tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post2328347829450739943..comments2024-03-19T03:14:04.172-04:00Comments on Rabett Run: What Is Science?EliRabetthttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comBlogger125125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-58158500656678299752013-04-03T05:13:01.882-04:002013-04-03T05:13:01.882-04:00Did not reply the bradthing for a multitude of diu...Did not reply the bradthing for a multitude of diurnal periods.<br />Now, why? <br />I heeded advise from a number of participants here. Who, to my surprise (somewhat), never took even the tiniest shred of their own advisories. Resulting in two threads that imho should've gone down the ahole during the Bunny Days, of the year 2013 to be clear, already.<br /><br />I feel kinda raped by this bradthing. And by those telling me to keep quiet while being raped and cheering the thing meantime. The good news is there is now ample space in my rabett hole. <br /><br />/cRR <br /><br />Ps, for parabels resembling death threats better use numbers, like six digits, instead of christian names.cRR Kampenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07571285063752477448noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-68992134762904236052013-04-02T16:45:50.582-04:002013-04-02T16:45:50.582-04:00Trying to bring humor to the humorless is bound to...Trying to bring humor to the humorless is bound to be an unrewarding mission.garhighwaynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-2723219453480426262013-04-02T16:27:54.695-04:002013-04-02T16:27:54.695-04:00Ah yes, Roger was doing his usual high maintenance...Ah yes, Roger was doing his usual high maintenance fit, so Eli told him this story.<br /><br />One day Eli and Dano were walking down the railroad tracks, and they saw a hand. That looks like Diane's (Eli does forget which name he used, but as you shall see, nevermind) hand said Eli, why yes it does said Dano.<br /><br />Then they went a bit further, and they saw a leg. That looks like Diane's leg said Eli, why yes it does said Dano.<br /><br />As they went down the tracks they saw a body. For sure, that looks like Diane's body said Eli, why yes it does said Dano.<br /><br />Until finally they came upon a head. That is Diane's head said Eli, why yes it is said Dano adding, Diane pull yourself together.<br /><br />At the end of the story Eli pointed out that Roger too would do well to pull himself together.<br /><br />Of course, at the time he used the opportunity to throw another fit. High maintenance that boy. EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-18014278104529984042013-04-02T12:31:00.264-04:002013-04-02T12:31:00.264-04:00hI bRAD
Want a nice story about death threats and...hI bRAD<br /><br />Want a nice story about death threats and the Eli Rabbit?<br /><br />Years ago, Pielke Jr ran a blog. Prometheus. It was supposed to be a high quality venue, related to his CIRES work, yada yada etc.<br /><br />Eli Rabbit used to comment there. <br /><br />One day, as can happen, someone, or Pielke Jr ticked off Eli Rabbet with a nonchalant toss toward the precautionary principle, or by a stubborn refusal to accept damning circumstantial evidence (that CO2 will kill the world). After becoming suitably worked up, Eli Rabbit gave an example of a bloody murder scene to illustrate his case.<br /><br />Only, the victim's name in his example, coincidentally, happened to be the same as Peilke Jr's real-life offspring.<br /><br />Taking mortal offense, Pielke Jr shut down the thread. He declared that Eli had issued vieled death threats against his family members. IIANM, Pielke blew Eli Rabett's anonymity cover at this point. Who knows.<br /><br />The point is, Eli Rabett is well familiar with misinterpretations of material into 'death threats', or some form of 'threats', that take place from instincts of self-protection, cynical exploitation, discrediting and smearing one's opponents, and similar reasons. He ought to know from personal experience.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-25719288349565637182013-04-02T11:40:13.091-04:002013-04-02T11:40:13.091-04:00Eli,
Have you noticed that the mentally ill tend t...Eli,<br />Have you noticed that the mentally ill tend to talk to themselves a lot?a_ray_in_dilbert_spacenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-87030617521107719032013-04-02T08:56:23.494-04:002013-04-02T08:56:23.494-04:00Eli, how about you spend some time trying to under...Eli, how about you spend some time trying to understand the science issues involved instead of making smartass comments to those who have?<br /><br />:-)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-64652696940997671272013-04-02T00:17:10.422-04:002013-04-02T00:17:10.422-04:00only 18 hours to go, people.
Stay the course ...
...only 18 hours to go, people.<br /><br />Stay the course ...<br />dhogazanoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-68358154739169811962013-04-01T16:27:40.437-04:002013-04-01T16:27:40.437-04:00Eli,
You have a deal, but please do tell Brad tha...Eli,<br /><br />You have a deal, but please do tell Brad that his very innovative concerns should welcome at Judy's:<br /><br />judithcurry.com<br /><br />Could you be so kind as to remind him of <a href="http://rabett.blogspot.ca/2013/03/laughing-at-those-who-laugh-at-science.html?showComment=1364583723764#c616095913415606696" rel="nofollow">this comment</a>? Brad seems to have missed it.<br /><br />PS: See you at Judy's, Brad!willardhttp://neverendingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-14631052670770426952013-04-01T15:24:04.985-04:002013-04-01T15:24:04.985-04:00So Eli the ever patient Bunny is gonna make everyo...So Eli the ever patient Bunny is gonna make everyone a deal. If no one replies to Brad for 24 hours, Eli will wipe the last load of Brad's comments out and throw them down the Rabett hole. Good for all posts. You can toy with him there.<br /><br />Remember you have to leave it alone. OTOH if Brad sock-puppets to stop this Eli will wipe ALL of Brad's comments out.EliRabetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07957002964638398767noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-19834246522626818692013-04-01T15:01:17.714-04:002013-04-01T15:01:17.714-04:00Oh, yeah - our 'philosopher' thus: "C...Oh, yeah - our 'philosopher' thus: "Comedy works where bile fails."<br /><br />/Please/ don't tell him that he is the living proof of the untenability of his own proposition...<br />Zibethicusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-75915937603529004452013-04-01T14:58:36.894-04:002013-04-01T14:58:36.894-04:00"Brad, So you don't understand the differ..."Brad, So you don't understand the difference between a warning and a death threat. Really, Brad? Are you really that dim?<br /><br />Congratulations. That's the stupidest thing I've read so far on the Intertubes this year."<br /><br />Shorter Brad (TM to whomever):<br /><br />It's not a 'campaign' because I say it's not a 'campaign'.<br /><br />They're not 'death threats' because I say they're not 'death threats'.<br /><br />*<br /><br />For the rest of it, Keyes has discovered - at truly gargantuan length and volume - that Readfern is correct in stating that Australian climate scientists have been receiving death threats - or 'death exhortations', which are different things, you understand.<br /><br />Perhaps we shouldn't be too hard on him. After all, he /is/ a 'philosopher'...<br /><br />At the rate which he has been noisily discovering phenomena which are common knowledge to everyone else, perhaps with a few more years of diligent effort he'll manage to stumble upon the existence of daylight, or even perhaps the wheel.<br /><br />Can his felicitous arrival upon the shores of climate science be too many decades behind these revelations?Zibethicusnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-37242659018026959962013-04-01T14:51:40.302-04:002013-04-01T14:51:40.302-04:00In the end, the problem with trying to reason with...In the end, the problem with trying to reason with Bradley is not that he is so hard to get through--it is that even if you do get through, he has nothing to offer. No wit, no understanding, no insight, no humor. He is a pathetic parasite.a_ray_in_dilbert_spacenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-523066013843017732013-04-01T14:46:53.907-04:002013-04-01T14:46:53.907-04:00Brad, So you don't understand the difference b...Brad, So you don't understand the difference between a warning and a death threat. Really, Brad? Are you really that dim?<br /><br />Congratulations. That's the stupidest thing I've read so far on the Intertubes this year.a_ray_in_dilbert_spacenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-47202480308491010912013-04-01T14:33:52.573-04:002013-04-01T14:33:52.573-04:00Y'all have way more patience for BS than I.
...Y'all have way more patience for BS than I. <br /><br />All of Brad's maze of twisty little passages can be cut through by asking "so what?" So what if Phil J. didn't give Warwick H. some data... so what if Phil J. expressed private relief that John D. was dead ... so what? Does this change at all our understanding of climate? No. And that's science. Take away any one result or person and there are other results or people telling us substantially the same thing.<br /><br /><br />Gatornoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-76283153401188974322013-04-01T14:33:41.754-04:002013-04-01T14:33:41.754-04:00An individual—who had earlier become frustrated wi...<i>An individual—who had earlier become frustrated with the science being presented by myself—</i><br /><br />.... and that's where the credibility drained out of your made up anecdote. For "Brad" of course doesn't 'do' science.<br /><br />Now if the would be assailant had instead become enraged by your ill-informed, incessantly flapping piehole, that would be believable.<br /><br />Of course, particularly if you presented your own case, finding a jury willing to convict for such an assault would be the hard part.chekhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09076463055055404580noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-26395007748627974722013-04-01T14:24:59.723-04:002013-04-01T14:24:59.723-04:00dilbert:
"I know of no similar flow of death...dilbert:<br /><br /><i>"I know of no similar flow of death threats in the opposite direction."</i><br /><br />Really? How about "your children will be killed by extreme weather if you don't keep warming below 2 degrees"? :-D <br /><br />Some, not Brad to be sure, might argue that, in a sense, the entire Science™ of dangerous anthropogenic climate change is <b>one big death threat</b>!Brad Keyeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12154595019913023703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-92119019406045337152013-04-01T14:20:11.148-04:002013-04-01T14:20:11.148-04:00w:
"You have been advised to keep your own a...w:<br /><br /><i>"You have been advised to keep your own authority out of the conversation, Brad."</i><br /><br />When? I must have forgotten who gave such advice; or perhaps it got lost in some ninja's artsy periphrasis?<br /><br />Nonetheless, I would have had no occasion to mention my "authority" (actually, mere <i>knowledge / competence</i>) had an interlocutor not made the false assumption that I shared his lack of "authority." (Maybe we should leave this to the philosophers, said a warrior-poet; so I was forced to correct him.)<br /><br /><i>"It will be tough now to play dumb, perhaps the only strategy left for you."</i><br /><br />Such dissimulation is difficult for me at the best of times, for try as I might, I always revert to my true nature. Therefore it is not even in my strategic repertoire. In fact, I have long been in the habit of secreting but a single trick up my sleeve: honesty.<br /><br /><i>"OTOH, we can be grateful for all these concerns you do need to provide again and again."</i><br /><br />It would be more... optimal... if I could provide them just once, though, and be assured that they were comprehended and actioned, no?<br /><br />Finally, I wish to make a complaint! <br /><br />An incident occurred during an exchange about climate warming. An individual—who had earlier become frustrated with the science being presented by myself—suddenly boasted that he was a professional killer and brandished what he claimed was a ninja licence! The individual is understood to have left voluntarily and silently.<br /><br />Whether this incident would be technically called a "death-threat" or simply a relentless, organised campaign to sexually harass me, my workmates and extended family is, to me at least, academic!Brad Keyeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12154595019913023703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-61066503132442060502013-04-01T14:19:57.761-04:002013-04-01T14:19:57.761-04:00Brad,
How many death threats must a scientist rece...Brad,<br />How many death threats must a scientist receive before it is considered a "campaign". I would think one should suffice. I know of no similar flow of death threats in the opposite direction. The scientists have been pretty passive.a_ray_in_dilbert_spacenoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-69789750069985779832013-04-01T13:44:50.729-04:002013-04-01T13:44:50.729-04:00Thank you for your tricksy answer, Brad.
This has...Thank you for your tricksy answer, Brad.<br /><br />This has not been the first one.<br /><br />Such tricksy answer might not be optimal, if I can borrow your idiomatic equivalent.<br /><br />Many thanks for these unforgettable concerns,<br /><br />wwillardhttp://neverendingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-24982020749049649822013-04-01T13:04:54.485-04:002013-04-01T13:04:54.485-04:00willard:
"All this for the word 'campaig...willard:<br /><br /><i>"All this for the word 'campaign,' Brad? I agree it might have been suboptimal."</i><br /><br />I agree too, where "optimal" ≡ "true."Brad Keyeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12154595019913023703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-84629702246170772832013-04-01T12:11:04.213-04:002013-04-01T12:11:04.213-04:00Let's complete that sentence:
> For I beli...Let's complete that sentence:<br /><br />> For I believe you would prima facie believe that we have witnessed <em>death-threatening emails against Australian climate scientists</em>.willardhttp://neverendingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-22896164884704463702013-04-01T11:44:36.731-04:002013-04-01T11:44:36.731-04:00Brad,
Thank you for the kind words.
In no way wa...Brad,<br /><br />Thank you for the kind words.<br /><br />In no way was I using the fact that Rupert Murdoch owned **The Australian** as an <em>argument</em>. As you said elsewhere, it was just an assertion. Assertions can't be used as arguments, right? If you prefer, I could say that mentioning **The Australian**'s owner was "just a little dig" at the Australian's credibility and all that jazz.<br /><br />I'm afraid these two lines of defense might sound tricksy, though.<br /><br />As far as I'm concerned, this fact could deserve due diligence <em> whether or not you use any word taken from the Australian</em>, Brad. Thinking otherwise <em>would</em> commit the genetic fallacy, by the way. And you do seem to think otherwise.<br /><br />***<br /><br />Your point 3 does seem to rest on the word "campaign". For I believe you would prima facie believe that we have witnessed :<br /><br />So I believe this depends upon what we mean by "campaign". <br /><br />Whom should we consult as an authority on such matter, Brad?<br /><br />All this for the word "campaign", Brad? I agree it might have been suboptimal. As the Auditor says:<br /><br />> Maybe it's just a vocabulary thing:<br /><br />http://neverendingaudit.tumblr.com/post/31268600509<br /><br />Or perhaps not, since we should soon pay due diligence to the moral apparatus you wish to inject in a discussion about <b>What is science?</b><br /><br />***<br /><br />You have been advised to keep your own authority out of the conversation, Brad. It will be tough now to play dumb, perhaps the only strategy left for you. OTOH, we can be grateful for all these concerns you do need to provide again and again.<br /><br />Thank you so much for these thoughtful concerns,<br /><br />w willardhttp://neverendingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-56514260246795466772013-04-01T10:39:35.695-04:002013-04-01T10:39:35.695-04:00w,
All very interesting and civil, cheers.
Howe...w,<br /><br />All very interesting and civil, cheers. <br /><br />However:<br /><br />1. I didn't mean to imply that the alarming fictionalisation of the dinner party was unreliable <i>because its author, Will Steffen, is an alarmist</i>—I had already established that it was unreliable, and then threw in a little dig at Steffen's credibility <i>in light of the bollocks he'd uttered</i>. So there was no <i>ad hominem</i> involved—which, if you remember your propositional Tao, is a kind of fallacy in which the <i>speaker</i> is supposed to discredit the <i>speech</i>, not the other way round!<br /><br />2. your trivial pursuit about Rupert Murdoch was therefore an uncalled-for <i>ad hominem</i> and genetic fallacy... which was irrelevant to boot, <i>since I hadn't relied on anything printed in The Australian</i>—I only quoted John Coochey's words as he'd typed them <i>on Graham Redfearn's own blog</i><br /><br />3. what you and Zibethicus persist in ignoring is that the question is, and has always been, whether or not there was <b>a campaign of death-threatening emails against Australian climate scientists</b>, and the evidence—a measly handful of revolting emails per thousand scientist-years—says, "No, that's just a defamatory libel against the skeptical community as a whole."<br /><br />I do hope your next comment is responsive <b>to point 3</b>, Willard.Brad Keyeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12154595019913023703noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-81756576623880219512013-04-01T10:08:34.266-04:002013-04-01T10:08:34.266-04:00Brad,
Glad to know you're a philosopher. I m...Brad,<br /><br />Glad to know you're a philosopher. I myself am a ninja. <br /><br />Also happy to acknowledge your admission:<br /><br />> Certainly [Zibethicus] cited a couple which, if I received them, I would instinctively call death threats.<br /><br />This admission might have been sufficient to Zibethicus. I have no reason to believe that he was asking your legal opinion on the concept of "death threat". Handwaving to the AFP and playing definition games are moot at best. <br /><br />You have to admit that the handwaving and the definition game do seem a bit tricksy, more so now if we believe you when you say that you are philosopher. <br /><br />Not unlike ninjas, philosophers have authority, nay, <em>knowledge</em> of these tricksy tricks.<br /><br />***<br /><br />My question about **The Australian** was inspired by your smiley:<br /><br />> The email that fictionalised this banal exchange into something alarming was written by Will Steffen, an alarmist. :-)<br /><br />I'm not sure philosophers should smile at such ad hominem.<br /><br />But again, I'm just a ninja.<br /><br />Scratching my own itch, it seems that Rupert Murdoch owns **The Australian**:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch<br /><br />***<br /><br />Speaking of the Australian, here's a bit about John Coochey:<br /><br />> Mr Coochey says he realised some fellow participants might have been disquieted by kangaroo shooting, so he "made small talk" about the marksmanship expertise needed to gain the licence.<br /><br />http://www.theaustralian.com.au/higher-education/im-the-culler-referred-to-in-anu-threats/story-e6frgcjx-1226354304101<br /><br />Reading the MediaWatch's article should have been enough to realize why I was referring to **The Australian**.<br /><br />***<br /><br />I notice that you are still unresponsive on the other thread.<br /><br />Due diligence and all.<br /><br />Thank you for your philosophical concerns,<br /><br />w<br />willardhttp://neverendingaudit.tumblr.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-16612221.post-25131602693759108832013-04-01T09:58:44.923-04:002013-04-01T09:58:44.923-04:00Zibethicus,
nice one! I'll pay that. Comedy w...Zibethicus,<br /><br />nice one! I'll pay that. Comedy works where bile fails.<br /><br />Nevertheless the question is, <i>and has only ever been,</i> whether there was <b>a campaign of death-threatening emails</b> against Australian climate scientists, and the evidence—a measly handful of revolting emails per thousand scientist-years—says "No, that's just a defamatory libel against the skeptical community as a whole."<br /><br />Remember, Son of Sam doesn't justify the Protocols. Get the difference?Brad Keyeshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12154595019913023703noreply@blogger.com