RationalWiki talk:What is going on in the clogosphere?

From RationalWiki
(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
(Wiki4CAM)
(Wiki4CAM)
Line 98: Line 98:
  
 
I particularly liked this as well: "where they can build their knowledge base without any undue skeptical diversions."  Yeah, skepticism is teh suxxors. [[User:Smyth|Smyth]] 12:41, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 
I particularly liked this as well: "where they can build their knowledge base without any undue skeptical diversions."  Yeah, skepticism is teh suxxors. [[User:Smyth|Smyth]] 12:41, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
 +
 +
==Not WIGO worthy but funny:Tooth fairy deserves respect!==
 +
 +
I am in a fight over at wikipedia on the [[Law of attraction]] page. It can be seen [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Law_of_Attraction here]. One of the good guys shows up and says "you know saying there isn't much scientific research done on the law of attraction is like complaining that there is not enough research done on the tooth fairy." The reply is that the non-existence of the tooth fairy is merely his opinion and a minority one at best. That people must tolerate and respect other peoples beliefs in the tooth fairy. Yes these are adults. {{user:tmtoulouse/options}} 21:11, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

Revision as of 01:11, 15 August 2008

Can we date these entries (when we added them and when they were posted)? Please? humanUser talk:Human 20:24, 17 May 2008 (EDT)

Wouldn't that make them a bit unweildy? Where do you want the date, anyway? --Kels 10:16, 18 May 2008 (EDT)
I didn't think so... how about adding for example (posted May 5 2008) after each item? (Meaning, the date the blogger committed their thoughts to print) It will show what's stale and what's fresh, at least. I guess our "posting order" (new at top) kind of takes care of our "post date" thing. We could just use monthly headers for that, I suppose. humanUser talk:Human 15:08, 18 May 2008 (EDT)
How's that look? --Kels 16:11, 18 May 2008 (EDT)
Looks good to me. As people add more things in each section, of course, we'll have a better idea of what matters and where to say it. Thanks for adding some stuff, I think it makes it easier for others to follow. humanUser talk:Human 16:54, 18 May 2008 (EDT)

Contents

on conservative erotica

  • I can't define pornography but I know it when I see it. --glances at a example of conservative erotica-- yawn . . . that is definitely not it.
  • mary and john closed the bedroom door and presumably retired to their separate but matching beds because the time to reproduce was not yet nigh.

HAHAHAHAHA . .. oh . . sorry. Exasperate me!Sheesh!Not the most impressive contributor here 12:43, 21 May 2008 (EDT)

To steal from Bill Maher, they think sex is bad because sex with them always is! --Kels 13:10, 21 May 2008 (EDT)

Shelly the Republican

... it's a parody. It's been around a few years and was debunked not long after it started (can't remember where) D-Notice 18:18, 17 June 2008 (EDT)

Ray Comfort has a blog!

And his obsession with food analogies continues. tmtoulouse irritate 11:44, 25 June 2008 (EDT)

Not quite a Nobel

$100 and a book. Wow! these people really know how to value their best people. SusanG  ContribsTalk 14:25, 25 July 2008 (EDT)

Anonymous

Isn't that the guy attacking Scientology? DLerner 05:31, 26 July 2008 (EDT)

I think Anonymous is a pretty cool guy, eh is awarded awards by creationists and doesn't afraid of anything! --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 18:34, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

It was a joke

Errr, can't you guys get the joke... it wasn't a tyop! הרב ד.לערנער Ask the Rabbi a question 05:31, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

But the post is about bilingualism, not literacy or grammar. ~ Gloom(is never asleep) 05:33, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
It should be written in Spanish, methinks. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:20, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

English Fail

(Re: Phyllis about Obama and learning a second language)

I know that that's not strictly her point, but this section of her column cracked me up (emphasis mine):

Most Americans look upon the English language as the number-one factor that defines our national identity: "e pluribus unum," one nation out of many peoples. We want English to be our national, official language, spoken by all who call themselves Americans.

Yep, English sure defines your national identity, which is summed up in a non-English phrase. Brilliant. --Sid 17:33, 27 July 2008 (EDT)

And one suggested by a Swiss artist, even. --AKjeldsenCum dissensie 17:37, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
Yes, I fell off my chair when I read that, too. ħumanUser talk:Human 18:20, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
I read some where once "e pluribus unum" comes from a poem about making salad dressing, usually credited to Virgil. \approx\pi 18:43, 27 July 2008 (EDT)
I just copyed it to paste it here, only to see many of us saw the same damn thing. Et Tu, brute?


Should we be linking to paysites here

I went to the scientific evidence for irreducible complex article and found I couldn't read it for want of a subscription. I wonder if allowing linking to paysites will (a) make this section less reliable and therefore less popular(b) could result in blatant advertising in the future (not saying that this necessarily is). — Unsigned, by: Damo2353 / talk / contribs

I think it depends on the nature of the paysite and what is available for free? IE, I went to one the other day (some science journal) and the synopsis was enough to tell me what I needed. If I want to read it for free, I guess I could head to the local University library. If a site requires paying to read anything, it's not a very useful link, of course. ħumanUser talk:Human 16:12, 28 July 2008 (EDT)

Ron Paul

As someone who does not live in the US, who is Ron Paul and why won't he give up?\approx\pi 08:04, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

I second the question. And I ask who is he likely to hurt if he gets a few votes?--Damo2353 08:09, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
According to our article he is a Republican so he will be hurting McCann. What I don't understand is why he has not conceded defeat and why he thinks he is so important to continue down a futile and destructive path. \approx\pi 21:12, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

He is a libertarian/republican political crank that developed a very abusive and "large" internet presence of crazy kooks during his race. His is famous for winning ever online poll. He and his followers are total nut cases that I get a kick out of poking. tmtoulouse irritate 21:17, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Well he is Republican, but he seems to have a very Isolationist foreign policy, perhaps even more so than the Democrats. Plus he seems to invigorate a large youth market that might otherwise vote Obama (or I could be talking out of my ass). Would his nutcases vote Obama or McCain if he weren't there?Damo2353 21:19, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
There's a difference between isolationist (RP) & non-interventionist (Dem). SusanG  ContribsTalk 21:22, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
Neither, they are actually a very small number of the voting population, maybe 50,000-100,000 "hard" supporters, another half million weak supporters. Most would not vote, or are voting other third party options like Barr. Primarily dominated by extreme libertarian sects of the population. tmtoulouse irritate 21:23, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
I first became interested in him from following the tax protester movement that decided he was their messiah. Those are his followers, they are that far "gone." tmtoulouse irritate 21:25, 29 July 2008 (EDT)
(edit conflict) Of the people I know at school who supported Paul, one was a libertarian, who I think will vote 3rd party, and a couple more were toward the liberal side, who would either vote Obama, or not at all. --CPAdmin1 21:27, 29 July 2008 (EDT)

Darwin conspiracy

I thought that the general premise (Darwin wasn't first) was generally accepted as true. Like most "discoverers" of scientific breakthroughs he "stood on the shoulders of giants". Wallace and he both came up with the concept concurrently & Darwin was the one to publish & get noticed. "Natural selection" was probably a Wallacism.

"in the mid-1800s, Darwin and the British biologist Alfred Russel Wallace independently conceived of a natural, even observable, way for life to change: a process Darwin called natural selection." http://evolution.berkeley.edu/evolibrary/article/_0/history_14

It was luck and good PR that got Darwin the Kudos - like most such things it was collaborative - although unwitting. SusanG  ContribsTalk 07:16, 2 August 2008 (EDT)

It's one thing to put it the way you did, which is of course how most breakthroughs occur. It's another to say Darwin "stole" the ideas in his book, and to propose a conspiracy to support him. Right? ħumanUser talk:Human 22:29, 2 August 2008 (EDT)
The idea of "evolution" had been around for a long time (Erasmus Darwin, Lamarck, etc) so that was not the "breakthrough." The breakthrough was the idea of natural selection, if that was a Wallace idea that Darwin adapted than Darwin did nothing but collect specimens. The truth is Darwin had been writing in his notebooks the early idea of natural selection even as early his last few weeks on the Beagle. Certainly he had formulated the outlines of the theory by 1840, and had started sending the idea out to a few choice friends in letters decades before Wallace sent his letter to Darwin. No, Darwin did not borrow the idea of natural selection from Wallace. tmtoulouse irritate 20:21, 3 August 2008 (EDT)

Commenting out

The reason I commented out the Jinxmchue entry was because it was on the front page, even though it's about Conservapedia. It seems silly to say "We're boycotting conservapedia!" then have a clogosphere entry about it further down the page. Totnesmartin 12:55, 9 August 2008 (EDT)

The link is solely to his blog, not to CP and it was posted before the boycott. Also we still have all the CP WIGO entries active so commenting out this one is pointless. Jollyfish.gifGenghisYou have the right to be offended; and I have the right to offend you. 13:10, 9 August 2008 (EDT)

Wiki4CAM

"Only CAM practitioners can participate in this wiki." Quacks. I personally think that homeopaths should be made to wear pointy wizard hats and have a gong sounded when introduced to a patient. CorryTalk 00:06, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

They don't? \approx\pi 00:10, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
Unfortunately the recent internet attention has netted them what looks like a complete mess of vandalism. I will come back to it tomorrow or something. 24.36.227.74 00:12, 14 August 2008 (EDT)
Those are some enterprising bastards. CorryTalk 00:18, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

Thanx!

I don't think it took much effort - their "all pages" fit on one screen, and there were no hands (apparently) on board to check wandals. I'm sure they can fix what I didn't tomorrow. ħumanUser talk:Human 01:38, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

I particularly liked this as well: "where they can build their knowledge base without any undue skeptical diversions." Yeah, skepticism is teh suxxors. Smyth 12:41, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

Not WIGO worthy but funny:Tooth fairy deserves respect!

I am in a fight over at wikipedia on the Law of attraction page. It can be seen here. One of the good guys shows up and says "you know saying there isn't much scientific research done on the law of attraction is like complaining that there is not enough research done on the tooth fairy." The reply is that the non-existence of the tooth fairy is merely his opinion and a minority one at best. That people must tolerate and respect other peoples beliefs in the tooth fairy. Yes these are adults. tmtoulouse irritate 21:11, 14 August 2008 (EDT)

Personal tools
Namespaces

Variants
Actions
Navigation
Community
Tools
support