Home Page
   Articles
       links
About Us    
Traders        
Recipes            
Latest Articles
Suggestion for new "Naughty Corner"
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Site guidelines, Announcements, Problems and Suggestions
Author 
 Message
paul1963



Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 2161
Location: No longer active on the forum
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 10:52 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

cab wrote:
paul1963 wrote:
cab wrote:
paul1963 wrote:

That would run a risk of elitism. To give an example I am a qualified meteologist,


What kind of qualifications are available in meteorology?


Various ones, there are metereology degrees which are (or were) run in association with the met office, and specialising in environmental sciences (similar route to geology)


I really enjoyed studying it. Got one of my highest undergrad marks in the meteorology course, I'd have loved to continue with it if the timetabling hadn't clashed with genetics.


It can still be done through the OU and the met office in Reading I believe, but it is a long old slog through the lower levels, most of which you are already highly qualified in.

edited to say can "still" be done

cab



Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 32429

PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 10:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

paul1963 wrote:
although I would not dream of telling anyone they were talking twaddle


I've got no problem with that, if its part of a coherent argument. 'You're talking twaddle' on its own is just rude, its offends me. On the other hand 'No, thats not true because (x), (y), and (z), the claim is twaddle' (for example) is absolutely fine by me. By all means say that something is twaddle, but back it up

darkbrowneggs



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 663
Location: Worcestershire
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Sorry (and I am still hesitant to post on this thread, even though I started it myself)

I wasn't suggesting an unmoderated section, and I wasn't suggesting a section where the truths or untruths of people's beliefs could be discussed and thrashed out to everyone's satisfaction

What I was vaguely suggesting was an "Alternatives Corner" which you could opt into if you held views other than the scientific mainstream, and that those who felt otherwise (it seems twaddle was and unfortunate choice of word in my first post, but again mad unknowingly) .

ie one might believe in God and the power of prayer , one might believe in alternative therapies of all kinds, and maybe even had positive results with them oneself, and possibly wish to post to that effect, without getting into a scientific debate as to why your own personal "cure" had no standing as it had not been verified.

Things like Bio dynamic growing, planting by moon phases, dowsing, reiki, curing meat at moon phases, herbalism, homoeopathy, chiropractors, Bach's Rescue Remedy, magnetic egg sexers, - far to many things to mention.

I would not be interested in discussing whether or not these have been scientifically proven to work, but I would be interested to hear anyone's personal experiences - negative or positive, then armed with this information I could then go on and make a more informed decision as to how I intended to go on through my life.

I don't have to do what someone else has done, its just interesting to know what they did and how it worked out for them in their circumstances at that particular time.

I personally, think there are many things in this world that we cannot begin (at present) to understand, but that does not (in my opinion only I hasten to add mean that they don't exist

I think , unfortunately, and unknowingly, I happened to make my initial suggestion at a rather fraught time. I must admit I tend not to read posts which look as though they might be contentious - I dislike arguments of any kind - so hadn't realized anything might be amiss on the forum in general.

Most of the forums I am a part of I have joined simply to gain knowledge from the personal experience of others, and hope to learn something from their mistakes and triumphs, and also pass on anything I might have gleaned through my own passage through this lifetime.

One of my favorite poems is
The things that matter by E Nesbit 1858-1924 and I like to think there is a little bit about me in there somewhere.

All the best
Sue

this was edited as there were several more posts while I was typing, and I had included something which might have been seen as contentious - which is the LAST thing I was trying to be. Sue

Last edited by darkbrowneggs on Mon Mar 07, 11 10:58 am; edited 1 time in total

Midland Spinner



Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Posts: 2931
Location: Under a green roof
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 10:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

paul1963 wrote:
T.G wrote:
paul1963 wrote:
IMO those who hijack a subject and say it is twaddle are merely expressing their own ignorance of that subject and doing it in such a visible way that other DS members can form their own opinions of them without the need for moving the thread


But someone or more than one person stating that what you are asking or speaking about is twaddle can make the poster think 'sod it' I'll not bother and so the thread dies and those interested in reading others opinions on the subjects are left without .. and lets face it some people just can't help themselves and have to make off the cuff remarks and spoil it for those who are interested in reading what others may say on a subject, yet if it was reversed they'd be offended.

treat ppl as you'd expect to be treated and all that


That's a fair point and I won't disagree but I hope people wouldn't be put off by that (I am guilty of quite often dropping slightly facetious comments into conversations myself to lighten the mood although I would not dream of telling anyone they were talking twaddle) as any point of view, even if it is based on incorrect testimony serves to raise the level of thought and allows for constructive discussion.


I'm quite capable of sorting out the wheat from the chaff - i.e. I could ignore the odd post taking the michael out of a subject, but when what promised to be an interesting thread gets hijacked and I have to sift through 5 pages of silly posts by people who aren't interested just to read a couple of interesting posts I generally don't have the time or the energy to do so. So like TG says, I end up not reading any of it.

paul1963



Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 2161
Location: No longer active on the forum
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 10:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Midland Spinner wrote:
paul1963 wrote:
T.G wrote:
paul1963 wrote:
IMO those who hijack a subject and say it is twaddle are merely expressing their own ignorance of that subject and doing it in such a visible way that other DS members can form their own opinions of them without the need for moving the thread


But someone or more than one person stating that what you are asking or speaking about is twaddle can make the poster think 'sod it' I'll not bother and so the thread dies and those interested in reading others opinions on the subjects are left without .. and lets face it some people just can't help themselves and have to make off the cuff remarks and spoil it for those who are interested in reading what others may say on a subject, yet if it was reversed they'd be offended.

treat ppl as you'd expect to be treated and all that


That's a fair point and I won't disagree but I hope people wouldn't be put off by that (I am guilty of quite often dropping slightly facetious comments into conversations myself to lighten the mood although I would not dream of telling anyone they were talking twaddle) as any point of view, even if it is based on incorrect testimony serves to raise the level of thought and allows for constructive discussion.


I'm quite capable of sorting out the wheat from the chaff - i.e. I could ignore the odd post taking the michael out of a subject, but when what promised to be an interesting thread gets hijacked and I have to sift through 5 pages of silly posts by people who aren't interested just to read a couple of interesting posts I generally don't have the time or the energy to do so. So like TG says, I end up not reading any of it.


I can see your point, I must confess I tend not to go on for pages when I do it, but then I am only as you say reading the threads that interest me and when they go wholly off track I give up as well.

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 38658
Location: yes
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 11:01 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

off the wall corner

im with cab in that open discussion using facts and logic is best even if the facts and logic displease those who wont use facts and logic to understand the universe

paul1963



Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 2161
Location: No longer active on the forum
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

dpack wrote:
off the wall corner

im with cab in that open discussion using facts and logic is best even if the facts and logic displease those who wont use facts and logic to understand the universe


It's scientific stand point, which I am all in favour of, but my earlier threads are largely concerned with the risk of making threads elitist or denigrating those of lesser factual knowledge.

Gervase



Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 8655

PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 11:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

Agreed. To have a separate area where the normal rules of scrutiny, logic and what-have-you don't apply strikes me as being rather sily, and would perhaps detract from the site as a whole.
And what would go in there? Would any religious or faith-based discussion take place there? Climate change denial? Racial theories?
It would run the risk of becoming a rather flaky ghetto.
And there is nothing elitist about facts!

bagpuss



Joined: 09 Dec 2004
Posts: 10507
Location: cambridge
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 11:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

People being able to discuss their faith based positions without being derailed by non believers should be allowed and I am sorry if I have contributed to this no being a good space to do that

My concern with any thread where skeptics are strongly discouraged from contributing is where is the line. An alternative medicine practioner is helping with back pain smoking or anixeity that's great but suggesting not to vaccinate against childhood diseases or not to take malaria tablets or insulin for diabetes those are not good and should be actively discouraged

So when is it appropriate to point out that the alternative treatment is the wrong thing and that there are better conventional solutions

Jo S



Joined: 13 Jan 2009
Posts: 5174
Location: Somerset
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 11:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

darkbrowneggs wrote:
Sorry (and I am still hesitant to post on this thread, even though I started it myself)

I wasn't suggesting an unmoderated section, and I wasn't suggesting a section where the truths or untruths of people's beliefs could be discussed and thrashed out to everyone's satisfaction

What I was vaguely suggesting was an "Alternatives Corner" which you could opt into if you held views other than the scientific mainstream, and that those who felt otherwise (it seems twaddle was and unfortunate choice of word in my first post, but again mad unknowingly) .

ie one might believe in God and the power of prayer , one might believe in alternative therapies of all kinds, and maybe even had positive results with them oneself, and possibly wish to post to that effect, without getting into a scientific debate as to why your own personal "cure" had no standing as it had not been verified.

Things like Bio dynamic growing, planting by moon phases, dowsing, reiki, curing meat at moon phases, herbalism, homoeopathy, chiropractors, Bach's Rescue Remedy, magnetic egg sexers, - far to many things to mention.

I would not be interested in discussing whether or not these have been scientifically proven to work, but I would be interested to hear anyone's personal experiences - negative or positive, then armed with this information I could then go on and make a more informed decision as to how I intended to go on through my life.

I don't have to do what someone else has done, its just interesting to know what they did and how it worked out for them in their circumstances at that particular time.

I personally, think there are many things in this world that we cannot begin (at present) to understand, but that does not (in my opinion only I hasten to add mean that they don't exist

I think , unfortunately, and unknowingly, I happened to make my initial suggestion at a rather fraught time. I must admit I tend not to read posts which look as though they might be contentious - I dislike arguments of any kind - so hadn't realized anything might be amiss on the forum in general.

Most of the forums I am a part of I have joined simply to gain knowledge from the personal experience of others, and hope to learn something from their mistakes and triumphs, and also pass on anything I might have gleaned through my own passage through this lifetime.

One of my favorite poems is
The things that matter by E Nesbit 1858-1924 and I like to think there is a little bit about me in there somewhere.

All the best
Sue

this was edited as there were several more posts while I was typing, and I had included something which might have been seen as contentious - which is the LAST thing I was trying to be. Sue


I'll be honest: that's the point of an online forum. To discuss one or a million topics of interest. But unlike your local pub or even a community meeting, there are millions of voices on the wibbly web, all with their own opinions and (for some) the belief that the anonymity of the web means that they can say what they like without the consequences, unlike in real life.

Rather than what you're saying, I think that as a "community" we should do better at picking up our own rubbish, rather than expecting the litter pickers to do it for us. In other words, moderate ourselves rather than backing away because someone is being particularly vocal or facetious.

Last edited by Jo S on Mon Mar 07, 11 11:12 am; edited 1 time in total

paul1963



Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 2161
Location: No longer active on the forum
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 11:11 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

cab wrote:
paul1963 wrote:
although I would not dream of telling anyone they were talking twaddle


I've got no problem with that, if its part of a coherent argument. 'You're talking twaddle' on its own is just rude, its offends me. On the other hand 'No, thats not true because (x), (y), and (z), the claim is twaddle' (for example) is absolutely fine by me. By all means say that something is twaddle, but back it up


I agree with you on this, it's my preferred form of debate

cab



Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 32429

PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 11:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

bagpuss wrote:
People being able to discuss their faith based positions without being derailed by non believers should be allowed and I am sorry if I have contributed to this no being a good space to do that


Discussion of faith based things without being derailed by those who base alternative viewpoints on evidence? I'm not sure I get you, sorry

Would this mean that the rest of the forum should be a place where fact and reason shouldn't be challenged by faith and belief?

You quite rightly pointed out one slippery slope, I can see others here too!

Gervase



Joined: 17 Nov 2004
Posts: 8655

PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 11:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

bagpuss wrote:
So when is it appropriate to point out that the alternative treatment is the wrong thing and that there are better conventional solutions

From my point of view, from the very first mention. It doesn't have to be a rude response; simply one that points out that there is absolutely no evidence for the procudure under discussion and a few links to debate elsewhere would suffice. I wouldn't like to see a quack's corner here.

Penny Outskirts



Joined: 18 Sep 2005
Posts: 23385
Location: Planet, not on the....
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 11:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

cab wrote:
bagpuss wrote:
People being able to discuss their faith based positions without being derailed by non believers should be allowed and I am sorry if I have contributed to this no being a good space to do that


Discussion of faith based things without being derailed by those who base alternative viewpoints on evidence? I'm not sure I get you, sorry

Would this mean that the rest of the forum should be a place where fact and reason shouldn't be challenged by faith and belief?

You quite rightly pointed out one slippery slope, I can see others here too!


I don't understand that either.

dpack



Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 38658
Location: yes
PostPosted: Mon Mar 07, 11 11:15 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
    

in otwc extra rigor could be applied to the scientific process of testing hypothises

this could be interesting

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Downsizer Forum Index -> Site guidelines, Announcements, Problems and Suggestions All times are GMT
Page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 3 of 8
View Latest Posts View Latest Posts

 

Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
Copyright 2004 marsjupiter.com