You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #207: ... [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
HiFructosePronSyrup Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Mar-12-09 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #202
207. ...
"If science is treated by some as intellectual blood sport, no wonder some sciencebound types shoot down anything that might challenge their assumptions, ego and insistence on topdogging anyone they can."

Uh, well, yeah. Science is a place where ideas are constantly being forwarded, questioned, tested, and the better ideas are victorious. While the patently bad ideas are left bruised, battered, and end up on a long bus ride home.

Ego has nothing to do with it.

"The wiki posts, esp. the second one, didn't provide any definitive info. Is wikipedia the be all and end all of scientific certitude these days?"

Wikipedia is certainly an adequate source for the context of this discussion. If you've got an issue with the scientific merit of the articles on wiki, I'd love to hear it. The second article on Fourier series is clearly a logical continuation of first article. Although I'm sure a person would be confused if they didn't understand all the big words. But then again, if people are going to talk about harmonics, there's nothing in the articles that's too complicated.

Either way, links to wikipedia are certainly better than what you provided: nothing.

"The next time someone says LINK PLEASE, we should just passive/aggressively post some arbitrary link to wiki and if someone can't put an answer together themselves from a page of wikiness, they're an idiot?"

If somebody is curious about what you have to say and requests more information, then the correct, polite, and intelligent thing to do is to post a link. Not an arbitrary link, but one that has to do with the topic at hand.

"Sorry the phrasing didn't meet the standards of the wiki wielding brainiacs, too busy being "right" to share their insights with DU."

When you discuss science, Omega, terminology is important. "Energy," for example, might mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people, particularly the scientifically illiterate. But it has a specific meaning in science.

"Or maybe insights come from the godspot that so many deem bunk"

It's not the insights from the actual work in the OP that's deemed bunk, but the silly interpretations of other peoples work from people who don't know what they're talking about.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC