Crap site. Ignore.

[Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

This is a crap site but feel free look at it.
SCEPCOP Scientific Committee to Expose Pseudo-Skeptical Cynicism of the Paranormal (http://www.debunkingskeptics.com/)

[Lexion]

Victor Zammit.

:lol:

Yeah....


Lex

[Ducky]

Lots of goodies :D

I've got this one bookmarked. Thanks Wraith!

[Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Not a problem Ducky.
And just read the stupid thing Lex.
Amazing the things people find to turn their nose up when presented with something.

[Cogburn]

Yeah... one might hope that John Benneth might ad a little temper to Zammit's whacky.

http://johnbenneth.wordpress.com/

I think I'll save this one (SCEPCOP) for some later perusal.

[theeindiee]

I think Wraith is super cute. We should go out on a date. Are you up for getting gay, Wraith?

[Cogburn]

Oh geeze...

http://www.winston-wu.com/index.html

Yeah... that's him... scroll down to the bottom of the SCEPCOP page and compare the pictures.

http://www.happierabroad.com/

<sigh> oh well. Still a fun couple hours of digging around and Benneth might have left something worthy around there.

[Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Yea, the more I look into this site the wonkier it seems.
Did you notice the "physics FAQ" they linked to?
And no thanks Indie.
:lol:

[Eyeforalie]

As Phil Gibbs points out in “Physics FAQ”: (http://www.weburbia.com/physics/)

[offsite:368pon2v]“To begin with we used Occam&#39;s razor to separate theories which would
predict the same result for all experiments. Now we are trying to choose
between theories which make different predictions. This is not what Occam intended……..

The principle of simplicity works as a heuristic rule-of-thumb but some
people quote it as if it is an axiom of physics. It is not. It can work
well in philosophy or particle physics, but less often so in cosmology
or psychology, where things usually turn out to be more complicated than
you ever expected. Perhaps a quote from Shakespeare would be more
appropriate than Occam&#39;s razor: "There are more things in heaven and
earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

The law of parsimony is no substitute for insight, logic and the
scientific method. It should never be relied upon to make or defend a
conclusion. As arbiters of correctness only logical consistency and
empirical evidence are absolute.”[/offsite:368pon2v]
:lol:

Nice...

[Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

That FAQ is crap. Most likely made by them.
Sickens me how many vultures flock to the fringe of science and make a bad name for everyone who is legitimately curious about some of this stuff.

[Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Oh and that Wu guy is advertising over there as if it wasn't even his crap.
His screen name is WWU777 not very good at hiding crap is he?

[Ducky]

Well that sucks worse than ticks on a dog's bag.

[Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Agreed 1,000,000,000,000%.

[Cogburn]

LOL they can have him.

He just started posting a couple months ago. Strange he's been around for that long and not been to ATS.

Must be all that fine bargirl pussy he's been baggin.

[Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

Meh, apparently the guys a vulture in more sense than just one.

[KIWI]

As Phil Gibbs points out in “Physics FAQ”: (http://www.weburbia.com/physics/)

[offsite:1wbbifi0]“To begin with we used Occam&#39;s razor to separate theories which would
predict the same result for all experiments. Now we are trying to choose
between theories which make different predictions. This is not what Occam intended……..

The principle of simplicity works as a heuristic rule-of-thumb but some
people quote it as if it is an axiom of physics. It is not. It can work
well in philosophy or particle physics, but less often so in cosmology
or psychology, where things usually turn out to be more complicated than
you ever expected. Perhaps a quote from Shakespeare would be more
appropriate than Occam&#39;s razor: "There are more things in heaven and
earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

The law of parsimony is no substitute for insight, logic and the
scientific method. It should never be relied upon to make or defend a
conclusion. As arbiters of correctness only logical consistency and
empirical evidence are absolute.”[/offsite:1wbbifi0]
:lol:

Nice...

...makes perfect sense to me

[Alessandra]

I think Wraith is super cute. We should go out on a date. Are you up for getting gay, Wraith?


He's mine, back off pal. :P

[Watcher-In-The-Shadows]

I think Wraith is super cute. We should go out on a date. Are you up for getting gay, Wraith?


He's mine, back off pal. :P


Yea! You heard her I'm.......
Hey...
Uhm......... Huh?

[Alessandra]

:lol:

Can't beat em, baffle em with bullshit, wraith.