PDA

View Full Version : Crack-Pot Rating Index



Hungry4info
2010-Mar-21, 08:50 PM
A humourous evaluation of how crack-pot someone's theory is... obvious implications to the AGM or CT section.

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

NEOWatcher
2010-Mar-22, 05:04 PM
A humourous evaluation of how crack-pot someone's theory is... obvious implications to the AGM or CT section.

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

Sorry, old news (http://www.bautforum.com/off-topic-babbling/76395-crackpot-index.html) for us.

You may want to refine your search skills.

Kwalish Kid
2010-Mar-22, 07:35 PM
What is funny is that there is a user that was banned from here that, on another forum, proudly counts his own crackpot index up to 190.

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-23, 12:31 AM
A humourous evaluation of how crack-pot someone's theory is... obvious implications to the AGM or CT section.

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

I'm familiar with it, but I don't discuss it much because of those obvious implications. I'm not going to tell an ATM proponent he is a crackpot if, for instance, he compares himself to Galileo (no doubt, that would be looked on rather dimly here). Still, if an ATM proponent does compare himself with Galileo, it's pretty much an automatic fail in my book.

Regarding this one:



11. 10 points for beginning the description of your theory by saying how long you have been working on it. (10 more for emphasizing that you worked on your own.)

Sometimes a proponent says it as if it is supposed to somehow prove they are right. Sometimes, they seem to be looking for respect, or sympathy. In fact, there have been cases where I've felt sympathy for someone who probably has been working on something for a long time, but didn't realize they missed something fundamental (often in basic science). The sympathy tends to wear off when I find out they've been informed of this many times.

slang
2010-Mar-23, 12:41 AM
Interestingly, apparently the Crackpot Index predates the publishing of the Dunning-Kruger Effect by one year. One wonders how it would have affected the index, perhaps by adding several other scoring points.

kleindoofy
2010-Mar-23, 12:51 AM
... I'm not going to tell an ATM proponent he is a crackpot ...
I may not on BAUT, but I certainly will and do in real life.

Last year at the Frankfurt Book Fair, the owner of www.seeinglastsupper.com came by my booth and tried to sell me his book (= his website) *for publishing which supposedly demonstrates the "true" code behind Leonardo's (i.e. da Vinci) works, first and foremost the Last Supper.

It was the ATM/CT section come to life.

I had absolutely no problem telling him exactly what I thought of his ideas and that I would not dream of putting the good name of my company at risk by even touching his manuscript.

I then offered him a cookie.

He offered me his card.

If I were to go through the index, he'd be pretty far up.

*edit: added for clarification

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-23, 04:35 AM
I may not on BAUT, but I certainly will and do in real life.


I don't do it anymore. I might debate with someone until I see there's no point, though. Slightly rewritten, I think the list could be useful for would-be ATMers as suggestions of things to avoid. If they would only listen . . . .

Tensor
2010-Mar-23, 04:58 AM
I If they would only listen . . . .

There were a few that I would have been happy if they would have been able to read or better yet, understand. I still remember the guy who thought he saw a little martian, all the way down to his pocket protector, who was investigating and checking out the rover. No amount of explanation would convince him.

Grashtel
2010-Mar-23, 05:47 AM
I don't do it anymore. I might debate with someone until I see there's no point, though. Slightly rewritten, I think the list could be useful for would-be ATMers as suggestions of things to avoid. If they would only listen . . . .
I would say that if you are going to present an ATM theory totalling up your Crackpot Index score (omitting the -5 point credit because you are too close to your work to be really objective) is a good idea, and if your score is high (more than somewhere in the order of 25) you really should reconsider how you are presenting your theory.

There are also a few items I would add to the index, for example naming stuff after yourself should be worth at least 5-10 points (if it is really major your name will be associated with it as the discoverer, otherwise its just arrogance).

mugaliens
2010-Mar-23, 08:23 AM
A humourous evaluation of how crack-pot someone's theory is... obvious implications to the AGM or CT section.

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html

And naturally, BAUT's maximum tolerance for credibility is, what? Two points? Three?

Strange
2010-Mar-23, 09:38 AM
And naturally, BAUT's maximum tolerance for credibility is, what? Two points? Three?

Extra points for criticizing your audience? ;)

MAPNUT
2010-Mar-23, 01:36 PM
That index reads as very timely for something 12 years old.

John Baez, the founder of a new science, psychoceramics. The study of crackpots.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-24, 08:13 PM
There are also a few items I would add to the index, for example naming stuff after yourself should be worth at least 5-10 points (if it is really major your name will be associated with it as the discoverer, otherwise its just arrogance).
20 points, it's item 25 on the list.

Kwalish Kid
2010-Mar-25, 02:19 AM
I would say that if you are going to present an ATM theory totalling up your Crackpot Index score (omitting the -5 point credit because you are too close to your work to be really objective) is a good idea, and if your score is high (more than somewhere in the order of 25) you really should reconsider how you are presenting your theory.
Except that the true crackpots are quite happy having numbers over 100.

kleindoofy
2010-Mar-25, 02:43 AM
Oops, wrong thread. Text deleted