Buzz lightyear and the JREF Challenge

[Paul]

Rats in cages has everything to do with this topic Tricky.


Back in the 60s a dude named John Calhoun did some experiments with overcrowding and rats. It seemed that stress levels associated with overcrowding leads to an excess of cortisol in their brains.

The stress only occurred in those rats which were not in stable social groups, according to Time:

Two of the pens were quickly pre-empted by boss male rats that kept harems of females and allowed no other males to mate with them. The harem females made proper nests, bore healthy young and raised them successfully. But in the other two pens, where no single males took charge, social stress was rampant.​

Now, I had long wondered why skeptics tended to be overweight and angry. Or why overweight and angry people were skeptics.

Met many sceptics have you, or is this another amateurish attempt at a playground insult?

It seems that stress is the answer.

Are you using your lack of any medical knowledge to imply that, even though your own link calls it a rare endocrine disorder, we all have Cushion's syndrome?

If you read the linked pages you will see that the hypothalamus is heavily involved in the cortisol equation.

Only insofar as:

The hypothalamus releases CRH (corticotropin-releasing hormone), which stimulates the pituitary gland to release ACTH (adrenalcorticotropin hormone). ACTH travels via the blood to the adrenal gland, where it stimulates the release of cortisol​

So my bet is, that since this little sucker is the gateway for preception to the brain, you uptight stressed out characters have a limited field of perception.

Of course, you could be an idiot because Cushing's Syndrome doesn't affect the hypothalamus.

And if you have a close look at this pic you will not see too many skinny tanned outdoor types. They are mostly pasty overweight desk jockeys.

Whoa, I'm surprised you could get that many morbidly obese people near steps; I don't know how you all got into the building unaided, let alone to your hotel rooms.

So Tricky, if you quit the desk job, run off with the secretary, become a vego, and get a job in the boonies , who knows what might happen.

I imagine he would become like you, only with skills, a job, a girlfriend, and a grip on reality.

 

[buzz lightyear]

But you see, you changed subjects. Previously you were only talking about rats in cages. Now you're talking about overcrowding. Certainly I'm aware of what population stress can do to creatures, both human and otherwise. But simply living in a cage is not what causes it. Yet again, I cannot see what this has do do with any topic you were talking about previously. Population stress has nothing to do with love or honor or courage.
Sounds to me like you are making judgments based on appearances (and only your perception of appearances at that). There is a word for that sort of judgment. It is called "bigotry". I'll prefer an openminded, pasty, overweight desk jockey any day over a tanned, skinny bigot. YMMV.
I don't think that will happen. I am happily married and I have a job I like a lot. It feels good being responsible. You should try it.

Yeh It was a cheap shot Tricky.

But it is the point. When man was in small nomadic tribes he heavily relied on his companions and he chose them on their moral traits.
So love honour and courage would have been high on the agenda.

The rats have it untill they are exposed to overcrowding.

And the reason that this interests me, is I am looking for the differences between us. It is those differences that are the key to why I see the world different to you.
In this forum I have encounted a lot of hostility (e.g. The Athiest) so it seems to be part of being "skeptical". And as it appears most of the JREF are white westerners there must be something they all have in common.

It appears that as man has moved away from the tribal society he has become less connected with the spirit world. There is a good deal to suggest that this is a result of neurological changes due to overcrowding stress.

 

[Tricky]

But it is the point. When man was in small nomadic tribes he heavily relied on his companions and he chose them on their moral traits.
So love honour and courage would have been high on the agenda.

Are you telling me that small nomadic tribes are uniformly courageous and honorable? Based on my admittedly meagre studies in anthropology, this is not the case. Besides, "honor" and "courage" are more of those traits which we tend to define based on our own moral codes. Take a look at the world as a whole and you'll see a vast difference in what is considered "honorable". I can give you examples if you like.

The rats have it untill they are exposed to overcrowding.

Rats have honor? How exactly do you recognize it?

And the reason that this interests me, is I am looking for the differences between us. It is those differences that are the key to why I see the world different to you.

LOL. We see the world differently because we are different? I would say that is a tautology. Don't expect that one to show up in Bartlett's Familiar.

In this forum I have encounted a lot of hostility (e.g. The Athiest) so it seems to be part of being "skeptical". And as it appears most of the JREF are white westerners there must be something they all have in common.

In my brief exchanges with you, I've seen you ask questions then ignore the answers. I've seen you respond with complete non-sequiturs. I've seen almost every logical fallacy in the book. For some of our posters, that sort of thing becomes frustrating. Neither have you been "above the fray". I've seen you respond with anger as well.

Oh, and racist statements like the one above don't play well here either. Some people are sensitive about being lumped together by skin color or nationality. Go figure.

It appears that as man has moved away from the tribal society he has become less connected with the spirit world. There is a good deal to suggest that this is a result of neurological changes due to overcrowding stress.

It would seem more likely that the move from the "spirit world" would be strongly related to how much we have learned and how poorly the "spirit world" functions at explaining things.

Though it is not a perfect match, you will notice a strong correlation between ignorance and spirituality. The most educated of our societies are, in general, the least spiritual. There are, of course, exceptions. This is true both in areas with high population density and those with low population density.

 

[buzz lightyear]

It would seem more likely that the move from the "spirit world" would be strongly related to how much we have learned and how poorly the "spirit world" functions at explaining things.

Though it is not a perfect match, you will notice a strong correlation between ignorance and spirituality. The most educated of our societies are, in general, the least spiritual. There are, of course, exceptions. This is true both in areas with high population density and those with low population density.

Well Tricky, who is being the bigot now hey!

You think that with your university education that you have a better understanding of the world than the "ignorant" savage.

What if he can sail a boat across a thousand miles of open ocean without compass or charts.
Would it be that his deep practical understanding of ocean conditions, of waves and currents, of winds and birds, puts him in a better position to "understand" than words from a book?

What if he can track an animal, kill it, and prepare it for eating. Wouldn't it give him more "understanding" than picking up a TV dinner at the mall?

What if he can find water in a desert, and tell whether it is fit to drink.
Can you???

No Tricky it is not the education that takes man away from the spiritual world, it is his lifestyle.
It is living in a box, built by someone else. It is eating food from a box. It is travelling around in a box (on wheels).
It is living your life in a secure little box , protected at every turn from the reality of what the world is.
The one that the "ignorant" savage knew intimately.

 

[Belz...]

So, How're those delusions, Buzz ?

 

[Tricky]

Well Tricky, who is being the bigot now hey!

You think that with your university education that you have a better understanding of the world than the "ignorant" savage.

What if he can sail a boat across a thousand miles of open ocean without compass or charts.
Would it be that his deep practical understanding of ocean conditions, of waves and currents, of winds and birds, puts him in a better position to "understand" than words from a book?

What if he can track an animal, kill it, and prepare it for eating. Wouldn't it give him more "understanding" than picking up a TV dinner at the mall?

What if he can find water in a desert, and tell whether it is fit to drink.
Can you???

No Tricky it is not the education that takes man away from the spiritual world, it is his lifestyle.
It is living in a box, built by someone else. It is eating food from a box. It is travelling around in a box (on wheels).
It is living your life in a secure little box , protected at every turn from the reality of what the world is.
The one that the "ignorant" savage knew intimately.

I was speaking of understanding, not function. Organisms, even organisms without a central nervous system, are quite capable of functioning, even thriving, within systems they don't understand.

A man who knows how to navigate by the stars is still less trained in how the universe works than a man who knows what stars are. When he realizes that there are not really any scorpions and lions and various gods up in the sky, he is likely to be less spiritual about myths.

I'm not bigoted against ignorant people. We all start out ignorant. I admit though that I am not fond of the trait of willful ignorance. I cannot understand why a person who is offered knowledge decides to turn it down. If I'm bigoted against that, then so be it.

 

[Paul]

In addition to Tricky's points, there are a few other problems with your silly notions...

Well Tricky, who is being the bigot now hey!

That would be you.

You think that with your university education that you have a better understanding of the world than the "ignorant" savage.

Well, like duh! You're the one using ignorant savage as a description.

What if he can sail a boat across a thousand miles of open ocean without compass or charts.

What if he can, now one man can row across thousands of miles of open ocean, but with his compass and charts, both very old inventions, he knows where he will reach land.

Would it be that his deep practical understanding of ocean conditions, of waves and currents, of winds and birds, puts him in a better position to "understand" than words from a book?

Depends, is that book Noddy in Toytown or Bowditch's The American Practical Navigator?

What if he can track an animal, kill it, and prepare it for eating. Wouldn't it give him more "understanding" than picking up a TV dinner at the mall?

It would give him more understanding of hunting, butchery, and animal anatomy, on the other hand, it would also put him at risk of predation, infection, various elemental assaults, and the distinct possibility of starvation due to lack of game.

What if he can find water in a desert, and tell whether it is fit to drink.
Can you???

No, because I don't need to, people that do, can.

No Tricky it is not the education that takes man away from the spiritual world, it is his lifestyle.

Obvious nonsense, and if you'd though about it longer than it took to type, you would have noticed yet another dumb platitude.

It is living in a box, built by someone else. It is eating food from a box. It is travelling around in a box (on wheels).

Did you build your own house, do you gather your own food and walk everywhere, does your water come from a spring in the desert, do you treat any illness with local plants, did you derive your education solely from the experience of the men of your tribe, do you wear only clothing you have made yourself, do you regularly fight and kill your neighbours over sacred sites or territory, any of these seem familiar?

It is living your life in a secure little box , protected at every turn from the reality of what the world is.

Because your world of hallucinations, culturally confused mock-spirituality, and ignorance of almost everything is so real.

The one that the "ignorant" savage knew intimately.

As relatively ignorant or savage as he may have been, he still made a better job of explaining his world, with his level of knowledge and understanding, than you do.

 

[Oualawouzou]

Did you build your own house, do you gather your own food and walk everywhere, does your water come from a spring in the desert, do you treat any illness with local plants, did you derive your education solely from the experience of the men of your tribe, do you wear only clothing you have made yourself, do you regularly fight and kill your neighbours over sacred sites or territory, any of these seem familiar?

I can and do! And all these things I do as Minerios the Poofed Ranger. Then I turn off my computer sober up and the game mystical trans-plane-time-space-communion is over.

It's just a shame my wife pusher does not let me play communicate with the spirit world more often.

 

[Belz...]

I'm not bigoted against ignorant people. We all start out ignorant. I admit though that I am not fond of the trait of willful ignorance. I cannot understand why a person who is offered knowledge decides to turn it down. If I'm bigoted against that, then so be it.

Seconded.

 

[buzz lightyear]

I'm not bigoted against ignorant people. We all start out ignorant. I admit though that I am not fond of the trait of willful ignorance. I cannot understand why a person who is offered knowledge decides to turn it down. If I'm bigoted against that, then so be it.

If the "knowledge" that you are referring to, is your responses to my sandstone queries, then you are mistaken.
I did not "turn it down", in fact, quite the opposite.

I studied, and crosschecked with other sources, the ideas you put foreward. I then returned to the polygon site and applied the principles to the formations to see if they applied, but they didn't.

You see, I too dislike "willful ignorance", so I must keep searching to find the "truth". I could have accepted the flimsy "geological" explanation for these formations 20 years ago, it would have been the easy thing to do. But it does not fit!

And while we are on the subject of sandstone polygons, if they are a "normal" feature, then examples should occur everywhere.
Also they should be in different forms, such as polygon patterns with the "cracks" filled in, creating a pattern in a smooth flat surface.
Have you ever seen this type of formation, do you have pics?
In fact do you know of sandstone pollygons anywhere else in the world?

And don't get snooty on me, that IS a sign of willful ignorance.

 

[realpaladin]

It is living in a box, built by someone else. It is eating food from a box. It is travelling around in a box (on wheels).
It is living your life in a secure little box , protected at every turn from the reality of what the world is.

You are typing on a box....

But to take you at your own analogy. Can you build your own computer? Do you understand how it works. Can you add NAND-gates to form XOR-gates?

I can. I did. I have one, admittedly crummy, machine that I have built ground up that can connect to the net.

Does this all mean you are wrong when working with a computer? Or that your opinions are worthless when talking about computers? Or that my opinion is worth more?

These comparisons are utter nonsense, because they all come down to which people you are comparing.

And the use of 'bigot' reminds me of all these fora where 16 year old kids try to say something mean about someone else...

And on the matter of discussion; nobody will win here because all the reasoning is mostly confabulated anyway.
All minds are made up on what is right from the start.

 

[sinclairmcevoy]

You are typing on a box....



I can. I did. I have one, admittedly crummy, machine that I have built ground up that can connect to the net.

Does this all mean you are wrong when working with a computer? Or that your opinions are worthless when talking about computers? Or that my opinion more?

These comparisons are utter nonsense, because they all come down to which people you are comparing.

And the use of 'bigot' reminds me of all these fora where 16 year old kids try to say something mean about someone else...

And on the matter of discussion; nobody will win here because all the reasoning is mostly confabulated anyway.
All minds are made up on what is right from the start.

Well Said

 

[Hokulele]

<snip>

What if he can sail a boat across a thousand miles of open ocean without compass or charts.
Would it be that his deep practical understanding of ocean conditions, of waves and currents, of winds and birds, puts him in a better position to "understand" than words from a book?

<snip>

Regarding this point, I have both studied and applied celestial navigation. I can use a GPS system, sextant and charts, as well as read ocean current patterns (for areas I am familiar with) to determine direction and location. The Polynesian Voyaging Society is very active in my area, and our local paper devotes an entire section to the Hokule'a when it is preparing for a journey.

However, the Hokule'a and her sister ships always travel with an escort, and do file a detailed itinerary before leaving sight of land. Understanding Polynesian sailing practices can get you to your destination. GPS will get you there. Wind, current, bird behavior, and wave patterns can only help when you are navigating waters you are very familiar with. This was the basis for the Micronesian shell charts. The sticks represent various current and wave patters, the shells represent the islands. The distance between islands in the map represent travel times, not necessarily physical distances. So basically the Micronesian sailors preferred to read words from a "book" when planning a journey.

If I were sailing in unfamiliar waters, I would definitely want up to date charts and other information. Traditional navigational skills can actually get you into deep water (ha ha!) if you are not familiar with the currents in the area. Not all ocean currents behave similarly to the ones you may have learned in, especially when extreme tidal variance is taken into account, as can be seen in far northern or southern latitudes, but not tropically.

One last note, always bring backup instrumentation and spares of everything before leaving shore.

 

[Tricky]

If the "knowledge" that you are referring to, is your responses to my sandstone queries, then you are mistaken.
I did not "turn it down", in fact, quite the opposite.

I studied, and crosschecked with other sources, the ideas you put foreward. I then returned to the polygon site and applied the principles to the formations to see if they applied, but they didn't.

I cannot tell that you gave our answers any serious consideration whatsoever. The cracks are almost certainly a function of some sort of volume change, whether by desiccation or decompression. Such features (which include mud cracks and columnar basalts) are known from a variety of places. As all the geoscientists who have discussed with you have said, it would be speculation at best to feign certainty about a feature we've not seen in person. That is ignorance, but not willful. I can't travel to Australia just to satisfy your itch.

What is beyond reasonable doubt, though, is that your supernatural explanations are horribly wrong. Many glaring errors have been pointed out with them and you have simply ignored the comments. That you have not meaningfully addressed these comments shows willful ignorance on your part.

You see, I too dislike "willful ignorance", so I must keep searching to find the "truth". I could have accepted the flimsy "geological" explanation for these formations 20 years ago, it would have been the easy thing to do. But it does not fit!

You don't know whether it fits or not. You have taken a look at a few sentences and decided that geologists don't know what they are talking about, without the benefit of having actually studied any significant amount of geology. Yet you make profound pronouncements upon how rocks are formed. This is hubris at its most obvious.

And while we are on the subject of sandstone polygons, if they are a "normal" feature, then examples should occur everywhere.

Not necessarily. Diamonds are "normal" yet they don't occur everywhere. There is no doubt that your sandstone polygons are not a widespread phenomenon, yet that does not mean that they require supernatural origins. You have simply not found a natural explanation that satisfies you, so you retreat to incredible supernatural explanations, simply because you cannot bear to say the words, "I don't know".

Also they should be in different forms, such as polygon patterns with the "cracks" filled in, creating a pattern in a smooth flat surface.

Should they? Explain how you reached this conclusion? I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just just want you to show your line of reasoning. Do you remember the photo I showed you of the Devil's Monument? Do you remember my explanation?

In fact do you know of sandstone pollygons anywhere else in the world?

How about here.
Maybe this would help.
Some polygonal cracking in Tunisia.

This is just a quick Google. I'm sure with research, you could find lots of references.

And don't get snooty on me, that IS a sign of willful ignorance.

Buzz, I'm sure you are a capital fellow with lots of good traits, an effervescent personality, and a rich sense of humor. But when it comes to geology, you are willfully ignorant.

Though I said earlier that I don't respect willful ignorance, I should clarify. Willful ignorance is okay as long as there is a good reason for it, you're aware of it, and you don't pretend to knowledge. I'm willfully ignorant of quantum mechanics (because I don't want to take the time to get a degree in physics or study all of the texts on how it works and I don't do calculus well.) The difference is that because I am willfully ignorant of quantum mechanics, I don't pretend to knowledge about how quantum mechanics works. You, on the other hand, are willfully ignorant about geology, and yet you make fantastic statements about how it works.

I'm sorry you see that as "snooty", but I don't think you should get your knickers in a twist about it. I don't get all worked up about those "snooty quantum mechanics physicists".

 

[Oroborus]

Only if they're addicted.

I'd just like to hand it to you guys. I could only pick through about the first four pages of his soporific platitudes before the unintentional humor lost the battle against the desire to keep my sanity. I kept waiting for him to finish tumbling out of the rabbit hole and say it was only a bad dream.

 

[buzz lightyear]

You are typing on a box....

And on the matter of discussion; nobody will win here because all the reasoning is mostly confabulated anyway.
All minds are made up on what is right from the start.

Since when has a discussion been a contest, realpaladin?

Why should there be a "winner"?
As it has been pointed out "geology is a field subject" so untill I can get one of these skeptical good old boys off his as*, the best I can do is show a few pics and "chat".

And thanks for the links Tricky, any chance you could duck up to the Boundry Butte Anticline in Utah and shoot me a few photos?

I also like the paper by Williams and Robinson, paricularly where they say " the fissures resemble the cracking that forms in mud" but "are generally assumed to have a different origin".
It would be good if I could see the rest of the paper, huh.

But what I really need is PICS, like they say "a picture is worth a thousand words" .

And Hokulele, thanks for the link about the Hokule'a.
How does it feel for a skeptic when the captain chants for permission to enter the Te Ava Mo'a. Do you rush up brandishing your JREF membership card, screaming, "this is WOO rubbish" ? I think not.
And by the look in that guys face, he is meaning what he is saying.

And Oroborus, I have left most of the story untold. I didn't think you could handle it.

 

[realpaladin]

Since when has a discussion been a contest, realpaladin?

Why should there be a "winner"?

Actually, you got me there. I do not mind conceding...

 

[Tricky]

And thanks for the links Tricky, any chance you could duck up to the Boundry Butte Anticline in Utah and shoot me a few photos?

Um. No, I can't take another vacation now.
Here's another picture of polygonal weathered sandstones from the Navajo formation in Utah. They look very similar to the ones you're looking at.

Here's some more from Brazil

Here's something similar from NW Scotland.

And thanks for the links Tricky, any chance you could duck up to the Boundry Butte Anticline in Utah and shoot me a few photos?

I also like the paper by Williams and Robinson, paricularly where they say " the fissures resemble the cracking that forms in mud" but "are generally assumed to have a different origin".
It would be good if I could see the rest of the paper, huh.

It would probably require that you have some training in geology in order to make sense of it, but I'm sure you could write them and get a copy if you're truly interested.

But what I really need is PICS, like they say "a picture is worth a thousand words".

Pictures are just one tool that geoscientists use. By themselves, they are inadequate for a meaningful study of geology. It would be like saying, "All I really need to understand this formation is a rock hammer." I admit, they are cool to look at, but never forget how easily your eyes can fool you. Your brain too.

 

[Correa Neto]

Just to reinforce Tricky's points, those formations are common around the world.
Here are a couple of examples from Brazil. In Portuguese, but some have abstracts in English. Some pics are not of good quality but are more than enough to show you the overall morphology of the features.

http://www.unb.br/ig/sigep/sitio025/sitio025.htm
http://www.ibama.gov.br/revista/7cida/pagina13.htm
http://www.ufpi.br/sete_cidades.php

http://www.uepg.br/propesp/publicatio/exa/2002/01.pdf
http://pt.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parque_Estadual_de_Vila_Velha

There are more, at other sites. I just don't have time to google for them all.

Before you ask, no, there are no Native Brazilian myths of giant serpents or dragons associated with their formation, neither are reptiles regarded by Native Brazilians as linked to creation. And yes, some tribe do use hallucinogegic substances in their rituals.

And yes, I've been there, both for work and tourism. Yes, I read a lot about Native Brazillian myths. Yes, I talked with the folks who live there about their myths.

Your "hypothesis" has too many holes. You'd better accept that and stop ranting against those who are pointing them.

You don't need more pics. What you actually need is knoweledge. And you also need to be humble enough to admit you may be wrong.

ETA: Tricky is a faster googler and typer!

 

[Belz...]

Um. No, I can't take another vacation now.
Here's another picture of polygonal weathered sandstones from the Navajo formation in Utah. They look very similar to the ones you're looking at.

Dragon scales!!! Dragon scales!!!

never forget how easily your eyes can fool you. Your brain too.

Especially when using hallucinogens...