The Refuge of the Toads

Old subthreads
Cunning Punt
.
.
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Nov 03, 2012 10:50 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21841

Post by Cunning Punt »

HunnyBunny wrote:Zvan is a piece of work has written a piece about an imaginary gun that could have been held by a looney escaped from the hospital but who she quickly established wasn't holding anything. But, as is usually the case, what she has written is completely unimportant. The good stuff is in the comments. and results in this moment from Mike:
theonandonlymike
May 5, 2016 at 5:11 pm
10
I have to say, commenting at the orbit so far makes me feel like I should fuck right off (at least in two cases now because I was told to do so) having tried to seek out a community because I was so frustrated with how little of a shit anyone in my community seemed to give about social justice topics.
I had to read the comments 3 times to make sure I hadn't missed the glaringly horrible, nasty comments that they got so really, really, angry about. I hadn't missed anything, nor had they deleted any comments. I can only conclude they are self-medicationg the Cannucks self-diagnosed psychiatric illness with copious amounts of medicinal weed. And it isn't working.

If you fancy a trip down the rabbit hole, here's the link. Just make sure to take your totem with you so you can tell when you have returned to reality.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160505235 ... bout-guns/
Yeah, that was confusing to me too. She's a lousy writer. Individual paragraphs are good, but tying the whole thing together seems beyond her. She doesn't set the scene: I assumed she meant Planned Parenthood too. Plus she mentions the other place in Texas, not in Minnesota.

Still, I give her props for actually doing something other than blogging or giving talks an conferences. Being one of those escorts would be tough.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21842

Post by Brive1987 »

HunnyBunny wrote:Zvan is a piece of work has written a piece about an imaginary gun that could have been held by a looney escaped from the hospital but who she quickly established wasn't holding anything. But, as is usually the case, what she has written is completely unimportant. The good stuff is in the comments. and results in this moment from Mike:
theonandonlymike
May 5, 2016 at 5:11 pm
10
I have to say, commenting at the orbit so far makes me feel like I should fuck right off (at least in two cases now because I was told to do so) having tried to seek out a community because I was so frustrated with how little of a shit anyone in my community seemed to give about social justice topics.
I had to read the comments 3 times to make sure I hadn't missed the glaringly horrible, nasty comments that they got so really, really, angry about. I hadn't missed anything, nor had they deleted any comments. I can only conclude they are self-medicationg the Cannucks self-diagnosed psychiatric illness with copious amounts of medicinal weed. And it isn't working.

If you fancy a trip down the rabbit hole, here's the link. Just make sure to take your totem with you so you can tell when you have returned to reality.

https://web.archive.org/web/20160505235 ... bout-guns/
I'm crushed that HunnyBunny has me on ignore. :bjarte:

Cnutella
.
.
Posts: 1742
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:02 pm

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21843

Post by Cnutella »

free thoughtpolice wrote: She is an idiot. She fucked around with the baphomet crew, insulting them, even having them (including Eclipso) on a live chat, and now that they swatted her she is blaming it on Agentofdoubt and another of her critics that were warning her about her stupid behavior.
See the comments in this video. Michael is agentofdoubt that is also pwnageallstars.
[youtube]J0xXbfB_jOE[/youtube]
Although it was a miserable thing to have happen, freaking out and flailing around the way she is in the comments will probably significantly improve the chances of more RL harassment, although I am sure some part of her will get some temporary satisfaction from any additional drama. She's burned too many boats for this to be turned into any meaningful Patreon income, though.

I am not really surprised that the sorcerer's apprentice Bewildered Ape hasn't weighed in yet on whether this meets his own sociopathic standards for satire/performance art. I would like to hear why it somehow doesn't.

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1409
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21844

Post by HunnyBunny »

Brive1987 wrote:
I'm crushed that HunnyBunny has me on ignore. :bjarte:
Ninja'ing bastard. Pointing out articles before I do is misogynistic. No wonder you have to buy cherry liquor chocolates for your wife all the time.

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1409
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21845

Post by HunnyBunny »

:lol:

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21846

Post by welch »

ERV wrote:
welch wrote:I've also said that if Abbie and other "proper" scientists don't like the fact that Scibabe has become one of the main faces of public science communication, especially in the food woo arena, that maybe they should get off their asses and fix that, if they really think it's a problem.
Jesus fuck, welch. Did you recently take a railroad spike to the brain? 'Hey, person who had a science blog for 8 years! Person who talked to the general public about science whenever asked, despite terrible stage fright! If you want to educate laymen on science, get off your ass and do something about it!'
Whatsamatter Abbs, there's a set of lips here not firmly on your ass? Oh, if only I had acknowledged your blog over and over as I have in this squabble.

But hey, fuck accuracy right? This is your safe space, I'm probably wrong for questioning you on anything at this point.

Not that you care, because you've pretty much shit accuracy away in this case, but the point isn't that you don't have a blog, because you do. It's that outside of the sciblogs audience it effectively doesn't exist.

Here, let me put this in simple terms you might understand: Blogs parallel papers in this respect. If barely anyone reads a paper or cites it and no one really knows it exists, what value does it have in a practical sense? The blogs that matter are the ones that people know about, otherwise your winking in the dark.

It's why Mendel's work didn't mean fuck all until long after his death, because no one read his work or knew about it. He was right, mostly, and he'd done good work, but no one knew about it, so effectively, it didn't fucking matter. You could have the cure for fucking cancer in a box in your closet, but if no one else knows about it, it does no one any fucking good. Three steps outside of sciblogs, no one knows about shit there, so in terms of general effectiveness, it's a circle jerk in a basement at midnight. Feels good for the participants, no one walking by knows or cares.
ERV wrote:Know why I stopped? It's a thankless job. I have actively supported numerous 'food scientists', who have also run blogs for *years*. They don't get their stuff plugged by Gawker. They haven't had news sites run cutesy biographical sketches. They don't get invited to skeptic events to discuss their area of expertise. Skeptic blogs don't give them awards for their work.
Poor fucking baby, you didn't get feted by Gawker. Wah. None of you want to do the work to get the (highly valuable) stuff you're writing about marketed out to the larger world. You're like those moronic Indie Devs who think marketing is for suckers, then wonder why no one is buying their shit. Words on a blog is only the FIRST part. The rest of it involves making sure the right people know you're writing it. You can shit on Watson all day long, and deservedly so, but she has out-marketed and out-PR'd you every which way possible.

Dawkins gets this. Tyson gets this. They do things like PR and marketing so their words get in the right ears. But you are right, it is regularly thankless work. Which is why so few people do it. But the way shit works outside of the lab is pretty well-established. Facebook. Twitter. The shit you love to laugh at and dismiss. Don't bitch that by not doing the necessary work, you didn't get the attention you think you deserved.
ERV wrote:A seemingly endless parade of people who didn't give a rats ass about science communication (until they need to pay the water bill) do, though.

I've complained about this for years. Why the fuck would anyone fly Watson to Australia (or Mid Missouri) to speak about science, when so many qualified, eager scientists are on their doorstep?
Because no one knows who they are, because they never leave the fucking lab long enough for anyone to know they're there. Jesus christ, how do you fucking think this stuff works? You think a conference organizer has shit loads of spare time to beg people they've never heard of and don't know exist until they go trolling through a facutly list at a local university? If that's what you think, you are so very wrong it's not even funny. Organizing a conference, while not hard in terms of science, is really fucking hard in terms of logistics. It's the worst kind of cat-herding, and if you can save six seconds of time by getting speakers you actually know about, you're going to, because that gives you time to deal with the dickheads at the venue, the stupid fucks doing the catering and the unending ceaseless demands from the special snowflakes who thinks buying a conference pass entitles them to a daily rusty trombone!
ERV wrote:Totally cool when I said that about Watson. Epic tantrum when I say it about your dear, dear Facebook friend.
If the worst thing watson had done was, once, say she should have had a title she didn't really deserve, then you would have totally been overreacting. But it wasn't the first time Watson had been a raging cock to some random person who didn't deserve it. Different situations warrant different responses. I figured you knew this. Evidently I was wrong.
ERV wrote:I stopped 'sci comm' because it takes a ton of time and effort, with very little reward, and I can't afford that right now. Science rewards me for my hard work, when it can. So if you want to improve sci comm, welch, I would suggest supporting people who do it, even if they aren't endorsed by Gawker, or whatever future click bait website takes it's place.
Wank
Wank
Wank

The people doing the hard, thankless work of trying to talk to people who aren't other scientists do get my support. Like Kevin Folta, who got massacred far worse than you ever came close to.

But he at least gets how this whole publicity thing works. Contrary to what you seem to believe (but hey, you're a scientist, you're an expert on goddamned everything, right?) "build it and they will come" isn't even a line from a movie. It's a fantasy based on zero real world experience. If you want people to listen to you, you have to do the work to get their attention. You don't to do that? Totally cool, that's a valid choice. Most other scientists don't? Totally cool, totally valid choices for all of them.

But having made that choice, you don't get to decide who DOES do the communicating. You opt out of the process, you get to fucking live with the results. It's like voting. Don't want to vote? you don't have to, but at least have the spine to shut the fuck up when your voice goes completely unheard because no one knows it's there.

The problem isn't that you made your choice. The problem is, it's not working out the way you think it should and that's burning your ass so hard, you have a sunburn on your nose.

welch
.
.
Posts: 9208
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:05 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21847

Post by welch »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Forget it Abbie, John has gone to his "I'm a huge cunt" place on this issue. He won't back down and won't admit he's wrong.

Classic Welch!

U+1F595

Gumby
Pit Art Master
Pit Art Master
Posts: 5543
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 4:40 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21848

Post by Gumby »

Hey, who threw strawmen all over the floor?

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21849

Post by free thoughtpolice »

Cnutella wrote:
I am not really surprised that the sorcerer's apprentice Bewildered Ape hasn't weighed in yet on whether this meets his own sociopathic standards for satire/performance art. I would like to hear why it somehow doesn't.
So far he has come up with "it's different because I didn't put anyone in danger", ignoring the possibility that making criminal allegations about tf00t residing in a central European country might get him in trouble with a potentially screwed up justice system.
Also he didn't have a dog that might have been shot by a trigger happy cop. :?
Ape is an incredibly annoying shit. A perfect storm of immaturity, arrogance, and stupidity.
He has so far managed to dodge consequences for what he has been doing and getting Jenny McDupe and her imbecilic sidekick Laughing Witch to get the backlash.

comhcinc
.
.
Posts: 10835
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:59 am
Location: from Parts Unknown
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21850

Post by comhcinc »

Gumby wrote:Hey, who threw strawmen all over the floor?
We pick our sides and just keep going forward no matter what.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

CommanderTuvok
.
.
Posts: 3744
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 1:18 pm

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21851

Post by CommanderTuvok »

Cunning Punt wrote:
HoneyWagon wrote:Thinking about going to this. Could ask Heina if she finished her book yet or not.
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid ... =3&theater
https://scontent-dfw1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/ ... e=57AE0097
Heina has never been to anything IIG related AFAIK...but she is "appearing live" for some reason.
Using that massive "The Orbit blogger" clout I s'pose.
That is without doubt the shittiest piece of graphic design I have ever seen from a skeptic/freethought/atheist group/event. It beats American Atheists' billboards into the ground. It looks like someone's scrapbook. Abysmal.
I giggled at the way they overlaid "appearing live" and "appearing via video", almost as an afterthought.

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21852

Post by free thoughtpolice »

Gumby wrote:Hey, who threw strawmen all over the floor?
[youtube]v5vzCmURh7o[/youtube]
Was it Bob or Alice- you make the call.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21853

Post by Brive1987 »

And so Welch's trap is carefully laid. :popcorn:

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/imag ... i6egE2pQ-w

Cnutella
.
.
Posts: 1742
Joined: Wed Aug 05, 2015 7:02 pm

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21854

Post by Cnutella »

free thoughtpolice wrote:Cnutella wrote:
I am not really surprised that the sorcerer's apprentice Bewildered Ape hasn't weighed in yet on whether this meets his own sociopathic standards for satire/performance art. I would like to hear why it somehow doesn't.
So far he has come up with "it's different because I didn't put anyone in danger", ignoring the possibility that making criminal allegations about tf00t residing in a central European country might get him in trouble with a potentially screwed up justice system.
Also he didn't have a dog that might have been shot by a trigger happy cop. :?
Ape is an incredibly annoying shit. A perfect storm of immaturity, arrogance, and stupidity.
He has so far managed to dodge consequences for what he has been doing and getting Jenny McDupe and her imbecilic sidekick Laughing Witch to get the backlash.
Oh he did? If it was on Jenny's megathread over at KF, I missed it...

Besides, if trying to fuck with someone's livelihood in real life is a splendid satire on the double standards of YouTube atheists, I don't think he has a leg to stand on when another "artist" decides to push the boundaries further regarding his own double standards. I guess that terrorizing Jenny's neighbors who had nothing to do with her Internet drama might be a step too far, but I guess it's never too late to learn that ill-conceived actins can have serious unintended consequences.

I imagine Eclipso] will get busted at some point, as he seems to have a pretty lax standard regarding his own personal security. The rain falls on the just and unjust alike.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21855

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny »

Okay, so I had to click "show this post" after some comments above. White-knighting for SciBabe (jebus, that cracks me up every single time. SciBabe demands the respect due her exalted position) and Welch does what Welch does best. Well, as a scientist myself (in the best Welchian tradition), I have to state the dude has issues. If you disagree with him, you must indeed be some form of mentally deranged idiot, unable to form a coherent thought. With all the thoughtfulness of an anal fissure, he brings his point to bear. Which is absolutely nothing to do about the original SciBabe issue of her not feeling like she got her due credit for being a scientist who remarkably seems to market themselves as a "babe," but is now off an Abbie's apparent faults for something about something. Or something.

Okay, folks, help me out. I had some pain medication a bit ago, did I miss something? Did the original post about SciBabe not getting called a scientist despite her marketing somehow turn into a convoluted point about science blogging vs real science? Does Welch (bless his heart) really believe that SciBabe needs to be called a scientist? Is it actual sexism or the organizers just acknowledging her own marketing? Somebody throw me a spoon or two.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21856

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny »

Brive1987 wrote:And so Welch's trap is carefully laid. :popcorn:

https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/imag ... i6egE2pQ-w
Leave FreeThoughtPolice out of this. He just meant to hug those kids, he forgot about the whole "claws" thing. And after, dang, it seemed a shame to let them go to waste.

Guestus Aurelius
.
.
Posts: 2118
Joined: Fri Sep 06, 2013 5:14 pm

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21857

Post by Guestus Aurelius »

H. Korban wrote:Completely OT, but recently I was re-reminded of the great genius of Isaac Newton. I teach my teenage niece physics and math, trying approaches which she is unlikely to encounter in school, perhaps even in college. For example, to understand the foundations of calculus, we looked at hyperreal numbers, which are real numbers extended with "infinitesimals", formalizing the concepts which were only vaguely understood till very recently. (For those interested: an infinitesimal is a number that is smaller than any positive real number, but greater than zero. Obviously, it can't be a real number, and is a genuinely new thing, much like imaginary numbers are something new. These were only recently (1960) formalized by Abraham Robinson using very subtle ideas from mathematical logic).

In any case, to understand classical mechanics better, we looked, for fun, at a translation of Newton's Principia. I have to say, the clarity and precision of Newton's writing (once one gets over the baroque language) is amazing. His method of proof is pretty different than one would use in a typical college course that uses calculus extensively. Newton's method of proof was geometrical, and often these proofs are clearer and more intuitive than a brute-force calculus proof. In particular, his proof of Proposition 71, which has been called "Newton's Superb Theorem" is truly a thing of beauty. (This proposition shows that the gravitational force of spherically symmetric object is as if the complete mass of the object was located at its center). Several historians suspect that Newton actually worked out a calculus based proof and then redid the proof geometrically. In any case, this proof illustrates the great genius of Newton, who was able to derive such a surprising theorem in essentially a visual way. (For those interested, very recently, a simpler geometrical proof was shown in arxiv:1201.6534).

Another, to me, mind boggling example of Newton's genius is his study of the orbit of the moon. Ultimately, his results for the precession of the perigee (i.e. the top-like motion of the point of closest approach of the moon to the Earth) was incorrect and off by a factor of 2 compared to observations. However, this early tour-de-force in perturbation theory remains one of the great achievements of the Principia.

When one understands the genius of people like Newton, Maxwell, or Einstein, and reads their truly magnificent works, one develops a sense of humility, realizing the incomparable intellectual distance separating most of humanity from them.

(Incidentally, with my niece, I use geometrical algebra rather than vector algebra. It is conceptually cleaner, and also unusual enough to be a fun and off-the-beaten-path language to formulate physics. Not only that, it unifies in a single umbrella all the otherwise disparate objects (vectors, matrices, tensors, twistors, spinors, ...) than appear in physics.).

Back to nigger/cunt/scientist word wars.
Awesome, thanks for this.

free thoughtpolice
.
.
Posts: 11165
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21858

Post by free thoughtpolice »

[youtube]W7I92r9GqUw[/youtube]

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21859

Post by Brive1987 »

Brive1987 wrote:Oh my god, Oh my god, Oh my god, Oh my god, Oh my god. :o

Alex has a new post up. His first for the Orbit.

He is comparing the white bread male speaker lineup at an Orange County Con to the horrors of his old UK church. As always, the only lense thru which Alex can peer is one that points straight back at him.

The advert is unfortunate. But shit. It warmed the cockles to see such an unapologetic, un-PC missive.

http://i.imgur.com/GlqBBtA.jpg

I find it amusing that someone seeking her break thru moment by self identifying as "Scibabe" gets triggered by PR duly noting her selling point.

http://i.imgur.com/3QtvIRq.jpg

Now why the hell would they do that?

http://i.imgur.com/Hp168Kn.jpg


I betcha they don't even have a harassment policy. Let me hit pause for a moment.

.........................

Ah. They do, but it's one of those short sensible ones that says 'don't be a dick, and if we decide you are we'll boot you'

They may not have any female identifying speakers - but they do feature two "brains, body, both" candidates having a Comfort-discomforting banana fight on their homepage.

http://i.imgur.com/85P3gLg.jpg

Here is Exhibit A: first scibabe note.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21860

Post by Brive1987 »

ERV wrote:
Sunder wrote:

Literally the first person on the lineup is Mr. Deity, which is also not his actual name.

I see we have another "Skepchick" type selling themselves in a lowbrow manner and getting pissed over their own choice to do so.
Uuuuuuuuuuum Yvette has zero publications in Pubmed. Not a 'scientist', not that anyone who is a scientist uses that vague title.

Twat.
And Exhib B. ERV seems to indicate that currently practicing scientists don't use the term and popular wannabes need to earn the title.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21861

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny »

Her logo just screams science. Respect.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21862

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny »

Thank you Brive. I had thought perhaps SciBabe was just being presented as she marketed herself, but now I've come 360° on this issue.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21863

Post by Brive1987 »

It is ironic that Welch uses ERVs lack of blog visibility as a mark of click-whore failure while ERV uses Scibabe's lack of publishing on Pubmed as a marker for not being a working scientist.

It's almost as if they are talking about two different things.

Also while RW may have won the clickbait PR stakes, I'm still waiting for her to make that 'victory' worthwhile.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21864

Post by Brive1987 »

Don't you hate it when Twitter unilaterally removes your serious public designator like "scientist" and replaces it with silly shit that makes you look dumb?

Patriarchy.

http://i.imgur.com/oGyVEoG.jpg

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21865

Post by Brive1987 »

FAN OF SCIENCE

Ok. Are we good now? Got that locked in?

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21866

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny »

Brive1987 wrote:FAN OF SCIENCE

Ok. Are we good now? Got that locked in?
With you, I think.
ScienceFan.jpg
(42.12 KiB) Downloaded 251 times

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1409
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21867

Post by HunnyBunny »

Wait, what? when did the page title change? what does this mean? Have I missed something?

Phil_Giordana_FCD
That's All Folks
That's All Folks
Posts: 11875
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2012 10:56 pm
Location: Nice, France
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21868

Post by Phil_Giordana_FCD »

Cnutella wrote:
Cunning Punt wrote:
That is without doubt the shittiest piece of graphic design I have ever seen from a skeptic/freethought/atheist group/event. It beats American Atheists' billboards into the ground. It looks like someone's scrapbook. Abysmal.

Clearly the designer doesn't know that CRAP is an acronym
Commando de Recherche et d'Action dans la Profondeur? They decided to change the name shortly after I served. I suppose someone finally explained the English meaning of CRAP.

CaptainFluffyBunny
.
.
Posts: 7556
Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
Location: Somewhere in the pipes

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21869

Post by CaptainFluffyBunny »

comhcinc wrote:
Gumby wrote:Hey, who threw strawmen all over the floor?
We pick our sides and just keep going forward no matter what.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
You know, I'm honestly confused about what Welch is going on about. A person that never really markets themselves as a scientist, who clearly is accenting the Babe part, suddenly turn on a dime and yell sexism for promoters using their own marketing. It boggles my poor damaged mind. And poor Welch is so clearly wrapped around the axle. Call me confused and amused.

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1409
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21870

Post by HunnyBunny »

Someone needs to ask Nerd what he thinks of the Scibabe calling herself a scientist, because he knows the difference. Seems all you need is evidence to back up what you say and, boom, you're a scientist.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
5 May 2016 at 10:57 pm
These people make good arguments when taken in isolation, I find them less impressive after cross referencing. but with more intellectual honesty than people like Monkton,
You denialists keep talking arguments. Philosophy. We scientists talk evidence to back up our arguments, and that is missing from your arguments. Peer reviewed scientific literature. Which is why you get nowhere when you come to a site like this, where we know the difference between obfuscation and true science.

Old_ones
.
.
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:46 pm
Location: An hour's drive from Hell.

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21871

Post by Old_ones »

Brive1987 wrote:Oh my god, Oh my god, Oh my god, Oh my god, Oh my god. :o

Alex has a new post up. His first for the Orbit.

He is comparing the white bread male speaker lineup at an Orange County Con to the horrors of his old UK church. As always, the only lense thru which Alex can peer is one that points straight back at him.

The advert is unfortunate. But shit. It warmed the cockles to see such an unapologetic, un-PC missive.

http://i.imgur.com/GlqBBtA.jpg

I find it amusing that someone seeking her break thru moment by self identifying as "Scibabe" gets triggered by PR duly noting her selling point.

http://i.imgur.com/3QtvIRq.jpg

Now why the hell would they do that?

http://i.imgur.com/Hp168Kn.jpg


I betcha they don't even have a harassment policy. Let me hit pause for a moment.

.........................

Ah. They do, but it's one of those short sensible ones that says 'don't be a dick, and if we decide you are we'll boot you'

They may not have any female identifying speakers - but they do feature two "brains, body, both" candidates having a Comfort-discomforting banana fight on their homepage.

http://i.imgur.com/85P3gLg.jpg
I still don't understand why she has Hillary Clinton sitting on her logo.

HunnyBunny
Pit Sleuth
Pit Sleuth
Posts: 1409
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 9:54 am
Location: Blue

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21872

Post by HunnyBunny »

ChasCPeterson
5 May 2016 at 11:18 pm
wow. Same as it ever was around here, I see.
NoR still hasn’t learned to read for comprehension, preferring instead to go off rudely half-cocked on people who actually agree with him.
(And there’s even yet another Dictionary Atheist thread! Round and round and round.)
https://web.archive.org/web/20160506043 ... sts-heads/

Old_ones
.
.
Posts: 2168
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2013 3:46 pm
Location: An hour's drive from Hell.

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21873

Post by Old_ones »

HunnyBunny wrote:Someone needs to ask Nerd what he thinks of the Scibabe calling herself a scientist, because he knows the difference. Seems all you need is evidence to back up what you say and, boom, you're a scientist.
Nerd of Redhead, Dances OM Trolls
5 May 2016 at 10:57 pm
These people make good arguments when taken in isolation, I find them less impressive after cross referencing. but with more intellectual honesty than people like Monkton,
You denialists keep talking arguments. Philosophy. We scientists talk evidence to back up our arguments, and that is missing from your arguments. Peer reviewed scientific literature. Which is why you get nowhere when you come to a site like this, where we know the difference between obfuscation and true science.
He's claimed for the longest time that he has a Ph.D. in Chemistry, and that he is a process chemist somewhere in industry. He wants everyone to know he has the credentials to call himself a scientist. Personally, I'd love to read his dissertation, because that would be some comedy gold.

"Hi, my name is Nerd of Redhead..."

Matt Cavanaugh
.
.
Posts: 15449
Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21874

Post by Matt Cavanaugh »

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:now I've come 360° on this issue.
Dick Carrier doesn't mind.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21875

Post by Brive1987 »

Cool. Two essays, two distinctions.

I got sign off on my major work too. Looking at the development of British Army operational doctrine Sep 1915 (Loos and introduction of New Army Divisions) and July 1916 when something else happened.

Years of watching FtB has made the analysis of failure an acceptable pass time for me.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21876

Post by Steersman »

Brive1987 wrote:Cool. Two essays, two distinctions.

I got sign off on my major work too. Looking at the development of British Army operational doctrine Sep 1915 (Loos and introduction of New Army Divisions) and July 1916 when something else happened.

Years of watching FtB has made the analysis of failure an acceptable pass time for me.
If you're buying a lot of "cherry liquor chocolates" then you might consider whether your wife thinks the same .... ;-)

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21877

Post by Steersman »

Phil_Giordana_FCD wrote:Makes me think of someone...

[.img]http://files.explosm.net/comics/Kris/fe ... g?t=6B4C26[/img]
Speaking of which ... ;-)

comhcinc
.
.
Posts: 10835
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:59 am
Location: from Parts Unknown
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21878

Post by comhcinc »

CaptainFluffyBunny wrote:
comhcinc wrote:
Gumby wrote:Hey, who threw strawmen all over the floor?
We pick our sides and just keep going forward no matter what.

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
You know, I'm honestly confused about what Welch is going on about. A person that never really markets themselves as a scientist, who clearly is accenting the Babe part, suddenly turn on a dime and yell sexism for promoters using their own marketing. It boggles my poor damaged mind. And poor Welch is so clearly wrapped around the axle. Call me confused and amused.
I think everyone is kinda talking past each other.

People can correct me if I am wrong but from what I understand it's something like this.

Scibabe said something dumb on twitter. This started the discussion on what exactly is a scientist.

Welch feels that Scibabe is actually cool and should not be labeled an enemy because of two tweets.

ERV feels Scibabe isn't a scientist and that people like her get more attention than they deserve. She feels that people like herself don't get enough respect and I think she is completely right. That isn't because she bought me a beer either. It's because she is making the world a better place.

As brive has pointed out everyone is arguing about different things.

comhcinc
.
.
Posts: 10835
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:59 am
Location: from Parts Unknown
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21879

Post by comhcinc »

Captain America Civil War was great.

I recommend it to all.

Malky
.
.
Posts: 647
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2012 9:00 pm

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21880

Post by Malky »

screwtape wrote:
Shatterface wrote: I read Black Athena when I was studying Egyptology and found it as academically sound as Chariots of the Gods?
Personally, I often found that Charlottes were more god-like than Chariots. :icon-rolleyes:

Never did care for the godly versions of either of them.
You've of obviously never seen Martin Ofiah in full flow!

comhcinc
.
.
Posts: 10835
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:59 am
Location: from Parts Unknown
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21881

Post by comhcinc »

In fact, I recommend the shit out of it.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21882

Post by Steersman »

And, from the same source:

But just to show y'all that it's not just shits and giggles in the wacky world of Islam:
Pakistani police on Thursday arrested 15 members of a tribal council accused of ordering the burning alive of a young girl for helping a couple to elope in a so-called "honour killing", police said.

The 16-year-old girl was set on fire last week in the town of Donga Gali, about 50 km (30 miles) northeast of the capital, Islamabad, on the orders of the council, said district police chief Saeed Wazir.

Police said the honour killing was ordered as punishment for what the council deemed irreparable damage to the village's reputation. The couple appeared to have escaped. ....
One more reason, if any more were needed, why Islam should be extirpated, root and fucking branch. And, elsewhere on the Internet and along the same line:

First Angola and now China (more or less); one hopes it's the beginning of a (reasoned) stampede, more or less.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toadsk

#21883

Post by Brive1987 »

Steersman wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:Cool. Two essays, two distinctions.

I got sign off on my major work too. Looking at the development of British Army operational doctrine Sep 1915 (Loos and introduction of New Army Divisions) and July 1916 when something else happened.

Years of watching FtB has made the analysis of failure an acceptable pass time for me.
If you're buying a lot of "cherry liquor chocolates" then you might consider whether your wife thinks the same .... ;-)
I believe my approach is cheaper than yours. ;) ;)

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21884

Post by Brive1987 »

Without wanting to be pedantic, Scibabe's hoof stamping occurred on Facebook.

comhcinc
.
.
Posts: 10835
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:59 am
Location: from Parts Unknown
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21885

Post by comhcinc »

Brive1987 wrote:Without wanting to be pedantic, Scibabe's hoof stamping occurred on Facebook.
Admit it. You totally wanted to be pedantic.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21886

Post by Brive1987 »

Well, to be honest it had been bugging more now for a couple of days.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21887

Post by Brive1987 »

'me'

comhcinc
.
.
Posts: 10835
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:59 am
Location: from Parts Unknown
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21888

Post by comhcinc »

You glorious pedantic bastard! Take the wife to Captain America. She will thank you.

Kirbmarc
.
.
Posts: 10577
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2014 8:29 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21889

Post by Kirbmarc »

H. Korban wrote:The only thing which matters is agreement with experiment and observation. Newton's theory is very simple. You said yourself, in your condescending lecture to me. Does not mean it is applicable in strong gravitational case, or on very large scales. In any case two metric tensors are not much harder to deal with than one. Further, Einstein's theory will probably need revision once we figure out the correct quantum theory of gravity. Let me assure you, given the way things are going, this revision will be horrifically complicated. Not at all "ontologically simple".
The first sentence is not entirely true. Agreement with experiement and observation matters a lot, but it's not the only thing that mattes.

Abdelkader's hollow earth model agrees with experiment and observation just as well as the commonly accepted cosmological models. The only reason to reject it is that it introduces a large number of ad hoc hypothesis (the circular paths of light rays, for example) and is therefore less ontologically simple, because it multiplies the number of assumptions and elements.
One does not do things because they are "ontological simple". What does that even mean? (Just a rhetorical question, no need to answer). Reality is very complex. Try computing the Casimir effect and then tell me what is ontologically simple about it. Our goal is to understand some subset of physical phenomena. Which is complex. Ontological simplicity is irrelevant when your equations have 1000 terms in them, and there are 1000 of such equations. (I am not kidding. Try doing anything in quantum field theory and soon one is overwhelmed by the combinatorial explosion of terms. Also, Einstein's equations are 10 nonlinear coupled partial differential equations, not counting constraints and the effects of matter. Not simple at all.).
Maybe this is my fault, and I haven't been clear enough, in defining them, but you're confusing ontologically simplicity (which is about limiting assumptions, different elements of a theory and hoc hypothesis) with procedural simplicity (the amount of time and effort that it takes to solve equations).
Incidentally, this is probably the reason why no working physicist takes philosophers seriously. Its all a word jumble after the fact, after the poor physicist has worked through hundreds of pages of algebra and hours of fitting data to tease out the tiny anomaly needed to show some effect he is after. Here comes the philosopher, twirling his mustache, telling us its "ontologically simple".
That's a shame. I think that physicists ought to take philosophy of science more seriously. Post-modern philosophy is a jumbled mess, but some philosophical insight is useful to understand how the heuristics of science work.

Maybe I've done a poor job at representing it, but the heuristic of keeping theory ontologically simple (limiting assumptions and hoc explanations) is an important element in the formulation of scientific hypothesis.

One of the limits of pseudoscience is that it often doesn't follow this heuristic. Intelligent design, for example, needlessly multiplies the number of assumptions of its hypothesis in order to explain away any discrepancy between observational data and the account of the Bible.
Also, you misunderstand Ptolemy. His conception of planetary motion is actually very elegant. His introduction of "equants" was to explain observations. If he had stuck to "ontological simplicity" he would have abandoned observations and the messy reality of trying to fit his models to them, and turned to giving lectures to those who tried.
Of course he introduced the equants to explain observations. When have I ever argued otherwise? But equants were a further element added to his theory, and the fact that Ptolemy's theory needed equants in order to work was one of the main points of contention among astronomers.

Equants (and eccentrics) were seen as blemishes on Ptolemy's otherwise revered theory. Before Copernicus many others, from Nasir al-Din al-Tusi to Ibn al-Shatir (incidentally, forgive me for the crude transliterations) proposed models which avoided the use of equants.
Incidentally, you apparently don't know this, but Ptolemy's model contains fewer epicycles than that proposed by Copernicus.
You know, you accused me of being "condescending", but comments like this make me think that this might have been a bit of projection on your part.

I was well aware that Copernicus' model used more epicycles than Ptolemy's. Copernicus, however, did away with the equant, and that's one of the reasons why he was convinced that his model was superior to Ptolemy's.

Kepler's model avoided the use of epicycles and deferents, and so required much less assumptions than Copernicus'. Newton's model required only the assumption of an action at a distance, and explained both astronomical data and the fall of bodies on Earth. That's why his model was so successful.

feathers
.
.
Posts: 6113
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 3:12 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21890

Post by feathers »

Tigzy wrote:'Star Gender'

Okay, so I went and looked it up.
definition:

Star Gender is a gender that can be broken up into 3 different definitions.
The first is simply having the gender of a star.
The second is “an other-worldly/non-human gender” which is likened too being beyond comprehension.
The third is “no matter how many genders are discovered/coined, none would match for the person.”
You fucking what?
[...]
The second is “an other-worldly/non-human gender” which is likened too being beyond comprehension.
'...and presently Randolph Carter beheld that squamous gender so terribly alluded to in the mad Arab Alhazred's dread Necronimocon; that shrieking, polyphemous monstrosity flopping incohately so far beyond the bounds of cis that even those genderfuck weirdos could only crawl away from it in abject terror and babbling insanity...'

H.P. Lovecraft, The Colourful Hair Out Of Safe Space
:D

I'd think "star gender" is when you like to get it up the star.

Oglebart
.
.
Posts: 967
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2014 2:25 pm
Location: Ingerland

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21891

Post by Oglebart »

Easy J wrote:
Brive1987 wrote:Rat-tat-tat,

Brush skirmish continues. Escalated by the possible introduction of autism.

http://i.imgur.com/lHPlIQY.jpg
It's Joe McCarthy. John McCarthy is the famous UFC ref. Keep on impossible-izing that rational debate, there, Dick.
John McCarthy was a journalist that spent more than 5 years chained to a radiator in Lebanon, he was kidnapped by jihadists in the 80's along with Terry Waite and Brian Keenan. Doubt that's who he means though.

feathers
.
.
Posts: 6113
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 3:12 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21892

Post by feathers »

Brive1987 wrote:Don't you hate it when Twitter unilaterally removes your serious public designator like "scientist" and replaces it with silly shit that makes you look dumb?

Patriarchy.

http://i.imgur.com/oGyVEoG.jpg
Yvette?

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/arc ... 79705b.jpg

feathers
.
.
Posts: 6113
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 3:12 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21893

Post by feathers »

Steersman wrote:And, from the same source:
Why did someone bother wiping out all names? They're all Anonymous, this is 4chan, duh.

feathers
.
.
Posts: 6113
Joined: Tue Aug 13, 2013 3:12 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21894

Post by feathers »

comhcinc wrote:You glorious pedantic bastard! Take the wife to Captain America. She will thank you.
Does Captain America identify as "she"?

comhcinc
.
.
Posts: 10835
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:59 am
Location: from Parts Unknown
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21895

Post by comhcinc »

feathers wrote:
comhcinc wrote:You glorious pedantic bastard! Take the wife to Captain America. She will thank you.
Does Captain America identify as "she"?
No Spoilers.

Brive1987
.
.
Posts: 17791
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:16 am

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21896

Post by Brive1987 »

comhcinc wrote:You glorious pedantic bastard! Take the wife to Captain America. She will thank you.
I love the Avengers as much as she hates them.

This Sunday is Mothers Day.

My chance of swinging Civil War without a civil war :rimshot: is vanishingly small.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toadsk

#21897

Post by Steersman »

Brive1987 wrote:
Steersman wrote: <snip>
If you're buying a lot of "cherry liquor chocolates" then you might consider whether your wife thinks the same .... ;-)
I believe my approach is cheaper than yours. ;) ;)
:-) You might be right, and there is the aphorism about the price of everything and the value of nothing. Although on the other side of the coin, written on the subway walls and tenement halls, there's the other one to the effect that sometimes the sex you get for free is substantially more expensive than the sex you pay for. Cases-in-point:
Most expensive divorces:
Bernie Ecclestone's divorce from Slavica; estimated at $1–$1.2 billion.[1]
Harold Hamm's divorce from Sue Ann Arnall; estimated at $974.8 million.[2]
Adnan Khashoggi's divorce from Soraya Khashoggi; estimated at $850 million.[3]
Craig McCaw's divorce from Wendy McCaw; estimated to exceed $460 million.[4]
....
Neil Diamond's divorce from Marcia Murphey; estimated at $150 million.[10]
Frank McCourt's divorce from Jamie McCourt; estimated at $130 million.[11]
Greg Norman's divorce from Laura Andrassy; estimated at $103 million.[12]
Steven Spielberg's divorce from Amy Irving; estimated at $100 million.[13]
Madonna's divorce from Guy Ritchie; estimated at $76–$92 million.[14] ....
Interesting to note though that there's only one woman, one assumes ..., i.e., Madonna, in that list who's been obliged to pay serious coin for her previous fun and games after the party's over.

In any case, in other news and to throw a bit of fuel on the raging/flagging debate over the definition for scientist, one Julia Serano, a transwoman apparently, has written a post on the Antioch Review article on The Sacred Androgen. But of particular and relevant interest is her CV where she gives some indication that she has some serious chops in the biology department ("Ph.D. in Biochemistry and Molecular Biophysics from Columbia University in 1995"), and says:
This is a pretty informal summary of my research and work history as a scientist, one that is meant to be accessible to non-scientists.

comhcinc
.
.
Posts: 10835
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:59 am
Location: from Parts Unknown
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21898

Post by comhcinc »

Brive1987 wrote:
comhcinc wrote:You glorious pedantic bastard! Take the wife to Captain America. She will thank you.
I love the Avengers as much as she hates them.

This Sunday is Mothers Day.

My chance of swinging Civil War without a civil war :rimshot: is vanishingly small.
It's not an Avengers movie. It more adult. It does a very good job of taking this stuff serious without losing the enjoyable factor.

I think it's the best superhero movie ever. Robert Downey Jr. really gets to show off his skills.

I can think of only one real issue I had with the movie.

I honestly think most people will enjoy this movie. Even people who don't normally go in for the superhero fair.

Steersman
.
.
Posts: 10933
Joined: Mon Aug 06, 2012 8:58 pm
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21899

Post by Steersman »

feathers wrote:
Steersman wrote:And, from the same source:
[.tweet][/tweet]
Why did someone bother wiping out all names? They're all Anonymous, this is 4chan, duh.
Haven't the foggiest. I assumed it was Facebook, and that there was some identifying information that had been "redacted" (ooh - haven't had a chance to use that word, like, since forever ....) But which may still have been the case.

comhcinc
.
.
Posts: 10835
Joined: Wed Sep 18, 2013 10:59 am
Location: from Parts Unknown
Contact:

Re: The Refuge of the Toads

#21900

Post by comhcinc »

Except steersman. He shouldn't see this movie. He doesn't deserve it.

Locked