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
 


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 !MOD BOX WARNING!

Reply
Old 28th April 2018, 12:32 PM   #321
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,589
Sodhner,

- Sorry about that last post, I was baby sitting and rushing...

- I have asked a couple of apparent experts as to which way should we look to see where we came from (which way was the big bang) and they didn't know.
- Gotta admit, this stuff is hard to figure.

- If further away things go faster, maybe that means that you're going faster the further away you are from things "behind" you, and things opposite are going faster, in the same direction "ahead" of you. That way, you're just somewhere in a particular line, and at the center of what is visible from you in that line.
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba 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 28th April 2018, 01:55 PM   #322
jakesteele
Fait Accompli
 
jakesteele's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Rain City
Posts: 2,109
Originally Posted by Sideroxylon View Post
Debate around here when it comes to fringe ideas amounts to sceptics trying to extract good evidence and honest argument. If that is ever produced then minds will change.
I disagree with your take. What I have seen is much more name calling, scorn, contempt, derision, etc. In a debate, name calling is the last resort of the emotionally immature and the intellectually challenged.
__________________

There really was a man from Nantucket
jakesteele 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 28th April 2018, 04:02 PM   #323
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,336
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
Why?
Because he's "playing to the audience" rather than debating. He's betting that the audience won't know Hubble's Law any better than he does, and he can make it sound like the remedial questions he's asking about settled physics is really some way of holding S0dhner accountable.
JayUtah 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 28th April 2018, 04:08 PM   #324
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,086
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- If further away things go faster, maybe that means that you're going faster the further away you are from things "behind" you...

That would mean that if you were at different distances from two things behind you, you would be moving at two speeds.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo 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 28th April 2018, 05:53 PM   #325
Humots
Critical Thinker
 
Humots's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 359
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Sodhner,

- Sorry about that last post, I was baby sitting and rushing...

- I have asked a couple of apparent experts as to which way should we look to see where we came from (which way was the big bang) and they didn't know.
- Gotta admit, this stuff is hard to figure.

- If further away things go faster, maybe that means that you're going faster the further away you are from things "behind" you, and things opposite are going faster, in the same direction "ahead" of you. That way, you're just somewhere in a particular line, and at the center of what is visible from you in that line.
All together now: "I been working on derail road..."
Humots 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 28th April 2018, 07:02 PM   #326
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,487
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I have asked a couple of apparent experts as to which way should we look to see where we came from (which way was the big bang) and they didn't know.
The obvious solution is to look in a whole bunch of directions. So that's what they did. I'm surprised the experts you talked to didn't know that - who did you talk to? From a debate perspective it seems strange to appeal to experts but not say who they are or in what way they're experts, and then indicate that they don't know something that is pretty basic.

Also I just realized you said that they're "apparent" experts. That raises an interesting point - how do you determine if someone is an expert or not?

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Gotta admit, this stuff is hard to figure.
I respectfully disagree.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- If further away things go faster, maybe that means that you're going faster the further away you are from things "behind" you, and things opposite are going faster, in the same direction "ahead" of you. That way, you're just somewhere in a particular line, and at the center of what is visible from you in that line.
Sorry, I don't understand that. You'll have to explain it again.
SOdhner 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 29th April 2018, 11:21 AM   #327
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,589
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
The obvious solution is to look in a whole bunch of directions. So that's what they did. I'm surprised the experts you talked to didn't know that - who did you talk to? From a debate perspective it seems strange to appeal to experts but not say who they are or in what way they're experts, and then indicate that they don't know something that is pretty basic.

Also I just realized you said that they're "apparent" experts. That raises an interesting point - how do you determine if someone is an expert or not?



I respectfully disagree.



Sorry, I don't understand that. You'll have to explain it again.
Sodhner,
- Is it OK if I call you "Sod" or some other, easy name? I'm a two finger typist.
- Will you be trying to stick to my rules of debate?
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba 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 29th April 2018, 12:02 PM   #328
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 39,968
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Sodhner,
- Is it OK if I call you "Sod" or some other, easy name?

Quote:
I'm a two finger typist.
You'd be getting a two-fingered response from me to that suggestion.
__________________
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
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin 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 29th April 2018, 12:26 PM   #329
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,410
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Sodhner,
- Is it OK if I call you "Sod" or some other, easy name? I'm a two finger typist.
- Will you be trying to stick to my rules of debate?
Can I have Irony for 1000 points please? No, make that Dishonesty. Aw hell, I'll have both....
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager 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 29th April 2018, 12:40 PM   #330
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 21,832
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Will you be trying to stick to my rules of debate?
Did you not remember what SOdhner wrote when he offered to debate you? Why are you now stalling rather than just getting right to it?
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost
jsfisher 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 29th April 2018, 12:41 PM   #331
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,336
Yup, this is freshman level physics. As in, high school freshman. Granted not every 14-year-old paid attention to it, but it's not the brain-baking kind of physics you can come to if you stick with science as a profession. We observe the expansion to occur in all directions and we don't have -- nor should expect -- any sort of ultimate fixed point in the universe against which to reckon absolute motion. Even to consider that possibility is a pidgin, beginner Big-Banger mistake. The universe doesn't expand "into" anything against which the expansion can be measured. Jabba's naive questions and rather suspicious narrative suggests he's just now coming to grips with Hubble's actual work. And that's fine because everyone sooner or later comes to learn something new. But being new to something doesn't translate into it being new to everyone else either. Nor into it being an objectively difficult topic. This is what Jabba often does, and what Fringe Debate employs to disguise the ignorance of the claimant.

Other examples from Jabba's debate include probability distributions (and statistics in general), various chemistry and micrography techniques in archaeology, and elements of existential philosophy. "This is hard stuff," or "No one really understands this" are the kinds of excuses Fringe Debate raises when they can't address their opponents' learned points, or when the shaky foundations of their own affirmative points are revealed. It's a ploy meant to admit that there may be flaws in their own lines of reasoning, but also to assert that the nature of the problem is so complex that the other side of the debate is likely to be making mistakes too, or can't be as sure as they seem to be. It's a fallback position in the sense that in order to shake faith in your opponent's argument you have to shake faith in your own and hope to make it up some other way.

I wrote something akin to this post last night and then opted not to post it in order to let S0dhner get his word in first. I agree that appeals to anonymous, dubious expertise has limited value. Then there's the whole problem of appealing to third-party sources instead of just acquiring knowledge first hand. It's not as if it's hard these days to find introductory materials on Hubble's work. Jabba could easily spend an hour of his three hours a day he claims to spend at ISF reading up on Hubble's law, Hubble's constant, and thereby have a foundation from which he'd be able to reason through some of this debate on his own. Merely asking others to apply their understanding limits the value to that of the questions actually asked and reduces the claimant to an uncomprehending conduit. We have to trust Jabba to ask the right questions, which he didn't. This is one of a class of errors committed in Fringe Debate where expert knowledge from outside still has to be filtered through the limitations of the claimant. That's a problem where the claimant doesn't have a fully-fledged conceptual knowledge.

The problem with anonymous expertise has already been examined. There's little more than I can say. Fringe Debate tries to remove the ability of the opponent to rebut the evidence. One of the quickest and dirtiest ways to do that is to claim some third party has made an authoritative statement that must be respected. In terms of Jabba's rules, that's a violation. If his ideal of debate is between two well-informed experts, then converting that to a debate between one expert and an ignoramus who alleges he's on the phone to a real expert is the intellectual equivalent of the legal proscription against hearsay. The problem with hearsay under the law is that it can't be cross-examined and tested. Similarly, if we can't put Jabba's sources to the test, it's a dishonest debate. Effective Debate, as oppose to Fringe Debate, doesn't balk at having its sources identified and tested.

The problem with dubious expertise has already been examined. If expert knowledge is required, the standard by which expertise is judged is part of the debate. "Apparent expert" says that if the proponent isn't sure about the degree of expertise, then opponent is under considerably less obligation to respect it as expert opinion. More importantly, it's ambiguous what to do when "apparent" expertise is stumped. Is it because the proffered expert really isn't an expert and doesn't know the answer? Or is it because there's a legitimate controversy in the field? On the question of Hubble's law there's no controversy in the field. Any qualified physicist would not have said "I don't know." He would have said, "That question makes no sense in the context of Hubble's law." Given that, we have to conclude that Jabba's experts really aren't experts. And that makes us wonder why he would try to pass them off as such.

Which leads us to where we are now. Jabba is telling us a story of an interaction with alleged experts which seems more like something he made up than like something a physicist would say. This is why Effective Debate doesn't allow anonymous, dubiously qualified experts. Fringe Debate, on the other hand, tries to say that experts (or the general public, or some other respectable agent) say a certain thing that just happens to fit into the claimant's line of reasoning, but denies its critics the opportunity to test that statement.

And one last item -- Jabba asked S0dhner for an explicit rebuttal from the literature. This is a stunt Jabba has tried before. And it's reasonably prevalent in Fringe Debate. It's unreasonable to expect a body of professional and academic literature to have specific proscriptions against all the wrong ways the knowledge can be used. "Can you find me a specific reference that says statistics can't be used to prove immortality?" Yes, that's a comically, oddly specific request, but it's the kind of request Jabba has made before and the kind of request he's making now. Fringe Debate means to argue that if a specialized field doesn't allow a certain application, there should be some explicit citation to that effect. That's absurd on its face. First, it's impossible to enumerate the field of potential stupidity exhaustively. And second, that's just not how bodies of academic wisdom are formulated. Effective Debate treats expertise as a body of understanding. Fringe Debate treats it as a body of propositional fact that has to explicitly endorse or reject something. Fringe Debate says that if you can't find a specific reference specifically disallowing or allowing something, then the expertise isn't helpful in evaluating that thing In the real world, deciding individual question is a matter of first having learned to reason within the facts and interrelations of the field, then applying that reasoning.
JayUtah 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 29th April 2018, 12:56 PM   #332
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,336
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Is it OK if I call you "Sod" or some other, easy name?
Can we make up our own name for you too? <snip> sounds like a cool name.
Edited by jsfisher:  Edited for compliance with Rule 8 of the Membership Agreement.


On the subject of your use of names, I'm usually rather suspicious when someone I don't know tries to be friendly with me, especially when the activity that brings us together is intended as an adversarial process. In law this is known as "currying favor," and it's generally either forbidden or frowned upon. Fringe Debate tries various social engineering methods to build false trust or preclude an aggressive opposition. Currying favor is one of those methods. I can remember you trying to flatter me out of one side your mouth while excusing yourself for ignoring me out of the other side. The goal is to engender in the opponent a sentiment such as, "Gee, Jabba's been so friendly to me, it would make me look bad if I were to show he doesn't know what he's talking about."

Stick with being merely cordial. You aren't our friend and we are aren't yours. That's too personal a relationship for what we're trying to accomplish here.

Quote:
I'm a two finger typist.
Those two fingers manage to produce walls of text when you put your mind and fingertips to it. Please stop asking for concessions that you justify by citing various personal preferences and infirmities. It trains your critics into inadvertently deferring to you, which is inappropriate in Effective Debate.

Fringe Debate tries to substitute ad hominem elements where logic, evidence, and reason fail. I don't mean personal attacks per se; ad hominem means much more than that. Fringe Debate tries to appeal to aspects of human behavior to control the debate, discourage healthy objection, and undermine its objectivity.

Quote:
Will you be trying to stick to my rules of debate?
Will you?

The point of this particular debate is to evaluate the effectiveness of your rules. If they are not effective, we will eventually come to a point where your rules and the easily-discerned proper course of action will become apparent. When we get there, what will you do? Will you insist that we follow your rules along the primrose path to oblivion? Or will you revise your rules to accommodate the patently efficacious?

Last edited by jsfisher; 1st May 2018 at 01:37 PM.
JayUtah 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 29th April 2018, 01:05 PM   #333
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,589
Originally Posted by jsfisher View Post
Did you not remember what SOdhner wrote when he offered to debate you? Why are you now stalling rather than just getting right to it?
- I'm not stalling. I'm just being friendly -- and slow.
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba 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 29th April 2018, 01:23 PM   #334
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,819
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I'm not stalling.
No, now you're being insulting.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue 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 29th April 2018, 01:32 PM   #335
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,336
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I'm not stalling. I'm just being friendly -- and slow.
No, you're being rude -- and stalling. The focal point of S0dhner's line of reasoning is the selection of a frame of reference that defines him as the center of the universe. Because you don't understand Hubble's Law, you're trying to make the answer live there. That's settled physics. But you're using all your Fringe Debate tactics to "play to the audience" and pretend it's not, and to pretend that you've brought to bear the appropriate knowledge to say it's not.

As you've been accused of for years by every group you've encountered, you're simply wallowing in irrelevant detail and playing games in order to make sure the debate never arrives at a point that you have to engage.
JayUtah 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 29th April 2018, 03:03 PM   #336
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,086
Originally Posted by zooterkin View Post
You'd be getting a two-fingered response from me to that suggestion.

As many as that?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo 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 29th April 2018, 03:07 PM   #337
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,819
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
As you've been accused of for years by every group you've encountered, you're simply wallowing in irrelevant detail and playing games in order to make sure the debate never arrives at a point that you have to engage.
Here's the funny thing.

Unfortunate Truth: Jabba's only sin is how clumsily and badly he's playing this game, not in the game he's playing.

"If I can just keep the debate going I'll never have to admit I'm wrong" is, in some variation, pretty much the approved way discussions go on the internet these days.

Seriously take a step back and notice how many discussions... are sorta this same thing just with better performances from the actors involved.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue 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 29th April 2018, 04:50 PM   #338
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,336
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
As many as that?
If you assume Zooterkin has two hands...
JayUtah 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 29th April 2018, 05:38 PM   #339
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,487
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Is it OK if I call you "Sod" or some other, easy name? I'm a two finger typist.
Hmm... "Sod" has some negative connotations, but I'm okay with that. I'm a little more confused at how this is saving you time or energy. Typing that request out took you 83 keystrokes, and the shortened name saves you four keystrokes per post. That means it will pay off after 20.75 posts, which is a lot. Actually I didn't even count the use of shift or capslock, that would add eight keystrokes so it won't pay off until after 22.75 posts. It just doesn't seem like an efficient use of your typing.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Will you be trying to stick to my rules of debate?
As I already mentioned in a previous post, I'm not promising I always will. That being said, I'll generally make an effort when it makes sense. Mainly I'm looking to you to see how you model it. So far the only rules you've mentioned here is "don't call the other person stupid" - although you did word your comment in a way that implied it a bit - and your rule about including my name every time which you now want to change to being half my name (and which I don't really understand - we both know we're talking to each other, right?).

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I'm not stalling. I'm just being friendly -- and slow.
It does come across as stalling a bit. I don't actually care, since I'm not exactly in a rush, but it means your demonstration of effective debate hasn't been very effective so far. After all, I just asked you a question and you quoted it but then ignored it and went off on a tangent that didn't advance the debate at all so that doesn't really seem effective to me.
SOdhner 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 29th April 2018, 06:12 PM   #340
carlitos
"más divertido"
 
carlitos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 17,955
Actually Effective Written Debate/Effective Public Debate

By coincidence, i’m reading Neil DeGrasse Tyson “Astrophysics for People in a Hurry” and Sod’s topic is very timely. Jab could easily have read that entire short book by now to prep for this debate.

Jabba, if you have any interest, it’s a quick, breezy read. If you had 3 hours a day, you’d be done in a few days for sure.

Last edited by carlitos; 29th April 2018 at 06:49 PM. Reason: Typos
carlitos 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 29th April 2018, 07:09 PM   #341
jsfisher
ETcorngods survivor
Moderator
 
jsfisher's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 21,832
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
If you assume Zooterkin has two hands...
There is an American / British difference here. Zooterkin had only one hand in mind.
__________________
A proud member of the Simpson 15+7, named in the suit, Simpson v. Zwinge, et al., and founder of the ET Corn Gods Survivors Group.

"He's the greatest mod that never was!" -- Monketey Ghost
jsfisher 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 29th April 2018, 07:49 PM   #342
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,336
Originally Posted by jsfisher View Post
There is an American / British difference here. Zooterkin had only one hand in mind.
I've lived abroad. Message received.
JayUtah 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 29th April 2018, 08:54 PM   #343
Loss Leader
Do you want to date my Avatar?
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Florida
Posts: 25,136
I just read back the last couple of pages and I went from horrifically confused to terribly fascinated.

As far as I can tell, SOdhner made the argument that he is at the center of the universe. Jabba has so far made no argument of any sort, nor has he identified a list of issues or sub-issues. All he's done is ask for a source and more or less agreed with the basic premise of SOdhner's claim.

This may so far be a polite conversation, but I don't see any debate (let alone an effective one).

Jabba - You don't appear to be following your own rules of effective debate.
__________________
I have the honor to be
Your Obdt. St

L. Leader
Loss Leader 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 30th April 2018, 02:11 AM   #344
zooterkin
Nitpicking dilettante
Deputy Admin
 
zooterkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Berkshire, mostly
Posts: 39,968
Originally Posted by Mojo View Post
As many as that?
I can see the argument on the grounds of economy, but I stick with the traditional British gestures.
__________________
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
Zooterkin is correct Darat
Nerd! Hokulele
Join the JREF Folders ! Team 13232
Ezekiel 23:20
zooterkin 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 30th April 2018, 06:39 AM   #345
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 8,427
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
Jabba - You don't appear to be following your own rules of effective debate.
In other words, the thread is running the way we all thought it would.
halleyscomet 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 30th April 2018, 06:44 AM   #346
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,589
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
The obvious solution is to look in a whole bunch of directions. So that's what they did. I'm surprised the experts you talked to didn't know that - who did you talk to? From a debate perspective it seems strange to appeal to experts but not say who they are or in what way they're experts, and then indicate that they don't know something that is pretty basic.

Also I just realized you said that they're "apparent" experts. That raises an interesting point - how do you determine if someone is an expert or not?



I respectfully disagree.



Sorry, I don't understand that. You'll have to explain it again.
Sod (I agree that using "Sodhner" shouldn't really be an impediment for me, but for some reason, it is. I do think that referring to one's opponent by their 'first' name is helpful to effective dialogue -- but then, I wouldn't want to use a name that was offensive to you. I'm happy with "Jabba," but you could also use "Rich.")

- In responding to your responses, I'll try to respond to just one or two sub-issues at a time. From above,
The obvious solution is to look in a whole bunch of directions. So that's what they did. I'm surprised the experts you talked to didn't know that - who did you talk to? From a debate perspective it seems strange to appeal to experts but not say who they are or in what way they're experts, and then indicate that they don't know something that is pretty basic.

- In my format, the optimal situation is that the two opponents are both experts re the issue. Certainly, I'm no expert in physics or astronomy, so here, I'm just "flying by the seat of my pants," and I'll have to learn as I go.
- The one 'expert' I can remember for sure was Marilyn from Parade Magazine, but she just didn't answer me. The other two were physicists from GE. The people around me tend to be well educated, and no one I ever asked about this had ever thought about it before. To me, it's an obvious and 'exciting' question. Which way was the "Big Bang"?
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba 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 30th April 2018, 06:53 AM   #347
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,589
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
I just read back the last couple of pages and I went from horrifically confused to terribly fascinated.

As far as I can tell, SOdhner made the argument that he is at the center of the universe. Jabba has so far made no argument of any sort, nor has he identified a list of issues or sub-issues. All he's done is ask for a source and more or less agreed with the basic premise of SOdhner's claim.

This may so far be a polite conversation, but I don't see any debate (let alone an effective one).

Jabba - You don't appear to be following your own rules of effective debate.
LL,
- I'm no expert in this area -- I'm just getting my bearings.
- If the "things" are all going away from us at the same speed per distance from us, it would sure seem like we must be at the center of the expansion...
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba 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 30th April 2018, 06:58 AM   #348
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,336
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
I'm no expert in this area -- I'm just getting my bearings.
No, you're trying to obfuscate it and pretend the rebuttal to S0dhner's proposition "must" somehow lie in the blurry thing you've created.

Quote:
If the "things" are all going away from us at the same speed per distance from us, it would sure seem like we must be at the center of the expansion...
Yes, that is exactly Hubble's Law. It's not rocket science. It's not controversial. The whole point of Hubble's work is that by all observation we seem to be in the middle of an expanding universe, although intuitively we understand that's probably literally not the case. The point is whether you can rebut S0dhner's argument, and all you seem to be doing is claiming it must be really hard to reason about because you don't know physics. That's not a rebuttal.
JayUtah 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 30th April 2018, 07:04 AM   #349
JoeMorgue
Self Employed
Remittance Man
 
JoeMorgue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Florida
Posts: 10,819
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
from us, it would sure seem like we must be at the center of the expansion...
I've literally watched Bill Nye explain this concept to a 6 year old with a balloon and a magic marker.

THIS AIN'T THAT COMPLICATED.
__________________
"Ernest Hemingway once wrote that the world is a fine place and worth fighting for. I agree with the second part." - Detective Sommerset, Se7en
JoeMorgue 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 30th April 2018, 07:09 AM   #350
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,487
Jabba,

(I still don't see why you want me to write your name at the start of every post - we both know who we're talking to. But I'll do it from now on anyway I guess.)

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Sod (I agree that using "Sodhner" shouldn't really be an impediment for me, but for some reason, it is. I do think that referring to one's opponent by their 'first' name is helpful to effective dialogue -- but then, I wouldn't want to use a name that was offensive to you. I'm happy with "Jabba," but you could also use "Rich.")
That's another 325 characters, which is 339 keystrokes (not counting the underline). So 84.75 more posts - if we combine that with the previous number of 22.75 (minus one for this post of course) we see that the shortened name will pay for its own discussion in 106.5 posts. I hope you can see what I'm saying here - trying to save four keystrokes by using more than four hundred to talk about it just doesn't seem like a strategy that's worth it.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- In my format, the optimal situation is that the two opponents are both experts re the issue. Certainly, I'm no expert in physics or astronomy, so here, I'm just "flying by the seat of my pants," and I'll have to learn as I go.
What kind of credentials does one need to count as an expert for your purposes? If I just Google stuff a lot, can I eventually call myself an expert? Do I need external validation of some sort? If so, at what level? A Doctorate? Masters? Just taking a class at some point? If the latter, is high school enough?

I ask this because you said the people you asked were "apparent" experts, and that seems like an odd qualifier to me. It implies you weren't certain, in which case I personally wouldn't apply the label "expert" at all.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- The one 'expert' I can remember for sure was Marilyn from Parade Magazine, but she just didn't answer me.
I assume you mean Marilyn vos Savant? I don't know what would make her an expert on this topic. My understanding is that she took at least some courses in college but never obtained a degree (let alone in a field relevant to this conversation). She does seem to be generally intelligent, but that doesn't make someone an expert. Her columns in Parade typically deal with fairly simple math trivia and puzzles, which isn't relevant here.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
The other two were physicists from GE. The people around me tend to be well educated, and no one I ever asked about this had ever thought about it before.
If they've never thought about it before, can they really count as an expert?

Jabba, I had said I would leave the discussion of your actual debate tactics to others and focus on just being your opponent in this semi-mock debate so that you could showcase your Effective Debate rules. But I'm finding that difficult since you aren't really debating me yet. Look at this tangent that we're spiraling off into - does this seem effective to you? I have to admit it seems like your strategy isn't going to ever get this issue resolved.
SOdhner 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 30th April 2018, 07:13 AM   #351
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,610
Originally Posted by halleyscomet View Post
In other words, the thread is running the way we all thought it would.
I think the debate is going to end with Jabba conceding that SOdner is probably right.
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 30th April 2018, 07:51 AM   #352
Jabba
Philosopher
 
Jabba's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 5,589
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
The universe must have a center. Determining what that center is can be difficult, and yet I believe I have figured it out. Hubble (the person, not the telescope) found that the further away things are the faster they're moving away from us. This clearly demonstrates that we're in the center of an expanding universe. Also, there appear to be roughly the same number of galaxies in all directions, again indicating we're in the middle. As many, many people have found to be obvious the Earth is the center of the universe - it would be disrespectful to just assume they're all wrong. When it comes to figuring out the exact center, there are some experiments you can do. First you have to recognize that any frame of reference is valid, so we're just looking for any frame of reference that has some advantage that would make us say it's the "best" one. I already showed that Earth is in the center of the universe, so now we're just deciding whether or not we can narrow it down further. As it turns out, every single measurement I take to any heavenly body we can observe in the universe forms a DIRECT LINE back to me. What are the odds of this? Given the size of the universe (effectively infinite) I think it's safe to say that it's essentially zero and so cannot be a coincidence. Thus I am the center of the universe.



I'm going to leave the commentary on your actual debate techniques to others, I'll just serve as the cardboard stand-up opponent for you. Note that I don't intend to always match your rules, in part because you can then also show how you respond to people that don't share your debate style.
Sod,
- I had never asked this question of the Internet -- I was asking before that was a possibility for me.
- So anyway, I just asked and got the answer -- everything was at the center of the universe.
http://curious.astro.cornell.edu/abo...d-intermediate
- Sounds like I was at the center of the universe. I'll need to think some more about that.
- Is that what you meant?
__________________
"The problem with the world is that the intelligent people are full of doubts while the stupid ones are full of confidence." Charles Bukowski
"Most good ideas don't work." Jabba
"Se due argomenti sembrano altrettanto convincenti, il meno sarcastico è probabilmente corretto." Jabba's Razor
Jabba 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 30th April 2018, 07:57 AM   #353
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,487
Jabba,

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- I had never asked this question of the Internet -- I was asking before that was a possibility for me.
I don't really understand this sentence.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
everything was at the center of the universe.
By definition, when the universe was a single point everything was at the center.

Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
- Is that what you meant?
Well just to be clear, I'm saying that I specifically am the current center of the universe.
SOdhner 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 30th April 2018, 08:23 AM   #354
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,336
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
everything was at the center of the universe.
Before the universe, there wasn't anything we know of to be the center of. As I said before, the cardinal mistake one makes in grasping Hubble's work is to assume that the universe is expanding into something.

Quote:
Is that what you meant?
As soon after the Big Bang as the universe acquired physical dimensions, it would have been possible to reckon things like a centroid -- which is not a center per se but a construct expressing the idea of centrality among spatially distributed items. Obviously at this time and thereafter, not everything can be at that center. The question is whether you can refute S0dhner's suggestion that he is at that center.
JayUtah 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 30th April 2018, 08:41 AM   #355
SOdhner
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Arizona
Posts: 1,487
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
Before the universe, there wasn't anything we know of to be the center of.
This isn't specifically at JayUtah, just a general reminder for everyone:

Obviously this is a forum and you can feel free to respond to whoever on whatever topic, but I would like to humbly suggest that it would be most efficient if you spend your energy on the true purpose of this thread - Jabba's debate style. Be wary of getting drawn into the more specific bits of this debate I'm having with him - in this case the argument is meta and vice versa.
SOdhner 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 30th April 2018, 09:04 AM   #356
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 8,427
Originally Posted by JoeMorgue View Post
I've literally watched Bill Nye explain this concept to a 6 year old with a balloon and a magic marker.

THIS AIN'T THAT COMPLICATED.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KiR5tJOYZ9M
halleyscomet 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 30th April 2018, 09:09 AM   #357
JayUtah
Penultimate Amazing
 
JayUtah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 15,336
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
Be wary of getting drawn into the more specific bits of this debate I'm having with him...
Oh, right. We have a division of labor here. Carry on!
JayUtah 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 30th April 2018, 10:26 AM   #358
wollery
Protected by Samurai Hedgehogs!
 
wollery's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 10,778
Originally Posted by JayUtah View Post
As I said before, the cardinal mistake one makes in grasping Hubble's work is to assume that the universe is expanding into something.
Well, technically speaking. . .

But we really don't want to go down that rabbit hole!!
__________________
"You're a sick SOB. You know that, Wollery?" - Roadtoad

"Just think how stupid the average person is, and then realize that half of them are even stupider!" --George Carlin
wollery 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 30th April 2018, 11:06 AM   #359
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,086
Originally Posted by wollery View Post
Well, technically speaking. . .

But we really don't want to go down that rabbit hole!!

I suspect that one person involved in the thread might.
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo 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 30th April 2018, 11:21 AM   #360
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 26,610
Originally Posted by Jabba View Post
Sodhner,
- Is it OK if I call you "Sod" or some other, easy name? I'm a two finger typist.
- Will you be trying to stick to my rules of debate?
Wouldn't it be more effective to sort these things out before starting the debate?

Why is it that whenever you claim to have studied a topic for decades, it always seems like you've only just now started thinking about the most basic beginner concepts of the topic?

Surely in your extensive study of debating methods, you must have noticed that pretty much every method generally accepted as "effective debate" includes settling the ground rules before the debate begins.

How is it effective to start the debate, and then ignore the topic in favor of flailing about uselessly on forms of address?
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
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 06:05 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
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.