Skepticism and The Normal

I would also like to chime on BF's behavior as someone who did not know about him prior to his thread here. I have been a poster here since November of 2006, and have been fairly active.

I opened my discussion with BF because he seemed to have some interesting things to talk about. I thought his ideas were flawed and incorrect, but he seemed open to discussion. We ended up talking about mathematical concepts for a while here. He made some statements he later dodged around, and had some interesting misconceptions about elements of basic number theory that were at least fun to talk about, if nothing else.

However, Googling his posting history revealed a long string of the same thing. He pops into a forum, spams out stuff about OS 012, pretends to discuss it, modifies nothing, acknowledges nothing, claims OS 012 is perfect and superior to everything, claims he is always right, claims he has won, and moves on.

He admits to developing this stupid thing as an internet meme, and appears to be focused on moving OS 012 around the internet, rather than actually hashing out elements of the system itself. I think several posters here have made convincing, logical, well reasoned arguments against several things BF has said, but he just kind of blows it off.

Learning about his behavior on other forums, and seeing his silly behavior towards other posters (not me though, probably because I tried very hard to be polite towards him) was kind of a kick in the nuts.

I like to debate people, even people with insane ideas, if they're actually open to civilized debate. BF seemed to be more about trolling message boards and being a jerk to people who weren't nice to him or disagreed with him about certain things. Eff that noise.
 
Yeah, whatever he said........
I've said on this thread already that I came here to abuse Bubb, that and to try and give a heads up to the likes of Jonny.
It's not possible to debate sensibly with Bubb, I've tried.
 
Originally Posted by Gnu Ordure
Actually, this gives me an idea for the next episode of the Bubb Show: why don't you all go over to his site, storm the citadel, and try to blow him out of the water once and for all ?

I'm with Prof Yaffle, this has pretty much convinced me that Gnu is Bubb or an associate of his. I reckon this is just an attempt to continue the sorry proceedings that seem so entertain him so much and get some hits for his little vanity project at the same time.
 
Yeah, whatever he said........
I've said on this thread already that I came here to abuse Bubb, that and to try and give a heads up to the likes of Jonny.
It's not possible to debate sensibly with Bubb, I've tried.

Which was actually a big help. I had no idea that this wasn't BF's first foray into this exact same discussion.
 
The find more posts function seems only to include the last 300 posts. I checked JonnyFive who has over 2000 posts, and the search only came back with 300 as well.
 
If you want to find earlier posts, use the advanced search, and chose the "posts older than x months option". I got back to my first post that way. Yes, it was on this thread.

I can't see why BF would complain about people following him from bad science when he started the discussion here by referencing and completely mischaracterising what happened there.
 
I can't see why BF would complain about people following him from bad science when he started the discussion here by referencing and completely mischaracterising what happened there.

I was extremely suspicious when he came here claiming to have "destroyed" the people over at bs.net with his amazing OS 012 system.

To be fair, I always thought his OS 012 was at best obvious, and at worst a load of utter crap. However, I didn't know how much of a troll he'd been since the people from bs.net came over and I started Googling his posting on other boards.

I'm sure he'll make the same claim about the people here, so whatever.
 
I seem to remember earlier in this thread, BF said the next place he was going to post was on Richard Dawkins forums. I wonder if he is doing that right now?
 
Pah, I totally destroyed him with my multi-axis sliding scale of logical thinking. He never came back with a rebuttal, and seemed to ignore me after that. I still win. ;)

(Although I will give Jimbob credit for the multi-multi-axis bit.)
 
I'd also like to thank the tag team member who added "nonsense" to this thread's tags a while ago. :)

Unless it was BF himself, in which case he displayed a surprising level of insight.
 
Pah, I totally destroyed him with my multi-axis sliding scale of logical thinking. He never came back with a rebuttal, and seemed to ignore me after that. I still win. ;)

(Although I will give Jimbob credit for the multi-multi-axis bit.)

The trouble with our current proposed alternative is that it is not baroque enough and might have some slight validity.

It is also too intuitive.

Any suggestions for further needless complexity?
 
The trouble with our current proposed alternative is that it is not baroque enough and might have some slight validity.

It is also too intuitive.

Any suggestions for further needless complexity?

Your problem is that you two are too up-front with your system. You need to conceal more of it behind closed doors and non-disclosure agreements.

I would suggest adding in a few random metrics, such as additional meta-axes, and making sure that they don't really correllate to the other axes you have for your system.

Also, give everything esoteric names, and formulate complex rules for resolution of logical problems within your system but don't tell anyone what they are.

The first rule of BS 1234 is obfuscation. Everything else is just icing. ;)
 
Also, don't forget to come up with as many possible applications for this particular nostrum, even if they have absolutely nothing to do with its functions! After all, if OS 012 can bring about world peace and cure your gout, who's to say BS 1234 can't go one better?
 
flim said :
I'm with Prof Yaffle, this has pretty much convinced me that Gnu is Bubb or an associate of his


sigh...

the Prof said :

Gnu, I disagreed with the others that thought you were Bubblebrain until now. But with that last post you are doing a pretty good job of convincing me I was wrong.


double-sigh...

(note: for some reason I'm not quite sure of, I feel really quite depressed by this; I really thought my text-analysis suggestion had knocked the sock-puppet idea on the head, but obviously not.

And I now realize that if I'm going to stay on this Forum, I had better double-check everything I write from the point of view of someone who suspects I'm Bubb, in order to eliminate anything that might give credence to that suspicion.

Which I obviously failed to do with my last post).

Still, I have learned something else: my skin is not as thick as I thought it was. I knew before my I offered my interpretation of Bubb's activities that I could expect a certain amount of flak, and I thought it wouldn't bother me.

But it does.

(When I say 'something else' : first, I've learned how to spell 'suspicion' (see above); second, I've learned to never, ever make jokes about being someone's sock-puppet).

So, it was dumb of me to provide a link to Bubb's site, because that could be interpreted as Bubb trying to increase his hit-count....

And it was dumb of me to suggest that you go there and confront him, because that could be interpreted as Bubb trying to stimulate more meaningless debate...

sigh....

Yes, I see it now, but last night I didn't, ok ?

What happened yesterday was that I was reading one of the threads on Bubb's site, in which he was having a go at an old aversary, David Quinn, who runs his own Forum (The Genius Forum) - and Mr Quinn then joined Bubb's site to defend himself on the thread.

So, given that Bubb said some ridiculous things about you guys in the thread I linked to, it occurred to me that you could do the same thing ie go over there and sort him out...

So I naively (and only semi-seriously) suggested it...

(One of the reasons for doing so was a couple of you saying that you were unwilling to ignore Bubb completely on this thread, as I've been suggesting, in case it was assumed that your silence implied that you agreed with him. So when Bubb says on his own site "The problem with badscience.net is that they were ALL trolls", shouldn't you therefore as a matter of principle go and defend yourselves ?

And I admit that was a devil's advocate argument, because I disagree with the first part of it anyway: in my opinion, ignoring a nonsensical argument should not/cannot be interpreted as supporting it.)

jqh said :

ie both Mojo and I joined prior to this year, jimbob did not make his first posting here. Your "pursue" argument is falling apart. Incidently, do you monitor everybody to see where they posted first, or are we eight special targets?

OK, a retraction; I did say you guys hounded Bubb out of badscience, but I don't know exactly what parts you individually played in that process, so that was unfounded.

But I do stand by you pursuing him; like a pack; of hounds; after a fox.

But why is that such a bone of contention, jqh ? there's nothing wrong with playing fox and hounds; Bubb invites it, as I said.

So why deny it so vigorously, as you and flim do ?

And of course you're not targets; I made my metaphorical comparison without checking the facts; Mojo called me on it, so then I checked them, OK ?

And I now contend that the facts support my point; you all followed Bubb here, (in a pack), to continue your conversation with him:

Look, here's the date of you all joining the JREF, followed by the date of your first post to this thread , followed by the number of posts to the thread :

The Professor: 31/1/07 --- 31/1/07 --- 162
sinnikal.........: 31/1/07 --- 31/1/07 --- 93
pv+.............: 31/1/07 --- 02/2/07 --- 143
flim .............: 16/2/07 --- 16/2/07 --- 180
zooterkin......: 21/3/07 --- 23/3/07 --- 70
jimbob .........: 19/1/07 --- 30/1/07 --- 137
jqh..............: 06/7/06 --- 03/2/07 --- 20

The implication of the dates is that all of you (except jqh) joined this forum in order to converse with Bubb - as I said.

The implication of the number of posts is that you didn't join up simply to issue a warning.



You were here already, jqh, agreed. But you didn't post here at all until the rest of the pack arrived.

I don't see how you can deny it. And why bother anyway ?

The Professor admits she followed Bubb here because she likes arguing with idiots. Fair enough. Jimbob said 'ditto'. Sinnikal says he came here to abuse Bubb. Fair enough.

I'm guessing pv wouldn't deny he came here to give bubb an earful. That's four out of seven.

Zooterkin ? What do you say ?



Flim denies it, though. He said :

I think you’re wrong. I, and I guess many others, came here to warn others about Bubb and to converse with the other forum members


Flim, is this selective memory, or what ? You joined in here on page 25, way after warnings had been given by sinnikal and others. I've just re-read your first 5 posts here, they are all lengthy posts addressed directly to Bubb and his ideas, not to other Forum members.

And where did you issue a warning ? I can't find it.

So this directly contradicts your statement, doesn't it ? So are you trying to fool me, or are you fooling yourself ?




Is this level of detail important ? I think it is. How can we deconstruct Bubb's behaviour and motivation if we can't be honest and accurate about our own ?

I have tried to be honest here; I decided to share my interpretation of Bubb with all of you because I thought it might be useful; I should have realized that it would be seen as a defense of him, and I should have realized that you would mistrust me because of that.

And in the absence of Bubb, the pack has turned on me....



... Woe, woe, and thrice woe.


(Damn, this always happens; I get a good self-pitying depression going, and I then suddenly lurch into parody and start laughing at myself. Oh well).


OK, I must go - the levels of paranoia and suspicion that I've contributed to are now doing my head in. Enough already.

I've said my bit. (One more time, in case you missed it : I think Bubb is a performance artist, or some such - the starting point is always the same, Jonny, but the performance is always different).


I leave you,

an older, sadder,

slightly wiser,



Gnu.




.
 
Last edited:
The trouble with our current proposed alternative is that it is not baroque enough and might have some slight validity.

It is also too intuitive.

Any suggestions for further needless complexity?


If you can't fix it, it ain't baroque.

Regarding complexity, rather than numbering or lettering the axes, let's give them arabic star names. Dibs on Algol.
 
Zooterkin ? What do you say ?
I'm really unclear on your reason for this post, and why you have appointed yourself BF's guardian, or whatever it is you feel you are doing. I have already stated my reasons for posting here.

If you think any of us has done something wrong, why don't you come out and say so. Otherwise I really don't see what is to be gained by your analysis of the posts. And why, for example, did you choose to leave Mojo out?

The best way to convince me that you're not Bubb would have been to drop out of this conversation some time ago. Making statements like
How can we deconstruct Bubb's behaviour and motivation if we can't be honest and accurate about our own ?
is not going to help. Do you really believe that the minor inconsistencies that you allege are anything remotely like what BF has been doing?

ETA: Despite that last paragraph, I still don't believe that you are BF/Rome, but you certainly seem to have some of the same disingenuousness, and abilitiy to overlook the bleeding obvious while picking nits.
 
Last edited:

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom