• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

StumbleUpon suppressed the H2onE2 science, knowledge

Status
Not open for further replies.
Pietro_Mercurios said:
H2onE2 said:
...

In fact the Republican Presidential candidate “McCain”is the anchor man for his graduating class. That means since he graduated at the very bottom, everyone at the Naval Academy gave him one dollar. So how can you evaluate merit, acknowledgement, and reputation when the Republican leader spent no time at the library or studying? But, is acknowledged as an expert in his field.

...
In which field is it, that you claim that McCain is acknowledged as an expert? :confused:

Getting free dollars!
 
theyithian said:
Pietro_Mercurios said:
H2onE2 said:
...

In fact the Republican Presidential candidate “McCain”is the anchor man for his graduating class. That means since he graduated at the very bottom, everyone at the Naval Academy gave him one dollar. So how can you evaluate merit, acknowledgement, and reputation when the Republican leader spent no time at the library or studying? But, is acknowledged as an expert in his field.

...
In which field is it, that you claim that McCain is acknowledged as an expert? :confused:

Getting free dollars!
Possibly, but I was asking H2onE2, who may have meant something less tongue in cheek.
 
H2onE2 said:
No major “tongue and cheek” geologist has stepped forward to evaluate my work which means I am the only expert. I have called all geologists out into the school yard for their intellectual beating. I can’t help it if they are afraid to turn up.

I'm glad I didn't opt for a career in the world of geology - it seems so cliquey, violent and seedy and I don't like cliques. :(
 
I am doing geology studies, and I dread those parties where people apparently lick each other on the cheek.
 
H2onE2 said:
All Geologists take basically the same classes and comparable mapping field camp. Merits, acknowledge, and reputation is formed by tongue and cheek socializing / politics NOT natural special ability.

Are you saying that all geologists have the same level of education and that there are no specialists, or people working to advance geological knowledge by applying other sciences?
How does being able to socialise help, lets say an oil prospector who is paid on results?

And what is this natural special ability you speak of? Would it be the ability to see things that other people don't?


H2onE2 said:
No major “tongue and cheek” geologist has stepped forward to evaluate my work which means I am the only expert. I have called all geologists out into the school yard for their intellectual beating. I can’t help it if they are afraid to turn up.
I would have thought that being the only expert was something of a problem as you have no critique or review of your theories that you can accept.
Do you think your own internal review is sufficient to hone and test your theory?
Is your theory complete and perfect or are there aspects of it which need refining?

Sorry to ask so many questions but I'm interested in the answers.
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
H2onE2 said:
...

In fact the Republican Presidential candidate “McCain”is the anchor man for his graduating class. That means since he graduated at the very bottom, everyone at the Naval Academy gave him one dollar. So how can you evaluate merit, acknowledgement, and reputation when the Republican leader spent no time at the library or studying? But, is acknowledged as an expert in his field.

...
In which field is it, that you claim that McCain is acknowledged as an expert? :confused:

I don't think he is an expert in anything personally. But, a nomination to one of the two major US political party's would give him some status in reputation, acknowledgment of greater weight than people who were not considered for nomination. Following the thought pattern developed by "lawofnations", not me.
 
H2onE2 said:
...

I don't think he is an expert in anything personally. But, a nomination to one of the two major US political party's would give him some status in reputation, acknowledgment of greater weight than people who were not considered for nomination. Following the thought pattern developed by "lawofnations", not me.
Then you may not have come across the concept of 'the Peter Principle.'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principle

Peter Principle

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The Peter Principle is the principle that "In a Hierarchy Every Employee Tends to Rise to His Level of Incompetence." While formulated by Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull in their 1968 book The Peter Principle, a humorous treatise which also introduced the "salutary science of Hierarchiology", "inadvertently founded" by Peter, the principle has real validity. It holds that in a hierarchy, members are promoted so long as they work competently. Sooner or later they are promoted to a position at which they are no longer competent (their "level of incompetence"), and there they remain. Peter's Corollary states that "in time, every post tends to be occupied by an employee who is incompetent to carry out his duties" and adds that "work is accomplished by those employees who have not yet reached their level of incompetence".

...
Just think how incompetent someone would have to be, on past evidence, to become the Presidential candidate for the Republican Party.
 
AMPHIARAUS said:
H2onE2 said:
All Geologists take basically the same classes and comparable mapping field camp. Merits, acknowledge, and reputation is formed by tongue and cheek socializing / politics NOT natural special ability.

Are you saying that all geologists have the same level of education and that there are no specialists, or people working to advance geological knowledge by applying other sciences?
How does being able to socialize help, lets say an oil prospector who is paid on results?

Specialists mostly work on small or nano examinations to help fill a bigger picture. What I say is enough of this specialist work has been done and delivered and it is now time to attach the information into a conclusion. There will be no further advancement in geology until the big picture is drawn. I would not say direct socializing advances positions but it doesn’t hurt to know someone. Isn’t that the same for most fields? I have had some pretty dumb bosses, haven’t you?

AMPHIARAUS said:
And what is this natural special ability you speak of? Would it be the ability to see things that other people don't?

I am good at spatial analysis or drawing many functions together regardless of subject, processes or belief. It is a useless magic skill but great for solving puzzles or being a geologist.

AMPHIARAUS said:
H2onE2 said:
No major “tongue and cheek” geologist has stepped forward to evaluate my work which means I am the only expert. I have called all geologists out into the school yard for their intellectual beating. I can’t help it if they are afraid to turn up.

I would have thought that being the only expert was something of a problem as you have no critique or review of your theories that you can accept.

At first it might have been like that but not now the lack of anyone willing to critique my work makes me feel even more convinced I have everything solved.

AMPHIARAUS said:
Do you think your own internal review is sufficient to hone and test your theory?

I came into a world full of ghosts, spirit and unknown mysteries. I will leave this world with a unmatched level of reality. There is nothing left worth solveing.

AMPHIARAUS said:
Is your theory complete and perfect or are there aspects of it which need refining?

Complete but I would like to do a rewrite to add some additional elements that are not clearly expressed. And add some of the more complicated things like earth’s magnetic field, ext.

AMPHIARAUS said:
Sorry to ask so many questions but I'm interested in the answers.

I am open to any questions but be careful what you ask for, not everything has a happy ending.

EDIT: 'Quote' tags tidied-up by WJ (and not for the first time - tbh, if posters aren't able to use them properly, they're probably best steering away from them...).
 
H2onE2 said:
AMPHIARAUS said:
H2onE2 said:
All Geologists take basically the same classes and comparable mapping field camp. Merits, acknowledge, and reputation is formed by tongue and cheek socializing / politics NOT natural special ability.
AMPHIARAUS said:
Are you saying that all geologists have the same level of education and that there are no specialists, or people working to advance geological knowledge by applying other sciences?
How does being able to socialize help, lets say an oil prospector who is paid on results?

Specialists mostly work on small or nano examinations to help fill a bigger picture. What I say is enough of this specialist work has been done and delivered and it is now time to attach the information into a conclusion. There will be no further advancement in geology until the big picture is drawn. I would not say direct socializing advances positions but it doesn’t hurt to know someone. Isn’t that the same for most fields? I have had some pretty dumb bosses, haven’t you?

AMPHIARAUS said:
And what is this natural special ability you speak of? Would it be the ability to see things that other people don't?

I am good at spatial analysis or drawing many functions together regardless of subject, processes or belief. It is a useless magic skill but great for solving puzzles or being a geologist.

AMPHIARAUS said:
H2onE2 said:
No major “tongue and cheek” geologist has stepped forward to evaluate my work which means I am the only expert. I have called all geologists out into the school yard for their intellectual beating. I can’t help it if they are afraid to turn up.

I would have thought that being the only expert was something of a problem as you have no critique or review of your theories that you can accept.

At first it might have been like that but not now the lack of anyone willing to critique my work makes me feel even more convinced I have everything solved.

AMPHIARAUS said:
Do you think your own internal review is sufficient to hone and test your theory?

I came into a world full of ghosts, spirit and unknown mysteries. I will leave this world with a unmatched level of reality. There is nothing left worth solveing.


AMPHIARAUS said:
Is your theory complete and perfect or are there aspects of it which need refining?

Complete but I would like to do a rewrite to add some additional elements that are not clearly expressed. And add some of the more complicated things like earth’s magnetic field, ext.

AMPHIARAUS said:
Sorry to ask so many questions but I'm interested in the answers.

I am open to any questions but be careful what you ask for, not everything has a happy ending.

Thanks for taking the time to answer H2. I wish you well with your endevours.
 
Mccain graduated 5th from the bottom of his class. Did you just make that dollar thing up?
 
H2onE2 said:
No major “tongue and cheek” geologist has stepped forward to evaluate my work which means I am the only expert. I have called all geologists out into the school yard for their intellectual beating. I can’t help it if they are afraid to turn up.

Do you actually understand how academia works?

What peer reviewed jourals have you submitted your work to? Which conferences have you spoken at?

Why have I not seen you at GSA? Why do you not submit to the major journals? And if you do, and they have been rejected, why have you not asked for the reasons - that would reveal the peer reviewed disagreements that the experts have with your findings.

At SVP, they have had young earth creationists give talks on why dinosaurs only existed 6000 years ago, and the palaeontologists in the open question sessions debated with him. In the poster sessions, opposing viewpoints are vigorously contested.

You can't sit in your little corner, and complain of conspiracy when the leading experts in the world don't beat a path to your door to engage you in a town hall debate.

You are required to publish your science (of which you have demonstrated none) in peer reviewed journals where other geologists can evaluate and debate your findings.

That's science.

I am the world's only expert in hydrosocial genetic hermeneutics of biblical texts by a process of computerised rastification. I'm the world's only expert because I've just made it up and refuse to publish to peer reviewed journals.

Claiming your the world's only expert in a discipline you've invented and that you won't submit to scrutiny is hardly convincing.

Moreover, none of this addresses the basic fact that your refusal to abide by Stumbleupon's terms and conditions does not mean there is a conspiracy against you!
 
Pietro_Mercurios said:
Possibly, but I was asking H2onE2, who may have meant something less tongue in cheek.

I think this may be a reference to his alleged "foreign policy" expertise, which has been demonstrated only really by his reaction to the situation between Georgia and Russia, which owes more to his close personal friendship with the Georgian President, rather than a nuanced foreign policy. His expertise is a subjective call.
 
"Claiming your the world's only expert in a discipline you've invented and that you won't submit to scrutiny is hardly convincing."

You're! A few other phrases would benefit from hyphens.

That's English!

The other steam-hammers have moved on from this particular walnut.
:)
 
JamesWhitehead said:
Peer-reviewing! :)
Heh heh - remind me not to submit my thesis on a non-existant subject to you .... that sharp "You're!" made me sit up and tuck my shirt in!
 
JamesWhitehead said:
"Claiming your the world's only expert in a discipline you've invented and that you won't submit to scrutiny is hardly convincing."

You're! A few other phrases would benefit from hyphens.

That's English!

The other steam-hammers have moved on from this particular walnut.
:)

* Trying to be as tongue-in-cheek as possible*

My apologies for cack-handedness and sloppiness, ironic since I am known as a grammar nazi on one of the other boards I peruse - I can only assume that my incandescent rage got the better of me.

However - I'm not a daily visitor, so whilst the other steam hammers may have moved on, I wished to comment, so I did, and since this board is roughly democratic I'll thank you to respect that! ;)
 
H2onE2 said:
Following the thought pattern developed by "lawofnations", not me.

Then you've confused the back-scratching, lobbying and horse-trading of politics (sell your principles to special interests and you'll get the support of the faithful), with the hard-work, experimentation and scrutiny of a science.

You did actually pay attention in your science classes didn't you? You do understand how the scientific method works?
 
lawofnations said:
H2onE2 said:
Following the thought pattern developed by "lawofnations", not me.

Then you've confused the back-scratching, lobbying and horse-trading of politics (sell your principles to special interests and you'll get the support of the faithful), with the hard-work, experimentation and scrutiny of a science.

You did actually pay attention in your science classes didn't you? You do understand how the scientific method works?
A good close perusal of this and H2onE2's other Threads, should reassure you that in H2onE2's own opinion, he is the foremost expert in a field, in which he is the lone contender.
 
That depends on whether you're American or British. In America, most other punctuation goes inside the quotes. Parentheses, brackets, and other enclosers are the only exceptions of which I can think, and their placement would depend on the structure of the sentence as a whole.
 
This is something I would expect the government would pay people to do. When you can't attack the content go after the person. How is the government coffee anyways.

One of my videos has a new comment,

7hidden7agenda7

Well.... Damn!
That makes more sense than anything I've seen yet, about any subject.
 
H2onE2 said:
This is something I would expect the government would pay people to do.
Oh good Lord, no - this is purely voluntary.
H2onE2 said:
..When you can't attack the content go after the person.
On the contrary, we've been attacking the content since you first appeared. Or have you missed something?
H2onE2 said:
That makes more sense than anything I've seen yet, about any subject.
How many things have you seen?

Seriously though, we have discussed the content of your somewhat outre theories, at length. The only reason those discussions are now closed is that you repeatedly point-blank ignored direct questions, despite your continuing assurances that you will answer any query arising.

Besides, why would any government wish to suppress a theory that, to put it delicately, most people on even this most broad-minded of forums regard as utter bollocks?
 
The second para of your "thesis" at http://www.h2one2.com/main.sc

"Hydrogen and oxygen are the most abundant gas molecules found in the universe so the core is mostly built from these ignitable and explosive gases. "

Helium is far more abundant than oxygen, and in any case the Earth's core is clearly not formed of either (the density is far too great, apart from anything else).
Hard to see why anyone would bother reading further.

You mentioned before you'd never been called wrong; I'm calling you wrong.
 
Where is all your Helium :?: Not on Earth or space.

Helium (He) is a colorless, odorless, tasteless, non-toxic, inert monatomic chemical element. It has a full outer shell so will not bond with any other element. Exists only as a gas except in extreme conditions.

Water and ATM gas– H2O :?: No (He) Helium in there

Silica - Silicon Dioxide (SiO2) Silica is one of the most abundant oxides in the earths crust :?: No (He) Helium in there

volcanic earth rock - Basalt compositions are rich in MgO and CaO :?: No (He) Helium in there

volcanic earth rock - Basalt generally has a composition of 45-55 wt% SiO2 :?: No (He) Helium in there

Lunar basalts differ from their terrestrial counterparts principally in their high iron contents, which typically range from about 17 to 22 wt% FeO :?: No (He) Helium in there

Where is all your (He) Helium :?: Not on Earth or space. I only find Oxygen and Hydrogen in everything.
 
After hydrogen, helium is the most common substance by weight in the universe (which you'd know if you'd actually put the rest of the statement that you lifted for your first point).

Also, although there's not a lot of helium in the atmosphere (around 1 in 200,000 parts) as a "professional geologist" you'd know that much of the helium on Earth comes from natural gas fields mainly in the US, it's thought to be a product of radioactive decay. Or is that a bit of the course that you skipped? I don't think I'd trust the competence of a geologist who denies there's any source of helium on Earth.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helium

http://periodic.lanl.gov/elements/2.html

http://environmentalchemistry.com/yogi/periodic/He.html
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top