reminder of the rules

Climate-Debate.com > Discussion Forum > Climate debate in general > reminder of the rules

Page 1 of 3

reminder of the rules30-01-2020 20:42
spot ★★★★☆ (1323)	1) Stay inside the scope Climate-Debate.com is about climate change and related questions. If you want to discuss other topics, then you are welcome to do so in the Off Topic area (see the forum overview). Should the conversation turn into more personal or private talk, then consider withdrawing to Private Messages. 2) Stick to the subject Always stay on-topic in the thread you are participating in. If you want to discuss something else, then start a new thread. 3) Use the Search machine Many topics have been discussed several times, and a lot of questions have been answered before. Start by using the Search field (top left of the page), and try to make your post contribute to the forum in a new way. 4) Don't attack the messenger This doesn't mean that a tough tone and an offensive style is not accepted, but please focus on the message and not the messenger. 5) No advertisements Direct advertisements for other websites or products are not allowed. You can add a link to your website on your profile page. In order to prevent spam it is not possible to add links to the signature. 6) Don't make noise Don't write the same post in a lot of different threads. Don't write 100 lines with identical smileys. Don' write posts with just CAPITAL LETTERS. 7) No illegal content Content which is illegal due to insults, libel, hate speech, copyright infringements etc. is of course not allowed. 8) Be cautious with quotes Don't change the wording when you quote someone. If you quote outside the thread, then post a link or a source. If you choose to abridge a quote, then mark it explicitly with "...". And last but not least: Don't quote from a private message without the other user's consent. If these guidelines are violated, an admin or moderator will edit or delete posts. If no improvement is seen, it can be necessary to ban the user in question. Latest revised by Jeppe Branner (branner), admin and site owner, November 9, 2015. I contend two of the most active users violate 6 of the 8 rules daily and should be banned. Discuss IBdaMann wrote: "Air" is not a body in and of itself. Ergo it is not a blackbody. Planck's law describes the spectral density of electromagnetic radiation emitted by a black body in thermal equilibrium at a given temperature T.
30-01-2020 21:11
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	spot wrote: 1) Stay inside the scope Climate-Debate.com is about climate change and related questions. If you want to discuss other topics, then you are welcome to do so in the Off Topic area (see the forum overview). Should the conversation turn into more personal or private talk, then consider withdrawing to Private Messages. 2) Stick to the subject Always stay on-topic in the thread you are participating in. If you want to discuss something else, then start a new thread. 3) Use the Search machine Many topics have been discussed several times, and a lot of questions have been answered before. Start by using the Search field (top left of the page), and try to make your post contribute to the forum in a new way. 4) Don't attack the messenger This doesn't mean that a tough tone and an offensive style is not accepted, but please focus on the message and not the messenger. 5) No advertisements Direct advertisements for other websites or products are not allowed. You can add a link to your website on your profile page. In order to prevent spam it is not possible to add links to the signature. 6) Don't make noise Don't write the same post in a lot of different threads. Don't write 100 lines with identical smileys. Don' write posts with just CAPITAL LETTERS. 7) No illegal content Content which is illegal due to insults, libel, hate speech, copyright infringements etc. is of course not allowed. 8) Be cautious with quotes Don't change the wording when you quote someone. If you quote outside the thread, then post a link or a source. If you choose to abridge a quote, then mark it explicitly with "...". And last but not least: Don't quote from a private message without the other user's consent. If these guidelines are violated, an admin or moderator will edit or delete posts. If no improvement is seen, it can be necessary to ban the user in question. Latest revised by Jeppe Branner (branner), admin and site owner, November 9, 2015. I contend two of the most active users violate 6 of the 8 rules daily and should be banned. Discuss Violation of Rule 4 The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
30-01-2020 23:55
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	spot wrote: 1) Stay inside the scope Climate-Debate.com is about climate change and related questions. If you want to discuss other topics, then you are welcome to do so in the Off Topic area (see the forum overview). Should the conversation turn into more personal or private talk, then consider withdrawing to Private Messages. 2) Stick to the subject Always stay on-topic in the thread you are participating in. If you want to discuss something else, then start a new thread. 3) Use the Search machine Many topics have been discussed several times, and a lot of questions have been answered before. Start by using the Search field (top left of the page), and try to make your post contribute to the forum in a new way. 4) Don't attack the messenger This doesn't mean that a tough tone and an offensive style is not accepted, but please focus on the message and not the messenger. 5) No advertisements Direct advertisements for other websites or products are not allowed. You can add a link to your website on your profile page. In order to prevent spam it is not possible to add links to the signature. 6) Don't make noise Don't write the same post in a lot of different threads. Don't write 100 lines with identical smileys. Don' write posts with just CAPITAL LETTERS. 7) No illegal content Content which is illegal due to insults, libel, hate speech, copyright infringements etc. is of course not allowed. 8) Be cautious with quotes Don't change the wording when you quote someone. If you quote outside the thread, then post a link or a source. If you choose to abridge a quote, then mark it explicitly with "...". And last but not least: Don't quote from a private message without the other user's consent. If these guidelines are violated, an admin or moderator will edit or delete posts. If no improvement is seen, it can be necessary to ban the user in question. Latest revised by Jeppe Branner (branner), admin and site owner, November 9, 2015. I contend two of the most active users violate 6 of the 8 rules daily and should be banned. Discuss Violation of Rule #1. This thread is not about "climate change and related questions". This thread is better suited for the Off Topic section of the forum. Violation of Rule #4. This thread is focusing on the messenger rather than the message.
31-01-2020 01:22
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	gfm7175 wrote: spot wrote: 1) Stay inside the scope Climate-Debate.com is about climate change and related questions. If you want to discuss other topics, then you are welcome to do so in the Off Topic area (see the forum overview). Should the conversation turn into more personal or private talk, then consider withdrawing to Private Messages. 2) Stick to the subject Always stay on-topic in the thread you are participating in. If you want to discuss something else, then start a new thread. 3) Use the Search machine Many topics have been discussed several times, and a lot of questions have been answered before. Start by using the Search field (top left of the page), and try to make your post contribute to the forum in a new way. 4) Don't attack the messenger This doesn't mean that a tough tone and an offensive style is not accepted, but please focus on the message and not the messenger. 5) No advertisements Direct advertisements for other websites or products are not allowed. You can add a link to your website on your profile page. In order to prevent spam it is not possible to add links to the signature. 6) Don't make noise Don't write the same post in a lot of different threads. Don't write 100 lines with identical smileys. Don' write posts with just CAPITAL LETTERS. 7) No illegal content Content which is illegal due to insults, libel, hate speech, copyright infringements etc. is of course not allowed. 8) Be cautious with quotes Don't change the wording when you quote someone. If you quote outside the thread, then post a link or a source. If you choose to abridge a quote, then mark it explicitly with "...". And last but not least: Don't quote from a private message without the other user's consent. If these guidelines are violated, an admin or moderator will edit or delete posts. If no improvement is seen, it can be necessary to ban the user in question. Latest revised by Jeppe Branner (branner), admin and site owner, November 9, 2015. I contend two of the most active users violate 6 of the 8 rules daily and should be banned. Discuss Violation of Rule #1. This thread is not about "climate change and related questions". This thread is better suited for the Off Topic section of the forum. Violation of Rule #4. This thread is focusing on the messenger rather than the message. Good catch. You are right. This thread belongs in the Off Topic area. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
31-01-2020 03:21
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	spot wrote: I contend two of the most active users violate 6 of the 8 rules daily and should be banned. I suspect that anyone currently on the board would change their posting behavior with instructions from a moderator and simply the threat of a ban. I'm trying to work with ITN on getting him to at least define the statements he posts over and over again. As it is not only are they repetitive they are in his own private language and essentially no different than random characters. He has confirmed the dictionary and online references are no help in deciphering them. He's not the only one to post a quote two screens long to only have very little to say. I wish more people would edit what they are quoting more respectfully. You get concision points spot. Jeppe Branner is, as I understand it, the board owner/creator and has opted not to get involved with moderating posting aside from dealing with obvious spam. Personally I think the rules are very neutral and worth enforcing. I doubt anyone would actually get banned if they were. I have to say I looked into when posters were banned long ago on here and I didn't really get it. Edited on 31-01-2020 03:22

31-01-2020 04:12
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14453)	tmiddles wrote:I have to say I looked into when posters were banned long ago on here and I didn't really get it. I think there were two bannings: trafn and litesong. trafn was actually a moderator ... the only one ever if I recall correctly. He went off the deep end. He was like tmiddles in the sense that he came to the sight specifically to preach, ... and to sell a book Bursting the Atmosphere. His religion was WACKED like you would not believe (but he still referred to it as "settled science"). Ground Zero was Spindletop (pictured below) for the Man-Made Climate Change that was going to cause all water to vaporize and steam upward under pressure-cooker temperatures as the earth's crust collapses ... when CO2 reaches 500 ppm or something like that. ABOUT THIS BOOK: For centuries, people have spoken of the end of times, but always from a religious perspective. Now, for the first time in history, we are able to talk about the pending end of the human race in scientific terms, with all life gone from planet Earth before the year 2100. Using both thermodynamics and the Ideal Gas Law, Robert Ben Mitchell explains how global phase change (not global warming) is the ever present danger that will be the end of the world as we know it,Inquiries: trafn@yahoo.com or 786-262-5750 (USA) The matter was so urgent that he was desperate to silence any dissent. When he realized people wouldn't just start believing and worshiping as he dictated, he began spamming the board on every thread, just to disrupt all discussion. He spammed until he had the top post count (after just a few weeks), and then claimed that he was the top contributor. Branner finally banned him after giving him all the leeway in the world over a few months, after even letting him be a moderator (in hopes of appeasement). litesong I think was banned during my hiatus. Tim the Plumber claims credit somewhat for getting litesong banned and claims that he considered getting Into the Night banned, ... but granted him a reprieve of sorts. 13-10-2018 11:13 I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
31-01-2020 05:34
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: I think there were two bannings: trafn and litesong. Thanks I didn't know trafn's deal. litesong was the one I didn't get. Didn't see like extreme posting precipitated it. No biggie, nothing is done perfectly.
31-01-2020 05:40
HarveyH55★★★★★ (5197)	I think falling back on rules, is like a loser, calling everybody else cheaters. More of a democrat thing. Mostly, rules, tend to be guidelines, not intended to be enforced, like laws. Of course, some people are a little over zealous, and try to grow a foot or two, by abusing the power and control, of applying the rules. Usually, there becomes a double standard, where some are dealt with more harshly than others. It's not any easy thing to find the right balance, to keep a site civil, and productive, and not run people off. I think the owner does a more than remove spam. I've been on sites, that were suppose to be about electronics, which was kind of the weaker topic. Mostly, it was for swapping porn, MP3s, and most anything else. We mostly stay on the climate issues, and keep it legal.
31-01-2020 22:49
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: spot wrote: I contend two of the most active users violate 6 of the 8 rules daily and should be banned. I suspect that anyone currently on the board would change their posting behavior with instructions from a moderator and simply the threat of a ban. Thankfully, you aren't a moderator. tmiddles wrote: I'm trying to work with ITN on getting him to at least define the statements he posts over and over again. He already does so, at least with me. I've never had any issues with getting him to define a term or to explain a concept. From what I've seen of your correspondence, it seems like you have no desire to learn about other points of view and the reasoning behind them. tmiddles wrote: As it is not only are they repetitive When you make the same claims over and over, you are going to get the same response each time. If you commit the same logical fallacies over and over, you are going to keep getting called out for them. tmiddles wrote: they are in his own private language English is not a private language. Many people across the world speak it. tmiddles wrote: and essentially no different than random characters. Even if I would respond to you with "JSDAFHDFABS", that's not truly random characters, as my mind has a tendency to want to mash keys in a leftward direction on the keyboard. tmiddles wrote: He has confirmed the dictionary and online references are no help in deciphering them. Dictionaries do not define words and online references are not a substitute for science. tmiddles wrote: He's not the only one to post a quote two screens long to only have very little to say. I wish more people would edit what they are quoting more respectfully. In my opinion, that's the great thing about this forum. It is very easy to keep past exchanges within the same post to preserve the flow of the conversation within said post. tmiddles wrote: You get concision points spot. Jeppe Branner is, as I understand it, the board owner/creator and has opted not to get involved with moderating posting aside from dealing with obvious spam. Personally I think the rules are very neutral and worth enforcing. I doubt anyone would actually get banned if they were. I have to say I looked into when posters were banned long ago on here and I didn't really get it. He doesn't attempt to control speech. That is one major thing that I like about this forum.
31-01-2020 22:49
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	tmiddles wrote: spot wrote: I contend two of the most active users violate 6 of the 8 rules daily and should be banned. I suspect that anyone currently on the board would change their posting behavior with instructions from a moderator and simply the threat of a ban. I'm trying to work with ITN on getting him to at least define the statements he posts over and over again. RQAA. tmiddles wrote: As it is not only are they repetitive they are in his own private language and essentially no different than random characters. RQAA tmiddles wrote: He has confirmed the dictionary and online references are no help in deciphering them. RFAF. tmiddles wrote: He's not the only one to post a quote two screens long to only have very little to say. I wish more people would edit what they are quoting more respectfully. Bulverism fallacy. tmiddles wrote: Jeppe Branner is, as I understand it, the board owner/creator and has opted not to get involved with moderating posting aside from dealing with obvious spam. He has banned people here before for violating forum rules. tmiddles wrote: Personally I think the rules are very neutral and worth enforcing. I doubt anyone would actually get banned if they were. You can read Branner's mind now? tmiddles wrote: I have to say I looked into when posters were banned long ago on here and I didn't really get it. Because you aren't Branner. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
31-01-2020 22:53
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: I think there were two bannings: trafn and litesong. Thanks I didn't know trafn's deal. litesong was the one I didn't get. Didn't see like extreme posting precipitated it. No biggie, nothing is done perfectly. Trafn was banned for spamming the board with multiple posts. Litesong was banned for spamming the board with multiple posts and creating numerous whole threads that contained nothing but his posts. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
31-01-2020 22:54
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	HarveyH55 wrote: I think falling back on rules, is like a loser, calling everybody else cheaters. More of a democrat thing. Mostly, rules, tend to be guidelines, not intended to be enforced, like laws. Of course, some people are a little over zealous, and try to grow a foot or two, by abusing the power and control, of applying the rules. Usually, there becomes a double standard, where some are dealt with more harshly than others. It's not any easy thing to find the right balance, to keep a site civil, and productive, and not run people off. I think the owner does a more than remove spam. I've been on sites, that were suppose to be about electronics, which was kind of the weaker topic. Mostly, it was for swapping porn, MP3s, and most anything else. We mostly stay on the climate issues, and keep it legal. I think Branner finds a nice balance. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
31-01-2020 23:37
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14453)	Into the Night wrote:Litesong was banned for spamming the board with multiple posts and creating numerous whole threads that contained nothing but his posts. Frankly, I don't have a problem if he has his own thread. So what? Perhaps you remember on Topix how litesong had his Arctic temperature thread in which he posted his daily Arctic temperatures that were as hilariously bogus as the way the Arctic was characterized as "boiling" under negative temperatures Fahrenheit. For the while that I actually had floating temperature data, I enjoyed posting actual temperatures that ran completely counter to his posts. Good times! Was it really that bad on Climate Debate? I'm having difficulty imagining him as being disruptive. The biggest problem for me was trying to decipher his posts to figure out what he was saying. Otherwise I never saw a problem. Now I'm stuck thinking about those Global Warming Berserkers that were cooking the Arctic. I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
01-02-2020 00:04
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	IBdaMann wrote: Into the Night wrote:Litesong was banned for spamming the board with multiple posts and creating numerous whole threads that contained nothing but his posts. Frankly, I don't have a problem if he has his own thread. So what? Perhaps you remember on Topix how litesong had his Arctic temperature thread in which he posted his daily Arctic temperatures that were as hilariously bogus as the way the Arctic was characterized as "boiling" under negative temperatures Fahrenheit. For the while that I actually had floating temperature data, I enjoyed posting actual temperatures that ran completely counter to his posts. Good times! Was it really that bad on Climate Debate? I'm having difficulty imagining him as being disruptive. The biggest problem for me was trying to decipher his posts to figure out what he was saying. Otherwise I never saw a problem. Now I'm stuck thinking about those Global Warming Berserkers that were cooking the Arctic. You remember most of what he did. I likewise didn't have a problem with it. Unfortunately, his spam became repetitive and crossed several threads, essentially a milder version of Trafn. He was tolerated here by Branner until then. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
01-02-2020 00:56
James___ ★★★★★ (5513)	09-03-2018 12:30 litesong ★★★★★ Posts: 2297 Joined: 17.11.16 litesong wrote: Yes, continued temperature drops now occur, with FAB (2) dropping more, this time to "only" 8degC above average. Again, possible further temp decreases may continue. Much Northern Hemisphere heat has withdrawn to lower latitudes. Powerful continuous heat extends from Northern Africa & southern europe to countries south of russia, all the way to Asia, & China. Strong heat is on Canada to eastern U.S. As such, only smaller heat is on the High Arctic. Vast cold is on siberia, & russia. The high Greenland Ice Sheet, is now -50degC to -60degC. Thus, FAB (2) slips to only 4degC over the average. Much heat inflow to the High Arctic, from the south is cut off, altho FAB (2) has passed 200 straight days of existence. At this time FAB (2) temperature is vulnerable to dropping even further, such that FAB (2) could end. Edited on 09-03-2018 12:32

01-02-2020 04:27
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: I'm trying to work with ITN on getting him to at least define the statements he posts over and over again. He already does so, at least with me. Do you know his definition for "False Authority"? And how it's distinguished, if it is, from "Appeal to Authority"? He won't tell me.
01-02-2020 07:18
GasGuzzler ★★★★★ (2935)	Litesong, otherwise known as Chief Copynpaste (among a few other clever names) was banned for copynpasting the same message across several threads on on the same day on several occasions. Warned, ignored, and banned. It had nothing to do with content. He did have some crazy shit ideas about weather.... warm fronts moving into the Arctic from Europe and crashing south through Canada. I honestly don't miss it. IBdaMann could really push his buttons though, That was always entertaining.
01-02-2020 20:04
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: I'm trying to work with ITN on getting him to at least define the statements he posts over and over again. He already does so, at least with me. Do you know his definition for "False Authority"? And how it's distinguished, if it is, from "Appeal to Authority"? He won't tell me. Lie. RQAA. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
01-02-2020 20:06
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	GasGuzzler wrote: Litesong, otherwise known as Chief Copynpaste (among a few other clever names) was banned for copynpasting the same message across several threads on on the same day on several occasions. Warned, ignored, and banned. It had nothing to do with content. He did have some crazy shit ideas about weather.... warm fronts moving into the Arctic from Europe and crashing south through Canada. I honestly don't miss it. IBdaMann could really push his buttons though, That was always entertaining. Yes it was. IBDaMann can find some pretty good images to enhance his point as well. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
03-02-2020 17:12
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: I'm trying to work with ITN on getting him to at least define the statements he posts over and over again. He already does so, at least with me. Do you know his definition for "False Authority"? And how it's distinguished, if it is, from "Appeal to Authority"? He won't tell me. He has already told you what it is.
03-02-2020 17:18
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Into the Night wrote: GasGuzzler wrote: Litesong, otherwise known as Chief Copynpaste (among a few other clever names) was banned for copynpasting the same message across several threads on on the same day on several occasions. Warned, ignored, and banned. It had nothing to do with content. He did have some crazy shit ideas about weather.... warm fronts moving into the Arctic from Europe and crashing south through Canada. I honestly don't miss it. IBdaMann could really push his buttons though, That was always entertaining. Yes it was. IBDaMann can find some pretty good images to enhance his point as well. He sure can! I especially appreciated the one within this thread as I am familiar with where it comes from. Edited on 03-02-2020 17:19
04-02-2020 12:00
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: .... Do you know his definition for "False Authority"? . He has already told you what it is. nope Dont you think a glossary would make sense when posters don't follow common definitions?
04-02-2020 16:38
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: .... Do you know his definition for "False Authority"? . He has already told you what it is. nope Yup. tmiddles wrote: Dont you think a glossary would make sense when posters don't follow common definitions? No. The posters are available for you to ask questions of. Just ask them for the definition of a particular word or phrase. I do it all the time. I constantly ask Church Members to define "Climate Change" and similar language, but they have yet to provide me with anything outside of a circular definition, which is utterly useless. You can also learn from your interactions with posters. I have learned the meanings of all of the numerous acronyms and initialisms that ITN makes use of, and no longer need a reference to remember what any of them stand for. I find them useful and even make use of them myself from time to time. I've also come up with some of my own that I make use of from time to time.
04-02-2020 20:32
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote: The posters are available for you to ask questions of. But I'm not getting any answers. It's clearly either dishonest or a hopelessly stupid system. ITN lists fallacys all day long. 1/2 it seems have custom definitions he has confirmed are different than what's popular, but he refuses to provide his definition. So he's basically crapping on the board with what mine as well be a foreign language.
04-02-2020 21:06
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: tmiddles wrote: .... Do you know his definition for "False Authority"? . He has already told you what it is. nope Dont you think a glossary would make sense when posters don't follow common definitions? Lie. RDCF. RFAF. RFR. RQAA. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 04-02-2020 21:07
04-02-2020 21:09
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: The posters are available for you to ask questions of. But I'm not getting any answers. Lie. RQAA. tmiddles wrote: It's clearly either dishonest or a hopelessly stupid system. YALIF. Bulverism fallacy. tmiddles wrote: ITN lists fallacys all day long. Only because you keep making them. tmiddles wrote: 1/2 it seems have custom definitions he has confirmed are different than what's popular, RFAF. RFR. RQAA tmiddles wrote: but he refuses to provide his definition. Lie. RFR RFAF RQAA tmiddles wrote: So he's basically crapping on the board with what mine as well be a foreign language. Inversion fallacy. Try English. It works better. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
04-02-2020 21:48
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	tmiddles wrote: gfm7175 wrote: The posters are available for you to ask questions of. But I'm not getting any answers. It's clearly either dishonest or a hopelessly stupid system. ITN lists fallacys all day long. 1/2 it seems have custom definitions he has confirmed are different than what's popular, but he refuses to provide his definition. So he's basically crapping on the board with what mine as well be a foreign language. You've been getting direct and precise answers. I'd suggest that you stop playing the "woe is me" victim card, for starters. If you would stop committing logical fallacies in your argumentation, then ITN would have no fallacies to make note of. A lot of the "popular definitions" of fallacies that you will run into online are incomplete in their description of the fallacy (if not flat out wrong). Take the Fallacy Fallacy for example. The logicallyfallacious.com web page about it hones in on one specific form of that fallacy rather than the fallacy itself. It fails to recognize the overarching application of the fallacy. That's why posters such as ITN and myself will not accept "logicallyfallacious.com" (or some other website, book, etc.) as a source (or as a "master list") regarding logical fallacies. Logic is not defined by a website, book, etc... It is, rather, a closed functional system that is defined by its axioms. ITN has already provided you with the definitions that you have requested. I have read through some of your exchanges with others on here, and it's very clear to me that you are here to preach rather than to discuss and learn. Edited on 04-02-2020 21:50
04-02-2020 22:16
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14453)	tmiddles wrote: ITN lists fallacys all day long. 1/2 it seems have custom definitions he has confirmed are different than what's popular, but he refuses to provide his definition. So he's basically crapping on the board with what mine as well be a foreign language. Why don't you make a list. You can call it *The List. I'll be happy to host it on my site. You could ask people to find inaccuracies that you can correct in order to maintain an accurate listing. How about it? Of course if it isn't important enough to be worth the effort then why are you pretending that it is? . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit* A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
04-02-2020 22:18
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Into the Night wrote: Lie. RDCF. RFAF. RFR. RQAA. I haven't seen you use RFR yet... What does that one mean? Also, for some reason, this post reminded me of the nostalgia of the days when you had your "numbered mantras" list. The acronyms and initialisms are much easier to remember, I will admit, but there's just something about that mantra list that induces a feeling of nostalgia.
04-02-2020 22:55
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14453)	gfm7175 wrote: Also, for some reason, this post reminded me of the nostalgia of the days when you had your "numbered mantras" list. Ditto. We should create a master list of mantras and fallacies. We really should. From December 2017: Into the Night wrote: Wake wrote: Into the Night wrote: HAHAHAHA! I'm not going to define every word in the English language for you, bigot. ...deleted Mantra 2...10...1...13...10...1... Attempted redefinition of a compositional error as a sexual orientation. Attempted redefinition of science as a mental disorder. Compositional error involving people (homosexuals) as the class and a behavior (limp wrists) as the element making it a bigoted statement. You presented no argument, bigot. Only fallacies. Bring it back. Bring it back. . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist

04-02-2020 23:52
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	gfm7175 wrote: [quote]Into the Night wrote: Lie. RDCF. RFAF. RFR. RQAA. I haven't seen you use RFR yet... What does that one mean? RFR (or RRF) Redefinition Fallacy Repetitiously, or Repetitious Redefinition Fallacy. Typically, he is redefining 'logic' to void, usually as a result of one of his false authority fallacies. gfm7175 wrote: Also, for some reason, this post reminded me of the nostalgia of the days when you had your "numbered mantras" list. I still have that list. Perhaps I could start using it again. gfm7175 wrote: The acronyms and initialisms are much easier to remember, I will admit, but there's just something about that mantra list that induces a feeling of nostalgia. Heh. I know what you mean. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
04-02-2020 23:58
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	IBdaMann wrote: gfm7175 wrote: Also, for some reason, this post reminded me of the nostalgia of the days when you had your "numbered mantras" list. Ditto. We should create a master list of mantras and fallacies. We really should. From December 2017: Into the Night wrote: Wake wrote: Into the Night wrote: HAHAHAHA! I'm not going to define every word in the English language for you, bigot. ...deleted Mantra 2...10...1...13...10...1... Attempted redefinition of a compositional error as a sexual orientation. Attempted redefinition of science as a mental disorder. Compositional error involving people (homosexuals) as the class and a behavior (limp wrists) as the element making it a bigoted statement. You presented no argument, bigot. Only fallacies. Bring it back. Bring it back. . Due to popular demand , I will bring back the use of the numbered mantras. For those unfamiliar with this list, it is currently as follows: 1) ad hominems. 2) claims of not understanding. 3) condescending comments, essentially missionary efforts to try to 'convert a lost sheep'. 4) attempts to justify false sources or using a false source. 5) calling someone a liar. 6) Offers to 'work together' or 'go through the math' with no intention of actually doing so. 7) claims that you have lost, or have admitted to have lost the debate. 8) The use of 'logic' as a buzzword or redefining logic. 9) bigotry or any other compositional error. 10) attempts to redefine words (usually I show what words are being redefined unless the problem is a repetitive one). 11) claims of complexity as a cop-out. 12) claims of poor education. 13) claims of lunacy or mental incapacity. 14) argument of the Stick (argument by threat). 15) redirection of topic or non-sequitur statement. 16) contextomy or inversion fallacies. 17) Pascal's Wager fallacy. 18) calling someone evil because they disagree. 19) attempts to change history. 20) use of either void argument or buzzwords. 21) argument of the Stone. 22) claim of ulterior motive 23) math error or randU 24) fixation 25) mockery 26) argument of ignorance In honor of tmiddles, I am adding: 27) question already answered The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
05-02-2020 00:26
gfm7175★★★★★ (3314)	Great! Thanks ITN!! This definitely brings back memories!! I second the addition of "question already answered", as that's been a serious mantra lately. Did I miss what mantra bulverism would fall under? (ie, the typical "you're just an obscure forum user" response) That's also been rather popular lately. I would also suggest adding one for anything relating to a True Scotsman Fallacy, such as when twits respond with "REAL scientists say [such and such]" Edited on 05-02-2020 00:38
05-02-2020 01:22
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	gfm7175 wrote: Great! Thanks ITN!! This definitely brings back memories!! I second the addition of "question already answered", as that's been a serious mantra lately. Did I miss what mantra bulverism would fall under? (ie, the typical "you're just an obscure forum user" response) That's also been rather popular lately. I would also suggest adding one for anything relating to a True Scotsman Fallacy, such as when twits respond with "REAL scientists say [such and such]" Since the True Scotsman fallacy is just a particular kind of false authority fallacy, I lump it under Mantra 4. However, I will add another one: 28) Speaking for others. I do not number bulverism. I spell it out each time. I also do not number 'bigotry' or 'racism' or 'lie', due to the short nature of these words and the egregious nature of these fallacies. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan Edited on 05-02-2020 01:33
05-02-2020 02:50
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	gfm7175 wrote:I'd suggest that you stop playing the "woe is me" victim card,... Not that at all. It is dishonest what ITN, you and IBD are doing. I will continue to point that out. ITN is a shameless liar with his RQAA It's simply crapping on the board with meaningless characters. No one but ITN cares about his fallacy parade as most of it is incomprehensible. gfm7175 wrote:A lot of the "popular definitions" of fallacies that you will run into online are incomplete.... You make my point for me. So put a listing here of what YOU mean when YOU say something. gfm7175 wrote: ITN has already provided you with the definitions that you have requested. That is a lie. IBdaMann wrote: Why don't you make a list. To make a list of what ITN means when he says something I would need his participation. I don't have it. Edited on 05-02-2020 02:51
05-02-2020 03:57
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14453)	Into the Night wrote: Since the True Scotsman fallacy is just a particular kind of false authority fallacy, I lump it under Mantra 4. However, I will add another one: 28) Speaking for others. I do not number bulverism. I spell it out each time. I also do not number 'bigotry' or 'racism' or 'lie', due to the short nature of these words and the egregious nature of these fallacies. So, would you have a problem if they all had numbers? I compiled the list on Politiplex, cleaned it up, added a few items, gave all of them numbers of course, and now I'm asking everyone to review it and to provide comments so it can BDaBomb. The Official List of Spurious Mantras, Dishonest Tactics and Common Fallacies of Online Discourse on Politiplex . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
05-02-2020 04:02
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: So, would you have a problem if they all had numbers? What does: "#4 False Source" Mean to you you? I would presume that's a "false authority"? Examples would be good.
05-02-2020 04:27
IBdaMann★★★★★ (14453)	tmiddles wrote: IBdaMann wrote: So, would you have a problem if they all had numbers? What does: "#4 False Source" Mean to you you? I would presume that's a "false authority"? Examples would be good. I'm going to work out the wording with Into the Night. Do you have any suggestions? . . I don't think i can [define it]. I just kind of get a feel for the phrase. - keepit A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist. The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank :sigh* Not the "raw data" crap.* - Leafsdude IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
05-02-2020 05:27
Into the Night★★★★★ (21637)	tmiddles wrote: ...deleted Mantras 5...14...5...28...27...4...27...5...4... No argument presented. The Parrot Killer Debunked in my sig. - tmiddles Google keeps track of paranoid talk and i'm not on their list. I've been evaluated and certified. - keepit nuclear powered ships do not require nuclear fuel. - Swan While it is true that fossils do not burn it is also true that fossil fuels burn very well - Swan
05-02-2020 06:06
tmiddles★★★★★ (3979)	IBdaMann wrote: "#4 False Source"...Do you have any suggestions? There's False Authority (the authority claimed is no qualified, the Pope on Tire Pressure) Appeal to Authority (pretending because Einstein says it you don't have to defend it) False (the information is wrong) I guess I would think "False Source" might be a good title for a spoofed website. Something pretending to be CNN but it's really a spam site. It's not the best title.

Page 1 of 3

Join the debate reminder of the rules:

Threads	Replies	Last post
Ho Ho Ho, did everyone send in their Christmas list? A few ground rules though	2	28-12-2023 19:16
CHATGPT RULES THE WORLD... OR, AT LEAST, THE HOME	1	22-05-2023 21:02
Many Big Ideas For Global Currencies Using Rules In The Current World Financial System	0	10-08-2022 09:51
The USA Must Change The President Election Rules To Make Life More Fair & Interesting	1	28-07-2021 04:43
Trump Sued Over New Coal Rules	0	14-08-2019 02:37