I can see you all have a sense of humor.

[Moontanman]

It doesn't freakin' matter. Good grief. Arguments rest on their own merit, not on the qualifications of the person who makes them.

 

Nobody here is allowed to appeal to authority when making a point. You could be a triple PhD postdoc who's worked in a given field for 5 decades, or you could be an 8 year old with no formal training and just an awesome curiosity. It doesn't matter what someone's expertise is, nor how old they are. What matters is the quality of their argument, and the merit of their position.

 

 

Good grief is right, i can't believe anyone actually took this thread seriously, i didn't for sure...

[StringJunky]

This is completely unnecessary and superfluous. You can't "act" like you know science. Sooner or later, you'll say something stupid or you won't be able to address the issue with the math.

 

I can tell Swansont is a physicist because he *talks* like a physicist. I can tell John Cuthber is a chemist because he *talks* like a chemist. I can tell you're an architect (not architect, specifically, but someone not in a field of the natural sciences) because your speculation and opposition to certain subjects has a very "layman's" tone to it. I do not mean to be degrading or insulting; I'm only saying this to reinforce my original idea. You could not pretend to be a physicist. It would be very easy to see through.

 

An avenue already exists for people to discuss their qualifications. Let's leave it at that instead of some wild mandate about posting personal information.

 

It takes one to know one (like you do)...if you are not one how would you know? I do think somtimes, for example, that swansont should say he does or has helped design clocks for the GPS system and this would help impress upon people that argue with him about SR or atomic physics that he has high level of understanding in those subjects and he's not just making it up and may just accord him due respect for his responses. Qualifications do matter when one is not conversant in a particular subject that one may be interested in...nobody wants to find out later they've been taken in by a pseudoscientist.

 

In subjects like quantum physics where commonsense has to often be suspended in order to understand, knowing that a person is a real scientist can help the sceptic relinquish that commonsense...i write from experience as a layman and how my acceptance of physics more non-classical ideas has increased significantly over the last 2-3 years reading these boards based on the known expertise of the likes of swansont, DH et al. I personally don't need to know now that a person has a PhD because I can spot a bullshitter a mile off but 3 years ago...not so much.

 

 

 

It doesn't freakin' matter. Good grief. Arguments rest on their own merit, not on the qualifications of the person who makes them.

 

Nobody here is allowed to appeal to authority when making a point. You could be a triple PhD postdoc who's worked in a given field for 5 decades, or you could be an 8 year old with no formal training and just an awesome curiosity. It doesn't matter what someone's expertise is, nor how old they are. What matters is the quality of their argument, and the merit of their position.

 

You make valid points and I don't disagree with them but sometimes people want to see that authority to give them confidence in the respondent. It's a matter of personal case-by-case judgement on the part of the experts here whether they should use it. imo.

Edited February 13, 2012 by StringJunky

[Xittenn]

and who are you to regard michel as a layman? what is your field of expertise?

 

I have to agree about A Trip's statements and I treat the opinions of michel123456 accordingly. A Trip's example is well placed because michel123456 is someone many might find difficult to properly evaluate. I don't however, agree that it is always simple to identify someone as not being adequately equipped to properly convey the ideas that are often presented in these forums (i.e. michel123456). Should A Trip speak his mind? In a polite fashion absolutely! I'm not saying everyone should run around slandering everyone, I'm saying that if the issue came up it is probably best to speak your mind in a 'mature' fashion--I really can't emphasize mature enough. Others might not be aware of the reliability of the source that is speaking, even though really it is entirely on their shoulders to filter the information that they are choosing to absorb.

 

Should mods need to fully disclose their credentials? Absolutely not! There are enough people here that know the material that if a mod was full of B.S. they would be identified. If someone doesn't like the mods opinions they can choose to ignore their efforts and advices, and are always welcome to leave.

 

It doesn't freakin' matter. Good grief. Arguments rest on their own merit, not on the qualifications of the person who makes them.

 

Nobody here is allowed to appeal to authority when making a point. You could be a triple PhD postdoc who's worked in a given field for 5 decades, or you could be an 8 year old with no formal training and just an awesome curiosity. It doesn't matter what someone's expertise is, nor how old they are. What matters is the quality of their argument, and the merit of their position.

 

+1 This is the first thing that has ever come out of iNow that I've ever agreed with; I usually limit my reading of his material as it tends to be topics that I am not interested in.

 

The fact of the matter is someone will catch on or see it and most things are corrected at some point, and this will improve as the community grows. Which circles back to the OP and why some threads are treated with less respect than others. As far as I am aware--rules presented, the people who participate, general attitudes--the forum operates under the pretense that all information presented is to the effect of presenting ideas that are correct inside of science, and this is in fact not a place to haphazardly develop ideas that have flimsy foundations, period. I say this as someone who has spent a lot of time here and I hope you find a place be it here or elsewhere that you can find comfort in doing what it is you do!

 

Again to the OP, my brother recently made a discovery. He suddenly came to the realization that dark matter would in fact be made of dark atoms. If he opened a thread in main physics and it sat there what would that say about the forum?

[Appolinaria]

Saying someone has an IQ of 12, or calling them a fuckwit is a personal attack. That would absolutely never fly in a professional setting.

[homie12]

I have the feeling that the amount of people who locked your thread with a question is smaller than "all" - possibly even as low as one.

good thing i dont let you invest my money

 

The mods are generally pretty lenient as long as there is some well supported science behind what is being said. Another thing is how the idea has been presented, if an idea is presented as fact and the OP plans to argue about it like he or she has made an earnest contribution to the scientific community the mods will likely shut it down pretty fast. The reason for this--I assume--is pretty much the same as my assumed reason why you are making your points, they feel insulted. People work really hard to make their contributions to have less scientifically mature individuals come along waiving their big ideas around, and a lot of the time they really do not understand what they are even saying. Threads that deal with controversial topics are best addressed by maintaining them as controversial, where they are best presented as open questions under debate which is quite different from presenting them as fact.

 

 

 

 

Would be, but for most individuals this would probably not be to their benefit and it would be asking an awful lot. I say most because there are those who enjoy living dangerously!

 

 

 

 

I don't believe he was referring to his own threads, he may have been smug at points but I would expect that ignoring him is the most appropriate maneuver where confronting the behaviour might incite further such behaviour. I guess how individuals deal with their affronts are based on what the individual wishes to gain from their experiences. For me, molding those who do not meet my expectations into what I would prefer of them is more productive than chasing them away; unless of course they are simply impossible as individuals, in which case I terminate the relationship. I say this because I am interested in what drives your personal approach, and not because I condone his behaviour.

 

@homie12 I would like to point out that my thread on little green aliens was opened in speculations by myself, it was not moved there!

[/quote Did i make a reference to your thread being moved if so im sorry. Also i agree with what you said above so let me say I would rather appologies than be ignored,, thanks

 

This is completely unnecessary and superfluous. You can't "act" like you know science. Sooner or later, you'll say something stupid or you won't be able to address the issue with the math.

 

I can tell Swansont is a physicist because he *talks* like a physicist. I can tell John Cuthber is a chemist because he *talks* like a chemist. I can tell you're an architect (not architect, specifically, but someone not in a field of the natural sciences) because your speculation and opposition to certain subjects has a very "layman's" tone to it. I do not mean to be degrading or insulting; I'm only saying this to reinforce my original idea. You could not pretend to be a physicist. It would be very easy to see through.

 

An avenue already exists for people to discuss their qualifications. Let's leave it at that instead of some wild mandate about posting personal information.

 

yes my point was more about having a sense of humor and thankxs for your response

 

It doesn't freakin' matter. Good grief. Arguments rest on their own merit, not on the qualifications of the person who makes them.

 

Nobody here is allowed to appeal to authority when making a point. You could be a triple PhD postdoc who's worked in a given field for 5 decades, or you could be an 8 year old with no formal training and just an awesome curiosity. It doesn't matter what someone's expertise is, nor how old they are. What matters is the quality of their argument, and the merit of their position.

 

wow and i thought i was intense. Yes i have exact examples of experiments which I will post. The thing I have ran into is if someone doesnt want an idea approved they will use their knowledge to only discredit it. That seems to be human behavior no matter what level.and thanks for your responses.

 

Good grief is right, i can't believe anyone actually took this thread seriously, i didn't for sure...

 

Isnt human abstraction wonderful?

 

It takes one to know one (like you do)...if you are not one how would you know? I do think somtimes, for example, that swansont should say he does or has helped design clocks for the GPS system and this would help impress upon people that argue with him about SR or atomic physics that he has high level of understanding in those subjects and he's not just making it up and may just accord him due respect for his responses. Qualifications do matter when one is not conversant in a particular subject that one may be interested in...nobody wants to find out later they've been taken in by a pseudoscientist.

 

In subjects like quantum physics where commonsense has to often be suspended in order to understand, knowing that a person is a real scientist can help the sceptic relinquish that commonsense...i write from experience as a layman and how my acceptance of physics more non-classical ideas has increased significantly over the last 2-3 years reading these boards based on the known expertise of the likes of swansont, DH et al. I personally don't need to know now that a person has a PhD because I can spot a bullshitter a mile off but 3 years ago...not so much.

Yes if the superior is correct and not just hyptnotizing the subordinate

 

 

 

You make valid points and I don't disagree with them but sometimes people want to see that authority to give them confidence in the respondent. It's a matter of personal case-by-case judgement on the part of the experts here whether they should use it. imo.

 

I have to agree about A Trip's statements and I treat the opinions of michel123456 accordingly. A Trip's example is well placed because michel123456 is someone many might find difficult to properly evaluate. I don't however, agree that it is always simple to identify someone as not being adequately equipped to properly convey the ideas that are often presented in these forums (i.e. michel123456). Should A Trip speak his mind? In a polite fashion absolutely! I'm not saying everyone should run around slandering everyone, I'm saying that if the issue came up it is probably best to speak your mind in a 'mature' fashion--I really can't emphasize mature enough. Others might not be aware of the reliability of the source that is speaking, even though really it is entirely on their shoulders to filter the information that they are choosing to absorb.

 

Should mods need to fully disclose their credentials? Absolutely not! There are enough people here that know the material that if a mod was full of B.S. they would be identified. If someone doesn't like the mods opinions they can choose to ignore their efforts and advices, and are always welcome to leave.

 

 

 

+1 This is the first thing that has ever come out of iNow that I've ever agreed with; I usually limit my reading of his material as it tends to be topics that I am not interested in.

 

The fact of the matter is someone will catch on or see it and most things are corrected at some point, and this will improve as the community grows. Which circles back to the OP and why some threads are treated with less respect than others. As far as I am aware--rules presented, the people who participate, general attitudes--the forum operates under the pretense that all information presented is to the effect of presenting ideas that are correct inside of science, and this is in fact not a place to haphazardly develop ideas that have flimsy foundations, period. I say this as someone who has spent a lot of time here and I hope you find a place be it here or elsewhere that you can find comfort in doing what it is you do!

 

Again to the OP, my brother recently made a discovery. He suddenly came to the realization that dark matter would in fact be made of dark atoms. If he opened a thread in main physics and it sat there what would that say about the forum?

ya i would like to see the physical experiment that proves that.

[Xittenn]

Did i make a reference to your thread being moved if so im sorry. Also i agree with what you said above so let me say I would rather appologies than be ignored,, thanks

 

 

No you hadn't, I simply noted it to point out that speculations isn't simply a dumping ground for bad threads which was sort of implied in your original post!

 

Also, you deleted a quote bracket, edit the post to correct it please.

 

[/quote Did i make a reference to your thread being moved if so im sorry. <==== right here

 

Welcome to the forums!

Edited February 13, 2012 by Xittenn

[homie12]

Saying someone has an IQ of 12, or calling them a fuckwit is a personal attack. That would absolutely never fly in a professional setting.

I dont blame the admins for being harsh or even personal. Now that i have sampled some of all of your sentiments, Im glad to feel there is a effort here to pursue reality physically and not just of hot theoretical air. After all to know something requires personal work to experience it. Otherwise you just have to believe and we are in the age of knowing ,, now. we passed the age of believing. thanks

[iNow]

This is the first thing that has ever come out of iNow that I've ever agreed with

I might ask that you consider looking a little more closely given that there are more than 11,300 posts at this site alone in that particular data set, and the fact that "ever" is a rather long time. I'm sure I've made at least one other post with which you'd agree.

[StringJunky]

Yes if the superior is correct and not just hyptnotizing the subordinate

 

What I found in time is that there is concordance or patterns of similarity in the explanations between people that are explaining the science ideas that has a common professional consensus. None of the designated experts here would wilfully hypnotise anybody AFAICT. If any of the more scientifically astute members sensed that tactic they would call them out for it.

[mississippichem]

I might ask that you consider looking a little more closely given that there are more than 11,300 posts at this site alone in that particular data set, and the fact that "ever" is a rather long time. I'm sure I've made at least one other post with which you'd agree.

 

I tend to agree with you more when you're being an arse. Stick to your skill set iNow.

[homie12]

No you hadn't, I simply noted it to point out that speculations isn't simply a dumping ground for bad threads which was sort of implied in your original post!

 

Also, you deleted a quote bracket, edit the post to correct it please.

 

[/quote Did i make a reference to your thread being moved if so im sorry. <==== right here

 

Welcome to the forums!

 

ya im retarded but im wondering what everyone elses excuse is?

 

What I found in time is that there is concordance or patterns of similarity in the explanations between people that are explaining the science ideas that has a common professional consensus. None of the designated experts here would wilfully hypnotise anybody AFAICT. If any of the more scientifically astute members sensed that tactic they would call them out for it.

 

thats wasnt my focus or direction. On the other hand, society or civilization: over 4000 years ago someone figured out if you can herd sheep u can herd people. It takse 3 things #1 control access to energy ie food, #2 control access to information. #3 control the violence to discipline them to do what you want. The admins in here seem to actually move around here independantly. They dont really show signs of organized coersion . And thats a compliment. thanks.

 

No you hadn't, I simply noted it to point out that speculations isn't simply a dumping ground for bad threads which was sort of implied in your original post!

 

Also, you deleted a quote bracket, edit the post to correct it please.

 

[/quote Did i make a reference to your thread being moved if so im sorry. <==== right here

 

Welcome to the forums!

 

 

ido imply many things from timew to time but this being a dumping ground wasnt 1 of them , thanks

[A Tripolation]

and who are you to regard michel as a layman? what is your field of expertise?

 

In a few months, I'll graduate with a degree on Physics, concentration in Astronomy, and a degree in English, concentration on technical writing. I am not an "expert". But I've taken enough physics and maths to know when someone doesn't have the slightest clue what he or she is talking about.

 

Qualifications do matter when one is not conversant in a particular subject that one may be interested in...nobody wants to find out later they've been taken in by a pseudoscientist.

 

This is your only logical point. But in the context of this forum, it's completely irrelevant. If some whack job starts writing psuedoscience, he is almost *immediately* straightened out by a member of the staff or an "expert" in the field. So tell me again: Why is it a good idea to mandate that the mods and experts disclose their credentials?

[homie12]

homie = local or familiar person 1 2 = wants to. You guys can be so low brow when u want to be. Or some of you anyway. and have you ever touched your antenna on the high voltage lines above? The ticket to where might be inquired?

 

OH and hey dudes i was merely ensiting emotional responses. This thread of mine does not want to know or classify nor stratify anyone. i want to know where each one of you stands and not the conditioned answers you prepare. So dont debate each other,,, just tell me how you think? ,,, ya right...

[Appolinaria]

I tend to agree with you more when you're being an arse. Stick to your skill set iNow.

 

Skill set? As in calling someone a fuckwit? So you condone iNow's personal attacks?

[homie12]

if any of you wants to be someones daddy, just look in here at which people you would be proud of to be their parent,,, Then think how tough it is to be admin on this site..

 

In a few months, I'll graduate with a degree on Physics, concentration in Astronomy, and a degree in English, concentration on technical writing. I am not an "expert". But I've taken enough physics and maths to know when someone doesn't have the slightest clue what he or she is talking about.

 

 

 

This is your only logical point. But in the context of this forum, it's completely irrelevant. If some whack job starts writing psuedoscience, he is almost *immediately* straightened out by a member of the staff or an "expert" in the field. So tell me again: Why is it a good idea to mandate that the mods and experts disclose their credentials?

 

when will astronomers get some electrical engineering experience?

 

do not pass go or collect 200 dollars until you obtain some pertainent knowledge??

 

most of the field of astronomy has no clue. how you going to fix that?

 

it would be nice if it was you.

[Xittenn]

if any of you wants to be someones daddy, just look in here at which people you would be proud of to be their parent,,, Then think how tough it is to be admin on this site..

 

 

 

when will astronomers get some electrical engineering experience?

 

do not pass go or collect 200 dollars until you obtain some pertainent knowledge??

 

most of the field of astronomy has no clue. how you going to fix that?

 

it would be nice if it was you.

 

It really helps when you address the forum in complete thoughts. I've tried using 'cute' and colourful language and it generally gets lost in translation. Right now your statements are completely justifying the negative attitudes that some are taking towards individuals who have less interest in what the forum is about. The problem with that is it closes the forum and that really sucks capiche?

[A Tripolation]

most of the field of astronomy has no clue. how you going to fix that?

 

I've seen your posts about the electric universe garbage. You're honestly so stupid about it that I think you're trolling. Ergo, I deemed not to waste my time explaining precisely why you're stupid.

[ewmon]

I have not seen on this Forum a presentation page of Mods & experts. Something like age/profession/PhDs/field of expertise would be informative.

At first thought, this information would seem to edify/confirm the professionalism of this forum. At second thought, it might also have a dampening effect on discussions here ... once a highly-qualified moderator speaks, others may be less inclined to speak up, let alone disagree. As with government-appointed officials, we entrust their appointment to the chief executive, and I think it works well here.

 

It doesn't freakin' matter. Good grief. Arguments rest on their own merit, not on the qualifications of the person who makes them.

 

Nobody here is allowed to appeal to authority when making a point.

I find some of the most unqualified eyes have the most refreshing perspectives, and the speculations and questions that flow from those perspectives. Although an OP may quickly be found to be wrong or trivial, it can spark variants in people's minds that can lead to interesting discussions and elucidations that are otherwise unattainable.

 

Having said that, what I can't stand (and refuse to read) are rambling, 5,000-word, cut-and-paste views of reality by newcomers (post doc, rank amateur etc, it doesn't matter). Sorry (not really ), but if you can't give us a one-screenful-or-less (<500-word) summary of your manifesto, then I'm not bothering to read it. I know plenty of others here will read it, but not me (and I don't think I'm alone on this).

Edited February 13, 2012 by ewmon

[Appolinaria]

I have to agree about A Trip's statements and I treat the opinions of michel123456 accordingly.

 

+1 This is the first thing that has ever come out of iNow that I've ever agreed with;

 

 

That's a little contradictory.

 

It doesn't freakin' matter. Good grief. Arguments rest on their own merit, not on the qualifications of the person who makes them.

 

Nobody here is allowed to appeal to authority when making a point. You could be a triple PhD postdoc who's worked in a given field for 5 decades, or you could be an 8 year old with no formal training and just an awesome curiosity. It doesn't matter what someone's expertise is, nor how old they are. What matters is the quality of their argument, and the merit of their position.

 

I don't know why you got +4 for that. Of course it matters. Please look up what an appeal to authority is and then tell me that's not precisely how this forum works.

[Xittenn]

That's a little contradictory.

 

It had occurred to me that someone might bring this up but I assure you it isn't. I agree that identifying individuals who are not working within the common ground of science or who have serious flaws in what they are presenting is important. This level of community involvement creates a shit filter that reduces some of the need for the individual to filter the shit themselves. I don't however feel that they need to be identified in their bio or that moderators should suddenly be required to full disclosure. I agree with what iNow is saying in that most individuals who are full of shit are easily identified and so no such system would really be required. I further noted that individuals who were less easily spotted would none the less be spotted by the more astute individuals like the mods. If a mod is in question there are enough savvy individuals to call bullshit and the other mods would be included in this category. It isn't michel123456's credentials that are in question--I have no credentials so this would adversely affect me. michel123456 makes statements that affect the opinions that others have of him and some of his posts are questionable. If I saw him debating something that affected someone whose shit filter wasn't as well developed I would be inclined to say something, in a polite fashion.

 

I don't know why you got +4 for that. Of course it matters. Please look up what an appeal to authority is and then tell me that's not precisely how this forum works.

 

The authority here is science not a piece of paper!

 

I am aware of the tendency towards better science in those with the piece of paper and I act accordingly!

 

Since when are rep points to be taken seriously??

[rktpro]

 

most of the field of astronomy has no clue. how you going to fix that?

 

 

Is there any evil twin of yours who manages your account.

[StringJunky]

This is your only logical point. But in the context of this forum, it's completely irrelevant. If some whack job starts writing psuedoscience, he is almost *immediately* straightened out by a member of the staff or an "expert" in the field. So tell me again: Why is it a good idea to mandate that the mods and experts disclose their credentials?

 

If my other points were lost on you that's not my problem...perhaps you didn't understand because you are not a layman and are blind to or lack empathy for the problem.

 

As I said in another thread, it's a personal judgement call on a case-by-case basis whether it's appropriate to make a respondent aware of ones expertise...no mention of mandates by me.

[mississippichem]

Please look up what an appeal to authority is and then tell me that's not precisely how this forum works.

 

How can you say that? Our staff of mods and experts, as well as many of our very knowledgeable non-staffers almost always back up their assertions with references, and or somewhat detailed scientific logic/precedent. Has anyone on the staff ever made an assertion and then flashed their pedigree as their only evidence?

 

Science is hard and requires expertise that comes from years of grueling education and training. I will readily admit that I'm probably the least of experts among experts (we have some absolute BEASTS of science here on the staff). Would you be willing to put your physics knowledge up against that of swansont or your mathematics knowledge up against ajb or Dr. Rocket?

 

If not than you would be well advised to listen to their teaching and insight. I do.

Edited February 13, 2012 by mississippichem

[Phi for All]

Of course it matters. Please look up what an appeal to authority is and then tell me that's not precisely how this forum works.

Tell that to Cap'n Refsmmat. When I joined 8 years ago, he was very outspoken about many things, often wrong, often unnecessarily confrontational, and generally commented on EVERYTHING. There was definite brilliance there (I can always claim later that my cat actually typed this) but he was very scattered and seemed to post whatever flew into his head.

 

Cap started making more and more sense as time went by, and he started putting less emotion and more rational thinking and research into his responses. His authority grew from the bulk of his work, not from any titles or degrees. He was very reticent about revealing much about his personal life.

 

A few years later he confided to me privately that he was only 12 when he joined. I replied that, while I hadn't suspected it, I had to admit it really made no difference. And it didn't. Cap was asked later to be a Mod by the site owner, and eventually he was made Administrator. All that before he set foot inside college.

 

So it really offends me when someone claims that this forum works on Appeal to Authority. I think we've shown that anyone can have ideas that work and ideas that don't. It's the ideas that are scrutinized, not the people.

[Xittenn]

@Appolinaria: I've questioned whether or not I was expected to have credentials--or if I was treated any differently because I didn't--before myself, but it was never because of the mods. I've always worried that some of the users would prefer it this way even though the mods are clear on what they expect from users and that is simply that we provide a source and back up what we say (when necessary obviously). I realized that really it is not an issue with either party.

Edited February 13, 2012 by Xittenn