Before there is any confusion, let me add this: This IS NOT about setting up an echo chamber or banning people who disagree. Quite the opposite it is trying to save the comment section (on my posts at least) from being a sewer pit. It is no secret the comments section on Wizbang has been (ahem) messy for some time. THIS IS MY ATTEMPT TO INCREASE discussion. (by decreasing stupidity)

We'll see if it works.

(Oh, -- And lastly this applies only to my posts, you're all free to be idiots everywhere else on Wizbang, that ain't my problem.)

Glad you made them the offer to be idiots everywhere else here.

They WILL CERTAINLY take you up on your offer.

Preach it brother.

heh- I'm trying to carve out my own little Anbar. ;-)

That's interesting, Paul, and while I cannot disagree with your point, you really should have mentioned the socioeconomic status of black Norweigian midget lesbian transvestite dishwashers in East Timor. Does not the fact that there are no black Norweigian midget lesbian transvestite dishwashers in East Timor indicate that you are on Rove's payroll, and that this is all an attempt to stifle my Constitutional right to post whatever I want on your blog or through my own, non-existant but hypothetical blog that you should subsidize through a punitive tax structure? What would Ben Franklin, our second president and discoverer of America, say about your blatent fascism? Please, in the future, think of the children.

As a working astronomer I am far more concerned with variability of solar irradiance than human contributions to global warming.

http://www.ucar.edu/communications/factsheets/sun/connections.html#S9

Human caused global warming is most certainly not settled science.

That being said, if you want to reduce emmissions, I am fine with that. We have better things to do with oil.

The black Norweigian midget lesbian transvestite dishwashers in East Timor have a terrible map deficit.

We should do more to help them.

I, for one, have been happy to see you blogging again, Paul. Stick around, why don't you?

Human caused global warming is most certainly not settled science.

Unfortunately, liberals don't rely on science to settle science anymore. They rely on "consensus" (or claimed consensus). See, if they had lived hundreds of years ago, they'd have refused to accept that the Earth was not the center of the universe and orbited the Sun because there was no consensus on his observations.

But hey, that gets the Church back then off the hook. After all, they were only abiding by what the consensus of the time was, right?

Man, liberal arguments are so stupid.

and as you say, that makes one of you. ;-)

By "his" I meant Galileo, of course.

Paul:

I hope you do stick around as well, I enjoy reading your posts. However, I do understand burnout and getting sick of all the inane commentary.

So, I guess you have two in your solid readership column.

By "his" I meant Galileo, of course.

Actually, you meant Copernicus.

>Actually, you meant Copernicus.

There you go, making my life tough... I banned you from my posts, but then you screw the whole thing up by contributing to the discussion.

Actually, you meant Copernicus.

I did? I didn't know Copernicus was put on trial by the Church after looking through his telescope and seeing moons orbiting Jupiter.

then you screw the whole thing up by contributing to the discussion.

I am a man of surprises. Here's another one... although I stand by my comments, one thing that I will apologize to you for is baiting you when it was clear you were riled up.

I didn't know Copernicus was put on trial by the Church after looking through his telescope and seeing moons orbiting Jupiter.

Copernicus was the first to claim "that the Earth was not the center of the universe and orbited the Sun".

I didn't know Copernicus was put on trial by the Church after looking through his telescope and seeing moons orbiting Jupiter.

I didn't know anyone was put on trial for that. I do know that Galileo was put on trial after he portrayed the Church as being intellectually deficient through a Monk character in one of his dialogs, a trail which aimed to completely discredit Galileo as a consequence. Although, come to think about it, he didn't address black Norweigian midget lesbian transvestite dishwashers in East Timor either. So let that be a lesson to everyone.

Copernicus was the first to claim "that the Earth was not the center of the universe and orbited the Sun".

You're just not going to admit your attempt to correct me was wrong, are you?

Brain as issues with accusations he can't back up.

(hey, I let you post, I didn't say I had to be nice to you ;-)

If you would only blog about the topics that [i]I[/i] want you to blog about, then you too would be quoted on the floor of the Senate like me ... err, like my sockpuppet here.

Good [b]day[/b], sir.

Good post, Paul. This is perhaps the most annoying thing I've seen on blogs or message boards - and I've seen a lot of annoying things.

Heck, we even had the Bomb Squad for people to post their own stories, and still folks will chime in - completely off-topic - about the damned socioeconomic status of black Norweigian midget lesbian transvestite dishwashers in East Timor. Even when they could post about it on their own on the site.

Well, folks, here's a clue: We write about what we want to write about. It's a beautiful thing! Now, tomorrow, I may feel moved to post a lovely analysis of the socioeconomic status of black Norweigian midget lesbian transvestite dishwashers in East Timor. Today, I do not. If you don't care to comment on the posts I DID enter, that's fine - but don't continually post your "helpful suggestions" about other topics in those comments.

We HAVE a "tips" line (in the right-hand column) and stories suggested frequently get posted. No one has the time or inclination to post them ALL, of course. But there is still hope for your favorite subject, be it the socioeconomic status of black Norweigian midget lesbian transvestite dishwashers in East Timor, or just what toe-tapping in a men's room is required to send a "signal," there is hope:

You see, there are literally DOZENS - probably hundreds - of free places on the interwebs where you can create your very own little blog and post every little thought that crosses your little brain. If you are so vexed at what you fail to find here, why not start your own blog and be the Big Boss there - leaving us the heck alone in the meantime?

Oh, and by the way: the socioeconomic status of black Norweigian midget lesbian transvestite dishwashers in East Timor is a non-issue. Virtually all of the black Norweigian midget lesbian transvestites in East Timor work in either the Caberet or tech support sectors. NONE are dishwashers - they can't reach the racks to put away the clean glasses (East Timor doesn't have an "East Timorians with Disabilities Act," you see . . .).

20. Posted by Brian | October 2, 2007 3:47 PM

Speaking of sock puppet, that wasn't me.

You're just not going to admit your attempt to correct me was wrong, are you?

*sigh*

OK, your vague statement, which most closely describes Copernicus, could also be loosely applied to Galileo and others who supported Copernicus's writings, and then your second post, which attempted to clarify your reference to Galileo, does so while incorrectly conflating separate events in his life.

Two comments:

(1) I, too am glad you started blogging regularly again and hope you keep it up.

(2) I, too would like to see reasonable, civil, mature discussion in the comment sections. Sadly I doubt that will happen. Most often, when leftists get into reasonable, civil, mature discussions it quickly becomes obvious that they are losing so they decide not to stick around or they resort to logical falicies, topic changes, and outright bullshit. That leaves us with the religious fanatics like Hooson, Jim, Nogo, Barney, et. al.

(And by "religious fanatics" I mean those who think their beliefs are facts and unquestionably true. That is what religion is, at it's most basic level.)

An interesting side note, the first experimental proof of the motion of the earth came in around 1727 with the detection of the aberation of light. Up to that time you had to take it on faith that the earth orbited the sun.

As an interesting side note, I can use a Fourier function to make a very accurate Ptolomaic model(earth centered model). But observations of the stars and the Foucault pendulum tell me the earth is moving. Additionally I have a very accurate physics that wants the earth to move (Newton et al).

>OK, your vague statement, which most closely describes Copernicus, could also be loosely applied to Galileo and others who supported Copernicus's writings, and then your second post, which attempted to clarify your reference to Galileo, does so while incorrectly conflating separate events in his life.

OK OK OK.. I kept my nose out of it but I'm about to bite the tip of my tongue right off....

In a word Brian, Wrong.

He said:

See, if they had lived hundreds of years ago, they'd have refused to accept that the Earth was not the center of the universe and orbited the Sun because there was no consensus on his observations.

But hey, that gets the Church back then off the hook.

The key words where "The Church." That couldn't mean Copernicus because Copernicus held his beliefs until he was near death. In fact, his book was not published until after his death and the church didn't bother ban it for almost 100 years. -- Copernicus had no problems with the church. (well other than generic implied oppression)

You where also wrong when you said:

Copernicus was the first to claim "that the Earth was not the center of the universe and orbited the Sun".

Not by a long shot. The idea our solar system was heliocentric had been around for centuries. He just put it on paper.

Don't argue in ignorance, google my ass if you don't believe me.

Change that to "Copernicus had no confrontation with the church." if you prefer.

That couldn't mean Copernicus because Copernicus held his beliefs until he was near death.

Nope.

In 1514 Copernicus made available to friends his Commentariolus (Little Commentary), a short handwritten text describing his ideas about the heliocentric hypothesis.

In 1533, Johann Albrecht Widmannstetter delivered in Rome a series of lectures outlining Copernicus' theory. The lectures were heard with interest by Pope Clement VII and several Catholic cardinals.

On 1 November 1536, Archbishop of Capua Nicholas Schönberg wrote a letter to Copernicus from Rome:
...

By then Copernicus' work was nearing its definitive form, and rumors about his theory had reached educated people all over Europe.

(And please, no ad hominem "it's Wikipedia!" responses.)

You where also wrong when you said:
>Copernicus was the first to claim "that the Earth
>was not the center of the universe and orbited
>the Sun".
Not by a long shot. The idea our solar system was heliocentric had been around for centuries. He just put it on paper.

To quote you, the key words were "The Church." It seemed appropriate to stick within the European realm, and not to account for the Greeks and Muslims who predated Copernicus.

google my ass if you don't believe me.

Just as long as you don't require me to use Google Images to find it.

This has been a common thing that the trolls have done on here for quite some time. Either say something entirely unrelated as to direct the comments in an entirely different direction (IE talking about georcg bush and the war when the topic was global warming or vice versa) or, as mentioned above, they take issue with something "missing". If you think it's missing and is actually relevant, add it in the comments section without being a dick about it.

I love some of the topics on here that have some heated debate going on, but when i see too many people taking the bait and changing the course of a debate to something totally unrelated to the topic, it is somewhat disheartening and i lose my interest fairly quick. I think staying on topic is the best way to debate someone unless you're wrong.

It seems to me that reasoned debate is a 2 way street. Too often folks immediately repudiate a comment from someone from the opposite political spectrum. What is often lacking here, and I include myself in this at times, is a willingness to be open-minded.

Reasoned debate is not the province of one side or the other. I read "liberals" can't debate or "liberals" don't have the facts on their side etc. How is that a way to promote reasoned debate? And I'm not saying we on the left don't do the same thing.

An excellent example is your comment P. Bunyan. On the one hand you say you want reasoned, civil, mature discussions. But in the next breath you conclude "they" are losing so they , to paraphrase, disrupt the discussion. In the first place that's a generalization which is wrong. In the second place disruptive argument is equally prevalent with folks from the right. So there it is a nutshell. You say lets have reasoned discussion when you incorrectly believe the other side is incapable of it.

The habit of generalizations about both sides by both sides is a discussion killer here. I've noticed that I have a habit of doing it and am making an effort to stop.

Stringscape in Physics World.
=============================

>"Nope."

Brian that is why you got banned the first time. You are an insufferably dishonest debater.

* That he told a few friends meant nothing. His work was not even widely known for a century after his death.

* Of course the educated in Europe heard of his theory, they had heard of it before he was born becasue it wasn't his theory. (actually that is a Wikipedia problem)

================

But let's assume you're right. Let's assume his theory went thru the 16 century internet and everyone knew.

You're still wrong

EVEN if I give you that point, you have disproved a meaningless point.

The point was he never had a conflict with the church, that was Galileo. That is why you where wrong.

And this is why you are a dishonest debater.

You said something clearly wrong and when I explain why it was wrong, you find some strawman to attack.

PROVE TO ME THE he had a problem with the Church.

Please Brian, try to be a little more honest in your debate.

I agree with this post......kinda

"So here is the bottom line: From this point forward, if you're a hopeless troll who only wants to tell me how to blog and/or cast (intellectually dishonest) aspersions on my efforts, you're either going to have to hold your tongue or put me on your payroll."

I agree with this totally. Also, it makes discussion difficult when people completely go off topic just to argue. I think maybe I've done it once or twice, but I always try to comment on what has been posted.

The cool thing about being a mere commenter is that when some twerp goes off on a dipwad, tangent, I can just skip over it. When some names come up I just skip the whole comment because I know there is no point and it's just drivel. (If you are frequent nuisance poster or thread-jacker and are wondering if I could possibly be skipping your posts, I probably am. So HA!!!) Life is too short to waste time with morons.
I don't blame you a bit, Paul.

"Paul, you failed to mention that there is a scientific consensus that humans are causing global warming."

Well Damn - The surge is working. Everyone agrees on that, the numbers show it. So why don't the anti war liberals shut the hell up? Shouldn't they just fall in line whit what the experts say and the numbers prove? Why don't they just agree with what everyone knows?

Because they don't have to. Thats what makes America - America.

Everyones got an asshole - some people never learn not to fart in public. Trolls will be trolls, without them the internet would have died right after Al Gore invented it because it would have just been AOL Advanced and not worth bothering with because it would be boring after about 30 minutes.

Trolls have their place, every village needs an idiot, some villages are larger than others or have a higher concentration of high tension powerlines coated in tasty lead based paint.