swansont

It's human nature to categorize people, and if you're introducing a new subject for discussion — some new, possibly untested idea that is not part of the standard curriculum of science — you don't want to be classified as a crackpot. Here is some the behavior you must avoid. 1. Vocabulary Crackpots misuse terminology, especially terms like theory, or dogma. You don't want to be the one who proclaims "it's only a theory" or "you're being dogmatic" and make it clear you don't know the definitions of the words. Unless your posts actually get redacted, don't claim "censorship," either, unless you want peoples' irony meters to explode. You also don't want to get caught making up new jargon, especially not terms you've named after yourself. 2. Background knowledge Crackpots generally have little grasp of the theories they are critiquing and/or are unaware of the breadth and depth of experimental knowledge that exists (which often leads to the building of straw man arguments). Few things will get you dismissed faster than stating a claim that is trivially found to be false. Nobody will take the guy who proposes that the moon is made of cheese seriously. 3. You need Evidence Crackpots generally don't understand what is acceptable as evidence and often make assertions which they treat as facts. In a science discussion, evidence means scientifically-obtained data rather than anecdotes or assertions. And evidence is king. The only way to test your idea is to compare it to nature; it doesn't matter how logical it is to anyone — if it disagrees with actual experiment it's not correct. 4. Smoke and mirrors are no substitute for evidence Crackpots will often try and sidestep the question of evidence either by appealing to some conspiracy or engaging in personal attacks. Any excuse to follow up on a comment that leads away from the demand for evidence will be seized upon. Even the demand for evidence will often be viewed as a personal attack. Worse than this is when they go on the offensive and claim science is a religion, often coupled with the vocabulary issue mentioned above (dogma). 5. Don't act like you are the smartest person in the room You aren't going to dazzle the audience with your brilliance. If people can't understand what you are talking about, they aren't going to simply accept it as true. If you avoid the tough questions, or your response is to simply repeat your points, people will notice that you are dodging. Don't compare yourself to Galileo or Einstein. While it's possible that you are smarter than any single member of the audience, it's unlikely that you are smarter than all of the audience put together. 6. Speak the language One of the most common attributes of a crackpot is the unwillingness to express things mathematically. If you can't do the math, you are attacking the problem with an exceedingly dull instrument. Math is precise and has a very high information density — it is very powerful. Descriptive language is a poor substitute. At the other end of the spectrum is the numerologist, who works with a lot of numbers but doesn't connect them to reality in any scientifically meaningful way; there is no link to any mechanism or scientific model.

G Anthony has been suspended for two weeks (second suspension) for continuing to post off-topic speculation outside of the threads he has already opened.

cyclops banned for continuing to troll just as before the suspension, and abusing the PM system

Steve Christopher banned for being a troll (multiple violations of rules 1 and 8)

hydra6 and cherub have been banned as sockpuppet accounts of cyclops —— cyclops suspended 7 days for the sockpuppets and for violations of rule 8, i.e. trolling.

Scientific terminology is generally more precise (and occasionally less precise) than lay terminology, meaning that if you use the wrong word, you mean something you did not intend. However, you probably have no idea exactly how much a scientist is already translating their discussion into a version more generally digestible unless you spend time listening to him/her in discussion with colleagues. Compare a paper and the press release based on it sometime and you will have an inkling of how much translation is already going on, between the terminology and trying to express math in words. Some of the burden has to be on the audience to gain some scientific literacy if they want to participate in the discussion.

Bro-mide has been banned as a sockpuppet account for 00rich

ponderer has been suspended 3 days for trolling

Secular Sanity has been suspended for 5 days for being rude and ignoring multiple moderator warnings.

thescienceguy has been banned as a sockpuppet account for morgsboi ——— Dovada has been suspended for 7 days for re-re-introducing the subject of a closed thread and doing so by hijacking another thread.

! Moderator Note If you have a new theory to share, it should be posted in the Speculations section

Either that or it limits itself to searching posts made/threads started under the new software. I have a vague recollection of noticing this when we switched.

exploration has been banned for breaking the rules and then throwing multiple tantrums when called on it.

Hal has been banned for being an insufferable troll, continuing along the path of insulting members (for which he had already been suspended), culminated by an inappropriate foreign-language poem.

What are the approximate coordinates of the cache? That usually helps. The coordinates given on the cache page are usually close to the actual cache, so the degrees of lat and long are typically the same.

The user biljanica has been terminated as a sockpuppet account of bob boben.

Pincho Paxton has been banned at his request.

G Anthony has been temporarily suspended for spamming with multiple threads on the same topic, and using a sockpuppet account (Gary Anthony Kent) to perpetuate this. The sockpuppet account has been terminated.

! Moderator Note Religion debates should be made in the religion forum. However, telling people what they must or must not believe is probably not going to fly. Please make sure you are familiar with the board rules. No need to respond to this note. I don't see how it can be viewed as anything but evidence for common ancestry. The debate has to be about whether it is "enough" and genetics is not the only evidence.

If they are part of currently accepted paradigms, post in the appropriate sections. If it contradicts current paradigms, post in speculations.

Since Farsight has returned from his self-imposed exile and immediately resumed posting his pet theories in mainstream threads (rule 10 violation), he has been banned.

If you want to discuss it, it belongs in its own thread.

! Moderator Note Responses moved to new thread http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/58908-herschel-space-telescope/

But then you'd have to be banned, too, for posting those links.

Hal has been suspended for making some unfortunate comments in violation of rule 1 (civility/personal attack) and then blatantly ignoring the staff by continuing along that path.