This is a revelation that resulted from simply exquisite timing.
I've wandered into a pool of truthers over at the911forums. The indignation that arises by saying something as benign as "you're wrong about that" is astonishing. A touch of disagreement (plus a few out-&-out "you really screwed the pooch on that one") brings out such a howling that, if I didn't live in abject fear of a Monster Beatdown from Hokulele, I'd suggest that the lot of them suffered from Perennial PMS.
This whole little cluster-
[*] started when I suggested that the silly (but not pompous) brag on the part of the OP that he had achieved ±0.0001" precision in the placement of his columns in his model of the WTC core. I suggested that that claim, rather than being a statement of the high quality of his model, was more a reflection of a) his lack of appreciation of the precision of numbers & b) erroneous on its face, given the source of his data.
You'd think I'd insulted his mama..!!
Rather than a simple, reasonable "yeah, that's pretty silly in a construction building of this size", all hell broke loose.
Including his explaining that "No, he really did need precision at this level", and then a couple of different explanations of what he really meant.
If anyone would like to watch a good (but tedious) farce, it starts here.
If you'd just like to enjoy the
, THIS is a good place to start.
Now I've been warned that my ass is being watched carefully, and one more mortal sin like that & I'll be tossed out so fast it'll make my head spin. Gee, and I thought I'd left Sister Mary Brutality in my past...?!
The ability of the Truthers to turn simple disagreement into "you're a shill", "you're a NIST apologist", "you're arrogant" or simply "you're an asswipe" is astonishing. I've gone out of my way, on numerous occasions to be nice. You guys have seen how gentle & soothing I can be. It never seems to work.
The fact that, at some point I inevitably say, "Nope, I won't allow the possibility that 2+2=59.38, that is simply wrong" results in "you're an arrogant, NIST apologizing, shill, asswipe".
To which the ONLY reasonable response is pointing fingers & giggling.
But that's not the point of this thread. That experience was your typical, "Oh criminey, not another discussion that's turned into a flame war" yucchh.
But then I ran across this video. And the opening discussion explains perfectly why these discussion go south so fast & so regularly.
"The Four Horsemen"
It is a 2 hour discussion between Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens.
It is SUPERB.
Actually, I have to correct that. It has all the earmarks & personalities to be superb. But I only got thru the first 3 minutes or so, starting LMAO, and stopped to write this note.
Because the things that they say about trying to talk to deeply religious folks is exactly the same phenomenon as trying to talk to truthers.
Dawkins starts out by asking
[Paraphrase] "We've all been accused of being arrogant, or strident or vitriolic or shrill. What do we think about that?"
[I can NOT wait to hear Hitchens comments...]
But Dennett has a superb observation right off the bat.
This is exactly what one faces when conversing with truthers. Especially when they travel in packs.
Ah well. "One good horse laugh is worth a thousand syllogisms", I guess.
Enjoy the video. It should be at treat.
Tom
I've wandered into a pool of truthers over at the911forums. The indignation that arises by saying something as benign as "you're wrong about that" is astonishing. A touch of disagreement (plus a few out-&-out "you really screwed the pooch on that one") brings out such a howling that, if I didn't live in abject fear of a Monster Beatdown from Hokulele, I'd suggest that the lot of them suffered from Perennial PMS.
This whole little cluster-
[*] started when I suggested that the silly (but not pompous) brag on the part of the OP that he had achieved ±0.0001" precision in the placement of his columns in his model of the WTC core. I suggested that that claim, rather than being a statement of the high quality of his model, was more a reflection of a) his lack of appreciation of the precision of numbers & b) erroneous on its face, given the source of his data.
You'd think I'd insulted his mama..!!
Rather than a simple, reasonable "yeah, that's pretty silly in a construction building of this size", all hell broke loose.
Including his explaining that "No, he really did need precision at this level", and then a couple of different explanations of what he really meant.
If anyone would like to watch a good (but tedious) farce, it starts here.
If you'd just like to enjoy the
, THIS is a good place to start. Now I've been warned that my ass is being watched carefully, and one more mortal sin like that & I'll be tossed out so fast it'll make my head spin. Gee, and I thought I'd left Sister Mary Brutality in my past...?!
The ability of the Truthers to turn simple disagreement into "you're a shill", "you're a NIST apologist", "you're arrogant" or simply "you're an asswipe" is astonishing. I've gone out of my way, on numerous occasions to be nice. You guys have seen how gentle & soothing I can be. It never seems to work.
The fact that, at some point I inevitably say, "Nope, I won't allow the possibility that 2+2=59.38, that is simply wrong" results in "you're an arrogant, NIST apologizing, shill, asswipe".
To which the ONLY reasonable response is pointing fingers & giggling.
But that's not the point of this thread. That experience was your typical, "Oh criminey, not another discussion that's turned into a flame war" yucchh.
But then I ran across this video. And the opening discussion explains perfectly why these discussion go south so fast & so regularly.
"The Four Horsemen"
It is a 2 hour discussion between Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and Christopher Hitchens.
It is SUPERB.
Actually, I have to correct that. It has all the earmarks & personalities to be superb. But I only got thru the first 3 minutes or so, starting LMAO, and stopped to write this note.
Because the things that they say about trying to talk to deeply religious folks is exactly the same phenomenon as trying to talk to truthers.
Dawkins starts out by asking
[Paraphrase] "We've all been accused of being arrogant, or strident or vitriolic or shrill. What do we think about that?"
[I can NOT wait to hear Hitchens comments...]
But Dennett has a superb observation right off the bat.
This is exactly what one faces when conversing with truthers. Especially when they travel in packs.
Ah well. "One good horse laugh is worth a thousand syllogisms", I guess.
Enjoy the video. It should be at treat.
Tom
