View Full Version : Sociology
I like forums such as this because they provide a wonderful microcosm of society. Misunderstandings between social strata tend to be amplified many-fold and personal tiffs that began as minor disagreements on a single thread often propagate unattenuated into all others in which the two proponents lock horns on entirely unrelated matters.
Every forum with more than a hundred or so members has a 'clique' whose membership depends on who's accusing whom of being in the clique. The intersection between one members's clique and her antagonist's equivalent is often the empty set.
I love sociology. The study of the interactions between human beings is the ultimate science, it goes way beyond the inanimate study of matter that prevents many physicists, chemists and even biologists from making useful contributions to contemporary society.
Do you agree?
Camel Spider
08-Dec-07, 04:26
Fred .. is that you ?? .. ;)
No, but I appreciate your contribution. :lol:
I too find sociology fascinating; it is so fluid. If desired, we can learn a lot about ourselves and others by using a forum such as this. The nuances of some of us being incognito via our org titles makes me think that we can use the message boards to become our alter egos.
It would be interesting to see if we would act/react similarly if we met face to face......
Camel Spider
08-Dec-07, 04:58
No, but I appreciate your contribution. :lol:
Just kidding .. :D
I know what you mean but it is no different in here to real life, you are always going to have people you like better than others. I have to say though some of the people whose opinions I dont agree with or think are just plain nuts make it more interesting for everyone. I mean, who wants to log on with 100 people and agree with them all day ??
Im not sure about Sociology though, knew a couple of people who had studied it and they seemed able to sort out everyones problems except their own.
I am my alter ego. What's your excuse for posting at this time of the morning? I don't have one...
Moi x
Camel Spider
08-Dec-07, 05:04
I am my alter ego. What's your excuse for posting at this time of the morning? I don't have one...
Moi x
I am at work Offshore and majorly bored. Which is why my avatar and signature keep changing more often than .. no .. thats too much .. ;)
I just cant.
I am my alter ego. What's your excuse for posting at this time of the morning? I don't have one...
Moi x
Moi neither ... well maybe it's just that I can't sleep! Or maybe my alter ego is a vampire... but then I would be writing just now as a vampire and then my alter ego would be :eek:.....or would it be:confused...ZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Just kidding .. :D
I know what you mean but it is no different in here to real life, you are always going to have people you like better than others. I have to say though some of the people whose opinions I dont agree with or think are just plain nuts make it more interesting for everyone. I mean, who wants to log on with 100 people and agree with them all day ??
Im not sure about Sociology though, knew a couple of people who had studied it and they seemed able to sort out everyones problems except their own.Yes, it's just like real life but I tend to meet a rather restricted subset of humanity in my real life. Perhaps you're more fortunate.
Moi x
I am at work Offshore and majorly bored. Which is why my avatar and signature keep changing more often than .. no .. thats too much .. ;)
I just cant.Offshore = North Sea? With a Tesco and lamp posts? :confused
Moi x
Camel Spider
08-Dec-07, 05:21
Yes, it's just like real life but I tend to meet a rather restricted subset of humanity in my real life. Perhaps you're more fortunate.
Moi x
Looking at the Knuckle dragger opposite me who is snoring and gently breaking wind in the office then no .. i wouldnt say I do !!
Camel Spider
08-Dec-07, 05:24
Offshore = North Sea? With a Tesco and lamp posts? :confused
Moi x
Arrived out here this morning.
I love sociology. The study of the interactions between human beings is the ultimate science, it goes way beyond the inanimate study of matter that prevents many physicists, chemists and even biologists from making useful contributions to contemporary society.
Do you agree?
Don't marginalise the scientists!! Have you ever studied the social response is from someone who gets their lifelong belief and opinion debunked by a suitably qualified scientist?:cool:
Don't marginalise the scientists!! Have you ever studied the social response is from someone who gets their lifelong belief and opinion debunked by a suitably qualified scientist?:cool:Or the look on the face of a suitably qualified scientist failing to debunk someones lifelong belief.
Fred .. is that you ?? .. ;)
Once again I'm seeing my name bandied about in a thread I haven't even posted to.
I made it clear in another thread (http://forum.caithness.org/showpost.php?p=301482&postcount=79) I wasn't going to respond to you, since then I haven't replied to any of your posts or made any reference to you on this forum yet you still try to harass and intimidate me.
When I start getting hate mail from someone it's time to call it a day, this is a big forum, I'm happy to not respond or make reference to you, could you try and do the same for me.
Every forum with more than a hundred or so members has a 'clique' whose membership depends on who's accusing whom of being in the clique. The intersection between one members's clique and her antagonist's equivalent is often the empty set.
Do horses have herds? Do sheep have flocks and wolves packs? Do school children form gangs in the playground?
Of course forums have cliques, you're way out at a hundred though, they usually start forming when you get past the mid teens.
Or the look on the face of a suitably qualified scientist failing to debunk someones lifelong belief.
That shouldn't happen if the science is correct because scientists deal in verifiable facts, but if the scientist gets debunked then he/she should be glad and the face is a happy one because the field of science has been enhanced, nice try though...;)
That shouldn't happen if the science is correct because scientists deal in verifiable facts, but if the scientist gets debunked then he/she should be glad and the face is a happy one because the field of science has been enhanced, nice try though...;)Don't get me wrong, everyday we all take advantage of the benefits science has provided, but, has science ever got it wrong? A verifiable fact being debunked, nice curveball rheghead.:)
That shouldn't happen if the science is correct because scientists deal in verifiable facts, but if the scientist gets debunked then he/she should be glad and the face is a happy one because the field of science has been enhanced, nice try though...;)
Take a look at this (http://www.nowpublic.com/crime/ex-italian-president-9-11-inside-job) then, it should make your day.
Don't get me wrong, everyday we all take advantage of the benefits science has provided, but, has science ever got it wrong?
Scientists should never claim to be right for ever but science is a search for truth upon verifiable evidence. There is only one kind of person who claims to be right all the time and that is those who suspend their critical thoughts when they have their deepest faiths and beliefs challenged. Scientists on the otherhand should be happy or even overjoyed if their life's work is debunked but it is usually people who are all too quick to point out that science gets it wrong, are the ones who are the ones who suspend their critic thoughts about their own beliefs.
Take a look at this (http://www.nowpublic.com/crime/ex-italian-president-9-11-inside-job) then, it should make your day.
It is hardly science is it?
Scientists should never claim to be right for ever but science is a search for truth upon verifiable evidence. There is only one kind of person who claims to be right all the time and that is those who suspend their critical thoughts when they have their deepest faiths and beliefs challenged. Scientists on the otherhand should be happy or even overjoyed if their life's work is debunked but it is usually people who are all too quick to point out that science gets it wrong, are the ones who are the ones who suspend their critic thoughts about their own beliefs.I notice you have changed from verifiable fact to evidence, fact is irrefutable, evidence can be corrupt.
I notice you have changed from verifiable fact to evidence, fact is irrefutable, evidence can be corrupt.
You are twisting the words, if evidence is corrupt then it isn't verifiable so it isn't evidence.
Piltdown Man is a classic example, science didn't get it wrong there, because the assertions from it weren't scientific, it was fraudulently presented, like all the wtc7 stuff.
It is hardly science is it?
The thread isn't about science, it's about the sociology of forums.
Take a look at the last paragraph of the link.
he can't be sidelined as a crackpot conspiracy theorist.
The thread isn't about science, it's about the sociology of forums.
Take a look at the last paragraph of the link.
Incorrect, sociology is a science, and the link between crackpot conspiracists like yourself and sociology is.....?:roll:
Incorrect, sociology is a science, and the link between crackpot conspiracists like yourself and sociology is.....?:roll:
Why do you feel the need to keep repeating that I'm a crackpot conspiracy theorist? Don't you think a scientist would be more interested in providing evidence for their hypothesis than trying to discredit anyone who doesn't agree?
Why do you feel the need to keep repeating that I'm a crackpot conspiracy theorist? Don't you think a scientist would be more interested in providing evidence for their hypothesis than trying to discredit anyone who doesn't agree?
Why do you keep on coming out with the same old anti american rubbish and then why do you avoid dispassionately answerring certain questions which challenge your assertions?
This is the hallmark of a conspiracy theorist, no?:confused
http://www.worth1000.com/entries/171500/171742KQSO_w.jpg
molten aluminium, just see how it glows!!
Why do you keep on coming out with the same old anti american rubbish and then why do you avoid dispassionately answerring certain questions which challenge your assertions?
I don't, you just keep telling everyone I do.
molten aluminium, just see how it glows!!
Molten aluminium does not glow, aluminium melts and runs away from the heat source before it reaches even red hot therefore the white hot molten metal seen flowing from the WTC was not aluminium.
I'm so confident about what I say that I don't need to make ad homine attacks on anyone who disagrees.
The Emperor really doesn't have any clothes.
Molten aluminium does not glow,.
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/aluminum/Aluminum_Glows.html
See what I mean? I present you with a photo of molten aluminium and you reject it. Case closed, you are a conspiracy theorist.;)
Can someone please put the children back in their playpens? Is no thread safe from their bickering? ;)
Can someone please put the children back in their playpens? Is no thread safe from their bickering? ;)
But that bickering is the subject of the thread.
Yes there are loads of threads out there on a whole range of subjects, read through them I don't post at all to the vast majority. The subject of this thread is the bickering you are complaining about. See the original post:
I like forums such as this because they provide a wonderful microcosm of society. Misunderstandings between social strata tend to be amplified many-fold and personal tiffs that began as minor disagreements on a single thread often propagate unattenuated into all others in which the two proponents lock horns on entirely unrelated matters.
See, bickering is what the thread is all about.
http://www.drjudywood.com/articles/aluminum/Aluminum_Glows.html
See what I mean? I present you with a photo of molten aluminium and you reject it. Case closed, you are a conspiracy theorist.;)
Why did you feel the need to say "Case closed" then make a personal attack on me, call me a conspiracy theorist? If your argument had any merit, which anyone with an IQ larger than their shoe size can see it hasn't, you wouldn't need to be constantly trying to convince people you are right by constantly trying to discredit anyone who doesn't agree with you.
Why did you feel the need to say "Case closed" then make a personal attack on me, call me a conspiracy theorist? If your argument had any merit, which anyone with an IQ larger than their shoe size can see it hasn't, you wouldn't need to be constantly trying to convince people you are right by constantly trying to discredit anyone who doesn't agree with you.
Again, you avoided the issue then made an ad hominem attack.;) The case was closed because my post emphatically debunked your 911 conspiracy theory and yet you deny it.
Again, you avoided the issue then made an ad hominem attack.;) The case was closed because my post emphatically debunked your 911 conspiracy theory and yet you deny it.
I didn't avoid any issue, the issue here is forum sociology and I asked why you felt the need to call me a conspiracy theorist, you haven't answered.
I made no ad homine attack against you, I attacked your argument which is without merit, I didn't call you anything.
I rather think Moi was inviting us to agree/disagree as to:-
"The study of the interactions between human beings is the ultimate science, it goes way beyond the inanimate study of matter that prevents many physicists, chemists and even biologists from making useful contributions to contemporary society."
and
".....minor disagreements on a single thread often propagate unattenuated into all others in which the two proponents lock horns on entirely unrelated matters."
Yes Moi, sociology is very interesting indeed! :lol:
Human interaction is fascinating.......one thing that you cannot study on the Org however is body language, which makes up a considerable percentage of communication in the real world.
I didn't avoid any issue, the issue here is forum sociology and I asked why you felt the need to call me a conspiracy theorist, you haven't answered.
.
I called you a conspiracy theorist because your posts on 911 invariably try to support the conspiracy theory that the US government perpetrated the 911 attacks. Not to mention the Japanese A-bomb attack conspiracy.
Do you concede now that aluminium does glow red now? If so do you concede that the balls of molten metal that were falling from the WTC could be aluminium?
I made no ad homine attack against you, I attacked your argument which is without merit, I didn't call you anything.....If your argument had any merit, which anyone with an IQ larger than their shoe size can see it hasn't
That is ad hominem because it implies my IQ isn't larger than my shoe size if I can't see that my aguement has no merit.
Incorrect, sociology is a science.:roll:That could be debated either way, not whether it is classed as a science but whether it merits being so. I like the quote you have as a signature but that could be written another way ' Isn't it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to analyze why it is beautiful':)
I called you a conspiracy theorist because your posts on 911 invariably try to support the conspiracy theory that the US government perpetrated the 911 attacks. Not to mention the Japanese A-bomb attack conspiracy.
So you support the conspiracy theory that a hand full of people sitting in a cave in Afghanistan managed to overcome the most sophisticated defence system in the world but I don't call you names.
Do you concede now that aluminium does glow red now? If so do you concede that the balls of molten metal that were falling from the WTC could be aluminium?
Read what I wrote:
Molten aluminium does not glow, aluminium melts and runs away from the heat source before it reaches even red hot therefore the white hot molten metal seen flowing from the WTC was not aluminium.
I was talking about aluminium in the real world where it can flow away from the heat source not trapped in a crucible as you well know.
That is ad hominem because it implies my IQ isn't larger than my shoe size if I can't see that my aguement has no merit.
I didn't imply anything of the sort. There are other reasons why you would use false arguments, which is what sociology is all about, why people in a society do things. Why do you seem to want to talk about molten aluminium rather than the issues raised by the thread? Why do you feel the need to keep calling me names?
So you support the conspiracy theory that a hand full of people sitting in a cave in Afghanistan managed to overcome the most sophisticated defence system in the world but I don't call you names.
Read what I wrote:
I was talking about aluminium in the real world where it can flow away from the heat source not trapped in a crucible as you well know.
I didn't imply anything of the sort. There are other reasons why you would use false arguments, which is what sociology is all about, why people in a society do things. Why do you seem to want to talk about molten aluminium rather than the issues raised by the thread? Why do you feel the need to keep calling me names?
Aye but surely the stuff (either glowing or flowing) at the WTC would have been aluminum;)
I was talking about aluminium in the real world where it can flow away from the heat source not trapped in a crucible as you well know.
Aluminium whether it is flowing away from a heat source or in a crucible still exhibits the chemical properties of aluminium and still glows if elevated to a sufficient temperature.
Why do you feel the need to keep calling me names?
I didn't, 'conspiracy theorist' is a verb+noun or just a noun, it isn't a proper noun.
".....minor disagreements on a single thread often propagate unattenuated into all others in which the two proponents lock horns on entirely unrelated matters."
Which is what we are studying first hand at the moment.
Which is what we are studying first hand at the moment.But you are not locking horns on matters entirely unrelated to the thread this time, yourself and reghead are becoming a case study.;)
I didn't, 'conspiracy theorist' is a verb+noun or just a noun, it isn't a proper noun.
Now you are merely arguing semantics which illustrates everything I have been saying.
Now why did you feel the need to try and disprove what I said even though it was blatantly true? Everyone here knows what calling someone names means, why did you feel you had to change the meaning to try and disprove the obvious?
Anyone for some popcorn during the interval ?
Anyone for some popcorn during the interval ?Forget mayweather V hatton.[lol]
Now you are merely arguing semantics which illustrates everything I have been saying.
Now why did you feel the need to try and disprove what I said even though it was blatantly true? Everyone here knows what calling someone names means, why did you feel you had to change the meaning to try and disprove the obvious?
There is no arguing semantics involved here, the definition of a conspiracy theorist is pretty unambiguous. It isn't a name, it is a noun. If I described a green grocer, a green grocer, then I am not calling him a name I am describing him what he is, a green grocer.
But you have proven yourself to be a conspiracy theorist because you haven't addressed and conceded to my valid points about the chemical properties of aluminium.
There is no arguing semantics involved here, the definition of a conspiracy theorist is pretty unambiguous. It isn't a name, it is a noun. If I described a green grocer, a green grocer, then I am not calling him a name I am describing him what he is, a green grocer.
But you have proven yourself to be a conspiracy theorist because you haven't addressed and conceded to my valid points about the chemical properties of aluminium.Would aluminium remain white or red hot as it flowed through the windows and away from the heat source?
Would aluminium remain white or red hot as it flowed through the windows and away from the heat source?
I don't know, it depends on the initial temperature I guess.
I don't know, it depends on the initial temperature I guess.So would you concede that it could possibly be a thermite reaction taking place?
So would you concede that it could possibly be a thermite reaction taking place?
No I don't.
You tell me what the chemical process is involved in a thermite reaction and tell me if aluminium is the end product?
No I don't.
You tell me what the chemical process is involved in a thermite reaction and tell me if aluminium is the end product?I'm not a chemist so I can't.
There is no arguing semantics involved here, the definition of a conspiracy theorist is pretty unambiguous. It isn't a name, it is a noun. If I described a green grocer, a green grocer, then I am not calling him a name I am describing him what he is, a green grocer.
But you have proven yourself to be a conspiracy theorist because you haven't addressed and conceded to my valid points about the chemical properties of aluminium.
This thread isn't about aluminium and your argument is no more valid than your argument that you were not calling me names because "conspiracy theorist" is not a proper noun.
"Liar", "rat", "moron", "idiot", none are proper nouns but everyone with an IQ greater than their shoe size knows that if you call someone those words you are calling them names.
So why did you feel you had to change the meaning of the phrase from the commonly accepted one?
I'm not a chemist so I can't.
So do you concede you know nothing about thermite reactions and so asking a chemist to concede that there is a thermite reaction going without any evidence could be a seriously flawed method of debate?:confused
Camel Spider
08-Dec-07, 20:34
Once again I'm seeing my name bandied about in a thread I haven't even posted to.
I made it clear in another thread (http://forum.caithness.org/go.php?url=http://forum.caithness.org/showpost.php?p=301482&postcount=79) I wasn't going to respond to you, since then I haven't replied to any of your posts or made any reference to you on this forum yet you still try to harass and intimidate me.
When I start getting hate mail from someone it's time to call it a day, this is a big forum, I'm happy to not respond or make reference to you, could you try and do the same for me.
Right (said) Fred.
If you cant take a tongue in cheek comment then that is not my fault.
I did not ask for a response from you did I ??
As for your claims of Harrassment, Intimidation and "Hate Mail" .. then please feel free to report me to the Moderator. Otherwise dont make accusations you have no intention of backing up in the vain hope of making me look bad. Are you so arrogant that you now think you can tell orgers what and who they can now mention ??
You have had plenty digs at me in the past such as comparing me to a Nazi symapthiser and describing my time in uniform as "wanting to kill people for a living" but you dont see me crying about it all the time.
You could have sent me a PM but instead you chose to post on the thread .. why was that Fred ??, is it because you wanted to fling a bit of mud ??
Sad.
So would you concede that it could possibly be a thermite reaction taking place?
That isn't important from a sociological point of view.
What is important is why he refuses to even consider the possibility.
This thread isn't about aluminium and your argument is no more valid than your argument that you were not calling me names because "conspiracy theorist" is not a proper noun.
"Liar", "rat", "moron", "idiot", none are proper nouns but everyone with an IQ greater than their shoe size knows that if you call someone those words you are calling them names.
So why did you feel you had to change the meaning of the phrase from the commonly accepted one?
This thread is about sociology and the study of human interaction, you don't get it do you? You don't even interact with any points I've made, you avoid them totally by making ad hominem remarks.
So do you concede you know nothing about thermite reactions and so asking a chemist to concede that there is a thermite reaction going without any evidence could be a seriously flawed method of debate?:confused
But the molten metal may not have been aluminium.
May I return to the beginning
The light is dimming, and the theme is too
The org and I, we are still waiting
Still contemplating
Any words will do (with much thanks to Andrew Lloyd Weber)
I like forums such as this because they provide a wonderful microcosm of society. Misunderstandings between social strata
I am not sure which social strata you see as clashing on the org. In fact I don't think that any of the strata in traditional society are even part of the org board. Education, social position, economic condition, age, gender, even religion, are very rarely revealed and I have never observed a clash of voices from such strata in the org discussions. Perhaps we have observable strata to do with the number of posts or even word crafting skills, but again, I've never seen those strata forming the basis of rivalries.
I do totally agree with you that we form a fascinating society.
Human interaction is fascinating.......one thing that you cannot study on the Org however is body language, which makes up a considerable percentage of communication in the real world.
Yes, Saveman, body language is a huge part of human communication. And we take it for granted in everyday life. That is one of the reasons why, when using the internet, we have to be so very careful with the written word for all the other depths of communication emotion are not being conveyed. (Little smilies just don't do it. :) ) But we can still have a functional society without body language if everyone understands the limitations and accepts the same set of social norms.
But the molten metal may not have been aluminium.
What else could it be?
What else could it be?
I wore my coat, with aluminium lining
Bright colours shining, wonderful and new
And in the east, the fire was raging
The coat was melting
Any words will do
A crash of drums, a flash of light
The aluminium melted out of sight
The colours faded into darkness
I was left alone
May I return to the beginning
The light is dimming, and the theme is too
Right (said) Fred.
You have had plenty digs at me in the past such as comparing me to a Nazi symapthiser and describing my time in uniform as "wanting to kill people for a living" but you dont see me crying about it all the time.
I have never compared you to a nazi sympathiser or said anything about you wanting to kill people for a living.
I don't do personal attacks.
Sad.
Unlike some.
Now I know what Jeremy felt like.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwlsd8RAoqI
I wore my coat, with aluminium lining
Bright colours shining, wonderful and new
And in the east, the fire was raging
The coat was melting
Any words will do
A crash of drums, a flash of light
The aluminium melted out of sight
The colours faded into darkness
I was left alone
May I return to the beginning
The light is dimming, and the theme is too
That worked well then!:roll::lol:
karia
Camel Spider
08-Dec-07, 21:30
I have never compared you to a nazi sympathiser or said anything about you wanting to kill people for a living.
I don't do personal attacks.
Unlike some.
Well thats me told .. :lol:
Currently searching all your posts Fred .. ;)
Rheghead, well done ............[lol]
Cheers, it required a lot of social interactions! [lol]
This thread is about sociology and the study of human interaction, you don't get it do you? You don't even interact with any points I've made, you avoid them totally by making ad hominem remarks.
Well how about you not avoiding the question I asked you?
Why would you rather redefine the meaning of calling names rather than say why you did it?
Well how about you not avoiding the question I asked you?
Why would you rather redefine the meaning of calling names rather than say why you did it?
Again, the information sailed straight through with all the interaction of a neutrino.[lol] Have you nothing positive to add?
Now I know what Jeremy felt like.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uwlsd8RAoqI
Where did we get sidetracked onto the prison service and inappropriate floral arrangements?
Again, the information sailed straight through with all the interaction of a neutrino.[lol] Have you nothing positive to add?
Why did the information sail through with all the interaction of a neutrino? Is there some reason why you don't want to face the things you say or understand why you say them?
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.