Quote:
Originally Posted by PeterM
Carl, I have enjoyed and no doubt will continue to enjoy many posts you have made in all manner of threads. But here you seem determined to "win" and I just don't get it. You talk about having an opinion but in your passion you have sidelined others with opinions, perhaps totally unintensionally. As you keep reminding us you are the scientist here and I get impression we are being lectured to and I simply don't like it.
The last thing I want is bad blood here as we are all brought here by our enjoyment and love for this great hobby. If I may, I will agree to disagree with your views contained in this thread.
This thread started with an intentional double meaning that only pointed to a couple of links, it has probably achieved what it appears to have set out to do. The thread author tried another similar double meaning designed to draw in both sides and Mike was quick to nap that one in the bud.
To the thread starter, I say this, research your stuff (you haven't) and you will see much of that is just hand me down stories, years old, old hat and largely yawned at. Seems I touched a raw nerve with the CAPITAL LETTER reply you originally posted - after your derogatory remarks about the late great Carl Sagan then I'm glad I did.
I am not an expert in anything but I do have lots of life experience and believe me that is as good and as standing as any degree anyone will ever get anywhere.
PeterM.
|
I'm not in the business of winning, Peter. Never was. What I have been trying to do is to show that there's more to science and to anything else which maybe (even indirectly) connected to the subject than what meets the eye. What gets to me is when I try and explain something and then someone totally ignores what I've said, or doesn't seem to follow what I've said then continues on to deride mine or others comments and opinions. Whether that is unintentional or not. Especially when those others (not yourself, though) have gotten into their heads that they have some profound take on what the subject of science is about, when they've had little or no training or a background in any of the fields that have been discussed. You can read all you like from a book or get info off the net, but that doesn't make one an expert or insightful into any subject. Just means they read a lot and pick up a few things.
Nor am I in the business of lecturing people, either. This isn't a classroom, for a start. And I'll only offer my knowledge if someone asks me to provide it. However, I won't dictate word and verse to them and expect a paper back from them to see if they've been listening. I'm more interested in their opinions on what they learn from me than anything. That's why I like letting people here bounce questions off of me
Yes, I agree, this thread was loaded right form the start. But I can also see the other intentions of the poster, even if they were understated in his initial post. The idea of accusing men who have distinguished careers and reputations as being crackpots being the height of ridiculousness. However, he was getting carried away in some of his replies and it wasn't warranted.
Like I said to your earlier in the piece....we have differing views and that's perfectly fine by myself. I'm very happy with that

You just repeated the goodwill
