User talk:Nature's Mockery/Archive 1

The path selected for archiving is not in your user space! Add suppresswarning=true if you wish to continue. Report bug

This is an archive page, last updated 27 April 2022. Please do not make edits to this page.

Meh

Meh. You signing up for a RationalWiki account doesn't really move us one way or the other, Nature's Mockery. This is probably because of your poor, obvious attempts at trolling or displays of unwelcome behavior. Maybe you should try to examine our articles and mission statement first, or take a walk outside. We realize that it's possible that you may be here in good faith, so we'll do our best to tolerate it. But don't expect us to get too excited. Our Newcomers' Guide may help clarify things for you.

Looks like we've got ourselves yet another pet Conservapedian. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 00:09, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Eh, I don't even have any of the rights yet. I tried to tell CP how to fix the broken autoconfirmed feature but was ignored. Sievert 81 (talk) 00:21, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Every time CP crashes, it shakes a nut or two our way. Sievert 81 tried to claim — without citation or evidence — that transmittable (wow) spongiform encephalopathies (Mad Cow Disease) is not transmitted by prions,[1] contrary to the scientific consensus. Bongolian (talk) 02:49, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

@Bongolian I know. It was I who reverted them the second time and protected the page to try and de-escalate the edit war. Feel free to unprot it and trout me if you think I shouldn't have done that. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 03:29, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

He admitted he was wrong on his talk page. I never said TSEs were not caused by prions. Sievert 81 (talk) 03:33, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

You claimed that. TSEs are caused by prions, and I never said it wasn't. I was responding to the dumbass that said it did. Check the prion-related pages on Conservapedia I created https://www.conservapedia.com/Transmissible_spongiform_encephalopathy where I spell it right and clearly spell out that it is caused by prions. Show any evidence that I didn't. Sievert 81 (talk) 02:54, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

And check the talk page of Prions and re read it very carefully. It's obvious what I meant, and the intellect of someone who can't figure that out is the same as spelling it 'transmittable spongiform encephalopathies'. Sievert 81 (talk) 02:57, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I misread what you wrote. Sorry about that. Bongolian (talk) 03:30, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, we were both in the wrong there. I shouldn't have insulted you, and you shouldn't have called me out without checking the diff. Sievert 81 (talk) 03:34, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘That said, the main problem with Sievert 81's edits is the mainspace text additions that are lacking in confirming citations. Bongolian (talk) 03:43, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

fair enough, but this https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2019/05/414326/alzheimers-disease-double-prion-disorder-study-shows proves Alz is a prion disease. Sievert 81 (talk) 03:45, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

@Bongolian Check previous message, also just released this https://www.conservapedia.com/Essay:75,000_cases which shows how my 75,000 cases theory works. Sievert 81 (talk) 04:53, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

We're not interested in your theory unless you get it published in reputable journal that we can cite. Bongolian (talk) 04:57, 18 November 2020 (UTC)

Masks

When trying to dispute a scientific consensus, it might be useful to have something better than a single study from four years ago. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 04:52, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

I argue that an older study is better because newer ones may be manipulated by bias. Sievert 81 (talk) 18:47, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

One, the older one is biased. Two, that position is stupid and untenable. Three, no, that's not how bias or studies work. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 19:00, 19 November 2020 (UTC)

Block notice

You have been blocked for 9 hours. You will be unblocked automatically at around 13:08, 20 November 2020 (CDT). You won't able to make any edits until that time. --{{{3}}}

Here's one for edit-warring. When established users tell you not to repeat an action and give you a solid explanation why, it's generally a good idea not to repeat it. @GrammarCommie Feel free to unblock them and trout me if you feel that this is too excessive. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 04:07, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

You guys have no clue how to read sources. It does not 'compare', it says. I edit war because the reason is stupid. Sievert 81 (talk) 04:26, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

You guys are a bunch of fucking idiots and this place is an echo chamber. Completely worthless to try to change your mind on 1 thing. MASKS DONT WORK, 75,000 CASES, BLM ARE TERRORISTS. Sievert 81 (talk) 04:34, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

I mean, defaulting to non-sequitur talking points really doesn't help your case. I admitted to making a typo, and have removed myself from his discussion up until this point. I'm sorry if that wasn't to your liking, but then again such a mistake wasn't to my liking either. As to your current dispute with Circular Reasoning, perhaps you ought to try to lay out your case in a calm and clear manner, trying to work the other person from A to B to C. Yes, I understand that you believe you've been doing that, that you're frustrated and probably more than a little annoyed, but it clearly hasn't conveyed the intended position. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 04:47, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

IF nanoplastics can misfold ANY protein, why can't it be the prion protein???? Sievert 81 (talk) 04:51, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

That sounds like mistaking the map for the territory, honestly. ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 04:55, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

https://www.conservapedia.com/Nanoplastics This is what I wrote on CP, and it hasn't been reverted yet. The right is more tolerant of science than the left, ironic. Sievert 81 (talk) 05:00, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Look, you've caught me in a sympathetic mood. But honestly, CP's understanding "the right" and "the left" is intellectually dubious, at best. Your site exists because you thought Wikipedia was "too far left", which honestly, is just laughable. As for science, you can't just point at something and yell "science!", you have to actually go through the work of submitting evidence, having it reviewed in good faith, accepting criticism and then double checking your work with that criticism in mind, because you have no goal other than to try to figure out what is true. That's science. Now, I've been more or less patient with you, just as I was with Ken and with LT when they both showed up here, even knowing the stuff they get up to on CP. But honestly, I find your defaulting to talking points and ad hom attacks to be incredibly childish and unproductive. Either present your case, or don't. Quit with the nonsense posturing about "the left" and "the right". ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 05:12, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

If I wasn't 16 I would. I am going to submit my 75,000 cases essay for my high school senior project, and am going to work towards a Masters or PhD so people will listen to me. I am just pissed that people don't see the obvious conspiracy here. Why was there very few Alz and CJD cases before plastic and mass farming of cows. Questions I want to answer.Sievert 81 (talk) 05:20, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Maybe David Benatar was right. Maybe humanity isn't worth saving... ☭Comrade GC☭^{Ministry of Praise} 05:24, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

Alas, now it seems, from your comments all too typical of Conservapedian snowflakes (like your buddies LT, RobSmith and Ken) when they come here only to then realize they can't monopolize the narrative like they can at the blog, and then play victim when their ideas get shot down that I showed you too much of that "assume good faith" attitude, which- unlike your blog- while our judgement may admittedly not be perfect, we at least encourage. Thanks for hurting my perception of you even more, Sievert. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 16:40, 20 November 2020 (UTC)

For fucks sake

It is conceivable that you could actually piece together a useful addition to RW, but for fucks sake try to write a coherent sentence.[2] Bongolian (talk) 23:12, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Coop Notice

A case involving you has been raised at the Chicken Coop. Feel free to comment.

JJPMaster (talk) 18:52, 16 December 2020 (UTC)

Actually, the case has been moved to the mod noticeboard. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 18:20, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

It should be noted that Sievert is currently blocked and cannot thus defend himself on this case. Maybe the block should be lifted for the duration of the ATIM vote. ^{— Unsigned, by: Knight Commander / talk / contribs}

Kay, sounds fair; unblocking now. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 18:34, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Topic banned.

You have been topic banned from all articles relating to Biology & Medicine. This means you are not allowed to make edits to these articles or edit their talkpages. Violating this sanction may result in escalating blocks or vandal binning of your account. Repeated violations may result in a vote to permanently block your account. Creating alternate accounts to bypass this topic ban is not allowed. If you want to appeal this topic ban, feel free to open a case over on the moderator noticeboard. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 22:49, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

An atheist AND a Republican?

That's a combination you don't see every day (although there are some "Atheists 4 Trump" groups on Facebook and some ideologically-conservative activist groups like Atheists for Liberty). Interesting. It's good to know that at least we agree on two things, the other being that Trump is scum. I like seeing liberals, conservatives, and far-leftists all come together in their hatred of him. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 02:43, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

My ban from Conservapedia and the storming of the Capitol was the last straw. I only supported Trump because I feared Biden and Harris would end up being a lot worse. Now I think Trump needs to be arrested. I don't know if there WILL be a Republican party anymore. I expected them to protest outside the Capitol, but not destroy it. Is the rumor that they wanted to take the senators as hostages true? Sievert 81 (talk) 04:02, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

Brings to mind the Michigan (I think it was Michigan) kidnapping plot... Twodots (talk) 19:52, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

And there were riots at Georgia's capitol as well, possibly also egged on by the fact that DA JOO Ossoff won. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 20:03, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

I can't say for sure since it of course didn't happen, but one of the protestors did bring zipties so... yeah there's that. At least all of them are being easily identified because none of them wore masks, which is frankly hilarious because not making yourself easily identifiable is protesting 101. Techpriest ^{(I am Alpharius! / / / )} 22:44, 9 January 2021 (UTC)

Racists aren't very bright... if they were they wouldn't be in the Trump cult. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 07:29, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

I would agree, but then again I was stuck in this shit for a while... Sievert 81 (talk) 07:31, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Autopatrolled

I figure you've proven yourself to no longer be a troll, so I'm removing that pesky Captcha for you. Try not to screw up- it may reflect badly on me... Twodots (talk) 18:48, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

The topic ban still applies, but you've been following it well thus far, so I have faith in you I'm confident you'll remain a good-faith editor after being Autopatrolled as well. Knight Commander^{In Service}_{To Her}^Goatness 19:04, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

I will. Hopefully I can get it removed at some point. Sievert 81 (talk) 19:24, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

If you keep this up, I bet you could get it removed pretty quickly... Twodots (talk) 19:31, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

I see the opportunity for more useful additions to the Prions page, specifically mentioning multiple system atrophy and variably protease-sensitive prionopathy, and including a few studies I had on the durability of prions. Sievert 81 (talk) 19:34, 10 January 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations

Seriously, you have grown very much ever since your CP ban. You have gone from being a sockpuppet, to reverting sockpuppets. As such, I have given you the {{welcome}} template in order to cancel out with your {{meh}} from earlier.

What is going on? World Blogs Clogs Elections The Bar (talk) (talk) (talk) (talk) (hic) Welcome to RationalWiki, Sievert 81! Check out our guide for newcomers and our community standards! Tell us how you found RationalWiki here! If you are interested in contributing: Read what our articles are intended to be Check out the to-do list See our help page and Wikipedia's formatting cheatsheet If writing a new article, consider writing up a draft And most importantly: Pull up a goat and have some fun!

JJP...MASTER!_{[talk to] JJP... master?} 20:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Sievert is not a sockpuppet. The reason why I originally put that {{meh}} up there is because we were being visited by a whole bunch of CP trolls back in the day- of which the old Sievert was one. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 21:21, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Talkback!

You have new messages at RationalWiki talk:All things in moderation#Vote: Rescind Sievert 81's topic ban from articles relating to biology and medicine, broadly construed

JJP...MASTER!_{[talk to] JJP... master?} 22:38, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

Notice of demotion

Message from the RationalWiki Ministry of Demotion and Personal Impediment

Dear Sievert 81, We regret to inform you that you have been demoted to the rank of sysop. You have been granted a mop and bucket for the purposes of cleaning up the mess around here. No questions are allowed. If you have any further questions, (further questions are permissible) please refer to the enclosed pamphlet So you are now a sysop. At your leisure, please go to the dungeon Room 202 to see the reward mops and hammers you can work towards having!

--Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 06:19, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

(Copied) Looks like the vandalism is over. One question, can I rename offensive usernames? I don't see any option for it. Sievert 81 (talk) 10:42 pm, Today (UTC−8)

No. Only techs and mods can do that. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 06:44, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

hopefully this edits the talk page instead of the template, but is there anything else interesting I can do I should know about? Sievert 81 (talk) 06:46, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

For setting an excessively huge joke-expiration time for protecting your userpage

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Somebody just wants to let you know you did something silly.

It's better to just select "indefinite" when protecting your userpage. Apparently, from what I've seen discussed on tech support, such high values as "9999" can fuck with the recent changes. Please don't let it happen again. (We should include an entry advising new sysops to not such high values in the sysop guide to prevent mistakes like this in the future methinks.) --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 21:18, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

I was asleep when that happened. What happened to the recent changes? Sorry for breaking it. didn’t know that could happen. Sievert 81 (talk) 21:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Oh, it's okay. Just don't do it again. Many new sysops tend to make mistakes quite often. More information on what happened can be found here. --Goatspeed. _{How's my editing}🎄CircularRasoning🎄^{My experiments} 21:25, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

We should probably raise an issue at MediaWiki itself. Someone doing that intentionally could disable a wiki. Sievert 81 (talk) 21:38, 19 January 2021 (UTC)