Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > rec.arts.sf.written > #419587 > unrolled thread

Junk Science

Back to article view | Back to rec.arts.sf.written

Contents

  Junk Science The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-10 10:26 -0700
    Re: Junk Science Alan Baker <email@domain.com> - 2015-08-10 10:30 -0700
      Re: Junk Science djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) - 2015-08-10 17:45 +0000
        Re: Junk Science Joe Pfeiffer <pfeiffer@cs.nmsu.edu> - 2015-08-10 12:18 -0600
          Re: Junk Science The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-10 11:29 -0700
            Re: Junk Science The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-10 17:38 -0700
              Re: Junk Science The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-10 21:52 -0700
        Re: Junk Science The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-10 11:21 -0700
      Re: Junk Science The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-10 11:15 -0700
        Re: Junk Science The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-08-10 22:16 -0700
    Re: Junk Science Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-08-29 07:24 +0200

#419587 — Junk Science

How do you protect yourself from Junk Science?

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#419589

On 2015-08-10 17:26:49 +0000, The Starmaker said:

> How do you protect yourself from Junk Science?

It starts with not paying any attention to you...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#419594

In article <mqan2p$n9p$1@news.datemas.de>,
Alan Baker  <email@domain.com> wrote:
>On 2015-08-10 17:26:49 +0000, The Starmaker said:
>
>> How do you protect yourself from Junk Science?
>
>It starts with not paying any attention to you...
>

Wouldn't it be nice if nobody ever responded to the Starmaker?
Then I wouldn't see his silly posts at all.

-- 
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the gmail edress.
Kithrup's all spammy and hotmail's been hacked.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#419598

djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:

> In article <mqan2p$n9p$1@news.datemas.de>,
> Alan Baker  <email@domain.com> wrote:
>>On 2015-08-10 17:26:49 +0000, The Starmaker said:
>>
>>> How do you protect yourself from Junk Science?
>>
>>It starts with not paying any attention to you...
>>
>
> Wouldn't it be nice if nobody ever responded to the Starmaker?
> Then I wouldn't see his silly posts at all.

Me too.  That would be so cool...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#419600

Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> 
> djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
> 
> > In article <mqan2p$n9p$1@news.datemas.de>,
> > Alan Baker  <email@domain.com> wrote:
> >>On 2015-08-10 17:26:49 +0000, The Starmaker said:
> >>
> >>> How do you protect yourself from Junk Science?
> >>
> >>It starts with not paying any attention to you...
> >>
> >
> > Wouldn't it be nice if nobody ever responded to the Starmaker?
> > Then I wouldn't see his silly posts at all.
> 
> Me too.  That would be so cool...



it seems  that the community is filled with 'wishful thinkers'...a source of junk science.



science fiction writers are another source...but that is to be expected.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#419623

gilber34 wrote:
> 
> On 8/10/2015 1:29 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> >>
> >> djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
> >f nobody ever responded to the Starmaker?
> >>> Then I wouldn't see his silly posts at all.
> >>
> >> Me too.  That would be so cool...
> >
> >
> >
> > it seems  that the community is filled with 'wishful thinkers'...a source of junk science.
> >
> >
> >
> > science fiction writers are another source...but that is to be expected.
> >
> 
> the media, reporters who cannot understand basic science, because the
> reporters failed science and math courses and had to take a lower path
> into journalism, where subject knowledge is not needed.


"basic science"??? 

https://www.google.com/#q=define+basic+science

You don't acutally believe members of the 'scientific community' understand...."basic science"????


Definition of BASIC SCIENCE. : any one of the sciences (such as anatomy, physiology, bacteriology, pathology, or biochemistry) fundamental to the study of medicine.



Why are you bring up ....the study of medicine???


Maybe You don't understand...basic science.


And certaintly 'science journalist' don't understand...any science!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#419650

gilber34 wrote:
> 
> On 8/10/2015 7:38 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > gilber34 wrote:
> >>
> >> On 8/10/2015 1:29 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> >>> Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> djheydt@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
> >>> f nobody ever responded to the Starmaker?
> >>>>> Then I wouldn't see his silly posts at all.
> 
> >> the media, reporters who cannot understand basic science, because
> >> the reporters failed science and math courses and had to take a
> >> lower path into journalism, where subject knowledge is not needed.
> >
> >
> > "basic science"???
> >
> > https://www.google.com/#q=define+basic+science
> >
> > You don't acutally believe members of the 'scientific community'
> > understand...."basic science"????
> >
> >
> > Definition of BASIC SCIENCE. : any one of the sciences (such as
> > anatomy, physiology, bacteriology, pathology, or biochemistry)
> > fundamental to the study of medicine.
> >
> >
> >
> > Why are you bring up ....the study of medicine???
> 
> ...... but thats' what druggies do too, study meds,
> 
> REM Google is recording all the sites you visit and redirects your
> search to what THEY think you want


Google is not in the search engine business, they are in the advertising business. 



> 
> >
> >
> > Maybe You don't understand...basic science.
> 
> I understand advanced science, but not "basic" science, the stuff
> written in the BASIC programming language,
> 

BASIC is not advanced programing.


> REM - it gives me a headace.
> 
> >
> >
> > And certaintly 'science journalist' don't understand...any science!
> 
> they, science journalists, are only required to have previously reported
> on something that may have looked scientific, or someone told them it
> was sciency like, or if it was in a movie, or could have been.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#419599

Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> 
> In article <mqan2p$n9p$1@news.datemas.de>,
> Alan Baker  <email@domain.com> wrote:
> >On 2015-08-10 17:26:49 +0000, The Starmaker said:
> >
> >> How do you protect yourself from Junk Science?
> >
> >It starts with not paying any attention to you...
> >
> 
> Wouldn't it be nice if nobody ever responded to the Starmaker?
> Then I wouldn't see his silly posts at all.


That is what I call "Junk Science", because that isn't how nature works.


It's what it is called in the 'scientific community'....wishful thinking.



And we need to be protected from the likes of the Dorthy's in the world...with
their wishful thinking junk science.


Get rid of all the wishful thinkers in the 'scientific community'...is that even possible????

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#419597

Alan Baker wrote:
> 
> On 2015-08-10 17:26:49 +0000, The Starmaker said:
> 
> > How do you protect yourself from Junk Science?
> 
> It starts with not paying any attention to you...


Can you point to any item I posted that you would consider junk science?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#419652

gilber34 wrote:
> 
> On 8/10/2015 1:15 PM, The Starmaker wrote:
> > Alan Baker wrote:
> >>
> >> On 2015-08-10 17:26:49 +0000, The Starmaker said:
> >>
> >>> How do you protect yourself from Junk Science?
> >>
> >> It starts with not paying any attention to you...
> >
> >
> > Can you point to any item I posted that you would consider junk science?
> >
> 
> here is your post on 8/8/2015, REM ?
> 
> How God Created The Universe
> 
> Most people have
> a misconception on
> How God Created The Universe.
> (including the 'scientific community')
> 
> I can explain
> how God did it.
> 
> To create
> the heavens and
> the earth, in the
> beginning...
> 
> He used sort
> of a 3D printer...
> I'm not sure
> what type of
> printer...could
> be a hologram
> printer...but
> it is a 3D printer
> type in order
> to print...

It's how you take an idea..
and turn it into a solid form.

God had an idea 'in His mind'
to create the heavens and the earth..
but he needed to put that idea into
a solid visible form...

So He got behind His computer
turn on His 3D pinter
and press the print button.

He projected His idea
from the fourth dimension
into the 3D universe.


Did I leave something out?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#421432

Am 10.08.2015 19:26, schrieb The Starmaker:
> How do you protect yourself from Junk Science?

Depends on who 'you' is.

If you have authority assisted by military force, you could round up 
'junksters' and send them to 'reedjucation.

If you are 'boss' of some sort and you have them in your staff, you may 
eventually fire them.

But in both case you have a problem to identity 'junk science'. This is 
because 'junk science' had to be distinguished from 'good science'. And 
actually only scientists could do that (and not the boss).

These very same scientists are actually those, who produced that same 
junk, hence would actually fire (or round up) 'good' scientists (because 
of heresy).

This problem is called 'relativity' (of junkness) and shows, that you 
cannot chose the same people as jury about the benefits of what they 
have produced themselves.

Only there are no other people available. And those that had actually 
been available are now silenced, because they have been burned at the 
stake (for the crime of heresy).

This also wards off other potential heretics.


TH

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | rec.arts.sf.written

csiph-web