Is there a place for woo in science?

Discussion in 'General Philosophy' started by Magical Realist, Aug 17, 2014.

  1. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,960
    Then I guess I have no clue as to why I was banned. The infracted post, which was called trolling, was my harmless statement that TV paranormal shows offer genuine evidence of the paranormal. After that I was banned without warning or explanation. Frankly I'm so over this now I don't wanna go into it again. But my conclusion seems warranted, that certain pro-paranormal statements/photos will automatically warrant infractions for trolling.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    We're not talking about his latest ban, E. Kitta banned him a while back.
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Did you actually read the infraction-PM you got? I guess not...
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Fair enough, but I think MR is talking about the lastest ban though.
     
  8. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,960
    Here's the PM:

    Are you saying now you didn't call my post trolling?
     
  9. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    Did you notice this part: "Trolling troughout entire thread"?

    It wasn't just that post. I have to flag one, you know. I just picked one.
     
  10. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,960
    Trolling suggests posting things I don't really believe just to yank people's chains. How is posting things I DO believe trolling? And how am I morally responsible for people's flummoxed reactions?
     
  11. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    It has been explained to you repeatedly. Go back and read it again if you still don't get it.
    In the mean time, how about you get back onto the topic of your own thread..
     
  12. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,960
    No..you never explained it and refuse to even now because you don't have an explanation. But you're right. We digress. In the future don't post off topic quips about me making stuff up. Try to stay on topic...
     
  13. Enmos Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    43,184
    You were making it up.
    Others explained it to you quite clearly in that "Small Question"-thread of yours (or whatever it was called).
    Besides, you know full well why you were banned; you're not stupid.
     
  14. Balerion Banned Banned

    Messages:
    8,596
    You're right. I misunderstood him.

    Carry on!
     
  15. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,960
    Either post on topic relevant posts here or move on. I have no interest in your unsubstantiated accusations.
     
  16. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,994
    You can make science of anything.
     
  17. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    But you're perfectly happy with your own.
    Go figure...
     
  18. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    Really?
    You can APPLY science to many things, but you can't "make science out of them".
     
  19. kx000 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,994
    I'm talking about the application of how and what, hence making science.
     
  20. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    Like I said: applying science.
     
  21. Captain Kremmen All aboard, me Hearties! Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,738
    Trolling. Sciforums definition.
    Trolling is having your own opinion, even when a mod has told you that you are wrong.

    Trolling throughout entire thread. Sciforums definition.
    Persisting in having your own opinion, even when a mod has repeatedly said you are wrong.

    Punishment for flagrantly having your own opinion is a ban of up to one month,
    which may be followed by a permaban if the member foolishly insists on having their own views.

    Sciforiums has sections for posting about ghosts, monsters, flying saucers, religion, and conspiracies.
    Those sections are only for scientific discussion, and exposure of the falseness of said woo woo subjects.
    Please do not post here if you believe any of these things are genuine.
     
    Last edited: Aug 20, 2014
  22. Magical Realist Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,960
    Then by that reasoning photos of concentration camp victims isn't convincing evidence of that crime since it could always have been faked. There are in fact people who believe the holocaust to be an elaborate fabricated hoax. But few people take their claims seriously. Other people say the lunar walk photos were fake. See where this can lead? People with elaborate conspiracy theories will always claim fabricated evidence. But that doesn't mean their claims are therefore valid.

    Those claiming the evidence to be faked need to provide a good reason for thinking so. Simply saying it could be faked proves nothing. But then I guess that's what you're saying: evidence never provides proof because people can always claim it was faked.

    I do that. See my haunted theater thread in which I considered various alternative explanations such as strings or edited CCTV video but found them inadequate. I then support the paranormal thesis by referring to reports of the theater having other unexplained phenomena occur in it. This was met with only: "How do you know he's not lying." Well, for one he's set up a CCTV video of his theater and runs it every night to catch evidence. Someone who was lying wouldn't likely go thru such trouble.

    A single photo of a phenomena might NOT be strong evidence. But repeated photos of the same phenomena accompanied with eyewitness reports of such? Then we're talking something more convincing than a hoax. People who spend time investigating such things wouldn't likely be hoaxing them.

    Why is it necessary to know what a thing is to know if the photo is genuine? If I capture a lighting anomaly on film, I have evidence of the anomaly without knowing what it is. Same with ghosts. We know that they are. But we don't exactly know WHAT they are.

    Not sure how you are going to apply scientific rigour to a phenomena that appears essentially anomalous and unpredictable.

    So if I ask whether the photo is a ghost or not, then that wouldn't be seen as trolling? I don't see the point in posting photos of ghosts without including a claim that it IS a ghost. People aren't generally impressed by mere light artifacts or smudges.
     
  23. Dywyddyr Penguinaciously duckalicious. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    18,953
    And you wonder why you get accused of trolling.
    If ALL we had as "evidence" of concentration camps was photos then yes: we could legitimately claim they faked.
    But, unlike your claims, there is massive corroborating evidence for those photos. Some of that other evidence is, in and of itself, strong enough to stand alone.
    When all you have is photos and claims (especially claims along the lines of "I KNOW") then it's rather hard to take you seriously. And somewhat difficult to believe that YOU are being entirely serious.

    No.
    Those onus is on those making the initial claim.
     

Share This Page