Character Assassination by Academics....

[PoliticalChic]

I love the way PC goes from trying to pretend to be an academic to Turning into full on rabid name calling when called on her bullshit.

Be serious.

How could anyone as dumb as you call me on anything.....

....we both know you're a moron trying to sound as though you're capable of a critique.


C'mon....admit it.



Hey....I'm thinking of another OP about race.....you down wit' dat?

 

[Cassandro]

Description of Circumstantial Ad Hominem

A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy in which one attempts to attack a claim by asserting that the person making the claim is making it simply out of self interest. In some cases, this fallacy involves substituting an attack on a person's circumstances (such as the person's religion, political affiliation, ethnic background, etc.). The fallacy has the following forms:


Person A makes claim X.
Person B asserts that A makes claim X because it is in A's interest to claim X.
Therefore claim X is false.

Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on A's circumstances.
Therefore X is false.


A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy because a person's interests and circumstances have no bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made. While a person's interests will provide them with motives to support certain claims, the claims stand or fall on their own. It is also the case that a person's circumstances (religion, political affiliation, etc.) do not affect the truth or falsity of the claim.

Fallacy: Circumstantial Ad Hominem

The only fallacy here is that you actually believe you have a point in addition on the top of your head.

Do you believe that a scientific study by 'liberal' scientists can in fact be of genuine scientific value, and can be objective despite the personal leanings of the scientists,

and therefore any attempt to summarily impugn or reject any study using those leanings is a fallacious argument?

Academic hero-worshiping usually derives from an intellectually destitute background wherein the individual is taught not to question those of superior status.

 

[ClosedCaption]

I love the way PC goes from trying to pretend to be an academic to Turning into full on rabid name calling when called on her bullshit.

Be serious.
How could anyone as dumb as you call me on anything.....

....we both know you're a moron trying to sound as though you're capable of a critique.


C'mon....admit it.

Hey....I'm thinking of another OP about race.....you down wit' dat?

Next time try not to make me look like Nostadamus. Check and mate

 

[francoHFW]

OP etc-So dumb and so arrogant- Perfect chumps of the greedy idiot rich. Luckily, also so scary stupid the GOP is disintegrating...

 

[PoliticalChic]

I love the way PC goes from trying to pretend to be an academic to Turning into full on rabid name calling when called on her bullshit.

Be serious.
How could anyone as dumb as you call me on anything.....

....we both know you're a moron trying to sound as though you're capable of a critique.


C'mon....admit it.

Hey....I'm thinking of another OP about race.....you down wit' dat?

Next time try not to make me look like Nostadamus. Check and mate

You probably meant a Czech's cell-mate.....

 

[PoliticalChic]

OP etc-So dumb and so arrogant- Perfect chumps of the greedy idiot rich. Luckily, also so scary stupid the GOP is disintegrating...

Let's go over that....

1. "... dumb and so arrogant-..."
Certainly not the former...but the latter....well....

2. "...greedy idiot rich."
Again....as is true of all of your attempts at posting, a farrago...

I'm not greedy....and always busy!
Just ask the upstairs maid, or the chauffeur!

3. "... the GOP is disintegrating."

"CNN Poll: Majority Doesn't Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe Drop"
CNN Poll: Majority Doesn't Trust Obama, Approval Rating Plunges




4. It must take a great deal of courage on your part to use the phrase "so scary stupid," I mean, in light of your 'condition.'

 

[ClosedCaption]

OP etc-So dumb and so arrogant- Perfect chumps of the greedy idiot rich. Luckily, also so scary stupid the GOP is disintegrating...

Let's go over that....

1. "... dumb and so arrogant-..."
Certainly not the former...but the latter....well....

2. "...greedy idiot rich."
Again....as is true of all of your attempts at posting, a farrago...

I'm not greedy....and always busy!
Just ask the upstairs maid, or the chauffeur!

3. "... the GOP is disintegrating."

"CNN Poll: Majority Doesn't Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe Drop"
CNN Poll: Majority Doesn't Trust Obama, Approval Rating Plunges



4. It must take a great deal of courage on your part to use the phrase "so scary stupid," I mean, in light of your 'condition.'

You think that poll has anything to do with the GOP's popularity. That is how you work. In la-la land

 

[PoliticalChic]

OP etc-So dumb and so arrogant- Perfect chumps of the greedy idiot rich. Luckily, also so scary stupid the GOP is disintegrating...

Let's go over that....

1. "... dumb and so arrogant-..."
Certainly not the former...but the latter....well....

2. "...greedy idiot rich."
Again....as is true of all of your attempts at posting, a farrago...

I'm not greedy....and always busy!
Just ask the upstairs maid, or the chauffeur!

3. "... the GOP is disintegrating."

"CNN Poll: Majority Doesn't Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe Drop"
CNN Poll: Majority Doesn't Trust Obama, Approval Rating Plunges



4. It must take a great deal of courage on your part to use the phrase "so scary stupid," I mean, in light of your 'condition.'

You think that poll has anything to do with the GOP's popularity. That is how you work. In la-la land

You probably haven't noticed that there are really only two political parties....

Do you know what a 'zero-sum game' means?
I guess not.....

 

[ClosedCaption]

Let's go over that....

1. "... dumb and so arrogant-..."
Certainly not the former...but the latter....well....

2. "...greedy idiot rich."
Again....as is true of all of your attempts at posting, a farrago...

I'm not greedy....and always busy!
Just ask the upstairs maid, or the chauffeur!

3. "... the GOP is disintegrating."

"CNN Poll: Majority Doesn't Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe Drop"
CNN Poll: Majority Doesn't Trust Obama, Approval Rating Plunges


4. It must take a great deal of courage on your part to use the phrase "so scary stupid," I mean, in light of your 'condition.'

You think that poll has anything to do with the GOP's popularity. That is how you work. In la-la land

You probably haven't noticed that there are really only two political parties....

Do you know what a 'zero-sum game' means?
I guess not.....

No I don't, why don't you explain how Obamas' popularity has anything to do with the GOP disintegrating.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Let's go over that....

1. "... dumb and so arrogant-..."
Certainly not the former...but the latter....well....

2. "...greedy idiot rich."
Again....as is true of all of your attempts at posting, a farrago...

I'm not greedy....and always busy!
Just ask the upstairs maid, or the chauffeur!

3. "... the GOP is disintegrating."

"CNN Poll: Majority Doesn't Trust Obama, Approval Rating Suffers Severe Drop"
CNN Poll: Majority Doesn't Trust Obama, Approval Rating Plunges



4. It must take a great deal of courage on your part to use the phrase "so scary stupid," I mean, in light of your 'condition.'

You think that poll has anything to do with the GOP's popularity. That is how you work. In la-la land

You probably haven't noticed that there are really only two political parties....

Do you know what a 'zero-sum game' means?
I guess not.....

The Republicans in Congress have an approval rating of around 23%.

Congress: Republicans

 

[NYcarbineer]

The only fallacy here is that you actually believe you have a point in addition on the top of your head.

Do you believe that a scientific study by 'liberal' scientists can in fact be of genuine scientific value, and can be objective despite the personal leanings of the scientists,

and therefore any attempt to summarily impugn or reject any study using those leanings is a fallacious argument?

Academic hero-worshiping usually derives from an intellectually destitute background wherein the individual is taught not to question those of superior status.

Your response does not include a simple yes or no answer to the question I posed,

which of course can be translated into a 'yes', which you cannot bear to utter out loud.

 

[NYcarbineer]

I love the way PC goes from trying to pretend to be an academic to Turning into full on rabid name calling when called on her bullshit.

Be serious.
How could anyone as dumb as you call me on anything.....

....we both know you're a moron trying to sound as though you're capable of a critique.


C'mon....admit it.

Hey....I'm thinking of another OP about race.....you down wit' dat?

Next time try not to make me look like Nostadamus. Check and mate

And the best part is her blithe ignorance of what she just did.

 

[PoliticalChic]

You think that poll has anything to do with the GOP's popularity. That is how you work. In la-la land

You probably haven't noticed that there are really only two political parties....

Do you know what a 'zero-sum game' means?
I guess not.....

No I don't, why don't you explain how Obamas' popularity has anything to do with the GOP disintegrating.

Miss Utah said she can't believe you're this dumb.

 

[ClosedCaption]

You probably haven't noticed that there are really only two political parties....

Do you know what a 'zero-sum game' means?
I guess not.....

No I don't, why don't you explain how Obamas' popularity has anything to do with the GOP disintegrating.

Miss Utah said she can't believe you're this dumb.

Just as I thought, cant make sense of your own post so you go back to the only thing you've ever done. Name call and deflect.

You're welcome to join the masses of people who have no idea what the hell you're talking about because you cant even explain it

 

[PoliticalChic]

No I don't, why don't you explain how Obamas' popularity has anything to do with the GOP disintegrating.

Miss Utah said she can't believe you're this dumb.

Just as I thought, cant make sense of your own post so you go back to the only thing you've ever done. Name call and deflect.

You're welcome to join the masses of people who have no idea what the hell you're talking about because you cant even explain it

I appreciate that you didn't deny that you're a dunce.

 

[midcan5]

Topic conversation started here: http://www.usmessageboard.com/science-and-technology/299118-what-you-really-believe-that.html

"Only someone miraculously innocent of history could believe that competition among ideas could result in the triumph of truth" John Gray

The interesting aspect of this OP is the fact the authors were criticized and eventually corrected where wrong. That is what science does, or is supposed to do, even if late to the game. Comments on certain aspects from personal knowledge:

If you live in a big city chances are there are the good sections and the not so good sections. You don't have to guess who mostly lives in the not so good sections, nor do you wonder at their ethnicity. Why. I can give reasons on all sides, but reasons are often ignored if the stereotype is strong enough. If I were to take the average joe around the various streets I bicycle, do you know what they would say? Guess. No need to say more.

Now guns. First I have read that guns were rare in colonial times. Given manufacturing then, that doesn't seem all that earth shaking. Gary Wills writes about that aspect in 'A Necessary Evil.' But can anyone of my generation remember all this hullabaloo about guns when they grew up? I remember nothing at all? So then something must have changed. Again the answer is kinda obvious but rarely spoken.

Comic books, movies, books, etc etc were always the cause of all sorts of things, one can find a so called scientist who claims anything, so this is hardly a reason to give up on science. We used to study the list of forbidden books and movies in church on Sunday just in case we had an opportunity to enjoy one. Boys will be....and we turned out alright.

As for 'The Authoritarian Personality' for those of us to whom the Holocaust changed how they viewed good and evil, Adorno's study was an attempt to understand. Personality does matter. Read Stanley Milgram or check out this video: Philip Zimbardo: The psychology of evil | Video on TED.com

And if you read: [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Becoming-Evil-Ordinary-Genocide-Killing/dp/0195189493/ref=pd_cp_b_2]Amazon.com: Becoming Evil: How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing (9780195189490): James Waller: Books[/ame]


Gun laws. [ame=http://www.amazon.com/Gunfight-Battle-over-Right-America/dp/0393077411/ref=cm_cr_pr_sims_t]Amazon.com: Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America (9780393077414): Adam Winkler: Books[/ame]


Scientist noted in OP making up stuff. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/28/magazine/diederik-stapels-audacious-academic-fraud.html

.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Well, then there's that hockey stick model that Al Gore pushed, and the Climategate via the University of East Anglia, then I can jump to the laughable peer-review process instituted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which summarily rejected studies that conflicted with global warming. Then there was the Himalayan Glaciers incident.

Yes, and Liberals call US uneducated?

If the overalll overwhelming consensus among scientists, including an overwhelming consensus among those not shown to be unethical or incompetent,

if that consensus is that the planet is warming,

how would it be that anecdotal incidents of unethical or incompetent actions in the scientific community serve to refute that consensus?

Does rampant pedophilia in the Catholic Church refute all principles of Christianity?

So how did religion come into the discussion? The planet is warming, but humans aren't causing the warming. It is part of an ancient cycle, there have been multiple warming periods over the past 800,000 years. And if you have to change the data, and manipulate models, lie about it to the masses, and intimidate or preclude scientists who come to different conclusions about a theory, then it is a fraud. I hate to break it to you.

 

[editec]

So what are we to conclude from this thread?

That we ought to dismiss any and all academic studies because some academic studies are found to be biased?

Social Science: elaborate demonstration of the obvious by methods that are obscure.

Nice try

Social Science: a branch of science that deals with the institutions and functioning of human society and with the interpersonal relationships of individuals as members of society.

A basic rule: when the results of some study doesn't make sense.....don't believe 'em.

Fair enough. But simple DENIAL doesn't make it so...no matter how much the voices in your head tell you that they do.

Warning: this rule is dangerous to utilize if one either has no brain, or is a Democrat.

Or faith based thinkers of any stipe.

 

[Old Rocks]

Well, then there's that hockey stick model that Al Gore pushed, and the Climategate via the University of East Anglia, then I can jump to the laughable peer-review process instituted by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which summarily rejected studies that conflicted with global warming. Then there was the Himalayan Glaciers incident.

Yes, and Liberals call US uneducated?

If the overalll overwhelming consensus among scientists, including an overwhelming consensus among those not shown to be unethical or incompetent,

if that consensus is that the planet is warming,

how would it be that anecdotal incidents of unethical or incompetent actions in the scientific community serve to refute that consensus?

Does rampant pedophilia in the Catholic Church refute all principles of Christianity?

So how did religion come into the discussion? The planet is warming, but humans aren't causing the warming. It is part of an ancient cycle, there have been multiple warming periods over the past 800,000 years. And if you have to change the data, and manipulate models, lie about it to the masses, and intimidate or preclude scientists who come to different conclusions about a theory, then it is a fraud. I hate to break it to you.

OK. Name the cycle.

And prove your lies about the scientists that have been gathering evidence for the last century on the warming.

 

[Old Rocks]

It is so ironic to read these "Conservatives" constantly denigrating scientists as the post on their computer over the internet.

As far as PC's constant railing at the people that have spent their lives becoming expert in a given field, one can see the envy of someone that has succeeded where that person has failed.