ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 

Notices


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags atheists , Lawrence Krauss , sexual misconduct charges

Reply
Old 12th March 2018, 10:07 PM   #601
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,663
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
You've added things that weren't in the post I replied to or in the links IIRC.

For Krauss to assert motive requires an awful lot of evidence. That's close to mind reading. If there was evidence of Krauss being followed, I don't know anything about that.
I haven't added anything, it was all in the claim by the accuser. I even left out that the other eye witnesses were her students and that they didn't complain at the time but waited until they had discussed it later.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2018, 10:55 PM   #602
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 22,602
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
You aren't going to get the statement from a long time acquaintance of Krauss's, someone with at least as much standing in the Atheist community?

You don't seem eager to get to the bottom of this.
Astute observation. I'm not. What interests me most is the ISF personalities and arguments that are made here. IOW, I'm following the process, not the outcome.
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2018, 11:05 PM   #603
SezMe
post-pre-born
 
SezMe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Santa Barbara, CA
Posts: 22,602
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
No mind-reading necessary. Just one simple axiom: People do stuff because they want the benefit that comes from doing it.

From this one axiom we can reasonably infer that people are attacking Krauss because they want the benefit of attacking Krauss. And because they proceeded in their attack without due process, and without evidence, we can reasonably infer that they wanted the benefit without having to work out those other things.

I suppose one of the accusers could say that they didn't want it to be this way at all, but actions speak louder than words.
That's not an axiom. That's an assumption and not one necessarily shared by all.
SezMe is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th March 2018, 11:43 PM   #604
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 21,320
Originally Posted by SezMe View Post
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
No mind-reading necessary. Just one simple axiom: People do stuff because they want the benefit that comes from doing it.

<snip>
That's not an axiom. That's an assumption and not one necessarily shared by all.

Don't worry.

After he gets through Bobbing around the meaning of "benefit" it'll be an axiom.

Although "truism" would probably be a better description.
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
***********************************************
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." - Saul Bellow
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 02:29 AM   #605
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,675
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
Really? Krauss was there, he's an eye witness and that's evidence. There is also corroborating evidence to support his claim. The accuser admitted that she had supposedly heard through the "whisper network" about his behaviour and was hyper-aware of everything he did, following him all evening and waiting for any action he might make that she deemed offensive.
Yes, his testimony counts as evidence.

Can you quote the part about what "the accuser" "admitted"? I don't remember seeing that, either.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 07:37 AM   #606
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,663
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Yes, his testimony counts as evidence.

Can you quote the part about what "the accuser" "admitted"? I don't remember seeing that, either.
This is right from the Buzzfeed article, I guess you didn't read it. There is another article online where she elaborates.

Quote:
Shortly before the conference, said Melanie Thomson, a microbiologist from Melbourne and another invited speaker, she was warned about Krauss’s reputation by Michael Brown, an astronomer at Monash University in Melbourne.

“So I was like a watchdog, making sure that nothing untoward happened,”
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 08:05 AM   #607
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,305
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
There is another article online where she elaborates.
Her predisposition to excercise caution around Krauss is enough for you to discount all three eyewitnesses?
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 08:09 AM   #608
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,994
Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger View Post
Firstly, learn the difference between evidence and conclusion/assertion.
That's what I'm trying to do. In fact, that's exactly what I just asked. Do you have the answer?

Quote:
Unsupported claim, this is a conclusion for which there is no evidence.
Same as the accusation against Krauss, yes?

Quote:
That is opinion, not eyewitness evidence.
What is the difference between saying you saw something without evidence, and saying you saw something without evidence?

If someone claims they saw aliens mutilating cattle, is that eyewitness evidence?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 08:14 AM   #609
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,994
Originally Posted by SezMe View Post
That's not an axiom. That's an assumption and not one necessarily shared by all.
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
Don't worry.

After he gets through Bobbing around the meaning of "benefit" it'll be an axiom.

Although "truism" would probably be a better description.
Axiom, assumption, truism, call it what you like, it makes no difference to my argument--which is that it's possible to make reasonable inferences about people's motivations by observing their actions. No mind reading necessary, to reach simple conclusions from reasonable assumptions.

In this case, that Melanie Thomson et al intend to benefit from attacking Krauss, without due process or evidence.

Last edited by theprestige; 13th March 2018 at 08:15 AM.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 08:21 AM   #610
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,994
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Her predisposition to excercise caution around Krauss is enough for you to discount all three eyewitnesses?
Eyewitness testimony is shaky at best. I think you're kind of reversing the burden here. Eyewitness testimony should be discounted by default. Then we look for reasons to count it.

It's one thing to ask witnesses about a event that is provable by other means. If you strike someone and leave a bruise, there's physical evidence of a witnessable event. If one car collides with another, there's physical evidence of a witnessable event.

Now, groping someone in public during a photo shoot is absolutely a witnessable event. And if there were a photograph of it, that would be physical evidence of a witnessable event. You could ask witnesses about their recollection and perception of an event that you *know* actually happened.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 08:25 AM   #611
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,663
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Her predisposition to excercise caution around Krauss is enough for you to discount all three eyewitnesses?
Her predisposition to be hyper vigilant around Krauss is enough for you to go rob banks?
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 09:27 AM   #612
tyr_13
Penultimate Amazing
 
tyr_13's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 15,443
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Because we are vastly more forgiving of just plain assault. Imagine if Krauss got into a shoving match with Shermer, now try to imagine a wave of people calling for an end their public speaking careers over it.
Ok, I'm imagining it. Doesn't seem implausible. Seems extremely believable with the hypothetical I set out, which isn't a shoving match.

But it also mostly misses the point I was setting out. It is less about the people who believe the accusations (in my hypothetical and for the real accusations), nor even all the people who doubt them, and more about the criticism that even making the accusation without physical evidence is irresponsible. My main point there is how ridiculous it is to tut-tut the people who speak up, while also pointing out that testimony is evidence.

Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Eyewitness testimony is shaky at best. I think you're kind of reversing the burden here. Eyewitness testimony should be discounted by default. Then we look for reasons to count it.

It's one thing to ask witnesses about a event that is provable by other means. If you strike someone and leave a bruise, there's physical evidence of a witnessable event. If one car collides with another, there's physical evidence of a witnessable event.

Now, groping someone in public during a photo shoot is absolutely a witnessable event. And if there were a photograph of it, that would be physical evidence of a witnessable event. You could ask witnesses about their recollection and perception of an event that you *know* actually happened.
I think you've missed something in my hypothetical; the strikes were not said to have connected. Put yourself in the shoes of someone attacked. I can absolutely see wanting to keep quite about it for many reasons (including the huge 'WTF?!' factor), but I cannot see speaking up in such cases as irresponsible.

If nothing else, your entire argument springs forth from some weird hindsight bias. How do you, in that situation, know there isn't physical evidence until after speaking up? How is it possible to figure that out without enlisting the aid of others, which all but necessitates making the claim?
__________________
Circled nothing is still nothing.
"Nothing will stop the U.S. from being a world leader, not even a handful of adults who want their kids to take science lessons from a book that mentions unicorns six times." -UNLoVedRebel
Mumpsimus: a stubborn person who insists on making an error in spite of being shown that it is wrong
tyr_13 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 09:48 AM   #613
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,675
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
This is right from the Buzzfeed article, I guess you didn't read it. There is another article online where she elaborates.
....

You're saying Melanie is "the accuser" in this sentence?


Quote:
The accuser admitted that she had supposedly heard through the "whisper network" about his behaviour and was hyper-aware of everything he did, following him all evening and waiting for any action he might make that she deemed offensive.
Several times previously in this discussion we've referred to "selfie woman" as "the accuser".
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 09:51 AM   #614
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,675
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
If someone claims they saw aliens mutilating cattle, is that eyewitness evidence?
It is, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 09:54 AM   #615
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,675
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Eyewitness testimony should be discounted by default.
Even if 100 people see it?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 10:00 AM   #616
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,675
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post

In this case, that Melanie Thomson et al intend to benefit from attacking Krauss, without due process or evidence.
Yes, it's probable that they intended to let people know what they saw.

What sort of "due process" is there for minor acts of sexual harassment/assault where nobody sees police involvement being appropriate?

If someone gets butt-squeezed by a co-worker, what's the appropriate reaction? Just pretend it didn't happen?
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 10:02 AM   #617
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,994
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
It is, but extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
Claims require evidence.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 10:03 AM   #618
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,994
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Even if 100 people see it?
Even if 100 people see what?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 10:04 AM   #619
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,994
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
Yes, it's probable that they intended to let people know what they saw.

What sort of "due process" is there for minor acts of sexual harassment/assault where nobody sees police involvement being appropriate?

If someone gets butt-squeezed by a co-worker, what's the appropriate reaction? Just pretend it didn't happen?
What's the appropriate due process for the incident in question?
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 10:09 AM   #620
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,675
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Even if 100 people see what?
A non-extraordinary event, like one person groping another.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 10:12 AM   #621
kellyb
Philosopher
 
kellyb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 7,675
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
What's the appropriate due process for the incident in question?
In a professional environment, report it to HR or your boss.
In a more social environment, I'm really not sure. There isn't anything remotely similar to due process that's appropriate or not.
__________________
The whole problem with the world is that fools and fanatics are always so certain of themselves, and wiser people so full of doubts ~ Bertrand Russell
kellyb is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 10:21 AM   #622
Jerrymander
Critical Thinker
 
Jerrymander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 370
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Claims require evidence.
And different claims require different standards of evidence. Eyewitness testimony can be good evidence for mundane human interactions.
Jerrymander is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 10:24 AM   #623
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,663
Originally Posted by kellyb View Post
....

You're saying Melanie is "the accuser" in this sentence?




Several times previously in this discussion we've referred to "selfie woman" as "the accuser".
The selfie woman is the alleged victim and has never spoken out about it. The accuser is the hyper-aware watchdog and her two student companions who claim Krauss got hip checked.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 11:09 AM   #624
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 21,320
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Axiom, assumption, truism, call it what you like, it makes no difference to my argument--which is that it's possible to make reasonable inferences about people's motivations by observing their actions. No mind reading necessary, to reach simple conclusions from reasonable assumptions.

In this case, that Melanie Thomson et al intend to benefit from attacking Krauss, without due process or evidence.

And if the perceived benefit is to discourage the continuing repetition of such behavior by the individual they witnessed doing it, how would that cast doubt on the veracity of their eyewitness testimony?

If they witnessed no such behavior they would have no need to discourage it.

What "benefit" do you suspect of calling their honesty into question?
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
***********************************************
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." - Saul Bellow
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 11:29 AM   #625
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,305
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
The selfie woman is the alleged victim and has never spoken out about it. The accuser is the hyper-aware watchdog and her two student companions who claim Krauss got hip checked.
Student companions?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mich...hall_(skeptic)
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 11:55 AM   #626
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,994
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
And if the perceived benefit is to discourage the continuing repetition of such behavior by the individual they witnessed doing it, how would that cast doubt on the veracity of their eyewitness testimony?
It doesn't. The two issues are orthogonal.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 01:52 PM   #627
quadraginta
Becoming Beth
 
quadraginta's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Central Vale of Humility
Posts: 21,320
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
It doesn't. The two issues are orthogonal.

I'm sure you think that sounds very clever, but I'm less clear as to why you think it is.

If someone witnesses an act, and their motive, their only motive, the "benefit" they derive by reporting it, is to make an effort to discourage the repetition of such acts, do you feel that such a benefit casts doubt upon the value of their evidence? If not, then why not?

You are the one who brought up the presumably confounding factor of a "benefit". I am offering an example of one.

What sort of "benefit' were you referring to, and why do you think it applies to this case?
__________________
"It never does just what I want, but only what I tell it."
***********************************************
"A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep." - Saul Bellow

Last edited by quadraginta; 13th March 2018 at 01:55 PM.
quadraginta is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 02:17 PM   #628
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,994
Originally Posted by quadraginta View Post
I'm sure you think that sounds very clever, but I'm less clear as to why you think it is.

If someone witnesses an act, and their motive, their only motive, the "benefit" they derive by reporting it, is to make an effort to discourage the repetition of such acts, do you feel that such a benefit casts doubt upon the value of their evidence? If not, then why not?

You are the one who brought up the presumably confounding factor of a "benefit". I am offering an example of one.
You're waaay overthinking this. There's no "confounding factor" here.

Quote:
What sort of "benefit' were you referring to, and why do you think it applies to this case?
I was not referring to any sort of benefit in particular. I don't pretend to know their inner motives. I am critiquing their process, which I believe is a flawed process even with the purest of motives.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 02:48 PM   #629
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,305
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post


I was not referring to any sort of benefit in particular. I don't pretend to know their inner motives. I am critiquing their process, which I believe is a flawed process even with the purest of motives.
Assuming they honestly reported what they witnessed, I'm not seeing a process issue here.

ETA: Were they somehow obligated to keep Krauss' behaviour under wraps when the reporters rang up?
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/

Last edited by d4m10n; 13th March 2018 at 02:56 PM.
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 02:57 PM   #630
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,994
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Assuming they honestly reported what they witnessed, I'm not seeing a process issue here.
That's the problem: The legitimacy of their process depends on assuming their process is legitimate.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 03:02 PM   #631
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,305
You seem to assume that three people are lying or mistaken rather than just one. That doesn't strike me as a rational method of updating on testimonial evidence.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 03:23 PM   #632
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,663
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
You seem to assume that three people are lying or mistaken rather than just one. That doesn't strike me as a rational method of updating on testimonial evidence.
There is a long line of evidence to suggest 3 people can be just as wrong as 1 especially under the described circumstances where they discussed the incident at length before reporting. That is a recipe for implanting false memories. This very thing happened in Northern Canada with far more than 3 people and it wasn't the one person denying the claims who was wrong.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 03:24 PM   #633
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,305
Of course thst can happen under peculiar circumstances, but I'm generally inclined to trust the word of three skeptics over one.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 03:45 PM   #634
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,994
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Of course thst can happen under peculiar circumstances, but I'm generally inclined to trust the word of three skeptics over one.
"skeptics" - what, like they're board-certified Fair Wintesses, now?

This is just an appeal to popularity now.
theprestige is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 04:22 PM   #635
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,305
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
"skeptics" - what, like they're board-certified Fair Wintesses, now?

This is just an appeal to popularity now.
I expect speakers at skeptic events to be at least moderately more aware of their own biases than, say, random people off the street.
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 05:05 PM   #636
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,663
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
I expect speakers at skeptic events to be at least moderately more aware of their own biases than, say, random people off the street.
Can you cite a study?
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 05:06 PM   #637
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,305
Originally Posted by qayak View Post
Can you cite a study?
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 06:10 PM   #638
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,663
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Yeah, I thought that was just your opinion. The studies I've seen show that scientists have very strong confirmation biases in areas they think they have knowledge. What causes them to be good scientists can easily cause them to see things that aren't there.

Peer review is a there to help control for scientists' bias.
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 06:33 PM   #639
d4m10n
Illuminator
 
d4m10n's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Mounts Farm
Posts: 3,305
Scientists? Who was talking about them?
__________________
I'm a happy SINner on the Skeptic Ink Network!
Background Probability: Against Irrationality, Innumeracy, and Ignobility
http://skepticink.com/backgroundprobability/
d4m10n is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th March 2018, 07:45 PM   #640
qayak
Penultimate Amazing
 
qayak's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 12,663
Originally Posted by d4m10n View Post
Scientists? Who was talking about them?
Pretty much everybody.

Quote:
Melanie Thomson, a microbiologist from Melbourne . . .
Quote:
Hello, I'm Jo Alabaster,

I am an aspiring science communicator and am slowly chipping away at a BSc (Applied Sciences) via Open Universities Australia . . .
__________________
"How long you live, how high you fly
The smiles you'll give, and tears you'll cry
And all you touch, and all you see
Is all your life will ever be."
qayak is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:07 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.