all.

[YT2095]

all the ones you made claims in and were asked for evidence/citations etc... that sounds fair, and would likely earn you back a little respect.

[Tom Vose]

Well, ok. There isn't many.

 

.................................

 

What??? My work consists of 127 pages, what makes you think i have the kind of time to check every post?

[swansont]

By the way, i made a complaint about this post, and how does one know if something has been done?

 

I don't think freely calling people idiots is good ettiquette, but purely condescending and insultive.

 

A warning was indeed issued for that act.

[Phi for All]

Well, let's close this now that Tom Vose/Graviphoton/Tsadi has been banned again.