Science is a popularity contest

Humy has assumed that because I will not reveal my science (after trying to goad me repeatedly) education I must not have any. By this logic humy must be a woman since humy will not answer the question.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Humy has assumed that because I will not reveal my science (after trying to goad me repeatedly) education I must not have any. By this logic humy must be a woman since humy will not answer the question.

Not many conspiracy nuts have a formal scientific background, so the assumption seems reasonable.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Humy has assumed that because I will not reveal my science (after trying to goad me repeatedly) education I must not have any.

It would be quite obvious to all of us here that read your posts that it unlikely you have any noteworthy science credentials else;

1, you would have stated them to put us to shame for disagreeing with your opinion on science (and yet you haven't ). Unsurprisingly, people that have genuine science credentials generally state them and don't hide them. Why would you hide them from us? that makes no sense at all.

2, no general ignorance of science would have shown through your posts (like it did )


Please don't insult our intelligence.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
Not many conspiracy nuts have a formal scientific background, so the assumption seems reasonable.

Humy is a conspiracy nut. It is obvious when he says corrupt politics is preventing a policy of promoting renewables. In fact, most global warming alarmists are conspiracy nuts.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Humy is a conspiracy nut. It is obvious when he says corrupt politics is preventing a policy of promoting renewables.....

Nope. Obviously, I don't equate "corrupt politics" with "conspiracy". Obviously, there can be corrupt politics without involving a conspiracy. Just general stupidity, not secrecy (hence no conspiracy ), is the cause of this corruption.
Anyway, I thought you where the one who believed in conspiracies; like believing that there is a mass conspiracy to make out that man made global warming is a scientific fact when, according to you, it isn't. So you are the "conspiracy nut".

Originally posted by humy
Nope. Obviously, I don't equate "corrupt politics" with "conspiracy". Obviously, there can be corrupt politics without involving a conspiracy.
Anyway, I thought you where the one who believed in conspiracies; like believing that there is a mass conspiracy to make out that man made global warming is a scientific fact when, according to you, it isn't. So you are the "conspiracy nut".

"Obviously, there can be corrupt politics without involving a conspiracy."

No, there can't. Look up conspiracy in the dictionary.

Everybody believes in conspiracies in reality. Do you believe organized crime exists? If so, you believe in conspiracies.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
"Obviously, there can be corrupt politics without involving a conspiracy."

No, there can't. Look up conspiracy in the dictionary.

Everybody believes in conspiracies in reality. Do you believe organized crime exists? If so, you believe in conspiracies.

1, I took the meaning of conspiracy in this context to imply involvement of secrecy. Obviously, you can have corrupt politic that is both corrupt and not involving secrecy -it is called incompetence or stupidity. You can be stupid or incompetent without trying to keep a secret.

2, I was talking about corrupt politics, not "organized crime".

3, merely believing there exists organized crime doesn't make someone [irrationally] believe in conspiracies.

Originally posted by humy
1, I took the meaning of conspiracy in this context to imply involvement of secrecy. Obviously, you can have corrupt politic that is both corrupt and not involving secrecy -it is called incompetence or stupidity. You can be stupid or incompetent without trying to keep a secret.

2, I was talking about corrupt politics, not "organized crime".

3, merely believing there exists organized crime doesn't make someone [irrationally] believe in conspiracies.

"1, I took the meaning of conspiracy in this context to imply involvement of secrecy. Obviously, you can have corrupt politic that is both corrupt and not involving secrecy -it is called incompetence or stupidity. You can be stupid or incompetent without trying to keep a secret."

So you assumed again. Secrecy is not implied in the true definition. Many common conspiracies do involve secrecy though. Organized crime is one of them and corrupt politics is another.

"2, I was talking about corrupt politics, not "organized crime"."

What is the difference?

"3, merely believing there exists organized crime doesn't make someone [irrationally] believe in conspiracies."

Organized crime can't exist without a conspiracy. This is obvious and very rational to believe. To deny it is irrational.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

You once made the statement that men rape women to remind them they live in a man's world. That implies conspiracy. Merely observing (and experiencing) the vindictiveness of women does not at all. You are a hypocrite and you are wrong.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
Not completely of course, but few can argue that facts alone guide which theories are accepted in the short term and which theories are not.

How much does popularity influence the course of science?

The Nobel prizes are evidence of this.

Originally posted by Metal Brain
"


I was talking about corrupt politics, not "organized crime"."

What is the difference?

.

1, not all "organized crime" involves politics as in directly involving governments and/or politicians deliberately committing the organized crime.

2, corrupt politics may involve simply the incompetence of an individual politician not sharing his incompetence with others and/or the criminality of an individual politician who commits a crime (or at least does something bad if not technically illegal ) by himself i.e. not involving other people deliberately committing the same crime with him nor in any way helping him to do so. Either way, you cannot call that "organized" crime by "organized crime" because "organized crime" involves a number of people, not just one person, working together to deliberately commit crime.

Originally posted by humy
1, not all "organized crime" involves politics as in directly involving governments and/or politicians deliberately committing the organized crime.

2, corrupt politics may involve simply the incompetence of an individual politician not sharing his incompetence with others and/or the criminality of an individual politician who commits a crime (or at least doe ...[text shortened]... involves a number of people, not just one person, working together to deliberately commit crime.

"1, not all "organized crime" involves politics as in directly involving governments and/or politicians deliberately committing the organized crime."

It doesn't have to. Bribery is a crime and it involves more than 1 person. Bribing politicians to vote for invading a foreign country is very organized. Installing puppet governments is even more organized. Imperialism is essentially organized crime at the highest level.