Skepicism Doesn't make you a denier or a crank.

[Schneibster]

How is this forum not your personal soap box nowadays?

I'm not the admin.

Is that website of yours just a clever split personality act?

LOL

I can smell the nutjobs, they always have a conspiracy theory about me.

[Betruger]

PopSci trolls were sysadmins.

if this board turns into nothing more than a political fight club, I may as well shut it down... but I won't, because I still have reason to hope we'll eventually get something new to discuss with regard to polywell fusion!

This forum won't be kept open because you haven't gone past the limit with your self-serving verbal diarrhea, but because J.Strout sees Polywell light at the end of the tunnel.

[Jccarlton]

PopSci trolls were sysadmins.

if this board turns into nothing more than a political fight club, I may as well shut it down... but I won't, because I still have reason to hope we'll eventually get something new to discuss with regard to polywell fusion!

This forum won't be kept open because you haven't gone past the limit with your self-serving verbal diarrhea, but because J.Strout sees Polywell light at the end of the tunnel.

If the PopSci trolls were sysadmins it explains some things. I never commented there, but if the trolls were sysadmins and playing the kinds of games that our commenter seems to indulge in its bad news for the magazine. If the sysadmins were doing things like spontaneously shutting people out and deleting comments they didn't like and the likely backlash that caused streaming over into editorial and maybe even over to advertising, then I can see why they had to just shut the thing down. If a major account had some peeved off people in it because the sysadmins monkeyed with their accounts to shut them up then PopSci had good reason to worry.

[GIThruster]

Well there is also the trouble that many consider themselves to be able "debunkers" or "mythbusters" who haven't the necessary skills for any particular field of science. People pretend to be experts who are not (like our troll) and attempt to adjudicate issues they have no apprehension of. So for example, when our troll talks about GR, he is strutting what he believes will convince others he knows GR, but anyone trained in GR knows this is a con game. The trouble comes when a serious challenge to GR is issued, and such pseudo-experts are there "debunking".

And BTW, this is why I am always ready to admit I do not have the math skills of many here. It is when we pretend we have skills we don't, that we are setting up a situation for failure. My guess is that given the nature of popsci--science for the uneducated--the site drew all manner of pseudo-experts like our troll.

[Jccarlton]

Well there is also the trouble that many consider themselves to be able "debunkers" or "mythbusters" who haven't the necessary skills for any particular field of science. People pretend to be experts who are not (like our troll) and attempt to adjudicate issues they have no apprehension of. So for example, when our troll talks about GR, he is strutting what he believes will convince others he knows GR, but anyone trained in GR knows this is a con game. The trouble comes when a serious challenge to GR is issued, and such pseudo-experts are there "debunking".

And BTW, this is why I am always ready to admit I do not have the math skills of many here. It is when we pretend we have skills we don't, that we are setting up a situation for failure. My guess is that given the nature of popsci--science for the uneducated--the site drew all manner of pseudo-experts like our troll.

I'm sure that GR can stand or fall on its own. If an experiment turns up weird or a null result where a positive is expected than you revisit the theory in the light of new knowledge. GR isn't an end point, but just a stop on the journey. Even Einstein thought so and who am I to argue with that?

[Schneibster]

Well there is also the trouble that many consider themselves to be able "debunkers" or "mythbusters" who haven't the necessary skills for any particular field of science. People pretend to be experts who are not (like our troll) and attempt to adjudicate issues they have no apprehension of. So for example, when our troll talks about GR, he is strutting what he believes will convince others he knows GR, but anyone trained in GR knows this is a con game. The trouble comes when a serious challenge to GR is issued, and such pseudo-experts are there "debunking".

And BTW, this is why I am always ready to admit I do not have the math skills of many here. It is when we pretend we have skills we don't, that we are setting up a situation for failure. My guess is that given the nature of popsci--science for the uneducated--the site drew all manner of pseudo-experts like our troll.

Reported as a personal insult. These aren't welcome here any more.

[GIThruster]

If an experiment turns up weird or a null result where a positive is expected than you revisit the theory in the light of new knowledge.

Precisely correct. That's why we call them "theories" rather than "facts". When someone says a theory is a fact, such as when they claim evolution is a fact; then you know you're dealing with someone who doesn't understand what science is all about. Certainly I believe in evolution, but if it had the status of fact, then we would have to say we were wrong in our facts when Gould modified the theory by adding punctuated equilibria. Facts don't get modified. Theories get modified as we learn more and more.

[Schneibster]

If an experiment turns up weird or a null result where a positive is expected than you revisit the theory in the light of new knowledge.

Precisely correct.

Actually precisely wrong. You go looking for where you screwed up the experiment. See "Pioneer effect." See "FTL neutrinos." Just two recent examples.

IIRC the FTL neutrinos fiasco turned out to be some optical fibers that had been bent around a corner too tightly. They're made of glass. That doesn't work out well.

I just happened to look up the Pioneer effect, and it was heat radiation from the reactor. When they calculated it the first time they misplaced a decimal point.

[Jccarlton]

If an experiment turns up weird or a null result where a positive is expected than you revisit the theory in the light of new knowledge.

Precisely correct. That's why we call them "theories" rather than "facts". When someone says a theory is a fact, such as when they claim evolution is a fact; then you know you're dealing with someone who doesn't understand what science is all about. Certainly I believe in evolution, but if it had the status of fact, then we would have to say we were wrong in our facts when Gould modified the theory by adding punctuated equilibria. Facts don't get modified. Theories get modified as we learn more and more.

Well there are advantages to having actually worked in a large accelerator lab. There was so much to experience beyond my job. You really get to understand how science works good ands bad when you see from the inside. Made some good friends too.

[Schneibster]

If an experiment turns up weird or a null result where a positive is expected than you revisit the theory in the light of new knowledge.

Precisely correct. That's why we call them "theories" rather than "facts". When someone says a theory is a fact, such as when they claim evolution is a fact; then you know you're dealing with someone who doesn't understand what science is all about. Certainly I believe in evolution, but if it had the status of fact, then we would have to say we were wrong in our facts when Gould modified the theory by adding punctuated equilibria. Facts don't get modified. Theories get modified as we learn more and more.

Well there are advantages to having actually worked in a large accelerator lab. There was so much to experience beyond my job. You really get to understand how science works good ands bad when you see from the inside. Made some good friends too.

The FTL neutrino fail was at a satellite facility of the LHC.

[Betruger]

The PopSci trolls weren't admins. They were keyboard warriors with enough time to spam PopSci into censorship.

[Schneibster]

The PopSci trolls weren't admins. They were keyboard warriors with enough time to spam PopSci into censorship.

Yep: climate cranks, mostly according to PopSci, but also some YECs. I think some anti-vaxxers and AIDS deniers as well.