Display:
Yes I remember his studies of magneto-hydro-dynamics as the propulsion system for UFOs. But he really seemed stubborn in never considering all the impossibilities pointed at by critiques. As for CNRS, I met quite a number of crackhead there during my Ph D. And wasn't Benveniste also CNRS (the one of the "memory of water" thing) ? So some of them are not just crackheads, they're outright crooks.

Pierre
by Pierre on Fri Jun 23rd, 2006 at 07:56:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In a way I am always lenient towards scientists who put forward new ways of looking at things. If they're flat wrong, they become known as crackheads, but when they turn out to be right, they end up with a nobel prize.

That said I fully agree with you that working at the CNRS is not a guarantee of an empirical mindset ;)

by Alex in Toulouse on Fri Jun 23rd, 2006 at 08:02:24 AM EST
[ Parent ]
If they're flat wrong, they become known as crackheads

I disagree. You're not a crackpot just because you're wrong. You're a crackpot if

  • you make logically inconsistent statements and adhere to them after careful correction
  • you use thought experiments that contradict real experiments
  • you use works of fiction as if they were facts
From this situation it is easy to slide into the depths of crackpotness, where
  • you compare yourself favourably to Einstein, Newton or Feynman
  • you compare yourself to Galileo and your critics to the Inquisition


guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jun 23rd, 2006 at 08:11:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for a more thorough definition ;)
by Alex in Toulouse on Fri Jun 23rd, 2006 at 08:16:43 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I think you're actually a crackhead if you smoke crack.

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jun 23rd, 2006 at 08:20:09 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Ach, I was hoping you wouldn't notice that.
by Alex in Toulouse on Fri Jun 23rd, 2006 at 08:25:27 AM EST
[ Parent ]
I disagree. You're not a crackpot just because you're wrong. You're a crackpot if

    * you make logically inconsistent statements and adhere to them after careful correction
    * you use thought experiments that contradict real experiments
    * you use works of fiction as if they were facts

It's lucky you'll never find anything like that happening in economics or politics.

</snark>

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Fri Jun 23rd, 2006 at 11:21:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]
In economics or politics, you're a crackpot for pointing out that's what the mainstream is doing </snark>

guaranteed to evoke a violent reaction from police is to challenge their right to "define the situation." --- David Graeber citing Marc Cooper
by Migeru (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Jun 23rd, 2006 at 11:23:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Nobody appreciates my genius.

</metasnark>

by ThatBritGuy (thatbritguy (at) googlemail.com) on Fri Jun 23rd, 2006 at 11:27:17 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Display:
Login
. Make a new account
. Reset password
Occasional Series