|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
 Posted - 09/25/2011 : 22:55:41 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
CRUX:
Kil, how do you know that for a fact, please ? |
I follow the threads, even when I'm not commenting. Dave is an administrator here, as am I. But I am one of the founders of SFN. So I've been here the whole time Dave has. Never once has he altered a thread. We just don't do that. Above all, and no matter how gnarly it gets, we have ethical standards that we must have if we are to be a skeptics forum. It just doesn't happen. We couldn't function if it did. And I still don't know why you would make such a serious accusation?
|
Well, Kil, thanks for answering that you have no means of knowing. I just wanted to know why you would act like that; so sure.
The examples of unfair demands being made by some of your staff are evident, surely, even to you...??? |
| Edited by - CRUX on 09/25/2011 23:00:31 |
 |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2011 : 22:59:52 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by CRUX
How dense are you, Dave ? Where does it say it was ? It says it is an example of something else than what I was looking for. Sheesh ! |
You said it was an example of the "honesty" Kil was talking about, which was about me removing posts or altering threads. You presented a completely different kind of alleged dishonesty, which is itself dishonest. And then you compounded the dishonesty by alleging that it's a regular practice for the staff here to demand answers to dishonest questions "or else."| So you made the accusation without having evidence for it. |
That is not the case. |
Well, when are you going to present the evidence? |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 09/25/2011 : 23:00:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by Kil
CRUX:
Kil, how do you know that for a fact, please ? |
I follow the threads, even when I'm not commenting. Dave is an administrator here, as am I. But I am one of the founders of SFN. So I've been here the whole time Dave has. Never once has he altered a thread. We just don't do that. Above all, and no matter how gnarly it gets, we have ethical standards that we must have if we are to be a skeptics forum. It just doesn't happen. We couldn't function if it did. And I still don't know why you would make such a serious accusation?
|
Well, Kil, thanks for answering that you have no means of knowing. I just wanted to know why you would act like that; so sure, where the examples of unfair demands being made by some of your staff are evident.
|
What is your means of knowing? It's a serious accusation. Why did you make it? On what grounds? This isn't a matter of not liking Dave's debating style. You are accusing him of a serious breach of ethics. On what grounds? |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2011 : 23:02:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by CRUX
...where the examples of unfair demands being made by some of your staff are evident. |
Of course, MG wasn't banned because of some allegedly unfair demand. He was banned for admittedly trolling. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2011 : 23:04:44 [Permalink]
|
Here is some honest debate:Dave said:
Flamingos have different genes than do cockatoos. You ask us to focus on the differences that cause things, and so I will:Cockatoo genes plus normal diet equals white birds.
Cockatoo genes plus carotenoid-heavy diet equals white birds.
Flamingo genes plus normal diet equals white birds.
Flamingo genes plus carotenoid-heavy diet equals pink birds. What is different, CRUX?
|
So he presented this as evidence. But claims the same kind of thing is not good enough as evidence.
Honest debate? |
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2011 : 23:13:56 [Permalink]
|
| you're the one who thinks that the pinkness of flamingo feathers has a "SOLE" cause. |
Note the continual misrepresentation of my position. I've told him many times now that I am not talking about "pinkness of feathers" and sole cause.
He continues to do these tricks.
Of course, my position is that food difference is sole cause of the CHANGE in color.
|
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2011 : 23:15:02 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Originally posted by CRUX
...where the examples of unfair demands being made by some of your staff are evident. |
Of course, MG wasn't banned because of some allegedly unfair demand. He was banned for admittedly trolling.
|
wtf are you yammering about?
the unfair demands are YOURS. |
|
|
|
H. Humbert
SFN Die Hard
USA
4574 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2011 : 23:17:18 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by CRUX
| you're the one who thinks that the pinkness of flamingo feathers has a "SOLE" cause. |
Of course, my position is that food difference is sole cause of the CHANGE in color. |
The change from white to the color pink requires both the proper diet and the proper genetics. The change will not occur without both of those things. Your clarification of your position doesn't seem to address this.
|
"A man is his own easiest dupe, for what he wishes to be true he generally believes to be true." --Demosthenes
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself - and you are the easiest person to fool." --Richard P. Feynman
"Face facts with dignity." --found inside a fortune cookie |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2011 : 23:21:01 [Permalink]
|
| CRUX. You accused one of my administrators of altering threads. Are you going to address that or just keep complaining about Dave's style of debating? |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2011 : 23:28:47 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by H. Humbert
Originally posted by CRUX
| you're the one who thinks that the pinkness of flamingo feathers has a "SOLE" cause. |
Of course, my position is that food difference is sole cause of the CHANGE in color. |
The change from white to the color pink requires both the proper diet and the proper genetics. The change will not occur without both of those things. Your clarification of your position doesn't seem to address this.
|
ah, the kitchen sink thrown back in. The question, HH, is not "what is required at every level in order for an observation to be made of the change", or that we ask to know "every cause of everything and the causes of the preceding causes for that", and so on ad infinitum.
The question is very precise and economical; it cuts out the biological elements and environmental and genetical(as per a species)elements or factors, that are held in common, by all members of the group[s] involved.]
The reason this is good, is that otherwise, you'd have to calculate in temperature, wind speed, star positions etc as part of the equation. Kitchen sink time. Better to consult an astrology nut, it's so impossible.
and that's senseless, when all share a common condition.
Agreed ?
|
| Edited by - CRUX on 09/25/2011 23:34:22 |
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2011 : 23:35:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
CRUX. You accused one of my administrators of altering threads. Are you going to address that or just keep complaining about Dave's style of debating?
|
You throw false claims out there, of fairness, and I respond showing it's not true. Don't bully. You know you've been screwing up. You claimed honest debate. Is that right? Not in my books. You're being a bully as you have been. I certainly do not intend to stay up all hours tonite showing you your own shit, I might well sleep. Everywhere I look, there is evidence of what you've been doing..such as the unfair demand backed by intimidation.
You yourself did some pretty fucked things, Kil
Someone called MG an idiot, and that person could not spell "too". Upon further assaults by the same individual, MG responded playing on that spelling mistake and the words ( idiot) of the one doing the assaulting.
MG got the reprimand, of course.
Kil,
The thread was altered, unfavourably for MG
You guys suck |
| Edited by - CRUX on 09/25/2011 23:46:35 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 09/25/2011 : 23:49:32 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by Kil
CRUX. You accused one of my administrators of altering threads. Are you going to address that or just keep complaining about Dave's style of debating?
|
You throw shit out there, I respond showing it's not true. Don't bully. You know you've been screwing up. You claimed honest debate. Is that right? Not in my books. You're being a bully as you have been. I certainly do not intend to stay up all hours tonite showing you your own shit, I might well sleep.
|
Being the skeptic that I am, I doubt that you will find a single example of Dave altering a thread.
I said Dave is a tough debater. Yeah. He's honest. Are you debating honestly? As I see it, the genotype determines whether or not a flamingo will turn pink (phenotype) when fed a certain food. This whole debate seems to revolve around you insisting that we shouldn't consider biological reasons for why a flamingo would turn pink when fed a different food. Well, fine. Don't consider it. But don't tell us that we shouldn't consider it. I mean, is that honest debating? Saying the "sole" reason for flamingos turning pink is the food? Why do you ask us to ignore genotype, which often determines the phenotype, when it must be considered or we should assume that all white birds will change colors depending on what they ate, and than accuse us of not getting it? Is that honest?
I'll give you this. The phenotype is the manifestation of a flamingo being fed a certain food. But other factors need to be considered to explane why a pink flamingo is pink.
Anyhow, yes, I do want to know, after you get done telling me that I don't understand the flamingo thing either, why you would accuse Dave of altering threads. For the life of me, I can't see how I'm being a bully by asking that question. The claim is yours. And this is, after all, a skeptics forum. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2011 : 00:14:13 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Originally posted by CRUX
Originally posted by Kil
CRUX. You accused one of my administrators of altering threads. Are you going to address that or just keep complaining about Dave's style of debating?
|
You throw shit out there, I respond showing it's not true. Don't bully. You know you've been screwing up. You claimed honest debate. Is that right? Not in my books. You're being a bully as you have been. I certainly do not intend to stay up all hours tonite showing you your own shit, I might well sleep.
|
Being the skeptic that I am, I doubt that you will find a single example of Dave altering a thread. |
It's difficult to find things once removed, isn't it ?
I said Dave is a tough debater. Yeah. He's honest. |
His tactics have been anything but fair or honest. We seem to disagree on what honesty IS.
We can leave that for now.
Are you debating honestly? |
YES. But back on to your end here for a second, since you've asked that.I've already presented some examples of unfairness - quite readily visible. I would like you to show examples of me doing that or any other kind of trick if you would. I'll admit it if I did something that I am not aware of right now. You, on the other hand, admit nothing - after evidence is there for you.
To the debate:
| As I see it, the genotype determines whether or not a flamingo will turn pink (phenotype) when fed a certain food. |
yes.
This whole debate seems to revolve around you insisting that we shouldn't consider biological reasons for why a flamingo would turn pink when fed a different food. |
It's been streamlined well, yes, so that is the core.
| Well, fine. Don't consider it. But don't tell us that we shouldn't consider it. I mean, is that honest debating? |
Yes it is honest debating, and here is why: I do not say you should not consider it. I say it's not relevant and is dumped. That is my claim. Not that I insist because of me, but I do say it is considered proper to do, and is done that way. Obviously ! Sheesh.
How else would anyone ever perform simple garden variety testing , Sir ?
Saying the "sole" reason for flamingos turning pink is the food? |
It's the sole CAUSE of ***the change*** from ****phenotype white*** to ***phenotype pink***.Key words: "the change" (from one to the other). This of course, obviates all the messy stuffs.
Not "sole reason for turning pink", except in a loose- worded way. aid in reference to the testing I describe, then it is OK to say it like that...it would be "sole cause of white flamingos turning pink"
It's about relation to change in states, Kil. Not about the actual state. Maybe those words aren't good enough. Let me try to explain again: it's not about relating everything that goes into the making of a pink feather. It's only about noting the relationship as to change from one state to another, and what is the observed cause for that change. In experiments, when you toggle the one available variable...it is the cause of the change observed to happen.
That is so very plain. If I step on your toe, and you feel pressure, and I then let go of your toe, and pressure is let off..you know !
Sole cause of pressure....
and it's not about leather at that point !!!!!!
Those different words convey something different.
Why do you ask us to ignore genotype |
When I do, it's because it's an element held in common by all members, just like the sky is, or the weather is, or the ground is; they are all common elements for the whole group - and MUST be ignored in order to proceed with simple testing
Not by decree, but by need to proceed. |
| Edited by - CRUX on 09/26/2011 04:56:34 |
|
|
|
CRUX
BANNED
192 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2011 : 00:26:28 [Permalink]
|
it's bullying to repeatedly make suggestions that a research task is to arrive like "just like that" and to intimate that there is nothing to my claim, because nothing appeared yet WHICH HAS BEEN REMOVED.
all, as you guys keep peppering with things that need attention. |
| Edited by - CRUX on 09/26/2011 00:30:08 |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 09/26/2011 : 00:33:50 [Permalink]
|
CRUX:
When I do, it's because it's an element held in common by all members... |
It may be common to all members of the species, but it's still a factor. Knowing that will not prevent simple testing. You sir, are nit picking. And this whole stupid debate has been a nit pick.
Except for you accusing Dave, with no evidence at all, that he has altered threads. That's pretty serious. |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
If I get a haircut 2
