• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

My responses to Michael Shermer

RSLancastr said:
And that it will be directed only to those people who live in Santa Monica, California.

On 5th street.

With even-numbered addresses.
Click to expand...

With an E in their names. And either a T or an N.

My theory is that Everclear is ALMOST ready for use in automobiles.
 
T'ai Chi said:
No, one does not. As mentioned, one can simply say

"I don't know either way since I don't know."

Not sure why one would have to come down on either side.
Click to expand...

Excuse a bit of snippety-snip here, as I have not yet read through to the end of this thread, but ...

Surely the weight of evidence will determine which side of the fence you will come down on.
 
Hastur said:
That would be an accurate statement. Religious folk stayed out of politics until Justice Black handed down the Court's decision in Engel v. Vitale. Then they really got upset.
Click to expand...


So it is incorrect to think that states had offical religions or that public servants had to be of certain faiths to hold office in early America? I have been terribly misinformed.
 
valis said:
So it is incorrect to think that states had offical religions or that public servants had to be of certain faiths to hold office in early America? I have been terribly misinformed.
Click to expand...

This was certainly true within some of the states (there was no religious test for FEDERAL government employees). Madison recognized this in his Remonstrance and intended that as people expanded out westward and moved around that these state-established churches would eventually dissolve.
I could not say which states had established churches (my educated guesses would be Pennsylvania and Maryland), but I do know the Northwest Ordinances (which would include Ohio) had its own version of the Establishment Clause.
 
Phil Plait's commentary

Oh dear! Stand by for another blast from Diamond! This week's commentary is all about NASA. How could Phil Plait discuss a topic that's so obviously only to do with the USA? Doesn't he realize there's lots of countries out there with no space program at all whose citizens will be offended by discussion of such a US-centric topic in a Randi commentary?

Ouch. My tongue just penetrated my cheek!
 
Spiro said:
Oh dear! Stand by for another blast from Diamond! This week's commentary is all about NASA. How could Phil Plait discuss a topic that's so obviously only to do with the USA? Doesn't he realize there's lots of countries out there with no space program at all whose citizens will be offended by discussion of such a US-centric topic in a Randi commentary?

Ouch. My tongue just penetrated my cheek!
Click to expand...

Dang! Beat me to the punch; I was on my way to this thread to post something similar.
 
This is from the January 20 Swift commentary, which is the next to last real Randi commentary before TAM and then his surgery. I've included the whole section. He quotes a Maureen Dowd column that is obviously referring to the US and yet Randi doesn't qualify the remarks to say that they are US-specific.


SOME WISE WORDS

From The New York Times column written by Maureen Dowd:

Despite George Washington and the cherry tree, we no longer have a society especially consecrated to truth. The culture produces an infinity of TV shows and movies depicting the importance of honesty. But they're really talking only about the importance of being honest about your feelings. Sharing feelings is not the same thing as telling the truth. We've become a country of situationalists.
 
I guess I'm confused. An American writer, discussing a topic about America, on a website hosted in America, and run by Americans, needs to write about global topics every time?

(sarcasm off)

I'm watching my country (America, for those who haven't figured that out) being subverted by religious and political ideologues, and I decided to speak up about it. If you have similar problems in your country, then please also speak up, and maybe we can get a global perspective on it.
 
The Bad Astronomer said:
I guess I'm confused. An American writer, discussing a topic about America, on a website hosted in America, and run by Americans, needs to write about global topics every time?

(sarcasm off)

I'm watching my country (America, for those who haven't figured that out) being subverted by religious and political ideologues, and I decided to speak up about it. If you have similar problems in your country, then please also speak up, and maybe we can get a global perspective on it.
Click to expand...

pfff! Using your clever "logic" and "reasoning skills" won't help you this time! We need to take a broad and global view of everything so that everyone can feel all smug and included and stuff. Everyone knows global vision and political correcntess don't stifle us by trying to make us all the same. They nurture us by making us all the same. You're just one of those xenophobic, jingoistic and other long words type guys.

Sheesh. Next, somebody's gonna tell me you've got experience with these things and "credentials" and stuff.

You should read the commentary by the guy THIS week. Now THAT guy knows how to write.
 
Last edited:
Spiro said:
Ouch. My tongue just penetrated my cheek!
Click to expand...

I take it you've been following the Everclear sub-thread then? Dude, you're not supposed to hold it in your mouth for any length of time!


(As a brit, I've never had the opportunity to try Everclear. But I have had the "pleasure" of that Stroh Rum. 80% by vol. Neat. My tongue was sore for most of the next day. For a disembodied bespectacled brain without a tongue to speak of, that's quite a feat)
 
Last edited:
The idea that Americacentric crap is the kind of thing that is associated with poor white trash and that Shermer should get out of the trailer park and see a bit more of the world is probably the most offensive thing I have read in this forum. That is not a valid criticism of Shermer's commentary. It is a personal attack.

Just in case you don't realize it, Diamond, where I come from the terms you used are considered racist and hate-mongering against low-income people, generally of Scots-Irish descent. Perhaps in your limited and provincial world view you didn't realize that.
 
Hastur said:
Parsimony, aka Occam's Razor: Entities should not be multiplied unnecessarily. Learn it, love it.
Click to expand...

I have learned it, apparently better than you. :)

OR says that if you have two theories; T1 which has m assumptions going into it, and T2 which has n assumptions going into it, and both T1 and T2 explain event E equally well, choose T1 as the leading theory if and only if m < n.

If the event E is 'no evidence of object A', T1 is 'A doesn't exist' and T2 is 'A might exist', it actually seems that T1 is assuming more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom