catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
Cont: Luton Airport Car Park Fire IV
- Thread starter Andy_Ross
- Start date
catsmate
No longer the 1
- Joined
- Apr 9, 2007
- Messages
- 34,767
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Oh, I would have loved to have you as one of my Masters or PhD students. Would you like to take a crack at the engineering licensure exams?
Lie. The figure you cited was employment placement, not exam passage. Were blind trusts on the exam, or did they skip over that?
Stop trying to be something you aren't.
You can brag all you want about how many books you imagine must be studied in order to be an accountant. But when you can't actually display any accountancy expertise—including basic topics—we doubt you did any of what you claim.
Further, you keep encroaching upon other people's professions. You know absolutely nothing about how engineering accidents are investigated, yet you seem to think your "Masters equivalents" qualify you to stand as an expert in my profession. Any time someone with superior knowledge and experience corrects you, out come the accusations of "snobbery."
You are unqualified and clearly uninformed in the fields you invoke to support your conspiracy theories. It largely doesn't matter what other fields you think you've mastered.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Ham-fistedly dodging the actual challenges does not straighten up the record.
Wudang
BOFH
I have a BSc(Hons) in psychology. After a year struggling to find a job I could convince people I would be good, at I returned to Uni for a 1-year Post Graduate Diploma in Computer Science. I have never claimed, nor would I be stupid and mendacious enough to claim, that I was a psychology postgraduate. I would even be careful stating that it was a postgrad qualification even though it's in the name as the course was the 3 year BSc (non-Hons) in CS crammed into 1 year.
Psychology degrees (Honours or not) may include some lab work depending on the fields specialised in. Eg animal psychology is an obvious one, others more theory driven less so. A thesis would be required as part of the degree, Hons or not.
Psychology degrees (Honours or not) may include some lab work depending on the fields specialised in. Eg animal psychology is an obvious one, others more theory driven less so. A thesis would be required as part of the degree, Hons or not.
Foster Zygote
Dental Floss Tycoon
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2006
- Messages
- 22,114
Are you still of the opinion that diesel fuel requires high pressure to be ignited, and that it is otherwise benign? I ask because it does not. If that is your opinion, then it is a worthless and foolish opinion based on nothing more than an unfortunate combination of arrogance and ignorance. And it may have been something you credulously accepted at one point, but now that you have been corrected, your persistence in defending such a claim makes you a liar now. The same holds for everything else I listed.
You try so strenuously, yet so clumsily, to impress people with what you imagine as your extraordinary investigative ability that when you inevitably reveal your ignorance of whatever subject you pretend to have penetrated with your piercing deduction you attempt to cover up your egregious errors with a pathetic excuse like, "well it's my opinion...".
MarkCorrigan
Героям слава!
A thesis or dissertation is pretty much standard for any degree. My friend who did an English degree had to do one. I had to. My friends who did zoology, marine biology and even film studies did them. I didn't meet a single person at uni who didn't do one unless they dropped out.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Surely someone with as much expertise as you want to have in the equivalence of academic and professional certifications would recognize that "baccalaureate" is the formal American terminology for a bachelor's degree—a term coming back into fashion as we avoid gendered terminology. So if you're confused, just substitute "bachelor" every time you see "baccalaureate" in my posts and you'll be fine.
Clearly not. You claim to have a BSc (Hons). You have no problem Britishing unto us as we American unto you, so now it comes out that (Hons) may not be as prestigious as perhaps you want it to mean to your largely American critics. So we still have to know whether those are first, second, or third degree honors.
And while you claim this degree is in a STEM field, ostensibly in psychology, we still wonder why you had to pad your resume to include clerical and lab technician work as if it were a lab science qualification. Connecting electrodes is not science, nor is repeating the classical experiments. Those are introductory course materials, not expert research. Understanding how witness testimony works is, however, science. And we wonder why you can't have a discussion about it that rises no higher on your end than obviously hastily Googled stuff and lay misconceptions.
But all that pales in comparison to your utter lack of ability to demonstrate any competence in any science you've attempted in any of your threads on this forum. You boldly claim, "I am a scientist." But all you seem to manage by way of proof is an equivocal, hand-waving set of attendant claims about what a good girl you were in school. And when others provide real expertise from real academic and professional experience, you cloak yourself in an accountancy charter and dismiss everyone else's academic experience as "snobbery" because you're just oh so very smart and accomplished and no one else can compare. Your accountancy charter is somehow more hard-won than any academic post-graduate degree, yet somehow you want it to equate to one. An accountant's charter is not a scientific credential and you are not a scientist in any sense of the word.
You can't make up your mind who you are, how you got there, and what it all means. All you seem to know is that you're the most curious turkey in the barnyard and everyone else should listen to you.
Steve
Penultimate Amazing
Over the past couple of days during this bizarre derail I have been imagining Vixen in front of a committee defending a master's thesis using the types of arguments she presents here. It is good for a few chuckles.
Wudang
BOFH
I should also add that although my psych courses leaned to the sciences, physiology, cogsci, it would have been entirely possible to have graduated alongside me with practically zero science knowledge.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
They have not been common in American baccalaureate programs until recently, and previously mostly confined to humanities programs. Nowadays STEM degrees most often require a "capstone project," which is a significant practicum in the actual field, such as producing an actual engineering design. In some engineering schools, the capstone was passing the FE portion of the licensure exam. I think only Purdue still requires this. Vixen would absolutely not pass the FE exam.
I think most psychology undergraduates I can think of these days opt for the thesis. But unlike a thesis in a post-graduate degree, these writings are generally not original or novel contributions to the field. They are generally summary or survey papers. You wouldn't cite to one in a journal article, for example.
But American Master and Doctor degrees require a significant thesis or dissertation with almost no exceptions. Unlike a capstone project or an undergraduate thesis, a doctoral dissertation is meant to be a significant new finding in the field.
This is what I mean when I say I would have loved to see Vixen stand tall in a thesis defense or doctoral oral exams and bluff her way through. She has such a low opinion of the rigors of such programs, but we have to keep in mind she hasn't been through them. As with most of her other opinions, this one is entirely uninformed. In some fields such as physics, a PhD is considered a minimum qualification. I have been through PhD programs as both a student and an instructor. I have also been through professional licensure. Vixen's judgment on this issue is pure fantasy.
STEM includes psychology with some reluctance. There are ways to study and practice psychology that amount to science with rigor commensurate to other STEM fields. But I don't think this amounts to all psychology.
Irrespective of those claims and experiences, Vixen's demonstrated understanding of scientific fact, scientific principles, and scientific practice is essentially non-existent. Thus it's proper to reject her claims sounding in science but given solely on her own authority, no matter how good an accountant she claims to be.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Last edited:
For my BSc in Computer Science, I was not required to produce a dissertation or thesis as such; we did have to produce documentation of our final software project, but that didn't require the sort of research and development of ideas that I'd associate with a dissertation or thesis.
Which is straying from the point, of course. Why does Vixen think that the Bedfordshire Fire and Rescue Service is continuing to lie to us about the fuel of the car where the fire started?
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
This bears emphasis. Vixen summarizes her engagement with Milgram as follows :—
Vixen said:
To be absolutely clear: no electric shocks were actually administered to anyone in the Milgram compliance experiment. Subjects were asked to administer what they thought were electric shocks to other participants who were actually confederates and were only pretending to be shocked. The subjects themselves were not threatened with electric shocks. The method was to instruct the subjects to administer sham electric shocks of increasing severity to the confederates if the confederates made an error in some contrived task. The goal was to determine how far the subjects would comply with increasingly unconscionable instructions. Vixen seems confused over who was being threatened with electric shocks and why. Given that this is one of the most well-known and controversial studies in psychology, I would expect someone claiming to be an expert in psychology to be able to describe it accurately.
However, she is correct in pointing out that concerns emerged about the ethics of the experiment. Vixen doesn't say what she thinks was found to be unethical, but to be clear: it wasn't that people were being given electric shocks. No person received any actual electric shocks, except perhaps by shuffling across the carpet in the experiment setup. The experiments are considered unethical by modern standards because of the mental and emotional distress involved in the subjects who were led to believe they were harming another person and were not permitted to leave the experiment. And these days you aren't allowed to use anything beyond inconsequential deception.
Happily I've done more than shake hands with some eminent psychology researchers. I've taken their classes and participated in their research.
Again, the key point is witness testimony. Vixen's conspiracy theories rely partly on evaluating witness testimony in a manner contrary to what we know about it. She generally wants outlier witness testimony to be taken at face value and given priority over other witnesses or other kinds of evidence. She characterizes prioritizing more reliable forms of evidence in resolving a conflicting narrative as tantamount to calling the witness a liar or dismissing the import of the witness's experience. She has deployed these broken arguments in evaluating witness testimony of the Luton fire.
When confronted with the work of the most notable practitioners in this field, her ability to have the discussion doesn't rise any higher than what she apparently able to Google about these people and their research. To be sure, there is criticism of their work, but Vixen doesn't know anything about it, how to find it, or how to engage with it. If anything, people properly trained in a particular science know how to find out what the practitioners of the science have found. Vixen seems to lack this skill.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
The flames were from the engine bay via an electrical fault, as an AA boffin said 11 Oct 2023 was the 'most likely cause'. For it to be a diesel fire the diesel would have had to have been leaked from somewhere.
Can you explain why the flames in the video appear to be spurting outwards, with no black smoke (as we would have in a diesel fire) at the side, and with what is grey or white smoke, or vapour. In addition, the flames appear to emanate from beneath the car and are yellow/crimson in colour.
How does this fit in with your diesel hypothesis and why would the flames look like classic lithium flames if it was a diesel only vehicle?
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
My undergraduate capstone project (as a small team) was the gloves Bruce McCandless was wearing in his iconic shot of the original shuttle MMU. My brother in law's capstone project for his computer science bachelor's was a security model for next-gen onboard digital communications in airliners, a version of which is being incorporated into the Boeing 777X.
I agree neither of these is equivalent to the writing you produce in a Master or Doctor program, nor do they necessarily involve original research or study. But the point is that having completed them, the people who did them can speak with some authority and correctness about the realities of the field. And they probably have some idea of what is required to complete significant work in any related field.
As noted copiously before the derail, she has no new information. She reopened the thread by explicitly saying there was no new information, and that this was apparently suspicious. Rather than discover the reasons why the expected reporting was not forthcoming, she just assumed the reasons consistent with her ongoing conspiracy theory. She provides no knew information or insight, merely a new list of things she pretends to know about and wants us to give her credit for.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
See here:
https://nature.berkeley.edu/ucce50/...ality, the only electric,from 15 to 450 volts.
This was key to showing that the 'teachers' were aware of delivering pain to another, rather than it could be argued, they did it mindlessly because they were unaware of what an electric shock feels like.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
Yes. This was explained to you several times.
Diesel smoke is primarily grey/white.
Asked and answered. You did not apply appropriate color evaluation procedures.
They are "classic lithium flames" in your imagination only.
Again, this has all been discussed before. You don't know what you're talking about, and you have no new information or insight.
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
That is pretty much the most incorrect description of the Milgram compliance experiment I have ever heard.
I doubt you have any significant qualification in psychology.
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
Hello? The page I linked to is Berkeley Uni.
https://nature.berkeley.edu/ucce50/...ality, the only electric,from 15 to 450 volts
Last edited: