Can/should we Skeptics in Modern Science?

[Throg]

It's your time, feel free. If you don't want to learn from the bitter experience of people who approached Kumar with that attitude 18 months ago, that's your prerogative.

Our comments were intended as a friendly warning. Pass the popcorn, someone.

Rolfe.

I try never to learn from the experiences of bitter people. By definition, they lack objectivity.

Your warnings did not seem particularly friendly. Perhaps you intentionally miscommunicated what you were apparently trying to communicate. There's a lot of it going around.

 

[Throg]

Sorry you feel this way. In my view, Kumar gets what he deserves. He has treated me and many others in quite a bit more insulting ways than that.

Really? What is more insulting than assuming that one's own language and culture are innately superior to someone else's.

 

[flume]

Although I don't like the insults, I think you're missing the point of the grammar fairy insult - or at least the point as it was originally used. Some people in the past have suspected Kumar of being a false identity for, say, a young man in the US who is stringing everyone along. When they think his English improves, they suggest that he has forgotten to post in his supposed fake accent. So the grammar fairy comment was not originally meant to be a slur on anyone's native language but to suggest that he is a fake identity. It is still an insult, and I dislike it. But it was a personal insult, calling him a troll, rather than a culturally related one.

I have never thought that Kumar is a false identity. He seems consistent to me in his posting style. I think I can understand his posts pretty well. I think we have had some good communications.

The comment he made about Rolfe not being able to explain his tissue salts, though, is irritating because people have tried carefully and politely to clarify this several times. If he himself could produce any information on these experiments he wants explained, it would be a whole lot easier to explain them.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Cool. Let's derail this thread.

Of course it is. So is mine and so is yours but we each get lots of practice using English everyday.

So does Kumar. He posts as much as I do.

We are very good at using English.

Thank you!

It's like we began learning the rules from the moment we were born and incorporating them at the most fundamental level of the learning process.

I didn't. My native language is Danish.

When the standard of our English slips because of an unfamiliar context, we go from very good to able.

Or, we refer to a dictionary.

I am merely o.k at speaking French and German.

Spanish, German, Swedish, Norwegian for me.

French and German are languages that have a great deal more in common with English than Hindi does.

Except of course, that English is an official language in India.

Maybe you are an exceptionally talented polyglot such that you lack sympathy for the enormous problems that expressing complex ideas in a foreign language presents for most people. Not everyone is so gifted.

Maybe. Or I feel that if you can use a language well some of the time, you should be able to do it all of the time.

You mean when he's under pressure and taking his ideas to limits he had not previously considered? That is exactly what one should expect of someone using a foreign language.

In speach, yes. In writing, where you have all the time you need to proof-read, no.


There is no way to judge one independently of the other. Your reference to Kumar being a poor English speaker again suggests a startling lack of sympathy for his position.

The language problem is secondary. Kumar's arrogant refusal to consider anything that doesn't support his beliefs is primary.

That will be down to your innate linguistic facility again, I imagine. I repeat, we are not all so gifted.

Not important. Asking for knowledge and advice, and subsequently ignoring it or misrepresenting it IS important.

Trivial and ironic given your misspelling of the word "provocative".

Well, in my language, k=c.

Hans

 

[Throg]

Cool. Let's derail this thread.
Hans

I think that was done when the first set of insults began.

So does Kumar. He posts as much as I do

That does not come close to constituting lots of practice.

I didn't. My native language is Danish

Congratulations, you write English better than most natives do. There's no hidden meaning in that, by the way.

Or, we refer to a dictionary

Dictionaries offer very little help with grammar or cultural references and can actually be very confusing until you have a great deal of facility with a foreign language.

Spanish, German, Swedish, Norwegian for me

There you go, a polyglot. Most people are not nearly so linguistically capable and we have no right to expect them to be.

Except of course, that English is an official language in India

Which is by no means the same as it being widely used much less widely used in the way we use it.

Maybe. Or I feel that if you can use a language well some of the time, you should be able to do it all of the time

That's just a basic misunderstanding of human psychology, then.

In speach, yes. In writing, where you have all the time you need to proof-read, no

I never proof-read my posts in this forum. If you do, I congratulate you on your good habits and wish I had so much time to spare. You are being rather simplistic, however, if you think that proof-reading is going to be particularly helpful unless you already have considerable facility in a particular language.

The language problem is secondary. Kumar's arrogant refusal to consider anything that doesn't support his beliefs is primary

I have no problem with you taking anyone to task on the latter point.

Not important. Asking for knowledge and advice, and subsequently ignoring it or misrepresenting it IS important

You'll get no argument from me on that.

Well, in my language, k=c

What happened to proof-reading?

 

[Donks]

Really? What is more insulting than assuming that one's own language and culture are innately superior to someone else's.

Where did I do that?

Too bad the grammar fairy didn't hit this post. There are much better ways to say this, something like:
"Agree with me or shut up."

Sorry you feel this way. In my view, Kumar gets what he deserves. He has treated me and many others in quite a bit more insulting ways than that.

Those are the my posts that seem to have outraged you. Please point out where I said "Mexican culture is innately superior to Indian culture, and Spanish is innately superior to Hindi."
As flume already pointed out, the source of the grammar fairy insult comes form the belief of many that Kumar is an American teen. While it would not surprise me if he is, I do believe he is not. I think he is Indian, and I also believe that he purposefully changes his command of English to suit his needs. It seems awful convenient that Kumar's English suddenly vanishes the second people point out what's wrong with his latest theory.

 

[Donks]

I try never to learn from the experiences of bitter people. By definition, they lack objectivity.

Your warnings did not seem particularly friendly. Perhaps you intentionally miscommunicated what you were apparently trying to communicate. There's a lot of it going around.

You want to know why you have several people warning you about Kumar? Because people get sick and tired of putting a lot of effort on a post, giving lots of information on good faith, and then have Kumar sumarily dismiss all parts of it that don't fit his theory, pretend a portion of it does, and then ask for the whole explanation to be given again.
For instance, while first looking for how water could have memory, someone explained to him that the water molecule could simply store no information, and explained about atoms, and such. From that he decided that that meant that water memory worked through "part excitations." That is, electrons being partly excited, hanging around somewhere between orbits. Again, it was explained how this was not the case. People explained at many levels, from science for kids all the way to college level. From that he got that photons excited electrons, so photons carried the information from the remedy and the atom used part excitations to store it. And this goes on ad infinitum. He never corrects what's wrong, he just uses the explanations to add another level to his theory.

 

[flume]

Throg, I do agree with your intention not to be concerned with other people's interactions though. I think that is a fine approach.

 

[Kumar]

Thanks for giving so much but unnecessary attentions towards me. As far as I feel & if I account, I might have tolerated atleast 15:1 insults, backbiting 'this & that etc. The reason is not science but my dislike of contradictions on any mass...knowledge esp. homeopathy. These people looks to be allergic esp. to homeopathy--don't know for what interest? But they don't see my idea about Crudes+Potencies, inspite my repeated indications. Sometimes, I feel, some of then are made, just to oppose all except science. Others systems had given & can furthur give clues/base/seed to science for most 'yet unclear aspects' to construct or grow these furthur & clear from these basics.

I am just trying best to end 'this & that' type of interactions, but still provokations leads me to same state--as I just hate contradiction on any mass....knowledge esp. with least adversities. Good & bad points alike half filled glass, can be there in every knowledge, then why to see half filled for yourselve & half empity for others. Is it not "selfishness" or keeping other thirsty. Behave like a Thirsty Crow" not alike "Fox & the Grapes".

 

[Vikram]

Really? What is more insulting than assuming that one's own language and culture are innately superior to someone else's.

As an Indian who speaks Hindi, I can attest to the fact that almost everyone here has been extraordinarily patient with Kumar and his fractured English. When he started posting here months ago, many people, most notably Hans and Rolfe, went out of their way to politely and repeatedly explain simple scientific concepts to him in easy English. He would ignore their sincere attempts and instead attribute all scientific facts that did not agree with his pet theories to "vested interests/misses". Since you seem to have joined the forum quite recently, I'm guessing you haven't been exposed to his incredibly impenetrable cranium - a facet of his character that has no relevance whatsoever to his command over English or the lack thereof. I can quite assure you that Kumar would quickly become an object of ridicule even on a Hindi Skeptics forum.

If Kumar were being discriminated against on the basis of his language problems and if his honest and intelligent arguments were being brushed aside because of his imperfect syntax, I would have been the first person to protest. However, the digs (including Hans' fairy tale) that are now being made at his grammatical mangling are simply digs at the entire 'Kumar persona' and not towards any single aspect of his personality.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: Kumar's problem is not his lack of proficiency at English. It's his lack of logic and scientific training. He would be laughed out of any Hindi intellectual discussion.

Try reading through one of Kumar's early Homeopathy threads.

 

[Kumar]

As an Indian who speaks Hindi, I can attest to the fact that almost everyone here has been extraordinarily patient with Kumar and his fractured English. When he started posting here months ago, many people, most notably Hans and Rolfe, went out of their way to politely and repeatedly explain simple scientific concepts to him in easy English.

What a big lie? Have they not contradicted any time & tried to degrade me on this ground? Are you an Indian contradicting an ?????? Asean? What we call it?

He would ignore their sincere attempts and instead attribute all scientific facts that did not agree with his pet theories to "vested interests/misses".

Do you mean I should accept everything & don't present my dynamic/logical doubts & clarifications?

Since you seem to have joined the forum quite recently, I'm guessing you haven't been exposed to his incredibly impenetrable cranium - a facet of his character that has no relevance whatsoever to his command over English or the lack thereof. I can quite assure you that Kumar would quickly become an object of ridicule even on a Hindi Skeptics forum.

Dynamism & realities are often radiculed & nailed, as we in kalyuga may not be entitled for these. However, he may not need advice, as quite immune & inteligent to calculate & understand, himself.

If Kumar were being discriminated against on the basis of his language problems and if his honest and intelligent arguments were being brushed aside because of his imperfect syntax, I would have been the first person to protest. However, the digs (including Hans' fairy tale) that are now being made at his grammatical mangling are simply digs at the entire 'Kumar persona' and not towards any single aspect of his personality.

Imperfect syntax, from whose side? Questions are of mine, I should be convinced & satisfied.

I've said this before and I'll say it again: Kumar's problem is not his lack of proficiency at English. It's his lack of logic and scientific training. He would be laughed out of any Hindi intellectual discussion.

Not so wrong, I have mentioned non-technical in your system in my signature

Try reading through one of Kumar's early Homeopathy threads.

Throg, just look at manipulation "early Homeopathy threads.??

 

[MRC_Hans]

Thanks for giving so much but unnecessary attentions towards me.

Now that you mention it .

As far as I feel & if I account, I might have tolerated atleast 15:1 insults, backbiting 'this & that etc.

Depends on what you mean by insults. You are mostly polite, but your repeated ignoring of carefully given answers to your questions is really much more insulting that the mostly good humoured ridicule you are the target of.

The reason is not science but my dislike of contradictions on any mass...knowledge esp. homeopathy.

Partly right. First of all, it is not "any" mass...etc. It is only selected parts of mass ideas you endorse so vigorously. Others, many of wich are far older and have been more widespread than homeopathy, you reject together with the rest of us.

Secondly, it is about science. Many of our reactions are due to your constant misrepresentations of science.

These people looks to be allergic esp. to homeopathy--don't know for what interest?

For the interest of truth. All observations indicate that homeopathy does not work.

But they don't see my idea about Crudes+Potencies, inspite my repeated indications.

Because it doesn't make sense. It is just a hypothesis you have dreamed up to fit your beliefs. There is nothing to support it, and it isn't even logically consistent.

Sometimes, I feel, some of then are made, just to oppose all except science.

See? This comes after hundreds of posts where we have patiently tried to explain simple and basic scientific concepts to you. This is, IMO, such a deep insult that it easily outweigh 15 little jabs at you.

Others systems had given & can furthur give clues/base/seed to science for most 'yet unclear aspects' to construct or grow these furthur & clear from these basics.

They certainly can, but not from being accepted at face value. Only if we are prepared to take them apart and analyze them.

I am just trying best to end 'this & that' type of interactions, but still provokations leads me to same state--as I just hate contradiction on any mass....knowledge esp. with least adversities. Good & bad points alike half filled glass, can be there in every knowledge, then why to see half filled for yourselve & half empity for others. Is it not "selfishness" or keeping other thirsty. Behave like a Thirsty Crow" not alike "Fox & the Grapes".

Yada, yada. . You know, just leaving out this nonsense would make your posts much clearer.

And to Throg:

I guess you must realise that our interactions with Kumar have developed over a long time. You can go in and get your own experiences, but do not judge our ways of doing this unless you know the background.

For instance, his references to "back biting" come from some time back when he told people on other forums that he had discussed things here and pretended that he had found support for his ideas. I then posted in the same places and contradicted him, and he cam back here and accused me of "back-biting".

Also, Kumar has not always been as polite as he currently is. He has not been above reporting others to administrators, spamming the forum with silly google links and other trolling methods.

Hans

 

[H'ethetheth]

Congratulations, you write English better than most natives do.

Heh, indeed.
I see mostly phonetic errors in posts by native speakers. Like ending a word in "-ative" in stead of "-itive", "there" instead of "their" or "they're", or someone, probably from the southern US, who wrote that something or other "didn't make since".
It has always amazed me how English has such ludicrous pronunciation rules for words like though, through, trough and tough, whereas you could write infallibe, infallable or infalloble without noticeably changing the pronunciation.
I can see how anyone would have trouble writing English.
Me? I just watched too much English television when I was a kid.

Anyway, carry on.

 

[Kumar]

Now that you mention it .

So don't waste more time, by 'this & that'.

Depends on what you mean by insults. You are mostly polite, but your repeated ignoring of carefully given answers to your questions is really much more insulting that the mostly good humoured ridicule you are the target of.

No, it is big misunderstanding. Why I shall do, when I want to gain knowledge? Whatever I do is not ignoring you, but is ignoring un-clear tellings to me. WhateverIF & BUTS( note; not 'this & that'), I put, that is to clear something not ignoring & insulting.

Partly right. First of all, it is not "any" mass...etc. It is only selected parts of mass ideas you endorse so vigorously. Others, many of wich are far older and have been more widespread than homeopathy, you reject together with the rest of us.

Every mass....concept can have some logic behind it for some good in that. But if few, with some vested interests, misunderstandings/misinterpretations or ignorance deviate the real meaning of it--it can't be taken as discredit to that system. Eg; sleeping pills are made for good, but if some people take excess of these or become addictive & suffer, it can't be said as discredit of system(but can be, why such things are made, homeopathy/other systems take care somewhat for such misutilization/adiction )

Secondly, it is about science. Many of our reactions are due to your constant misrepresentations of science.

Do You just want to repeat or read?
For the interest of truth. All observations indicate that homeopathy does not work.

But they don't see my idea about Crudes+Potencies, inspite my repeated indications.

...of science community not by much of homeopathic community.

Rests are just repeations or this & that. I have to take care for such this & thats, in future accordingly, for best/materialistic/energetic utilization of my & your time.

Throg, you can take your own decision accordingly. Thanks for mentioning the truths without formalities. All/most of these people still interact with me in tons.

 

[MRC_Hans]

Depends on what you mean by insults. You are mostly polite, but your repeated ignoring of carefully given answers to your questions is really much more insulting that the mostly good humoured ridicule you are the target of.

No, it is big misunderstanding. Why I shall do, when I want to gain knowledge? Whatever I do is not ignoring you, but is ignoring un-clear tellings to me.

Unfortunately, that is not true. You are indeed ignoring things that don't fit your ideas. Just take "part exitations": How many times have you been told they don't exist? And how many times have you kept bringing them up, nevertheless?

Hans

 

[Mojo]

What a big lie? Have they not contradicted any time & tried to degrade me on this ground?

Kumar, you get contradicted because you post ideas that are clearly wrong, and in contradiction of well established scientific theories. Just because you are contradicted, it doesn't necessarily mean that there is any intent to insult you. In fact, I would consider it more insulting if people humoured you by going along with your completely wrong theories.

 

[Rolfe]

how mostly similar salts are/were found in several specimens of differant parts of humans bodies, on dry/burned ash analysis?Dr. Sch.'s TRS, got indications for deciding 12 tissue salts by looking at this analysis.

I don't expect an answer any more, but I'll try once again.

Kumar, who did this analysis? Was it Schüssler himself, or did he take somebody else's results? What were the methods used? Where were the experiments done, and when? What were the results obtained, in detail - or where can I read these results? As regards the crematorium analysis you have referred to, was it only the body that was burned, or were there grave-clothes and fuel as well? What about intestinal contents, and could there have been any fillings in the teeth?

You keep talking about these amazing results which you claim allowed Schüssler to work out an entire system of remedies, but you have never been able to show us the results so that we can look at the evidence for ourselves. So, how do I know that "mostly similar salts are/were found in several specimens of differant parts of humans bodies" if you can't show me the figures?

Rolfe.

 

[Kumar]

I don't expect an answer any more, but I'll try once again.

Kumar, who did this analysis? Was it Schüssler himself, or did he take somebody else's results? What were the methods used? Where were the experiments done, and when? What were the results obtained, in detail - or where can I read these results? As regards the crematorium analysis you have referred to, was it only the body that was burned, or were there grave-clothes and fuel as well? What about intestinal contents, and could there have been any fillings in the teeth?

You keep talking about these amazing results which you claim allowed Schüssler to work out an entire system of remedies, but you have never been able to show us the results so that we can look at the evidence for ourselves. So, how do I know that "mostly similar salts are/were found in several specimens of differant parts of humans bodies" if you can't show me the figures?

Rolfe.

This is just childish talk. Do you think that when scientist analyse, they include tubes, bottles etc. in sample. Whoever had analysed the humans ashes, he was science person & you can't expect that he had included cloths, dusts etc. in samples. Furthur, whether Dr.Sch. had analysed or got details from science books, is immaterial for us. I just want to know that when most of inorganic biochemicals, present in our body in their ionic forum, how got analysed in somewhat similar salts--as tissue salts on dry ash/burned analysis?

 

[drkitten]

This is just childish talk. Do you think that when scientist analyse, they include tubes, bottles etc. in sample. Whoever had analysed the humans ashes, he was science person & you can't expect that he had included cloths, dusts etc. in samples.

In other words, you don't know whether or not he did.

 

[thaiboxerken]

My simple answer is this:

Science IS organized skepticism.