I didn't think it was unreasonable to ask Henry Bauer to clarify whether the "science court" he had in mind was one in which expert judges would make decisions based on the substance of the evidence, as advocated by the originator of the concept, or one in which decisions would be made by "by judging whether opposing witnesses seem responsive or evasive, consistent or inconsistent, forthcoming or arrogant, etc.", as Bauer had said.
Still, perhaps the criteria of "responsive or evasive, consistent or inconsistent, forthcoming or arrogant" do have their merits.
(2017-11-22, 10:01 PM)fls Wrote: [ -> ]Ah, so it was about book sales.
Linda
Maybe it was a mixture of things that were to blame:
The forums policies that diluted his conversation.
Dante's preemptive post.
Your own ego.
His ego.
The few people that participate in the forum.
Etc etc
Maybe book sales can be included somewhere down the list. But I don't think they are his primary concern.
(2017-11-23, 09:56 AM)Stan Woolley Wrote: [ -> ]Maybe it was a mixture of things that were to blame:
The forums policies that diluted his conversation.
Dante's preemptive post.
Your own ego.
His ego.
The few people that participate in the forum.
Etc etc
Maybe book sales can be included somewhere down the list. But I don't think they are his primary concern.
Yes, my brief, tongue-in-cheek comment probably did not capture all the factors in play.
Forum policy would not hinder a discussion on his "science court" and the idea that non-experts make valid judgements on the basis of whether presenters are responsive or evasive, consistent or inconsistent, forthcoming or arrogant, etc. It was a bit disconcerting to be met with "read my book" rather than an attempt to address the points which were raised. I'm disappointed, as I thought this was going to be a good opportunity to really dig into the idea.
Linda
Sheesh. What a pussy.
Does anyone here really think Chris and Linda weren’t asking valid intelligent questions?
(2017-11-23, 05:20 PM)malf Wrote: [ -> ]Sheesh. What a pussy.
Does anyone here really think Chris and Linda weren’t asking valid intelligent questions?
Malf said >
"What a pussy ?"
and >
"Does anyone here really think Chris and Linda weren’t asking valid intelligent questions?"
The latter (FLS) is (possibly) doing the usual (shenanigans) IMHO that is but I can't "prove" it. Also why does someone who agreed to do an interview deserve to be called a pussy ?
(2017-11-23, 05:20 PM)malf Wrote: [ -> ]Sheesh. What a pussy.
Does anyone here really think Chris and Linda weren’t asking valid intelligent questions?
Would've liked if he would've chosen to respond, but is it that shocking that he didn't, really? Stan listed a lot of good reasons for him not to I think. I realize Linda was probably partially kidding but suggesting that he came here, of all places, to promote book sales is a joke in itself.
What do we have here, less than 100 members? Yeah, I'm sure he thought this would be a hotbed for increasing book sales.
Either way, his choosing not to engage is probably not very different from lots of people who tire of the round and round, pretty much the same discussions that are bound to occur in places like this. I'm sure he has no lack of experience with such situations.
If you'll call him a pussy, you probably should call everyone who wants to take a break from this forum or grows tired of the endless back and forth a pussy too. Kind of a stupid response.
(2017-11-23, 07:24 PM)Dante Wrote: [ -> ]Would've liked if he would've chosen to respond, but is it that shocking that he didn't, really? Stan listed a lot of good reasons for him not to I think. I realize Linda was probably partially kidding but suggesting that he came here, of all places, to promote book sales is a joke in itself.
What do we have here, less than 100 members? Yeah, I'm sure he thought this would be a hotbed for increasing book sales.
Either way, his choosing not to engage is probably not very different from lots of people who tire of the round and round, pretty much the same discussions that are bound to occur in places like this. I'm sure he has no lack of experience with such situations.
If you'll call him a pussy, you probably should call everyone who wants to take a break from this forum or grows tired of the endless back and forth a pussy too. Kind of a stupid response.
Just don’t forget this episode next time he’s bellyaching about folk not engaging with his nitwitted ideas.
(2017-11-23, 07:55 PM)malf Wrote: [ -> ]Just don’t forget this episode next time he’s bellyaching about folk not engaging with his nitwitted ideas.
Looks to me like he made a sensible decision.
(2017-11-23, 08:14 PM)Stan Woolley Wrote: [ -> ]Looks to me like he made a sensible decision.
Yep. Nobody likes an arse-kicking
(2017-11-23, 08:33 PM)malf Wrote: [ -> ]Yep. Nobody likes an arse-kicking
What ? from your hero, Linda (the academic who won't tell us who she is but is an expert on everything herself yet a critic of real experts like Pim Van Lommel, whom (Linda) told us is less qualified than Dean Mobs to talk about Near death experience !
fls[Image: buddy_offline.png]
Posts: 279
Threads: 4
Likes Received: 152 in 89 posts
Likes Given: 5
Joined: Aug 2017
#13
11-12-2017, 03:04 PM
Henry, I am an academic physician specializing in Internal Medicine, now retired. On a number of the topics you mention, I have extensive first-hand knowledge and experience, so I am able to evaluate whether your arguments on those subjects are valid, from the point of view of someone with expertise rather than from ignorance.
This is the kind of arrogant bluster that Madam thinks she can get away with.
How long has Linda the academic physician been retired now ? She's possibly been on message boards for 15 years ...was she retired then ? Read the thoughts of this academic physician on retirement.
http://blogs.einstein.yu.edu/on-retireme...physician/
Something not right IMHO with Linda as the retired academic physician.