"Timberwoof"
inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
in message
news:timberwoof.spam-E3851D.16360913082008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...> In article
bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "Painius" maol.com> wrote:>> "Timberwoof"
inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com> wrote...
>> in message
>> news:timberwoof.spam-B8D7B3.09500613082008@nnrp-virt.nntp.sonic.net...>>> In article
>>>
w7g2000hsa.googlegroups.com>,
>>> PD gmail.com> wrote:>>>> On Aug 12, 12:41 pm, "Painius"
maol.com> wrote:>>>>>> ...to those who are
>>>>>> asking a *question*. However, many of the people are putting
>>>>>> forward
>>>>>> claims of well-developed ideas that aren't well-developed at all,
>>>>>> and
>>>>>> they've been doing that for a long time, and they have no
>>>>>> intention
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> acknowledging what is necessary to develop it properly. These
>>>>>> people
>>>>>> are indeed worthy of very harsh criticism. They are a poison to
>>>>>> science.
>>>>>
>>>>> Aren't you being just a little overdramatic? A dignified
>>>>> form of behavior ought to be called for even under the
>>>>> most trying of circumstances. Anything else belittles
>>>>> and bespittles the one thing we have going for us...
>>>>>
>>>>> science
>>>>
>>>> I don't agree, entirely. It is entirely appropriate for the sake of
>>>> other newbies and lurkers to have the line drawn very clearly between
>>>> science and pseudoscience.
>>>
>>> Seconded. The pseudoscience should be pointed out and the reasons that
>>> it is pseudoscience should be given ... politely. There's an awful lot
>>> of amateur theorizing going on on this newsgroup. For example, Brad
>>> Guth's Velikovskian fairy tales about the moon. There's an opportunity
>>> to show how planetary orbits really work... Brad won't learn, but
>>> others
>>> might.
>>
>> Excellent, and i agree wholeheartedly with you, TW.
>> You have just come up with the justification for Brad's
>> existence. He and others like him serve a purpose
>> here, if only to stimulate us to walk carefully upon the
>> razor sharp cutting edge of astronomy.
>
> The only problem with him and others is that they keep making the same
> stupid (sorry, I should use a more polite word. Hm. Let me think. Uh.
> Wait! I know! "Stupid" That's polite.) stories about stuff with zero
> basis in reality. Meanwhile our little friend Sunny asks questions like
> an eight-year-old who hasn't discovered the Encyclopedia Britannica yet.
> So the newsgroup gets flooded with crap and trivia. The "opportunity" is
> an attempt to make lemonade out of dishwater. Even after adding sugar
> and lemon juice, it's still soapy and dirty.
I don't see anybody pointing a gun to your head and
making you read the posts of any given poster. Your
feelings are very real, however by now you must know
that they're generated within you and by you. If you
continue to read and whine about what you read, you
will only wind up like Saul.
Alt.astronomy has become what i like to call a cutting-
edge astronomy newsgroup, TW. In such a setting, it's
not always easy to separate the wheat from the chaff.
But the chaff will always be there anyway. I don't see
you as doing so badly. Cut yourself some slack. Trust
yourself, for you know a lot more than you think you
do.
happy days and...
starry starry nights!
--
Indelibly yours,
Paine Ellsworth
P.S.: Thank *YOU* for reading!
P.P.S.: http://painellsworth.net
