Still refusing to answer questions river?.
Still trolling river?
Your whole dismissive methodology of anything mainstream convicts you of what everyone believes anyway, :shrug:
A physicist explains ghosts in our digital reality
- Thread starter Magical Realist
- Start date
- Status
Still trolling river?
Your whole dismissive methodology of anything mainstream convicts you of what everyone believes anyway, :shrug:
Here are those legitimate questions again river.
how much investigation and research have you done into Bigfoot, the supernatural and other non scientific concepts and beliefs?
Please supply proof of any of these claims of your research.
And finally, what qualifications do you have to [1] do this research, [2] Interpret the data correctly, and [3] Do it in an unbiased scientific fashion as per the scientific method.
They are of course prompted by your well known unsupported and unscientific beliefs that you have rambled on about many times, along with MR.
They are also prompted by my personal feelings that you have not ever properly investigated any of your own nonsense and pseudoscience.
Prove me wrong.
Perhaps Hollywood movies such as Poltergeist, Exorcist, The Outer Limits etc are responsible for such nonsensical non scientific paranoia and those that accept such things as real.
I mean don't get me wrong, I found each movie entertaining, scary and funny, but that's where my logic prevented me taking it beyond Hollywood.
Oh agreed that he won't answer the questions, as happens most times with regards to him and any difficult questions put to him.
But my questions were actually prompted by some ironic hypocritical posts by this same believer in ghosts goblins and anal probing aliens.
The following exchange for example......
Again, certainly he will not answer them, because to do so, will reveal his true nature and purpose on this forum, which of course is anything but science or any scientific discourse.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
This is a forum dedicated specifically to sightings of ghosts, ufos, and monsters, not a science forum. If you want to discuss science, then go to the science forums. You'll find them listed under the big heading "Science".
Sure! And just as sure is the fact that overall this is first and foremost a science forum, and every sub-heading subject, will by necessity undergo whatever scrutiny that real scientific theories need to undergo.
That will happen I assure you, as many times as you post your unsupported nonsense, even in its proper fringe hole.
You and your nonsense will run the gauntlet, Ya hear?
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Actually, if this were overall a science forum, it'd be named Sci Forum, not Sci Forums. But in fact it isn't and the Sci Forums that are being referred to are the 10 forums under the Science heading. The other remaining 20 forums are all non-science forums, dealing with such non-science topics as religion, history, art/culture, politics, ethics, world events, philosophy, business, sci-fi and fantasy, and the paranormal. There are no requirements to be scientific in these other forums, and they can be discussed freely without fear of censorship from you or any other of your scientism-worshipping troll buddies. You wanna enforce your own personal "science rules" on posters, then go to the science forums. This is not the place to do that.
Last edited:
Blah, blah, blah blah, whatever.
The fact remains that since this is first and foremost a science forum, your nonsense wherever it is posted, will certainly and assuredly undergo whatever scrutiny your peers here deem as necessary.
Live with it.
Oh, looks like MR wants to cancel Rule 3.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Moderators that pull bullshit rules out their asses don't get to decide the site rules. Those rules are set by the administrator and site owners, and can be found here:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/sciforums-site-rules.142880/
"Contributions to sciforums inevitably reflect the personal views of the members. As a result, from time to time, one side of any given debate may be over-represented. Readers should not conclude that we therefore endorse one side over the other."
And THAT would include the so-called "scientific" side..
Last edited:
Correct.
SITE Rules are decided by the Admins and owner, sub/ additional rules for various sub-fora are decided by the appropriate mod.
I suppose it's a "bullshit pulled out of an ass" rule because you'd rather spout your inane gullible crap without any chance of criticisms?
Which has f*ck all to do with the argument at hand.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Uh no. There's only site rules applying to behavior and posting on this site and all the forums. There's no such thing as "subfora rules" that apply to only a particular forum. Kittamaru doesn't get to decide new posting rules for each forum.
Last edited:
And you're wrong again, is it that you haven't bothered looking (in case you're wrong) or that you're just ignoring the reality?
A number of sub-fora have a list of rules. And have had for many years - long before you turned up and started posting your tripe.
Bells
Staff member
No. You are incorrect.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/we...ts-and-monsters-forum-redux-and-rules.142863/
For future reference, these rules were specifically designed for this sub-forum and were discussed in the backroom. They work in conjunction with the rules of this whole site. Not against them.
The religion sub-forum also has a set of rules specifically designed for that sub-forum, which also work in conjunction with this site's rules. The same goes for Comparative Religion.
It has been this way since I first came to this site back in 2001. In fact, back then, each sub-forum also had their own set of rules pertaining to those particular sub-forums, as well as the general rules that cover all forums.
Magical Realist
Valued Senior Member
Wrong. I already checked on this. The only legit rules for a forum that I found are under alternative theories and comparative religion, and even that is just some questions and an exhortation to not be so emotional. Not really rules at all. The two other attempts to micromanage a forum come from the same mod Kittamaru--the Religion forum and the UFO, Ghosts, and Monsters forum. The rules for the Religion forum, coming from a Bible believer himself, are as follows:
"This forum is, by its very nature, not based in "traditional science". As such, the requirements of evidence and proof must be changed somewhat;
Acceptable evidence for claims in this sub-forum includes the use of biblical texts and passages.
In general, this forum will be given a pass on the scientific method, as the very nature of discussions going on within are of a metaphysical standard, and thus are difficult, if not outright impossible, to "prove". "
So no scientific method there folks. The only remaining forum with rules is this one, which is a laughably transparent attempt to censor all postings of sightings and evidence of the thread's topic. I don't abide by bullshit rules made up by people other than James and Plasma Inferno, assuming they're not bullshit from them too.
Last edited:
You. Are. Lying. Surprise.
And IIRC, before the reshuffle Pseudosci used to have a set of rules too. (And you were posting here when it did).
YOU don't get to decide whether or not they're "legit".
You need a better grammar checker.
What you meant was "supposed evidence".
Got it.
You want to be a special case.
And you want your ridiculous claims to be treated as special cases too.
Magical Realist:
Actually, the overall site rules were discussed and agreed to some time ago by the moderator group. You're correct that the site owners have the ultimate say, and admins/owners have veto over what goes on.
Now that you have raised the issue, Magical Realist, it might be a good idea for the moderators to review our subforum rules and decide whether they are still needed/appropriate.
Thankyou for raising this issue.
Actually, the whole slant of this site (sciforums) is supposed to include some respect for the scientific method. In all of our forums, we expect discussions to be reasonable and logical, such that all claims are open for critical evaluation.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/sciforums-site-rules.142880/
Actually, the overall site rules were discussed and agreed to some time ago by the moderator group. You're correct that the site owners have the ultimate say, and admins/owners have veto over what goes on.
This is true. I am not sure that we still need a proliferation of supplementary rules, though. At this stage, we have not had any discussions about this matter among the moderator group, so Bells has correctly expressed the status quo.
Now that you have raised the issue, Magical Realist, it might be a good idea for the moderators to review our subforum rules and decide whether they are still needed/appropriate.
Thankyou for raising this issue.
- Status