http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pseudoskeptic
I am reading an entry in the Wikipedia (awesome site) about Pathological skeptiscm. I went there after going to the "Skeptics dictionary" and could not believe such a book exist's. Science is getting (and probably has been) torn into so many different camps. Here's a quote from Max Placnk;
Then those innovation's don't seem quite so amazing anymore eh? This reminds me of when I went to (hell) badastronomy.com and started engaging the angry PATHOLOGICAL skeptics there to admit to remain true to science they would have to remain agnostic in their belief's toward the existance and visitation of E.T.I. Almost everyone one of them rejected that idea. They all put (as though they would know) limit's on the ability of intelligent life to get to Earth.
Making grand claims about the abilities of E.T.I. given that we know nothing about them, is the ultimate form of pseudoscience.
Yet - I was banned for trying to convince (Can you convince a pathological skeptic?) that a pathological skeptic could exist. HE LITTERALLY DENIED THAT SUCH A PERSON COULD EXIST!
Needless to say, that debate was useless. I hope those people get help, and likewise they wish I could get help, the only difference is I mean it. They generally think we are pathetic and a stain on science.
Oh how I love pathological skeptics!
I am reading an entry in the Wikipedia (awesome site) about Pathological skeptiscm. I went there after going to the "Skeptics dictionary" and could not believe such a book exist's. Science is getting (and probably has been) torn into so many different camps. Here's a quote from Max Placnk;
An important scientific innovation rarely makes its way by gradually winning over and converting its opponents [...] What does happen is that its opponents gradually die out, and that the growing generation is familiarised with the idea from the beginning.
Then those innovation's don't seem quite so amazing anymore eh? This reminds me of when I went to (hell) badastronomy.com and started engaging the angry PATHOLOGICAL skeptics there to admit to remain true to science they would have to remain agnostic in their belief's toward the existance and visitation of E.T.I. Almost everyone one of them rejected that idea. They all put (as though they would know) limit's on the ability of intelligent life to get to Earth.
Making grand claims about the abilities of E.T.I. given that we know nothing about them, is the ultimate form of pseudoscience.
Yet - I was banned for trying to convince (Can you convince a pathological skeptic?) that a pathological skeptic could exist. HE LITTERALLY DENIED THAT SUCH A PERSON COULD EXIST!
Needless to say, that debate was useless. I hope those people get help, and likewise they wish I could get help, the only difference is I mean it. They generally think we are pathetic and a stain on science.
Oh how I love pathological skeptics!