Hokulele
Deleterious Slab of Damnation
Skepticism and The Normal
- Thread starter WWHP
- Start date
Mojo
Mostly harmless
You missed one.
I notice it didn't include any attempt to defend this assertion (originally made by Bubblefish):
ETA: I'd better come clean here and admit that I have at least once addressed an unprovoked insult at Bubblefish (in his "TM" incarnation over at badscience).
The interesting thing is that on that occasion he didn't respond in kind. Not only does he respond to politeness with insults, he also fails to respond to insults with further insults. So much for his "tit for tat".
Last edited:
Gnu Ordure
Muse
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2007
- Messages
- 619
That was supposed to be my final post, zoot.
I signed off :
... because I had reached the same conclusion as you, that :
... so I'm doing it now, zoot, ok ?
though, actually, what I'll do is make this post, and, if there are any responses I want to address, (as I wish to adress yours and Mojo's), I'll make one last post in say, a week's time, and then I'll be gone, OK ? An orderly retreat...
I don't think any of you have done anything wrong.
I'm defining a set, zoot, thus :
There is a set, the members of which :
1. engaged with Bubb on the badscience forum
and who
2. had not, at that time, ever posted on JREF
and who
3. subsequently engaged with Bubb on JREF
As far as I know, this set comprises 7 members. I initially included Mojo in it, in error, so I then removed his name.
OK ?
So, I was curious about the motivation behind this behaviour, I didn't understand it, and I enquired about it. Why ? 'Cos I'm a nosy bastard.
(To be clear, this is what I don't understand: when Bubb appeared at badscience, Mojo immediately issued a warning, which was ignored. A long, apparently pointless thread ensued, a waste of time by most accounts. So, I don't understand why seven people would want to re-engage with Bubb on another forum, and repeat the process...)
The Prof and Jim said they like arguing with idiots. Fair enough, I've done it myself, it's a fun game.
And 'arguing with idiots' would be a game, wouldn't it, Prof/Jim ?
So...
... you're playing a game with Bubb.
And Bubb's playing a game with you.
Everyone has fun.
It's a win-win.
Gnu.
PS
Mojo, I think it would be impossible to prove this one way or the other; the insult situations develop gradually, it'd be like trying to decide "Who started it ?" in a play-ground fight.
You're honest enough to admit :
I'm willing to concede that Bubb may also have made unprovoked attacks himself...
Could we not agree that it might be six of one, half a dozen of the other... ?
Last edited:
Except in this case we have a complete record of who said what, and when, and this point has already been addressed, with examples, in this thread, if memory serves.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
The difference is that I have never claimed to only use insults in response to other insults, as Bubblefish has while persistently being insulting without provocation.
As far as I'm aware that's the only time I've insulted him. He does it consistently.
Whew, have I been busy! Finally just wrapped a major project and will have some time before the next one begins next week. I can't believe this thread is still going. Anyway, I will slowly be returning to this discussion this week.
And hey Mojo, just read your last post there, and all I have to say is a big 'HUH'?
we get what we put into this discussion. it's been going on for over half a year now. we officially have a relationship.
the difference is I have absolutly no hostility towards any of you, am actually quite fond of many of you (including the cranky Doc Kitten and the squimish PV). I would sit down to drinks and laughs with just about anyone here.
Should we have a re-union? It could be fun!
Bubblefish
And hey Mojo, just read your last post there, and all I have to say is a big 'HUH'?
we get what we put into this discussion. it's been going on for over half a year now. we officially have a relationship.
the difference is I have absolutly no hostility towards any of you, am actually quite fond of many of you (including the cranky Doc Kitten and the squimish PV). I would sit down to drinks and laughs with just about anyone here.
Should we have a re-union? It could be fun!
Bubblefish
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
I would probably agree that in many cases, BF is directly insulted before he insults. However this is because the insults are in direct response to his behaviour. He acts like a twunt for so long that you can't help calling him one.
I think it's time we started seeing other people.
Bubb, the only thing I have to add at this point is that until you can provide me with some testable evidence that you actually sat down and discussed this with someone who teaches logic or philosophy for a living, so I can check his side of the story and find out what if anything he thought of it, I have no further use for OS 012 in any form.
flimflam_machine
Thinker
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2007
- Messages
- 245
What's this? Bubb comes back just as Gnu signs off, promising never to post again? Call me suspiscsious, but that just doesn't feel right.
Fair enough, I did choose to take the time to consider Bubb's/Gnu's idea seriously. It's bollocks. Within a few posts you can see that I've pointed out that it's bollocks and that Bubb still hasn't explained anything or really engaged at all. Given that these messages were (and are) available to all, I'd say that constitutes a warning of sorts.
Wrong, Bubb is playing a game with us and getting some wort of pathetic thrill from it. We are trying to engage in a serious discussion and exchange of views partly in order to try to offer advice and information to someone who appears to be seriously misinformed about a whole heap of stuff. It turns out that person is a liar and a troll and is simply posting for the attention. Win-win? No, Bubb get's his boner from being so "clever" and we have our time wasted and our blood pressures raised (yes you are annoying Bubb; there's that boner again!)
Well in that case could I remind Bubb/Rome that people came here to participate in a discussion and don't want to be involved in some piece of third-rate performance art. Could I therefore invite him to f*** off and stop wasting our time.
Fair enough, I did choose to take the time to consider Bubb's/Gnu's idea seriously. It's bollocks. Within a few posts you can see that I've pointed out that it's bollocks and that Bubb still hasn't explained anything or really engaged at all. Given that these messages were (and are) available to all, I'd say that constitutes a warning of sorts.
Wrong, Bubb is playing a game with us and getting some wort of pathetic thrill from it. We are trying to engage in a serious discussion and exchange of views partly in order to try to offer advice and information to someone who appears to be seriously misinformed about a whole heap of stuff. It turns out that person is a liar and a troll and is simply posting for the attention. Win-win? No, Bubb get's his boner from being so "clever" and we have our time wasted and our blood pressures raised (yes you are annoying Bubb; there's that boner again!)
Well in that case could I remind Bubb/Rome that people came here to participate in a discussion and don't want to be involved in some piece of third-rate performance art. Could I therefore invite him to f*** off and stop wasting our time.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
By the way, do you remember "Celine Hagbard", who made one post on badscience supporting TM but then thought better of it and deleted it? I vaguely recall the style and content being similar to Gnu's.
Bubb says he's a big fan of Robert Anton Wilson, by the way.
Why does this not surprise me in the slightest? RAW seems to be a favorite author among woos, especially among woos who think they're smarter than the "average" woo -- i.e., one who slags The Secret and Oprah-style "psychics" but thinks there's something to that water-memory thing, without ever realizing they're cobbled together from the same intellectual refuse.
Professor Yaffle
Butterbeans and Breadcrumbs
Just for completeness:
Gnu made his first post a couple of weeks after registering. He made his first post in this thread and has made very few posts anywhere on this forum except this thread and his own off shoot of it. He only seems to post when Bubb is "busy" (and vice versa). He has recently registered at another forum that bubb posts at, but hasn't made any posts himself yet.
Feel free to use this info to draw your own conclusions.
Edit to add - I learned what ordure means today.
Gnu made his first post a couple of weeks after registering. He made his first post in this thread and has made very few posts anywhere on this forum except this thread and his own off shoot of it. He only seems to post when Bubb is "busy" (and vice versa). He has recently registered at another forum that bubb posts at, but hasn't made any posts himself yet.
Feel free to use this info to draw your own conclusions.
Edit to add - I learned what ordure means today.
Last edited:
Mojo
Mostly harmless
And chose to continue posting in this thread despite being invited to discuss the nature of beauty elsewhere.
sinnikal
Muse
Prof., I think Bubb would draw the conclusion that you are in 'love' with him as 'evidenced' by your 'obsessive behaviour' following him round the infoweb superhighway. Come to think of it Gnu would probably draw much the same
Gnu Ordure
Muse
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2007
- Messages
- 619
... sigh ...
I wouldn't mind if I was being accused of lying; maybe then I could disprove the lie; and if I couldn't, the worst would be that I would be considered a liar.
But no; I am being accused of not existing. I am accused of being the figment of someone else's imagination.
Which is a bit weird, to be honest. I don't believe it's ever happened to me before.
I would have thought beforehand that this wouldn't be a problem - to prove that I exist - but it evidently is.
Which is also weird.
And while I wrestle with this problem, some of you are exhibiting text-book symptoms of paranoia; and I don't mean to be rude, but some of you are attempting to prove your hypothesis that I am Bubb in a most unscientific manner.
It is generally accepted that it is not possible for a psychiatrist to cure a patient of their paranoia by the application of reason and logic. Any rational confrontation is simply incorporated by the patient into his delusion.
You believe I'm Bubb. Anything that I do or say is interpreted in such a way that it supports that belief.
eg
You were referring to FreedomCrowNest, Prof ? The forum that a couple of pages ago you provided a link to ?
I followed your link, checked what Bubb was up to, read a few threads, and found some woo that I wanted to reply to, so I signed up. I then realized that the woo was so ridiculous and wide-ranging that I didn't want to get involved.
And yet according to you, my actions are somehow supportive of the proposition that I am Bubb ?
Flim:
That Bubb, he is a card, isn't he ?
Dropped me right in it there, didn't he ?
Think about it, Flim. There's already been a discussion about the fact my first appearence here coincided wtih Bubb's absence, and how suspicious that was. Do you really think Bubb would be so stupid as to repeat that, thereby provoking another wave of suspicion, as we have now ?
After all, if he was me, he'd want to keep it quiet; because he'd be banned if it was found out.
And here's the beauty of paranoid thinking; you simply say that this is a double-bluff.
And I have no answer to that - because it might be.
third example :
Prof, I didn't realize until about a month after I registered how my moniker might be interpreted. I knew about the excrement part, but a friend later pointed out that a male wildebeest might be known as a 'bull', and so my handle effectively reads : 'B*llsh*t".
And you're now taking that to be further evidence that I'm Bubb, is that correct ?
... sigh ...
I'll tell you the truth, for what it's worth: at the time I registered, I happened to be listening to a New Order cd; the pun suggested itself, I took it.
fourth...
Mojo, this is a travesty. That thread was started by z. I was already talking to him here on the same subject; I said I was happy to transfer the discussion over there, if he thought it appropriate.. I was the newbie, he was the old hand, I took my lead from him. At one point, I asked "did anyone mind" if I carried on the discussion, given Bubb's absence: nobody said they minded.
And now those actions are seen as suspicious...
See what I mean ? Your paranoia is such that innocent actions are seen as sinister...
I said just now :
"some of you are attempting to prove your hypothesis that I am Bubb in a most unscientific manner."
You have this hypothesis. You search for evidence. Bubb writes in short sentences. So does Gnu. Bubb sometimes spells words wrong. So does Gnu. Bubb's theory has three parts. So does Gnu's.
(At the same time, you ignore any evidence that doesn't support your theory. Bubb uses American spelling, Gnu English. Bubb mis-spells common words; Gnu mis-spells more complex words).
I'm pretty sure you know this is not science; and if it leads you to believe that you have proved that I am Bubb, then your methodology must be wrong.
Because I know for a fact, as certainly as I can be certain of anything, that I am not Bubb, and that you are wrong.
Here's an idea; why not use the proper scientific method ?
You have your hypothesis; propose an experiment that would test it, prove it one way or another...
I cannot think of one myself. Earlier tonight, I was considering asking Mojo for his address in London, and then driving over to see him with my passport to prove that I was not RV.
And then I realized that this would prove nothing. According to the paranoid perspective, I could be a friend of Bubb's in London, who'd been asked by him to pretend to be a separate person, and who actually had nothing to do with the Forum, where all Gnu's posts had in fact been made by Bubb.
So, come on, I'm asking now; does anyone know a way to settle this ? Can anyone suggest an experiment that would test the hypothesis ?
If not, I'll do as zoot suggested, and just withdraw...
Gnu.
I wouldn't mind if I was being accused of lying; maybe then I could disprove the lie; and if I couldn't, the worst would be that I would be considered a liar.
But no; I am being accused of not existing. I am accused of being the figment of someone else's imagination.
Which is a bit weird, to be honest. I don't believe it's ever happened to me before.
I would have thought beforehand that this wouldn't be a problem - to prove that I exist - but it evidently is.
Which is also weird.
And while I wrestle with this problem, some of you are exhibiting text-book symptoms of paranoia; and I don't mean to be rude, but some of you are attempting to prove your hypothesis that I am Bubb in a most unscientific manner.
It is generally accepted that it is not possible for a psychiatrist to cure a patient of their paranoia by the application of reason and logic. Any rational confrontation is simply incorporated by the patient into his delusion.
You believe I'm Bubb. Anything that I do or say is interpreted in such a way that it supports that belief.
eg
You were referring to FreedomCrowNest, Prof ? The forum that a couple of pages ago you provided a link to ?
I followed your link, checked what Bubb was up to, read a few threads, and found some woo that I wanted to reply to, so I signed up. I then realized that the woo was so ridiculous and wide-ranging that I didn't want to get involved.
And yet according to you, my actions are somehow supportive of the proposition that I am Bubb ?
Flim:
That Bubb, he is a card, isn't he ?
Dropped me right in it there, didn't he ?
Think about it, Flim. There's already been a discussion about the fact my first appearence here coincided wtih Bubb's absence, and how suspicious that was. Do you really think Bubb would be so stupid as to repeat that, thereby provoking another wave of suspicion, as we have now ?
After all, if he was me, he'd want to keep it quiet; because he'd be banned if it was found out.
And here's the beauty of paranoid thinking; you simply say that this is a double-bluff.
And I have no answer to that - because it might be.
third example :
Prof, I didn't realize until about a month after I registered how my moniker might be interpreted. I knew about the excrement part, but a friend later pointed out that a male wildebeest might be known as a 'bull', and so my handle effectively reads : 'B*llsh*t".
And you're now taking that to be further evidence that I'm Bubb, is that correct ?
... sigh ...
I'll tell you the truth, for what it's worth: at the time I registered, I happened to be listening to a New Order cd; the pun suggested itself, I took it.
fourth...
Mojo, this is a travesty. That thread was started by z. I was already talking to him here on the same subject; I said I was happy to transfer the discussion over there, if he thought it appropriate.. I was the newbie, he was the old hand, I took my lead from him. At one point, I asked "did anyone mind" if I carried on the discussion, given Bubb's absence: nobody said they minded.
And now those actions are seen as suspicious...
See what I mean ? Your paranoia is such that innocent actions are seen as sinister...
I said just now :
"some of you are attempting to prove your hypothesis that I am Bubb in a most unscientific manner."
You have this hypothesis. You search for evidence. Bubb writes in short sentences. So does Gnu. Bubb sometimes spells words wrong. So does Gnu. Bubb's theory has three parts. So does Gnu's.
(At the same time, you ignore any evidence that doesn't support your theory. Bubb uses American spelling, Gnu English. Bubb mis-spells common words; Gnu mis-spells more complex words).
I'm pretty sure you know this is not science; and if it leads you to believe that you have proved that I am Bubb, then your methodology must be wrong.
Because I know for a fact, as certainly as I can be certain of anything, that I am not Bubb, and that you are wrong.
Here's an idea; why not use the proper scientific method ?
You have your hypothesis; propose an experiment that would test it, prove it one way or another...
I cannot think of one myself. Earlier tonight, I was considering asking Mojo for his address in London, and then driving over to see him with my passport to prove that I was not RV.
And then I realized that this would prove nothing. According to the paranoid perspective, I could be a friend of Bubb's in London, who'd been asked by him to pretend to be a separate person, and who actually had nothing to do with the Forum, where all Gnu's posts had in fact been made by Bubb.
So, come on, I'm asking now; does anyone know a way to settle this ? Can anyone suggest an experiment that would test the hypothesis ?
If not, I'll do as zoot suggested, and just withdraw...
Gnu.
Last edited:
Aye, he really thinks he's having one over us here...poor guy.
Gnu Ordure
Muse
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2007
- Messages
- 619
Well, it hadn't occurred to me, sinnikal, but I did say I was looking for a girl-friend...
so maybe ...
actually, no, I don't think it would work. After all, me and the Prof, this would be a relationship originating in an atmosphere of mistrust, suspicion and paranoia, wouldn't it ? Not exactly propitious...
I can see how it would end up.
Before long, this would be "our song":
We're caught in a trap
I can't walk out
Because I love you too much baby
Why can't you see
What you're doing to me
When you don't believe a word I say?
We can't go on together
With suspicious minds
And we can't build our dreams
On suspicious minds
So, if an old friend I know
Drops by to say hello
Would I still see suspicion in your eyes?
Here we go again
Asking where I've been
You can't see these tears are real
I'm crying
We can't go on together
With suspicious minds
And be can't build our dreams
On suspicious minds
Oh let our love survive
Or dry the tears from your eyes
Let's don't let a good thing die
When honey, you know
I've never lied to you
Mmm yeah, yeah
So, no offense, Prof, but I reckon we should just be friends, if that's OK ?
What's that ? We can't be friends because you don't believe I exist ?
Yes, that is a bit of a stumbling-block, isn't it ?
I know, why don't you just imagine I exist ?
I'll settle for that. I admit I was hoping for a girl-friend (or at least a hot date), but if the only thing on offer is to be somebody's imaginary friend... well, I guess that's better than nothing.
Just.
Gnu.
Last edited:
Z
Variable Constant
All totally off-topic.
OK, Gnu, whether you're Rome or not is utterly irrelevant at the moment. The important thing is, either there's more to discuss on the topic of this thread, or there isn't. Your existence or non-existence is irrelevant and meaningless, with regards to this thread.
So either let's stop the drama and carry on with whatever discussion may still be wrung from this apparently dry and somewhat mildewy rag of a topic, or let's stop the drama and let this thread die the indignant and long-drawn-out death it deserved several hundred posts ago.
OK, Gnu, whether you're Rome or not is utterly irrelevant at the moment. The important thing is, either there's more to discuss on the topic of this thread, or there isn't. Your existence or non-existence is irrelevant and meaningless, with regards to this thread.
So either let's stop the drama and carry on with whatever discussion may still be wrung from this apparently dry and somewhat mildewy rag of a topic, or let's stop the drama and let this thread die the indignant and long-drawn-out death it deserved several hundred posts ago.
Gnu Ordure
Muse
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2007
- Messages
- 619
Well, excuse me.
After I posted yesterday, there were 11 replies, 8 of which were either to me or about me.
Off-topic or not, I felt entitled to respond.
Irrelevant to you, perhaps.
Not to me.
And presumably not to those that keep raising the subject...
My request for an experimental procedure still stands...