Why the hostility against the Science forum?.

[mishku]

I almost didn't post because I am one of the "too uncomfortable to posts", but realised we're all grown ups here, and we won't get to the bottom of the issue unless we're open, and honest.

I have a BSc(Hons), and am not a silly kid, but gosh, it can get intimidating in here. I havent been at a lab bench for years, and have instead been working in an entirely different field (where I like to imagine I'm a bit of a legend in my own lunchbox ) As others have mentioned, there seem to be only a handful of voices which crop up. I have a few suggestions, make of them what you will - and let's be honest, I'm just echoing those who have gone before me.

Perhaps it would be a little less intimidating if we kept the focus on Amateur Science (rather than PostGrad level dissertations). This is supposed to be fun, right?

Maybe we all need to get to know each other a little better, and once we understand our backgrounds, we can tailor our posts accordingly? There are so many lovely folks that I've had the pleasure to interact with, who, in my estimations, have brains the size of planets. In spite of this, they've taken the time to kindly, and gently, help me break down difficult concepts in order to glean a thorough understanding of the issues at hand. To me, this speaks of an intellect sophisticated enough to convey a complex concept to someone who is essentially a layperson. It's one thing to be able to regurgitate information ad infinitum, but to be able to synthesise and communicate it in a meaningful way - THAT's the true skill.

One of the best qualities of IIS and the amateur astronomy community in general is their friendliness, and openness to share information with newbies. Because of this, I'm not afraid to ask people questions, because I'm not afraid that they're going to judge or think I'm silly. Perhaps we've lost sight of our purpose, a little?

Maybe a bit of the good ol' golden rule - do unto others (with patience, kindness, respect, Lovejoy, etc) might see more people in here having a bash. Gets a bit boring if it's just one or two, no matter how many big words are involved

Here's looking forward to a more inclusive General Science forum?

Originally Posted by jjjnettie

Speaking for myself.
I find the "vigorous debates" to be intimidating.
And quite frankly I am too scared to contribute to any of the science threads, knowing the sorts of comments that may be directed at me if I do.
I don't like feeling this way, it's horrible.
I find no joy or enlightenment in the Science forum.

I'm pretty sure the other women on the forum feel much the same way.

[GeoffW1 (Geoff)]

Originally Posted by iceman

From the private comments I've had made to me, it's because a few very opinionated people, such as Craig, post in such a way and comment in such a way that it makes it very intimidating for people to contribute - so they don't.

Sometimes it's not even the content itself, it's just the way it's delivered.

Hi,

I agree with Mike on this one. I do have a good education in the sciences, and I think I might contribute quite well in the science forum, but I'm utterly turned off it by the very opinionated, even arrogant, and occasionally quite personal approach of a few.

It has been put forward as a justification that science debates elsewhere are normally robust, even heated. Personally I think that argument isn't convincing for us because we definitely aren't a community of scientists. There are a lot of very active members here who would wish to contribute on their own level, whatever it might be. I'm one of them.

I also find unconvincing the "who ME ??" responses of some who are accused, or acknowledged (rightly or wrongly), as being a bit on the high-handed side. I mean, how many times would you have to be told before you began to see that your style is not universally appreciated.

I even saw one member say something like "I'll post when and where I please". Well, as I understand it, no, you can't. Neither can I.

There was another complaining that Mike had not instantly adopted his suggestions on how to "fix" the Science Forum, and make everything all better. What ?? Why would he ?

I am beginning to rant so....

Cheers

[GeoffW1 (Geoff)]

Originally Posted by casstony

We need you girls to have a go at running the world I think

Hi,

Did you see the lineup being sworn in by the G-G? Go girls.

Mike, I'll sneak one in here , do please consider a female moderator or 2 for the future.

Cheers

[Octane (Humayun)]

Does my long hair qualify me?

H

Originally Posted by GeoffW1

Hi,

Did you see the lineup being sworn in by the G-G? Go girls.

Mike, I'll sneak one in here , do please consider a female moderator or 2 for the future.

Cheers

[mill (Martin)]

Originally Posted by Octane

Does my long hair qualify me?

H

No mate
Unless you undergo a certain kind of procedure (can't go into details, this is a family friendly forum)

[mishku]

Not quite, H, but that slinky dress might?

Originally Posted by Octane

Does my long hair qualify me?

H

[TrevorW]

Remember there are no stupid questions only stupid answers ?

also

He who asks many questions might sound like a fool but he who asks none often are !!!

[GeoffW1 (Geoff)]

Originally Posted by Octane

Does my long hair qualify me?

H

no, have to be pretty as well

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by GeoffW1

I even saw one member say something like "I'll post when and where I please". Well, as I understand it, no, you can't. Neither can I.

Cheers

That was me Geoff, in response to Martin's post directed at me in the general Forum. It was meant in the context that if I was going to explain something, I don't have to necessarily keep it in one forum exclusively, if I thought that what was said (in this case, a station promo) was in error Which in fact it is. The problem with many science shows is that they tend to push what has been "accepted fact" like the statement "nothing can travel faster than the speed of light", when in fact, they're not facts. They're "throw away" lines that have been used to simplify the teaching of the subjects concerned.

Martin got hot under the collar because I happened to question the statement and he thought it was directed at himself, personally. It wasn't. All I said is that which physical law strictly forbade travelling faster than light. There isn't any. No reflection on his own knowledge, but on the accuracy of what was being broadcast by the show.

[GeoffW1 (Geoff)]

Originally Posted by TrevorW

Remember there are no stupid questions only stupid answers ?

also

He who asks many questions might sound like a fool but he who asks none often are !!!

OK a question. So ??

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by GeoffW1

no, have to be pretty as well

Some guys like "women" with long hair.......and beards

[jenchris (Jennifer)]

Speaking for myself.
I find the "vigorous debates" to be intimidating.
And quite frankly I am too scared to contribute to any of the science threads, knowing the sorts of comments that may be directed at me if I do.
I don't like feeling this way, it's horrible.
I find no joy or enlightenment in the Science forum.

I'm pretty sure the other women on the forum feel much the same way.

Yeah, me too JJJ.

Thoroughly put down, intimidated and patronised (and I'm an engineer, so not totally in the sewing/knitting brigade)

Can we leave out the stereotyping as well please Carl.

[renormalised (Carl)]

Originally Posted by jenchris

Yeah, me too JJJ.

Thoroughly put down, intimidated and patronised (and I'm an engineer, so not totally in the sewing/knitting brigade)

Can we leave out the stereotyping as well please Carl.

Are you referring to my previous post??

[TrevorW]

Originally Posted by GeoffW1

OK a question. So ??

Ah!! Grasshopper do I need to explain the meaning of life?, again !

[Ric]

Originally Posted by UniPol

Very clever Ric, I almost passed over your (deliberate?) misspelling of "Bachelor" .

Sorry Steve, nothing deliberate or witty there mate.

Just good ol fashioned bad spelling. The brain was in third gear but the fingers were in second.

Cheers

[Paul Haese]

I like a robust debate more than most with my legal background (I love to argue and in fact have on more than one occassion been in trouble here over the years); however I have observed on more than one occassion in the Astronomy and amateur science forum people getting personal with their attacks. Attacks of fact are perfectly fine and pretty well par for the course in academia. Attacks of a personal nature are in fact not very academic. One thing that Tuts teach is to argue well but don't get personal.

I don't contribute generally in that forum for two reasons. My interest is not high for this sort of critical thinking and I am not educated enough in the field presented to sustain the thorough arse kicking that goes on in there.

That is not fun in any sense of the word. And; as has been pointed out it appears there several people consider that forum as their personal fiefdom.

So that is what turns me off contributing and even reading those forums.

That said, each to their own and I don't have to read garbage it I don't want to; do I?

[sjastro]

The comment that Steven presents us in his opening post is far more dividing than anything I can remember reading in the science forum.

Peter how many people try to portray you as a phoney for participating in supernova research simply on the grounds that you have a level of knowledge they do not possess?

As absurd as this appears, this form of hostility happens on a regular basis if you have the knowledge of Science and express it.

If this was happening to you, I'm sure you would want some answers which is the point of the OP.

Regards

Steven

[mill (Martin)]

Originally Posted by renormalised

That was me Geoff, in response to Martin's post directed at me in the general Forum.
All I said is that which physical law strictly forbade travelling faster than light. There isn't any. No reflection on his own knowledge, but on the accuracy of what was being broadcast by the show.

The way you explained it here in those simple terms are a lot easier to understand and interpret.
In the other post you wrote:

"Which ones are they???. Even SR doesn't preclude objects travelling faster than light. That's the BIG misinterpretation of what Einstein said and a mistake that has been perpetrated and spread by most physicists since his time. What Einstein said, is that it is impossible for any material object to travel through space at the speed of light. The energy requirements rise asymptotically until they become infinite. However, there are solution to the equations in SR which allow for objects to always be travelling faster than light. However, these objects cannot slow down to light speed because it takes infinite energy to slow them down to this speed. In order to travel faster, you reduce the amount of energy they have. At zero energy, they travel at infinite velocity (theoretically). "

If you read thru that, you have to read it well and slow before you see what you mean and look up what SR is on Google and find Special Relativity.
One note though, i have and will always "belief" that there is a faster than light (nothing here to back it up though).
So we have the same as you can say "thoughts" about the speed of light.
Also there are many immigrants on this forum who don't know every word spoken in English but the way you described it in the quote at the top looks easier to understand.
I have no problems if anyone in the science forum uses technical lingo, I am a electrician and work with people who don't understand a word i say but i explain it to them in an easier way, how hard it can be sometimes.
It should be the same in all the parts of the forums.
You can talk technical in the imaging forum but when someone who doesn't know, asks something, it has to be a simple answer or else She/He will be gone out the door very quick.
That's all folks

[mishku]

Steven,

I respectfully wonder if you might have missed the answer somewhere in the posts below... perhaps it's not always the lack of understanding of "the knowledge of Science", but more the way people can sometimes express things?

Without the benefit of context, tone of voice, or ability to clarify points in real time, perhaps it all gets a little murky sometimes?

M

Originally Posted by sjastro

Peter how many people try to portray you as a phoney for participating in supernova research simply on the grounds that you have a level of knowledge they do not possess?

As absurd as this appears, this form of hostility happens on a regular basis if you have the knowledge of Science and express it.

If this was happening to you, I'm sure you would want some answers which is the point of the OP.

Regards

Steven

[renormalised (Carl)]

Martin....you forgot the "bedeeba deeba" before the "That's all folks!!!"