Kylie's Pluto Challenge

[Jimmy D]

I have over 143,000 times more posts than you; and I can assume you you have no clue as to what I think of scientists overall.

I think the ratio of likes to posts is more indicative than than the overall quantity. Less than 1%. As Brinny would say... LOL

 

[2PhiloVoid]

No problem. (AV appears to think they are doing Satan's work, so I'm uncertain how much "fun" he's having with it...but it certainly is silly.)

Actually it DOES matter because it helps establish a pattern. And the pattern I see is AV heaping scorn on science and scientists followed by his mealy-mouthed half-apology by either saying the scientists are too stupid to know they are doing the work of Satan or that they are God's Gift.

And, of course, whenever science says something that AV disagrees with then "science can take a hike".

I am glad he has so many more posts! (And the counting posts are always nice).

Aachen_hexgon, AV is not a bad guy, really. I do think he means well with his criticisms of modern science. On some points, occasionally, I might even agree with his evaluations of the work of scientists. In AV's case, I think maybe we should just try to understand him as he is -- a hyper-fundamentalistic Christian who believes that his comments (and challenges) make people think. The fact that he believes that his comments actually do make people think rather than inducing them to sheer irritation is perhaps a peculiarity of his point of perception, one that I think is humorously connoted by his choice of avatar--let's face it, he did choose Alfred E. Nuemen after all.

As far as Pluto is concerned, if scientists want to send a probe to its ice-ridden surface, then fine, let them send a probe. But on a personal level, whether we call Pluto a planet or not seems to me to be a lesser concern of life, as well as of science.

Peace,
2PhiloVoid

 

[aachen_hexagon]

Aachen_hexgon, AV is not a bad guy, really

I have no doubt about that point. But the words we say matter. Otherwise why say them?

. I do think he means well with his criticisms of modern science.

I disagree. If one means well in regards to science one doesn't simply toss it when it is inconvenient, one critiques it and finds the flaws.

One does not simply tell it to "take a hike" and then follow up with laying the blame for every single horror that has happened to humanity at its doorstep.

It appears that AV wants science to take responsibility for Thalidomide but he doesn't realize that it was science that helped us understand what thalidomide was doing that was bad. He wants science to take responsibility for Challenger yet it was science that helped explain what happened on Challenger.

Science inherently takes responsibility for the problems and the problems happen and can be fixed through science.

It wasn't prayer that figured out what thalidomide was doing to fetuses. It wasn't a sign from God that explained what happened with Challenger.

Science is like a group of pioneers out exploring the edges of what we know. Bad things happen from time to time. The only way to avoid it is we simply stop growing, stop exploring, stop learning.

And then we would say "Science can take a hike".

I think maybe we should just try to understand him as he is -- a hyper-fundamentalistic Christian who believes that his comments (and challenges) make people think.

No doubt. But it doesn't appear to me that he actually takes in the impetus to thought that others may provide. Instead he posts an endless stream of challenges and when faced with science that doesn't fit his view he doesn't examine the science he merely decrees it flawed and tells it to take a hike.

I don't think he should have to change his view of God by any means. He is free to believe as he feels is right. But if he despises scientists so much it seems disingenuous to call them all sorts of names, make unfounded accusastions against them, say they are unwitting tools of Satan and then try to slobber it into a compliment by decreeing these same creatures he's lambasted as "God's gift".

he did choose Alfred E. Nuemen after all.

I am more than willing to accept the "work" of those who would tweak the noses of the establishment, but they must do it from a position of actual thought. I don't really see that much of it from AV, especially when he gets on this rants about clipboards and satan's workers.

As far as Pluto is concerned, if scientists want to send a probe to its ice-ridden surface, then fine, let them send a probe. But on a personal level, whether we call Pluto a planet or not seems to me to be a lesser concern of life, as well as of science.

The Pluto Debate is an example of AV's special brand of intransigence. It has been explained to him countless times that it is merely a definitional concept and it doesn't change the science one whit other than to establish a definition where one didn't exist prior to 2006. Yet he still loves to point to it as a "flaw" of science.

He does not seem to be willing to think when challenged. But he wants to challenge others to think?

That sounds like hypocrisy or a certain solipsism that leads him to believe he is the one in command of all knowledge. Even as he tells science to take a hike.

 

[Subduction Zone]

I think the ratio of likes to posts is more indicative than than the overall quantity. Less than 1%. As Brinny would say... LOL

Many of AV's posts are counting posts. All he does is enter a number and then in the next post enters that number plus one. Rather boring and indicative of a problem of some sort. Also his "likes" increased at a rather amazing rate when this site moved to a new server and the old "likes" were lost. It was quite apparent that there was a bit of hanky panky going on.

Both of those figures appear to be inflated by artificial means for him.

 

[aachen_hexagon]

Many of AV's posts are counting posts. All he does is enter a number and then in the next post enters that number plus one. Rather boring and indicative of a problem of some sort. Also his "likes" increased at a rather amazing rate when this site moved to a new server and the old "likes" were lost. It was quite apparent that there was a bit of hanky panky going on.

Both of those figures appear to be inflated by artificial means for him.

I am sorely tempted to go in now and "Like" only certain numbers in the counting threads.

15 LIKE!
37 LIKE
43 INFORMATIVE
.
.
.

 

[AV1611VET]

I am sorely tempted to go in now and "Like" only certain numbers in the counting threads.

You'll die of old age before you LIKE every post in just one of my threads.

Namely, this one: Count

 

[pgp_protector]

I am sorely tempted to go in now and "Like" only certain numbers in the counting threads.

15 LIKE!
37 LIKE
43 INFORMATIVE
.
.
.

Thing is that's likes Received not Given.
If you want a bunch of likes you have to go post in this section
Repaholics Sub-forum

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

I think the ratio of likes to posts is more indicative than than the overall quantity. Less than 1%. As Brinny would say... LOL

Bah!

 

[AV1611VET]

Also his "likes" increased at a rather amazing rate when this site moved to a new server and the old "likes" were lost. It was quite apparent that there was a bit of hanky panky going on.

Either that, or our REPS were converted to LIKES.

FYI, I "only" have 32,730 positive ratings, and that places me 10th on the totem pole.

Brinny, a very well liked poster here because of her pleasing disposition, is at #3 with almost twice what I have.

And Gazelle reigns in at #1 with a whopping 80,625.

QV: POSITIVE RATINGS

So I think we can skip the 'hanky panky' accusation.

 

[HitchSlap]

Either that, or our REPS were converted to LIKES.

FYI, I "only" have 32,730 positive ratings, and that places me 10th on the totem pole.

Brinny, a very well liked poster here because of her pleasing disposition, is at #3 with almost twice what I have.

And Gazelle reigns in at #1 with a whopping 80,625.

QV: POSITIVE RATINGS

So I think we can skip the 'hanky panky' accusation.

Since when did a guy like you suddenly develop scruples with unfounded accusations?

 

[AV1611VET]

Since when did a guy like you suddenly develop scruples with unfounded accusations?

Huh?

 

[aachen_hexagon]

You'll die of old age before you LIKE every post in just one of my threads.

Namely, this one: Count

You must be quite proud! I guess it beats actually learning science or listening to people who disagree with your "opinion" of scientists.

 

[AV1611VET]

You must be quite proud! I guess it beats actually learning science or listening to people who disagree with your "opinion" of scientists.

Actually it calms my nerves while I'm waiting on replies.

 

[aachen_hexagon]

Either that, or our REPS were converted to LIKES.

It's good that "Number of Likes" correlates with "Moral High Ground"!

HOPEFULLY the people who generated the code for assigning "likes" weren't unknowingly doing the work of Satan!

 

[aachen_hexagon]

Actually it calms my nerves while I'm waiting on replies.

Why would you be nervous? You covered all the bases with your posts! Like calling scientists unwitting servants of Satan AND Gifts from God!

(Woah, you might be playing at a whole different level of theology... Hmmmm....)

 

[pgp_protector]

Either that, or our REPS were converted to LIKES.

FYI, I "only" have 32,730 positive ratings, and that places me 10th on the totem pole.

Brinny, a very well liked poster here because of her pleasing disposition, is at #3 with almost twice what I have.

And Gazelle reigns in at #1 with a whopping 80,625.

QV: POSITIVE RATINGS

So I think we can skip the 'hanky panky' accusation.

Well that depends on how you calculate that "totem pole"
If it's a weighted average Likes/Post You're down around 0.9% likability.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well that depends on how you calculate that "totem pole"
If it's a weighted average Likes/Post You're down around 0.9% likability.

Don't forget the FRIENDS LIST, which is now the FOLLOWERS.

 

[Quid est Veritas?]

This post is such a sad indicator of how little people know about science. Amazing breakthroughs that help in the field of medicine actually came from the Apollo missions.

But it's probably more fun to denigrate scientists as taking your tax money for fun. It certainly beats READING FACTS or things.

https://www.nasa.gov/sites/default/files/80660main_ApolloFS.pdf

LOLOL.

Sorry? The Apollo missions have almost nothing to do with cardiac pacing, invasive or non-invasive, research which long predate the Apollo missions. I don't even understand what your article is trying to infer they did.

Here is a quick summary of pacing:
A brief history of cardiac pacing

 

[aachen_hexagon]

Sorry? The Apollo missions have almost nothing to do with cardiac pacing, invasive or non-invasive, research which long predate the Apollo missions. I don't even understand what your article is trying to infer they did.

Oh, couldn't you read? Here let me help you:

Apollo sets the pace St. Jude Medical’s Cardiac Rhythm Management Division used Apollo technology to develop a programmable pacemaker system. A physician can communicate with a patient’s pacemaker by means of wireless telemetry signals transmitted through the communicating head held over the patient’s chest. Where earlier pacemakers delivered a fixed type of stimulus once implanted, this system enables “fine tuning” of the device to best suit the patient’s changing needs. Spinoff 1980

There, I highlighted it for you.

I assume you are also aware of significant improvements in computing etc. Things used by doctors (at least where I'm at here in the US) use today!

If you want to call NASA liars then by all means feel free to.

 

[AV1611VET]

St. Jude Medical’s Cardiac Rhythm Management Division used Apollo technology to develop a programmable pacemaker system.

May I ask what "Apollo technology" is? other than a vague term?