Guest OntarioSquatch Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 (edited) Any criticism towards RL, no matter how constructive, can get someone banned there... Edited December 17, 2012 by OntarioSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oonjerah Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 @OntarioSquatch That seems so unfair considering that he dishes it out in boxcars. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Bully's can rarely "take it".... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oonjerah Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 to finish my thought above ... Long, long ago when I was a kid, we were taught that those who will dish it out but are not willing to take it are cowardly scum. Is that value forgotten? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Bully's can rarely "take it".... Exactly what I said to him in a follow-up email when he emailed me to let me know I was banned (using some rather crude language I might add). to finish my thought above ... Long, long ago when I was a kid, we were taught that those who will dish it out but are not willing to take it are cowardly scum. Is that value forgotten? For the most part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Any criticism towards RL, no matter how constructive, can get someone banned there... The irony being we wouldn't be able to talk about him if he hadn't been banned here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 go read the post above the bigfoot post on RL's blog, all your questions about his behavior will be answered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 This is not exactly a prediction, but for interest, think about how amusing it would be for the journal editor to have reserved a spot on Dec. 21 for the paper. The is the date for the supposed Mayan prophecy for "the world to end" . It would be the end of the world as the public knows it if publication occurs then. MSK's comments about sending in corrections sounds like it was just the usual typographical corrections that all papers need. Sounds like the end game. I've been idly wondering about that myself - If the 'end of the world' prophecy is just the date that humanity wakes-up to the fact that we share the planet with another species of human. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 ^ & ^^ LOL! Is getting banned on the first post a record or is it typical for him to ban critics right out of the gate? I don't know about it being a record, but I got banned on the first post because I told him he didn't know what the hell he was talking about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest slimwitless Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 There's an article labeled "Genetics" with no keywords set to come out of embargo Thursday afternoon. This post is provided for entertainment purposes only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Texar Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 A question for those who know how this proces works much better than I do: Would the date the paper is to be released be secret as well? Or would MK be able to release the release date as soon as she knew? Given the track record thus far, it seems to me that the second she knew when it would be released, she would make another statement. Am I completely off-base here? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 Since Dr. Ketchum made her premature defense of the study, responding to unfortunate leaks, an army of armchair critics have already dismissed the results without waiting to see the actual data. That’s not the way science is supposed to work, but it is exactly how modern science operates. It’s as much a religion as Catholicism or Mormonism, and anything that falls outside the accepted scriptures must be ridiculed. Thank you George Knapp, for stating so eloquently, my position in this fight, and the reason I choose ScienceCritic. Tis really a shame... There will always be a private collector willing to pay a hunter for a 'stuffed trophy' - it pains me to put it like that but my guess is there are already sasquatch adorning a collection in the home of some well off millionaire fruitcake. Your guess is most likely 100% correct.. But BTW, Why release a body in this day and time and have to undergo the ridicule, etc. and have it possibly confiscated by some government agency. You applied the moniker "fruitcake" to "some millionaire". Shameful that the government and some members of the scientific community ARE not included under the category "Fruitcake". They are more deserving... That millionaire might have preserved a piece of history to be released later. Accuse one and leaving the Biased Lamestream Academic Scienctific Community out, is in itself biased... There's an article labeled "Genetics" with no keywords set to come out of embargo Thursday afternoon. This post is provided for entertainment purposes only. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gershake Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 A question for those who know how this proces works much better than I do: Would the date the paper is to be released be secret as well? Or would MK be able to release the release date as soon as she knew? I asked Sally Ramey that when she was still Ketchum's Public Relations person. She said that it was a good question and that she'd have to ask the paper to find out. She never got back to me about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 (edited) Since Dr. Ketchum made her premature defense of the study, responding to unfortunate leaks, an army of armchair critics have already dismissed the results without waiting to see the actual data. That’s not the way science is supposed to work, but it is exactly how modern science operates. It’s as much a religion as Catholicism or Mormonism, and anything that falls outside the accepted scriptures must be ridiculed. Thank you George Knapp, for stating so eloquently, my position in this fight, and the reason I choose ScienceCritic. Tis really a shame... Your guess is most likely 100% correct.. But BTW, Why release a body in this day and time and have to undergo the ridicule, etc. and have it possibly confiscated by some government agency. You applied the moniker "fruitcake" to "some millionaire". Shameful that the government and some members of the scientific community ARE not included under the category "Fruitcake". They are more deserving... That millionaire might have preserved a piece of history to be released later. Accuse one and leaving the Biased Lamestream Academic Scienctific Community out, is in itself biased... That is an excellent point however if you look at my previous posts on this thread a few odd pages back you will see I wholeheartedly agree with you. 'Lamestream' ha! I'm going to use that one... Below linked a very relevant article to digest in prep for the inevitable backlash. Published in The Guardian a very well respected broadsheet newspapr in the UK. Strap line is: Publish-or-perish: Peer review and the corruption of science Pressure on scientists to publish has led to a situation where any paper, however bad, can now be printed in a journal that claims to be peer-reviewed http://m.guardian.co.uk/science/2011/sep/05/publish-perish-peer-review-science Edited December 17, 2012 by kezra Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest DWA Posted December 17, 2012 Share Posted December 17, 2012 We probably shouldn't be too surprised that in the online age of instant info access, scientific debates and associated messiness might sometimes get played out in public. Who knows, maybe what many of us (including me) have been slamming as a circus is a deliberate attempt to get the public interesed and increase the pressure on scientists to take the topic seriously and pursue definitive action. Keep in mind that much of the public might not be so much the sticklers for procedure, but might be wondering anyway: why would anyone - let alone scientists - not want to get to the bottom of this? You tell me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts