Please stop with the silly phrase woo-woo

[rhinochopig]

It's childish - more in keeping with the lounge - and certainly not appropriate here. All IMO obviously.

That is all, carry on chaps.

[rhinochopig]

Einion Yrth said:

rhinochopig said:

It's childish - more in keeping with the lounge - and certainly not appropriate here. All IMO obviously.

That is all, carry on chaps.

How then would you suggest that we refer to the parascientific clap-trap?

Well if someone is incapable of articulating it without resorting to baby talk then perhaps the science section is not for them. Pseudo-science is fine by me.

Otherwise, it simply becomes yet another stupid PH meme like powerfully built, OXO tower, etc. I for one would prefer it if that didn't happen in this part of the forum TBH.

[rhinochopig]

Marf said:

rhinochopig said:

Well if someone is incapable of articulating it without resorting to baby talk then perhaps the science section is not for them. Pseudo-science is fine by me.

Otherwise, it simply becomes yet another stupid PH meme like powerfully built, OXO tower, etc. I for one would prefer it if that didn't happen in this part of the forum TBH.

But it's not a PH meme, it did not originate here.

But it is a PH meme. Just because it didn't originate here doesn't mean it can't be a meme.

A meme is simply a phrase or concept that is passed from one person to another. A few weeks ago very few had heard of it and it wasn't in any of the posts, it's now utterly pervasive.

[rhinochopig]

TheHeretic said:

rhinochopig said:

But it is a PH meme. Just because it didn't originate here doesn't mean it can't be a meme.

A meme is simply a phrase or concept that is passed from one person to another. A few weeks ago very few had heard of it and it wasn't in any of the posts, it's now utterly pervasive.

Sorry, fella, but the word woo has been used a lot on certain threads. Don't get yourself all upset about it. I for one won't stop using it because you find it offensive, or childish.

It has but this in recent threads. Go back to the creation of this section and to when science was discussed in the boats planes etc section and it was hardly used.

But, I'm not upset, I don't find it offensive, just find it slightly irritating.

[rhinochopig]

TheHeretic said:

I found one from 2008!

Bloody good job, well done. Award yourself some points.

[rhinochopig]

TheHeretic said:

rhinochopig said:

Bloody good job, well done. Award yourself some points.

Look, YOU stated that it was a new phenomena, and it is becoming pervasive. I simply searched 'woo religion' on pistonheads, and the term is found going back possibly even further.

But it IS becoming more pervasive. One has only to look at the first page of topics in this section

So whilst I was simply trying to show you that it is not recent, you got snotty. Therefore...

You were wrong that it is a PH meme.
"A meme is an idea, behavior or style that spreads from person to person within a culture." The usage of the phrase HAS seen a marked increase. Therefore it is perfectly correct to state that it IS a PH meme. Simply prefixing PH to word meme does not confer the meaning that PH invented the phase, simply that the phrase is spreading within PH. Hence PH meme

You were wrong that it is a recent inclusion.

I'm not claiming it was NEVER used before, simply that it has now become an over used, and silly, phrase

You were wrong that these subjects hadn't had it before.


You made the somewhat daft assumption that pseudoscience subjects would be posted in the planes and trains forum.

I used planes, etc. as an example. Of course other science topics get discussed in The Lounge, GG, Politics, etc. As for me not noticing it before, I think my post count suggests I might have noticed

So a bloody good job back at you. You may feel free to award yourself some points.

You carry on using it if you wish, I really don't feel strongly enough about it carry on an argument with someone I've never met. I think it's a silly phrase and its use demeans a science forum, you don't, we're not going to agree about it, so I'll shut up.

[rhinochopig]

deeen said:

GnuBee said:

Would it not be more befitting a forum area that positions itself as the bastion of rational thinking to adopt a more efficient form of rebuttal other than simply screaming "heretic"?

If you don't like a contributors question on UFOs, Pyramids, Ghosts etc I'd of thought it would be more useful in the wider educational context to explain why rather than resorting to name calling?

This forum area has great potential to those of us with an interest in science of any kind and it would be disappointing if the only discussion that was permitted was confined to specific areas that fall within areas not deemed as "woo woo".

There's clearly some very knowledgeable people contributing here and I, for one, would like their considerable intellect be used to educate rather than demean...

All fine, but the point is that questions on UFOs, ghosts etc. should not be in the science forum, they belong in whichever forum would be appropriate for discussing whether Father Christmas is real.

Why? The thread on UFOs has moved onto very real science and is now discussing the relativistic effects of flight at close to c. That's real science IMO. Simply dismissing it as 'woo' would have stopped what has turned into a very interesting discussion. Ask the question and then explore the science behind whether it is actually theoretically possible or not.

[rhinochopig]

Eric Mc said:

rhinochopig said:

deeen said:

GnuBee said:

Would it not be more befitting a forum area that positions itself as the bastion of rational thinking to adopt a more efficient form of rebuttal other than simply screaming "heretic"?

If you don't like a contributors question on UFOs, Pyramids, Ghosts etc I'd of thought it would be more useful in the wider educational context to explain why rather than resorting to name calling?

This forum area has great potential to those of us with an interest in science of any kind and it would be disappointing if the only discussion that was permitted was confined to specific areas that fall within areas not deemed as "woo woo".

There's clearly some very knowledgeable people contributing here and I, for one, would like their considerable intellect be used to educate rather than demean...

All fine, but the point is that questions on UFOs, ghosts etc. should not be in the science forum, they belong in whichever forum would be appropriate for discussing whether Father Christmas is real.

Why? The thread on UFOs has moved onto very real science and is now discussing the relativistic effects of flight at close to c. That's real science IMO. Simply dismissing it as 'woo' would have stopped what has turned into a very interesting discussion. Ask the question and then explore the science behind whether it is actually theoretically possible or not.

On the Infinite Monkey Cage just before Christmas, there was a debate on the relativistic requirements of Santa's Sleigh - and whether Rudopl's nose would look purple as he approached and even more red as he receded.

I heard that one. My favourite podcast for walking the dogs. It is genuinely laugh out loud at times. The competing theories posited by the various guests was very funny.

Proof that science can incorporate humour and not stoop to....anyway

[rhinochopig]

deeen said:

rhinochopig said:

Why? The thread on UFOs has moved onto very real science and is now discussing the relativistic effects of flight at close to c. That's real science IMO. Simply dismissing it as 'woo' would have stopped what has turned into a very interesting discussion. Ask the question and then explore the science behind whether it is actually theoretically possible or not.

Fine, so start a thread discussing travel near the speed of light? Why bring UFOs into it?

Again, you might as well use Father Christmas as a relevant example in a thread about logistics.

Because such ideas provide interesting frameworks in which to discuss potentially dull topics. Talk about UFOs and the discussion moves from the socio-political implications of the impact of little green men turning up, the engineering challenges of building a craft capable of ~ c or beyond, the physic of close to c or beyond travel, etc.

Doing as you suggest risks it becoming a tediously dull thread.

Listen to the IMC podcast regarding Santa. Plenty of real science in that, and funny and engaging to boot.

[rhinochopig]

carmonk said:

Now THAT is funny

[rhinochopig]

Eric Mc said:

rhinochopig said:

Because such ideas provide interesting frameworks in which to discuss potentially dull topics. Talk about UFOs and the discussion moves from the socio-political implications of the impact of little green men turning up, the engineering challenges of building a craft capable of ~ c or beyond, the physic of close to c or beyond travel, etc.

Doing as you suggest risks it becoming a tediously dull thread.

Listen to the IMC podcast regarding Santa. Plenty of real science in that, and funny and engaging to boot.

Because it was all tongue in cheek from the start. They didn't start the discussion because someone in the audience was actually postulating that Santa's Sleigh was a real artefact. That's where the "woo woo" element would have kicked in - and Brian Cox would have been the first to have a go (as he did a few times on Astronomy Live a couple of weeks ago).

I don't disagree, but the UFO thread is now one of the busiest threads in this forum, and has moved on from ill-informed speculation to some interesting discussion about the physical and engineering challenges of how the little green men could get here.

Pseudo-science can lead to some interesting discussions if looked at from a scientific perspective.