• 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.

What is wrong with what Steorn is doing?

T'ai Chi said:
If you believe so. ;)
Click to expand...

No, I am asking: Are you saying that if the results are not poor, you will believe them?

T'ai Chi said:
Now, to get this thread back on track, what is wrong with ignoring the challenge, any challenge by the organized skeptical movement, as having anything to do with the standard scientific process that everyone is entitled to?
Click to expand...

Why ignore it, if the challenge follows the standard scientific process?
 
This is very much on track:

Are you saying that if the results are not poor, you will believe them?

Why ignore the challenge, if it follows the standard scientific process?
 
What does one have against a company ignoring challenges from the organized skeptical movement?
 
T'ai Chi said:
What does one have against a company ignoring challenges from the organized skeptical movement?
Click to expand...

Why are you pretending that this hasn't already been addressed?

Are you saying that if the results are not poor, you will believe them?

Why ignore the challenge, if it follows the standard scientific process?
 
Last edited:
T'ai Chi said:
As I pointed out before, members of the skeptical movement tend to leave out the very important

Fact: They say they will make their results available for public scrutiny, so regardless of perceived biases in their process, anyone will be able to critique it.
Click to expand...
Fact: They are not submitting them for peer review, they are just going to stick them on their website. And remember who their target audience is: the readers of the Economist.
 
T'ai Chi said:
So if the result are poor, then people will see they are poor, regardless of the leadup (and politics and debate and frustratedly ignored organized skeptical movement) to how the results were obtained.
Click to expand...

Actually, they won't if the results are poor. This is a closed process. A private process. Not open. We can't know the quality of the results without being able to reproduce them. This is the reason why real science, done with real scientists, is done in peer reviewed journals.

We can't trust the results of a private process. We can't trust the results if they have even the possibility of being censored. We can't trust the results if the scientists are picked by Steorn. Their results will mean absolutely nothing, regardless of the outcome.

So, what is wrong with their challenge? Since their results will be meaningless, their challenge must therefore be a publicity stunt. It's only purpose is to fool people into thinking what they are doing is actually science. It is a form of prevarication.
 
That's a very good question, but probably needs to go in another thread.
 
People in the organized skeptical movement still don't have a good reason why they are against people (enough to ridicule them) going through the standard channels of science and ignoring challenges from the organized skeptical movement.
 
Do you honestly think you are winning here, T'ai? That you have outsmarted all these skeptics?
 
T'ai Chi said:
As I pointed out before, members of the skeptical movement tend to leave out the very important

Fact: They say they will make their results available for public scrutiny, so regardless of perceived biases in their process, anyone will be able to critique it.
Click to expand...

One word...

Clonaid.

You have been warned.
 
T'ai Chi said:
People in the organized skeptical movement still don't have a good reason why they are against people (enough to ridicule them) going through the standard channels of science and ignoring challenges from the organized skeptical movement.
Click to expand...

Let me state this clearly, and concisely: They are not going through the standard channels of science.

I really hope you are a troll, and not so incredibly dense as to have read everything we've said here without understanding anything.
 
T'ai Chi said:
See? No valid response yet.
Click to expand...

14 minutes is all we are allowed to respond? What, you think that an army of people are here hitting "Refresh" in the hope that someone will come along and post a message?

At this point, I have to call you a troll. You sir, are a troll.
 
T'ai Chi said:
People in the organized skeptical movement still don't have a good reason why they are against people (enough to ridicule them) going through the standard channels of science and ignoring challenges from the organized skeptical movement.
Click to expand...

As a hypothetical, I don't think many people in the organized skeptical movement would be against people going through the standard channels of science in order to test their theories, and ignoring challenges from skeptical organizations.

However, that's not what Steorn is doing in this not-hypothetical-at-all instance. There's nothing "standard" about the approach they're taking.

They're not seeking peer review.

They're not publishing their raw data in independent fora.

They're not presenting their results in open sessions such as conferences and journals.
 
Grimoire said:
14 minutes is all we are allowed to respond? What, you think that an army of people are here hitting "Refresh" in the hope that someone will come along and post a message?

At this point, I have to call you a troll. You sir, are a troll.
Click to expand...

I'm not so sure. And me and T'ai Chi go back a looooong way....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom