🚀 go-pugleaf

Eric Gisse wrote:

> On Feb 1, 3:15 pm, nonsense <nonse...@unsettled.com> wrote:

>>If you are afraid to reply to each paragraph
>>on its own merits you can justify that. In fact
>>you can justify just about anything.

> Since you are so in-tune with Max Keon, why don't you explain to me
> the merits of that paragraph?

Cheapshot. WTF is the matter with you? The paragraph
stands on its own two feet.

> My interpretation is that he sees conventional physics as having the
> kind of "militant faith" that which Dawkins was alluding.

That's true. Ever heard the old adage "We have to outlive
our teachers?"

This discussion grows out of the earlier question posed to
the public, "What do you believe is true even though you
cannot prove it?"

http://www.arn.org/docs/williams/pw_comparingdawkinsflew.htm

You've replied with a mathematics that models a universe
that you cannot prove is true other than by propping it
up with more models, finally claiming there must be some
continuity because if one part works this way then all
the rest must as well. Don't get burned out on this
tidbit because there's some redeeming discussion below.

In fact I don't agree with Keon in his details, but the
simple fact of the matter is that there is merit to some
parts of his thesis.

 > However,
> what he fails to realize is that he simply does not have the
> background required much less the desire required to understand the
> explanations given to him.

Ah, the priesthood thing? If you actually would like to
teach him anything, you could.

> Back to the science - he repeatedly tried to make use of an analogy
> between gravitational red shift from a point mass and the expected
> redshift since the big bang. I kept pointing out that there is no
> analogy because the situations are wildly different. Am I being
> militant because I think hes a moron for ignoring the explanation?

Have you tried to write to your audience, that being Keon?
The two of you are talking past one another.

>>>Is someone a pioneer because they refuse to understand, or just an
>>>idiot?
>>
>>>If you don't want to argue science, that's fine. Just don't expect me
>>>to play ball with you on it.
>>
>>That's a copout and you know it. But that's OK,
>>I really didn't expect better. You're still
>>seeing red. Just remember that "being right"
>>is not a valid justification for all sorts of
>>misbehavior.

> No, I'm not "seeing red". I have no idea where get 
 > this, but it won't become more valid by repeated
 > assertions that I am.

Because your armwaving and yelling have all the
hallmarks that you're angry.

> Being right and being nice don't have to overlap.

I'm usually not very nice myself, but most of the time
I think I can get my point across. That's not happening
here and I think you can do much better than you have.

The Uncle Al school of teaching is ineffectual. Please
try not to follow in his footsteps in any way. A
yelled at student winces, shuts down, and goes into
defensive mode.

Keon has attempted to argue for his points. His math
skills exist but are weak. You complain about my
"repeating" a strategy. Guess what, your arguing has
failed for that very reason. There are other ways
to explain why Keon's analogy is wrong.

Keon is not your peer no matter how much you treat
him as though he were as well invested in mathematics
as you are. Now you need to take the next step in
your own development and explain the differences to
him in terms he can understand. It can be difficult
learning to address such matters in plain English
after years of living in a world where the people
you are dealing with day in and day out explain
everything in terms of a succinct equation.

This paragraph applies to many of the sci newsgroup
posters. There is life outside of grad school. Lots
of it.

Now here's the punch line that brings it all home:
How would Carl Sagan have dealt with the discussion?

Your "militant faith" error lies in the fact that
you believe that mathematics is the only medium
of communications where science is concerned.

It isn't. It is the best and the fastest for those
who live in the disciplines. Try throwing equations
and the sorts of arguments you've been making here
into grants.