• 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.

Snake found in broccoli

Rolfe said:
A link to an example would be interesting, if anyone has one.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...
I'm going to have to check that one on Snopes. I think that's just an Urban Legend.

By the way, great thread everyone. It shows that skeptics have the potential to be just as pig-headed and evasive and the wooest woo.. Something we should all strive to avoid.
 
One thing Mr. Larsen has, however, is discipline.

When he decides that he had better avoid posting in a thread, as it appears he may have done on the morning of April 26, 2006, for example (or through most of December and January in my thread example above), then he just stops posting there.

I think ithe threads get dropped because chasing someone from thread to thread with questions takes a lot of time and effort, and no one wants to (a) put in that time/work, and (b) look like that big a jerk.

Well, almost no one.


ETA Capitalization
 
Last edited:
HarryKeogh said:
http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?t=37228&highlight=combination+color+black

posts 9 and 10. I remember it well as I got him to make an unqualified acknowledgement of his error.
Click to expand...
Well played, old chap! Though again I notice it was something extremely factual, and the correction, while it didn't occur immediately, did come before he'd painted himself into a corner.
NoZed Avenger said:
One thing Mr. Larsen has, however, is discipline.

when he decides that he had better avoid posting in a thread, as it appears he may have done on the morning of April 26, 2006, for example (or through most of December and January in my thread example above), then he just stops posting there.

I think ithe threads get dropped because chasing someone from thread to thread with questions takes a lot of time and effort, and no one wants to (a) put in that time/work, and (b) look like that big a jerk.

Well, almost no one.
Click to expand...
Er, still wondering who you're referring to, here.... :o

Never mind, as I said, all this started with Claus's declaration that Steve's absence from threads where Claus felt he should be answering questions (posed in a very snide and oblique fashion, by the way), was "evidence that Steve still runs away from the old questions." So I think we know how to interpret such absences, don't you?

We've got a perfectly good Larsen list above to link to now, just in case he starts with that sort of accusation again.

Rolfe.
 
NoZed Avenger said:
CFL, and, to some extent, myself.
Click to expand...
Wot, not yours truly? :rolleyes:

The irony is that while I had looked at the OP of this thread when Claus first posted it my only reaction was a big "what's that all about", as I simply couldn't see why any poorly-reported tale in the Sun (of all places) which got its facts wrong on snake anatomy was worth starting a thread about. However, days later, I was badgering Claus about his extremely annoying and disruptive vendetta against Steve, in which he felt entitled to hijack any thread he fancied with snide "Hi Steve" greetings (which he then admitted meant that he was demanding multiple apologies from Steve, and admissions of past errors), and to confuse all and sundry by bumping two-year-old threads with nothing but an oblique one-liner (and often the relevant perceived unanswered question was nowhere near the end of the thread). Claus repeatedly claimed that Steve's failure to rise to any of that bait was evidence that he refused to answer the questions. In support of this contention, Claus then linked back to this thread, citing Steve's willingness to engage in conversation with him about snakes as further "evidence that he still runs away from the old questions".

I clicked on the link, was surprised by where I found myself, then remembered that Claus was the one who had started the thread, and that Steve's hobby interest is well known to be snakes. I added that up, and the fact that Claus seemed to consider it some sort of victory to have induced Steve to engage in any sort of conversation with him, and the fact that Danish Dynamite had shortly before that referred to Claus as "machiavellian", put two and two together and got about 12.

I don't suppose he'll be back here, but he might be a bit more circumspect about rudely pursuing people with demands that silly questions be answered.

Rolfe.
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
I don't suppose he'll be back here, but he might be a bit more circumspect about rudely pursuing people with demands that silly questions be answered.
Click to expand...

Rolfe, Rolfe, Rolfe.

That's noble, but I must point you to some of the quotes I used from Claus in the Democracy thread I referenced above:


All we need is evidence.
You have it? I want to see it.
You claim to have it, but can't provide it? I'm your worst f****ng nightmare.
- CFLarsen

So, you really think it is not dishonest to jump in and out of discussions, answering only the points that are comfortable to you?
Fascinating.
- CFLarsen 6/1/04

When am I to understand that they have indicated that they are not interested in answering my questions? When they deflect the questions? When they demonstrably evade the questions?

Should we accept this kind of behavior? We don't accept this from Sylvia Browne: Oh, no, we all agree that her desperate attempts of avoiding the JREF Challenge is desssssssssspicable. Yet, we accept this from people if they make their claims here.

It is inconsequential. Even hypocritical.
-CFLarsen

If there is no answer, the question should be repeated.
-CFLarsen

How do you suggest that we find answers? Or do you think that we should let everything blow in the wind? Is it OK for people to walk away from their claims, and even repeat them later, as if no objections or counterarguments had been made?
-CFLarsen 5/31/04

Shouldn't we apply critical thinking to all claims that can be determined objectively? Or is it merely you whom we cannot demand evidence of?
- CFLarsen 1/7/05
Click to expand...


And one of my favorites:

Ask not of others what you aren't prepared to do yourself.
- CFLarsen 11/16/05
Click to expand...


So you may call me cynical, but I doubt that Mr. Larsen will be any more circumspect now. Indeed, my thread is hardly the first to point out the same problem that you are noting -- you can find similar ones dating back to early 2004, and probably even earlier.

Nevertheless, a good effort and goal.

N/A
 
Last edited:
NoZed Avenger said:
Rolfe, Rolfe, Rolfe.

That's noble, but I must point you to some of the quotes I used from Claus in the Democracy thread I referenced above:....

So you may call me cynical, but I doubt that Mr. Larsen will be any more circumspect now. Indeed, my thread is hardly the first to point out the same problem that you are noting -- you can find similar ones dating back to early 2004, and probably even earlier.

Nevertheless, a good effort and goal.

N/A
Click to expand...
Why, thank you sir! (Takes a bow.)

I'm sort of interested to see what happens if another post of Claus's to that effect is met with a link to the "Larsen list" above, and the observation thati asked first, and goose and gander sauce and so on. On the other hand, he's so bloody rude sometimes that maybe I just can't be arsed.

Seems likely that this has also been tried before, but I didn't see the results. Like I said, he has the hide of a rhinocerous.

Rolfe.
 
You know woo talking to Steve about reptiles is like Hoyt trying to talk to Rolfe about vet stuff.
 
Rolfe said:
Why, thank you sir! (Takes a bow.)

I'm sort of interested to see what happens if another post of Claus's to that effect is met with a link to the "Larsen list" above, and the observation thati asked first, and goose and gander sauce and so on. On the other hand, he's so bloody rude sometimes that maybe I just can't be arsed.

Seems likely that this has also been tried before, but I didn't see the results. Like I said, he has the hide of a rhinocerous.
Click to expand...

You can check the messages left just since he decided to abandon this thread and flee the field.

I'll give three to one that in that period of time you'll find at least one demand to answer questions; bonus points if he's thrown in an accusation of cowardice for failing to answer to his satisfaction or included a demand to just answer "yes or no."

Any takers?
 
NoZed Avenger said:
You can check the messages left just since he decided to abandon this thread and flee the field.

I'll give three to one that in that period of time you'll find at least one demand to answer questions; bonus points if he's thrown in an accusation of cowardice for failing to answer to his satisfaction or included a demand to just answer "yes or no."

Any takers?
Click to expand...

see the NDE thread
 
Steve, I'm not psychic - a link would be nice.

I've already thrown the link to that post at him twice in the Susan Blackmore thread, the first time about five minutes after my last post here, when he had the gall to ask me "Do you want more time?", when I had in fact addressed all his questions. He seems to think that any criticism of a rabidly scaremongering "we're all doomed with in a few decades and we'll have to barricade the island and decide who gets to live" article makes one a global warming denier, and one can then be challenged on that basis.

Whatamaroon.

By the way, when he replied to my post, he simply cut out the link to this thread from the quote, and ignored it. Anyone surprised?

Rolfe.
 
Rolfe said:
Steve, I'm not psychic - a link would be nice.

I've already thrown the link to that post at him twice in the Susan Blackmore thread, the first time about five minutes after my last post here, when he had the gall to ask me "Do you want more time?", when I had in fact addressed all his questions. He seems to think that any criticism of a rabidly scaremongering "we're all doomed with in a few decades and we'll have to barricade the island and decide who gets to live" article makes one a global warming denier, and one can then be challenged on that basis.
Click to expand...

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1608224#post1608224



By the way, when he replied to my post, he simply cut out the link to this thread from the quote, and ignored it. Anyone surprised?

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

No
 
SteveGrenard said:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1608224#post1608224
Click to expand...
It's OK, I got it. Bloody hell, he's incredible. I don't really know why you bother.

Interesting thread, it's that Blackmore woman again. She does seem to be a sacred cow, doesn't she! I'd never heard of her until Diamond linked to the apocalypse article, but she doesn't seem to have a great critical mind if you ask me.

Claus acknowledged my second link to this thread with "totally irrelevant". We'll see how he handles the third.

Rolfe.
 
MRC_Hans said:
[Rubs eyes] Do I see two grown men discussing, at length, whether whatever a snake has is to be termed "eyelids" or not?

:rolleyes:

Hans
Click to expand...

I'm only at page 2 of this thread, and I think I'll stop here. This kind of argument always puts me in mind of a legal case I read about many years ago. I have never confirmed whether it's real or not. It was supposedly a 1965 Canadian Supreme court case in Toronto, called "Regina Vs. Ojibway," in which the crown appealed an acquittal, in which a part goes like this:

Fred Ojibway, an Indian, was riding his pony through Queen's Park on January 2, 1965. Being impoverished, and having been forced to pledge his saddle, he substituted a downy pillow in lieu of the said saddle. On this particular day the accused's misfortune was further heightened by the circumstance of his pony breaking its right foreleg. In accord with current Indian custom, the accused then shot the pony to relieve it of its awkwardness.

The accused was then charged with having breached the Small Birds Act....
Click to expand...

The original court had acquitted Ojibway, but the attorney for the Crown, perhaps a long-lost relative of Mr. Larsen, put up a strong and well detailed argument for why a pony with a feather pillow can be legally considered a small bird. Crown's appeal was allowed.
 
Some follow-up of info on the snake in question, further compensation being sought by snake offended Tina :

from ANOVA News website:



I was shaking and so terrified that I could feel my heart racing. I had to have a cup of tea to calm down - and then I felt sick."

Tina's husband David, 33, took the reptile to a vet in Halstead, Essex, where it is being kept.

Experts believe it is a non-venomous horseshoe snake.They can bite humans - leaving teeth marks in a characteristic horseshoe shape.

Tina complained to Tesco where she bought the veg and was sent an apology and £50 in vouchers. But she is seeking further compensation.


Bosses launched an inquiry to find out how the snake got into the broccoli, which came from Spain.

Tesco said: "This obviously caused a bit of a shock. Our suppliers are going to review quality-checking procedures to ensure this cannot happen again."
Click to expand...
]
 
Last edited:
I suggest that as further compensation she be sent three cases of Kelloog's Corn Snakes.

[silly picture omitted to avoid further traumatizing herpetophobes ;-)]
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom