Skeptic Friends Network

Username:
Password:
Save Password
Forgot your Password?
Home | Forums | Active Topics | Active Polls | Register | FAQ | Contact Us  
  Connect: Chat | SFN Messenger | Buddy List | Members
Personalize: Profile | My Page | Forum Bookmarks  
 All Forums
 Our Skeptic Forums
 Astronomy
 Mozina vs. The Crackpot Index
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Next Page
Author Previous Topic Topic Next Topic
Page: of 3

BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard

3192 Posts

Posted - 01/25/2006 :  11:18:43  Show Profile Send BigPapaSmurf a Private Message
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

I dont have the time to review the whole shebang, but I can tell right off the bat that there is 90 points for #36 and #37, not a good start. (Low score is better)

quote:
40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is. (30 more points for fantasizing about show trials in which scientists who mocked your theories will be forced to recant.)

50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions.

"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History

"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini

Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend

Sweden
9688 Posts

Posted - 01/25/2006 :  15:58:21   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Send Dr. Mabuse an ICQ Message Send Dr. Mabuse a Private Message
quote:
5. 5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction.
Does anyone want to start counting? Check.

quote:
11. 10 points for beginning the description of your theory by saying how long you have been working on it.
While Mozina didn't actuall start with this, it has been brought up several times. Check.

quote:
14. 10 points for each new term you invent and use without properly defining it.
"Stratification layer". Check.

quote:
22. 20 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Newton or claim that classical mechanics is fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).
That the Sun's density cannot be calculated without taking "dark matter" into account definitly qualifies as a fundamental step away from classical mechanics. Check.


Someone else care to fill in the blanks?

Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3

"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse

Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26022 Posts

Posted - 01/25/2006 :  18:46:53   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
(I liked the Crackpot Index so much that I - with Mr. Baez' permission - modified and expanded it for medical use as the Quackery Index.)

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26022 Posts

Posted - 01/25/2006 :  18:51:16   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
By the way, Mozina has garnered himself many points with this:
7. 5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those with defective keyboards).
Too bad.

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

GeeMack
SFN Regular

USA
1093 Posts

Posted - 01/25/2006 :  22:40:10   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send GeeMack a Private Message
3. 2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.
"Sure, the "relative" density is density we use to launch satellites and to compute current calculations that allow us to move around in our solar system RELATIVE to movements of our solar system."
17. 10 points for arguing that while a current well-established theory predicts phenomena correctly, it doesn't explain "why" they occur, or fails to provide a "mechanism".
"I've answered as many questions as I can, and far more than most solar scientists can offer you as it relates to the cause of sunsposts, the suns 11 year active cycle, the layouts and arrangements of plasma in the atmosphere, etc."
Go to Top of Page

BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard

3192 Posts

Posted - 01/26/2006 :  06:24:32   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send BigPapaSmurf a Private Message
Fantastic Quackery Index Dave, theres a lot of negative choices, I bet MM would get at least 30 points over there as well.

"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History

"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini
Go to Top of Page

GeeMack
SFN Regular

USA
1093 Posts

Posted - 01/26/2006 :  08:26:46   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send GeeMack a Private Message
I think "cutting edge of a paradigm shift" and "blow NASA's model out of the water" should be considered synonymous, and I'll award Mozina another well deserved 10 points here...
19. 10 points for claiming that your work is on the cutting edge of a "paradigm shift".
"The issue of mass separation will be front and center of the debate once the STEREO data becomes available. At that point I 'expect' to find the transitional region is located under the photosphere which would blow NASA's model out of the water."
Go to Top of Page

BigPapaSmurf
SFN Die Hard

3192 Posts

Posted - 01/26/2006 :  08:38:48   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send BigPapaSmurf a Private Message
quote:
"The issue of mass separation will be front and center of the debate once the STEREO data becomes available. At that point I 'expect' to find the transitional region is located under the photosphere which would blow NASA's model out of the water."


I think that qualifies under #36, as in the first post.

The 'paradigm shift' option if for people who hear a term like that then use it to sound educated. Like George Bush using Latin.

"...things I have neither seen nor experienced nor heard tell of from anybody else; things, what is more, that do not in fact exist and could not ever exist at all. So my readers must not believe a word I say." -Lucian on his book True History

"...They accept such things on faith alone, without any evidence. So if a fraudulent and cunning person who knows how to take advantage of a situation comes among them, he can make himself rich in a short time." -Lucian critical of early Christians c.166 AD From his book, De Morte Peregrini
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 01/26/2006 :  08:40:06   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message
I've got 162 points total so far.

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

GeeMack
SFN Regular

USA
1093 Posts

Posted - 01/26/2006 :  10:35:18   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send GeeMack a Private Message
3. 2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.
I said, "Bottom line, if the surface isn't solid, it isn't solid. So what material is it?"

To which Mozina replied, "It is solid."

Vacuous? You bet.
Go to Top of Page

Dave W.
Info Junkie

USA
26022 Posts

Posted - 01/26/2006 :  10:48:33   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Dave W.'s Homepage Send Dave W. a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer

I've got 162 points total so far.
How many all-caps words did you estimate into that (assuming you didn't actually count 'em)?

- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too.
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 01/26/2006 :  13:26:54   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by Dave W.

quote:
Originally posted by Valiant Dancer

I've got 162 points total so far.
How many all-caps words did you estimate into that (assuming you didn't actually count 'em)?



Just one, but I didn't apply the -5 starting point because I have faith in the future posts of Mr. Mozina.

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

GeeMack
SFN Regular

USA
1093 Posts

Posted - 01/26/2006 :  14:07:43   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send GeeMack a Private Message
7. 5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those with defective keyboards). [20 points]

15. 10 points for each statement along the lines of "I'm not good at math, but my theory is conceptually right, so all I need is for someone to express it in terms of equations".
"Instead of using or considering anything I presented and could present, I was instead *TOLD* to do OOM calcs on *ONLY TWO* images (so they woulndn't have to consider what Yohkoh or Rhessi see). Better yet, I was given a 'two parter' that included the NEED to figure out light penetration through plasma, not one of my 'stronger' suits at the moment."
Go to Top of Page

GeeMack
SFN Regular

USA
1093 Posts

Posted - 01/26/2006 :  20:07:46   [Permalink]  Show Profile Send GeeMack a Private Message
7. 5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those with defective keyboards). [10 points]

34. 40 points for claiming that the "scientific establishment" is engaged in a "conspiracy" to prevent your work from gaining its well-deserved fame, or suchlike.
"Well, you're right about the last part, this issue is not related to a single individual, it's related to a set assumption that are made by a LOT (probably all) of the folks that study heliosiesmology today. Specifically there is an ASSUMPTION that there is nothing solid under the photosphere."
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 01/27/2006 :  06:17:05   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message
quote:
Originally posted by GeeMack

7. 5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those with defective keyboards). [10 points]

34. 40 points for claiming that the "scientific establishment" is engaged in a "conspiracy" to prevent your work from gaining its well-deserved fame, or suchlike.
"Well, you're right about the last part, this issue is not related to a single individual, it's related to a set assumption that are made by a LOT (probably all) of the folks that study heliosiesmology today. Specifically there is an ASSUMPTION that there is nothing solid under the photosphere."




232.

Includes -5 start point and all caps pointed out here.

Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page

Valiant Dancer
Forum Goalie

USA
4826 Posts

Posted - 01/27/2006 :  08:40:16   [Permalink]  Show Profile  Visit Valiant Dancer's Homepage Send Valiant Dancer a Private Message
OK, I've gone through the previous 2 threads to get a more accurate picture. I've take into account the stuff posted here on the third thread as I don't want to ding him on multiple of the same majors.

From First thread - 1,164
From Second thread - 3,035
From third thread thus far - 187

Total - 4,386

The first two threads allone have a combined unnecessary caps total of 760. I have included the -5 baseline in it. I have the details saved off to my hard drive.


Cthulhu/Asmodeus when you're tired of voting for the lesser of two evils

Brother Cutlass of Reasoned Discussion
Go to Top of Page
Page: of 3 Previous Topic Topic Next Topic  
Next Page
 New Topic  Topic Locked
 Printer Friendly Bookmark this Topic BookMark Topic
Jump To:

The mission of the Skeptic Friends Network is to promote skepticism, critical thinking, science and logic as the best methods for evaluating all claims of fact, and we invite active participation by our members to create a skeptical community with a wide variety of viewpoints and expertise.


Home | Skeptic Forums | Skeptic Summary | The Kil Report | Creation/Evolution | Rationally Speaking | Skeptillaneous | About Skepticism | Fan Mail | Claims List | Calendar & Events | Skeptic Links | Book Reviews | Gift Shop | SFN on Facebook | Staff | Contact Us

Skeptic Friends Network
© 2008 Skeptic Friends Network Go To Top Of Page
This page was generated in 0.12 seconds.
Powered by @tomic Studio
Snitz Forums 2000