PDA

View Full Version : Proof that GLPers have no sense of humor



ToSeek
2003-Nov-21, 03:27 PM
Funny initial post that most responses take seriously:

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/message.php?page=1&topic=3&message=218543&mpage=3& showdate=11/21/03

Sammy
2003-Nov-21, 06:34 PM
Funny, but tragic in it's implications for this nation. I sure hope that these folks are among the ones who don't bother to vote!

This is by far NOT the most revealing and heartbreaking thread. The ones that bother me the most are the chemtrail guys, the folks convinced that every post is captured and scrutinized by the government, the real demented ones convinced that the U.S. Govt., in combination with various other powers (Isrealis, aliens, the Brits, ect., depending on the particular nature of their dementia) carried out the 9-11 attacks, and my current favorite, a host of posting by people who have been persecuted by Masons, esp. during their highschool days (including one poor woman who ws not only persecuted by Masons-- tho she only now realizes that they were Masons -- but who also dated a "shape-shifting" alien for a while.

foxd
2003-Nov-21, 07:38 PM
Funny initial post that most responses take seriously:

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/message.php?page=1&topic=3&message=218543&mpage=3& showdate=11/21/03

I think sarcasm was intended for most those, it doesn't come across easily in text.

(Gak! I can't believe I would actually wind up defending a posting on GLP! ](*,) )

ignorant_ape
2003-Nov-21, 11:41 PM
TOSEEK :

ROFLMAO , we could all post GLP threads that demonstrate that they have no `sense of ` logic , honest , integrity , truth etc ad nauseum

can we just parse it down to " GLP`ers have no sense!" it works for me
\:D/

YRS - APE

Archer17
2003-Nov-22, 12:37 AM
Speaking of GLP, what's the story with idol_harobed? does the avatar tell the tale? Some GLP posters claim this is a male or, at the very least, not the real deal. Sour grapes or substance? Whoever this poster is, they don't appear to be loved by the woowoo mainstream, which, in itself, is a good thing. Any factual information will be included in my soon-to-be-published book, Avatars and Reality: The Connection :^o :wink:

Lycus
2003-Nov-22, 01:01 AM
Speaking of GLP, what's the story with idol_harobed? does the avatar tell the tale? Some GLP posters claim this is a male or, at the very least, not the real deal. Sour grapes or substance? Whoever this poster is, they don't appear to be loved by the woowoo mainstream, which, in itself, is a good thing. Any factual information will be included in my soon-to-be-published book, Avatars and Reality: The Connection :^o :wink:

Oh, she's definitely a scientifically-minded person who's one of Nancy's and the other woo-woos' biggest critics on GLP. I also believe that she's a BABBer and I have a hunch as to who she is here. :wink:

Archer17
2003-Nov-22, 01:30 AM
Speaking of GLP, what's the story with idol_harobed? does the avatar tell the tale? Some GLP posters claim this is a male or, at the very least, not the real deal. Sour grapes or substance? Whoever this poster is, they don't appear to be loved by the woowoo mainstream, which, in itself, is a good thing. Any factual information will be included in my soon-to-be-published book, Avatars and Reality: The Connection :^o :wink:

Oh, she's definitely a scientifically-minded person who's one of Nancy's and the other woo-woos' biggest critics on GLP. I also believe that she's a BABBer and I have a hunch as to who she is here. :wink:hmm .. interesting .. thanks for the skuttlebutt. I won't pursue this (on this board anyway), for obvious reasons :) So, that's "Lycus" with one "s" right? My book should be hitting the shelves in early spring '04 :D

ToSeek
2003-Nov-22, 01:32 AM
Speaking of GLP, what's the story with idol_harobed? does the avatar tell the tale? Some GLP posters claim this is a male or, at the very least, not the real deal. Sour grapes or substance? Whoever this poster is, they don't appear to be loved by the woowoo mainstream, which, in itself, is a good thing. Any factual information will be included in my soon-to-be-published book, Avatars and Reality: The Connection :^o :wink:

I've gotten the impression that the "real person" is Deborah Lodi (reverse that), but it's not been clear to me whether she herself is idol or idol is her boyfriend. Either way, the story is that she was initially taken in by Nancy but became disenchanted - hence the sometimes strident posts on GLP.

Lycus
2003-Nov-22, 01:38 AM
I've gotten the impression that the "real person" is Deborah Lodi (reverse that), but it's not been clear to me whether she herself is idol or idol is her boyfriend. Either way, the story is that she was initially taken in by Nancy but became disenchanted - hence the sometimes strident posts on GLP.

The only things I've ever seen her confirm are:
a) She's a woman.
b) Her avatar is an actual picture of herself.

As far as I know, the rest of that stuff is made up, and I wouldn't put it past some of those on that forum to make stuff up.

2003-Nov-23, 02:12 AM
Have you guys seen this thread? It's war on GLP! 8-[

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/message.php?message=219195&mpage=1&topic=3&showdat e=11/22/03

The title of the thread is extremely unflattering, but typically of GLP, it quickly meanders off subject. Before long, two regular anti-Phil people start slugging it out. :o

Personally, I'd love to see a libel case go to court--IDW would have to prove Phil is a lair, and paid for it. Then Phil could stand up and absolutely destroy the poor man (?) with facts and evidence. =D>

I'd sell tickets! I'd be rich! :lol:

Did I say that out loud? :oops:

SarahMc
2003-Nov-23, 03:51 AM
Have you guys seen this thread? It's war on GLP! 8-[

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/message.php?message=219195&mpage=1&topic=3&showdat e=11/22/03



That "IDW" is certainly one strange character. Some of his recent posts over there are really off the wall.

As far as Idol goes, AFAIK she's as described earlier, a disenchanted former Zetatalk follower, at least that's the claim. She certainly enjoys socking it to Nancy, but then again everyone does over there except for a few supposed followers. I have my doubts about them as well, they seem to post for the purpose of trolling for responses from the "debunkers".

Nancy is pretty much a joke over at GLP, much like she was all the while she was posting to sci.astro and sci.astro.amateur.

SirThoreth
2003-Nov-23, 04:08 AM
Have you guys seen this thread? It's war on GLP! 8-[

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/message.php?message=219195&mpage=1&topic=3&showdat e=11/22/03



That "IDW" is certainly one strange character. Some of his recent posts over there are really off the wall.

As far as Idol goes, AFAIK she's as described earlier, a disenchanted former Zetatalk follower, at least that's the claim. She certainly enjoys socking it to Nancy, but then again everyone does over there except for a few supposed followers. I have my doubts about them as well, they seem to post for the purpose of trolling for responses from the "debunkers".

Nancy is pretty much a joke over at GLP, much like she was all the while she was posting to sci.astro and sci.astro.amateur.

That's an interesting point, and would fit with a lot of what I've seen over there. Also, a lot of the pro-PX posts over there are from "anonymous" users, many of which appear to actually be Nancy posting as "someone else" to make herself appear to have more followers than she does. IDW is also guilty of the like.

GLP never ceases to amaze me - that so many conspiracy theorists, many with contradicting theories, can coexist the way they do (note I didn't say peacefully - it's hardly peaceful over there) astounds me. It's a lot like a train wreck: you're horrified, but you can't look away. Heck, I've even been accused of being a paid disinformation agent for "the Government" because I felt that, despite its problems, the US government is better than that of most other nations.

Sammy
2003-Nov-23, 05:24 AM
Have you guys seen this thread? It's war on GLP! 8-[

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/message.php?message=219195&mpage=1&topic=3&showdat e=11/22/03

The title of the thread is extremely unflattering, but typically of GLP, it quickly meanders off subject. Before long, two regular anti-Phil people start slugging it out. :o

Personally, I'd love to see a libel case go to court--IDW would have to prove Phil is a lair, and paid for it. Then Phil could stand up and absolutely destroy the poor man (?) with facts and evidence. =D>

I'd sell tickets! I'd be rich! :lol:

Did I say that out loud? :oops:
(Emphasis added)

Yep, IDW is a a real loon. Like Nancy, he is great at taking a little scientific knowledge and totally screwing it up. But, unfortunately, the Courts have (so far) held that stuff published on the internet can not constitute libel. That finding is being challenged by the operator of the great Quackwatch medical fraud site, over staements made by a quck scammer impugning the site's honest and the the owner's medical qualifications.

The Bad Astronomer
2003-Nov-23, 06:19 AM
I find GLP to be fascinating. At first blush, the entire board seems like it swings heavily into believing just about anything. But now that I go there rather frequently, I see all sorts of shades in it that are completely drowned out by the few loud noisemakers. I think we may be giving the board a short shrift. There are many rational people there, and many who are questioning a lot of what they are hearing (both from science and anti-science, which is healthy IMO). But again, we tend to see the IDWs and others who make a lot of sound and fury.

I wonder sometimes. Who here has ever wondered about what the vast audience of "Coast to Coast AM" is like? I just bet most people here think they are all real woowoos, believing whatever ridiculous tripe is fed them.

But I don't think so. First of all, we know a lot of skeptics listen in on occasion, because a lot of us here talk about it.

Second, and bear with me here: it has been said to me by many people that when you get feedback on something (whether it's a speech, an ad, a magazine article, whatever) usually about 90% of that feedback is negative. That's because people who didn't like whatever it is you did feel motivated to correct it, or just to say their piece, or to simply complain. But someone who liked it is far less likely to write in, and even if the audience is split 50/50, you still receive more negative letters.

So if you get 90% negative comments, you're probably okay.

I bring this up because after I had my little dust up with Nancy Lieder on C2C, I got quite a few emails. Now, Nancy's followers would be pretty likely to write me hate mail, so I was expecting a flood. I got a trickle. In fact I only got a very few letters accusing me of the usual nonsense (NASA disinfo agent, gov't spook, etc).

What I did get were a lot of supportive letters. Not hundreds, but dozens. They far outnumbered the negative letters. People were thrilled that someone would go on C2C and denounce the very stuff the show disperses. This happened again last week, after I specifically talked about Hoagland and McCanney. Lots of positive emails, one or two negative.

So we should all perhaps rethink our viewpoint of the C2C audience. And I think everyone who reads GLP should look at it with eyes open, and not be so quick to judge everyone on a few overwhelming posts. Yes, IDW will never back down, or ever make any sense, but he is one of just a few. Making fun of him or others won't change anything. When I write my pages here, and when I debate pseudoscientists, it's not the pseudoscientists I'm trying to convince. That's a waste of time. It's the people listening, the ones who have real questions; they are the ones to whom I am talking.

jscotti
2003-Nov-23, 07:06 AM
So we should all perhaps rethink our viewpoint of the C2C audience. And I think everyone who reads GLP should look at it with eyes open, and not be so quick to judge everyone on a few overwhelming posts. Yes, IDW will never back down, or ever make any sense, but he is one of just a few. Making fun of him or others won't change anything. When I write my pages here, and when I debate pseudoscientists, it's not the pseudoscientists I'm trying to convince. That's a waste of time. It's the people listening, the ones who have real questions; they are the ones to whom I am talking.

Well said Phil. I agree with you that whenever I try and debunk some sort of pseudoscience or errant claim, it is not the pseudoscientist I am trying to convince. It's those who are undecided or are not firmly lost to the woowoo side of the street. I actually think of myself as a teenager as the target of my work. I went through a lot of that Von Daniken stuff and the Bermuda Triangle and so on but also ran into Carl Sagan books too.

I'm not sure I agree with your 90% negative e-mail statement, however. Over the years with my Moonlanding Hoax Hoax debunking page, I'd say 90% of the e-mails I've gotten are positive and from people who just want to thank me for the page. Often they have just one nagging question.... Now, what fraction of the C2C listeners or the GLP readers are either skeptics or at least not prone to falling blindly for crackpot ideas? Can we say anything about the numbers based on the fraction of callers on one side or the other? How often do you hear a skeptic call in and try and confront a woowoo on C2C? I don't hear that very often, though I also don't listen to C2C very often (unless you are on it, anyway, Phil.... 8) ). The first hour of the C2C you were on last week (I caught it while driving home) had a couple of JFK conspiracy skeptics that were quite refreshing to listen to. Instead of the usual claims of grassy knoll shooters and so on, they presented a detailed account of the actual forensic evidence and were very much on the side of single shooter from the area of the 6th floor of the TSBD & that that shooter was LHO. When I first tuned in, I was expecting the usual conspiracy crap, but was surprised to hear a skeptical account of the events of 40 years ago.

Jim.

frenat
2003-Nov-23, 12:46 PM
I would be tempted to say that many of the woowoos that listen to C2C might not be able to figure out their email but that is just based on some of the calls I've heard.

Archer17
2003-Nov-23, 05:43 PM
I was a member of GLP for a few weeks in early summer and seen firsthand that lumping everyone on that board as woowoos is a mistake. There are some posters over there that dispute the sensationalist bullcrap constantly posted and some do so quite eloquently. Having said that, the site doesn't do anything for me. It's slow to download on my computer (I have DSL too) and filled with enough filth that it should be rated R at the very least. My hat is off to those that take the time to address the frequent inaccuracies posted over there but reading things like IDW's obsessive libel reminds me of why I deleted my account.

ToSeek
2003-Nov-24, 01:32 AM
Well, I don't mean to color all GLPers with the same brush, but, jeez, there are some amazingly clueless people on there, some of whom are proud of their total cluelessness.

What amazes me the most are all the posts complaining about the debunkers being insulting, when so far as I can tell the debunkers are pretty considerate - even though they're the brunt of most of the insults.

But generally I agree that we should try to be polite over there. You don't know how many people are "on the fence" and just looking at evidence from both sides. I doubt IDW's attitude has won him many converts.

Lycus
2003-Nov-24, 02:10 AM
As far as Idol goes, AFAIK she's as described earlier, a disenchanted former Zetatalk follower, at least that's the claim.

Well, until I hear that this tale has been confirmed by Idol herself, I'm going to give her the benefit of the doubt and assume that it's false.

Archer17
2003-Nov-24, 02:24 AM
..What amazes me the most are all the posts complaining about the debunkers being insulting, when so far as I can tell the debunkers are pretty considerate - even though they're the brunt of most of the insults.Tell me about it! OSA is a case in point. I realize I wasn't Mr. Tact over there but I was slammed from the git-go. My definition of fear-mongering was interpreted as "expression" by the wacko moderators of that cry-baby board. It's the poster's "opinion" or "views" (forget the exact phrase) I was told :roll: .. some idiots over there claimed to "feel" a solar flare!! .. sorry, I have no sympathy for anyone that naive to either believe it or expect it to be believed. That's probably why I'm not good woowoo-board "missionary" material. Sometimes I wonder how that particular breed can cross a street without being hit by a car! :-?

freddo
2003-Nov-24, 03:58 AM
OSA sure teaches a man to pick and choose his battles...

frenat
2003-Nov-24, 04:28 AM
I've learned to just watch most of the time at OSA. They never listen anyway, no matter how open-minded they are. Then one of the moderators comes by and accuses debunkers of not backing up their stuff with links when nobody else does and they spew some really off the wall stuff. I only go there now for humor.

freddo
2003-Nov-24, 05:00 AM
Then one of the moderators comes by and accuses debunkers of not backing up their stuff with links

That sounds strangely familiar...

You know someone else asked me to say my piece without links, the following day?

You can please some of the people some of the time...

Archer17
2003-Nov-24, 05:06 AM
OSA sure teaches a man to pick and choose his battles...That's the difference between me & you freddo. I never even made it to that long-winded Phobos thread that is amazingly still going!?! .. didn't Jigsaw blow that one out of the sky months ago? Are they hard-core woowoos or what? Like I said, I'm not woowoo-board material, the woowoos shoveling their poop never let a thing like logic or science stand in their way and I never felt like I had to be diplomatic attacking it. That's the way I am .. they're crybabies. Rule of thumb: when the so-called "moderators" of a board are woowoos, don't expect a fair shake. I have no regrets, in some ways I think GLP is superior. They don't whine as much :wink:

Musashi
2003-Nov-24, 05:30 AM
They are still talking about the phobos thing? I tried OSA for a while, but it was too much.

freddo
2003-Nov-24, 05:30 AM
Phobos thread that I don't believe is still going!?!
It's only show and tell now, every time I see it I'm tempted to pop in simply to roll my eyes.


Like I said, I'm not woowoo-board material, the woowoos shoveling their poop never let a thing like logic or science stand in their way and I never felt like I had to be diplomatic attacking it. That's the way I am .. they're crybabies.

You've got a point in that regard. Still, the BA 8) and jscotti put it into words - I'm not arguing with the woo-woo for their sake. It's an opportunity every time for me to learn something, and for me to share that learning with others. I don't expect a fair shake over there, nor have I recieved it. Certainly I spend a good deal of my time biting my tongue whilst composing something level-headed...
I need to give up on a topic a little sooner though - I've been good recently but sometimes I'm just repeating myself for the sake of it.

Archer17
2003-Nov-24, 06:07 AM
Don't get me wrong .. if you "missionaries" can help just one you've done a good thing. I just think if someone was open-minded regarding woowoo stuff they wouldn't need such outside intervention, they'd do some research themselves. Maybe I'm giving people too much credit for brains .. :-? This might be a surprise to some, but I used to be a "woowoo" myself in my youth! I "saved" myself - no "missionaries" required .. just unbiased research. Am I so special?

Lycus
2003-Nov-24, 08:16 AM
This might be a surprise to some, but I used to be a "woowoo" myself in my youth!

Oooh, Archer has a story to tell us! =D>

digitalspector
2003-Nov-24, 04:39 PM
I've learned to just watch most of the time at OSA.

thats become my stance over there. I started to get to many bruises on my nogin from banging my head against my desk.

Sadly, even things that I wish to discuss, like ancient philosophy and such...get mixed with off-wall psuedo-science...

Takes all the fun out of it.

Archer17
2003-Nov-24, 04:44 PM
This might be a surprise to some, but I used to be a "woowoo" myself in my youth!

Oooh, Archer has a story to tell us! =D>It was just a phase I went through when I was a kid. UFOs, The Bermuda Triangle, Philadelphia Experiment, etc. .. couldn't read enough about them. In the case of UFOs I began to question the craft themselves, some weren't even solid, and their m/o .. their behavior wasn't logical. I'm condensing things here (I went into further detail in that ETUFO thread) but my belief started to wane as I reexamined the reports. I know some still believe, but you'll have that. The Triangle went down the tubes when I researched the famous case of Flight 19 and found a lot of the info I read in woowoo books was embellished. It turns out they got lost and, thinking they were west of Florida, flew east. Well, unfortunately for them, they were east of Florida and flew right out into the Atlantic .. end of mystery, and the beginning of the end of my belief. The Philly Experiment was based on the Navy's practice of degaussing ships to make them 'invisible' to German homing torpedoes in WWII. Somehow, this "invisibility" morphed into the ship becoming literally invisible itself and the story just took off. The story of a sailor from the Eldridge that vanished in a local bar is often citing by the woowoos and it turns out a sailor vanished all right .. he was under-aged and was whisked out the back door when the MPs showed up. The ship teleporting from Philly to Norfolk is another case of woowoo embellishment. Turns out there was an inland canal connecting the two ports in those days. This, in a nutshell, is what happens when you analyze things outside a woowoo author's perspective.

I want to make it clear that, while I have differing views on the effectiveness of "missionary" work, it's just my opinion and maybe it's skewed somewhat by my lack of effectiveness in similar ventures. I don't mean to diminish what people like the BA, freddo, and others are trying to accomplish. I admire their patience and agree with their motives. My hat's off to them and I wish them luck.

Sammy
2003-Nov-24, 07:20 PM
Archer17 wrote


The Philly Experiment was based on the Navy's practice of degaussing ships to make them 'invisible' to German homing torpedoes in WWII. Somehow, this "invisibility" morphed into the ship becoming literally invisible itself and the story just took off.

Archer, you're right in principle, but a bit wrong on the "Philly Experiment facts." First, deguassing was done to demag ships to protect them from German MAGNETIC MINES, not torpedos. German homeing topedos (and later, ours) steered on sound--acoustic homers.

The actual Philly Experiment was an attempt to make ships OPTICALLY invisible. It was done at the Philly Navy Yard, and involved setting up a complex shipboard system of floodlights and photocell sensors, aimed at "washing out" shadows on the ships and its superstructure, and "painting" the whole ship with the proper amount of light to match the brightness of the sky behind it. Sea trials actually showed greatly reduced visibility at medium to long ranges, even when observers knew where to look. It was never put into use because of the complexity and practical problems of integrating all this lighting equipment with a fighting warship subject to high seas, the blast effects of its own guns, etc.

There are several books documenting this work, the best of which is the series put out by the OSRD (Office of Scientific Research and Development) in the years just after the war. I think that James P. Baxter, in the (approx. 1948) book, "Scientists At War," also discusses the Philly Experiment. Im own these books, but it would take some time to track them down if anyone wants more details.

John Jones
2003-Nov-24, 07:23 PM
I confess! I was taken in by Erik Von Daniken when I was 13, but any 13-year-old can be forgiven for such stuff.

Later, when I was 17, I heard about a group of people in Colorado (at that time) who were giving-away all their possessions in anticipation of some ET mothership coming to take them to a better life elsewhere in the galaxy.

I naively assumed that there must be something to it, because adults wouldn't give away their homes and walk away from their lives without compelling evidence (did I mention that I was 17?).

I didn't join them or anything, but it fascinated me. The next time I heard about them was when I was 40, after they had all commited suicide, and I had gained some education and experience in science and human nature.

It was the Heavens Gate cult. There but for the grace of god...

Archer17
2003-Nov-24, 08:21 PM
Wow, Sammy that's fascinating. Outside of the woowoo version, I was totally unaware that we actually were working on optical invisibility, just assumed this was all about degaussing. I based alot of my debunking on the testimony of the sailors on the ship regarding the degaussing and the young sailor that was spirited out the back door. Now that you mention it, I think I even read the degaussing had to do with German mines .. I'm just getting senile. :-? Glad you told me about the optical invisibility thing, you spared me some egg on my face if I ever ended up debating the merits of this thing on some woowoo board ... I never would've thunk it!

Sammy
2003-Nov-24, 09:29 PM
Archer17 wrote


Glad you told me about the optical invisibility thing, you spared me some egg on my face if I ever ended up debating the merits of this thing on some woowoo board ... I never would've thunk it!

My pleasure to help ....before I get senile and forgot all this stuff! :lol:

I don't know if this will help on a woo woo board, tho. They'll just tag you as another "paid government disinfo agent" (like BA). They KNOW what really happened -- it was posted on the internet!!!

Sigma_Orionis
2003-Nov-25, 12:10 AM
I confess! I was taken in by Erik Von Daniken when I was 13, but any 13-year-old can be forgiven for such stuff.


WooWoo stuff I read when I was a kid:

Nostradamus
Erik Von Daniken
Yosip Ibrahim (I visited Ganymede,UFO/Alien Stuff)
Rodolfo Benavides (Predictions of the Great Pyramid)
Salvador Borrego (New World Order/AntiCommunist/Facist Conspiracy Theory)

Probably the last three were never translated to English (which in my opinion is a GOOD thing :) )

I lent some credit (when I was about 15!) to the Von Daniken stuff, and to some of Salvador Borrego's conspiracy theories. Fortunately by the time I was 21 I was cured (4 years of college physics CAN do that to you! :lol:)

Charlie in Dayton
2003-Nov-25, 04:48 AM
...So we should all perhaps rethink our viewpoint of the C2C audience. And I think everyone who reads GLP should look at it with eyes open, and not be so quick to judge everyone on a few overwhelming posts...

...party pooper... :-?

SirThoreth
2003-Nov-25, 08:45 AM
I just had a realization. Interdimensional Warrior (IDW) from the GLP board is really oriel36, that dude who couldn't understand the whole sidereal day concept:

http://www.badastronomy.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?t=8552

http://www.godlikeproductions.com/bbs/message.php?message=219546&topic=3&showweek=

crux
2003-Dec-05, 04:56 PM
if anyone really cares.... I have been watching GLP for a long time - it is like living in a tough neighborhood instead of the suburbs

re: idol harobed - deborah Lodi

first appeared as a Bacon-esque avatar (expressionistically painted pig faced man behind a desk)

later came a story how Idol (as posted by Idol - mid summer) was dumped by his girlfriend Deborah Lodi due to Nancy and Planet X... and he was out to make sure no one else was taken in by her (Nancy).

Then he changed to an Obi Wan Kanobi (spelling?) avatar, after a couple of weeks, submitted the young girl avatar and said that this is his/her true photo.
so who knows, game playing or just another GLP identity crisis?

One thing is consistent - Idol always posts whenever Planet X or Nancy is mentioned and most of their posts are no longer than two sentences.

Archer17
2003-Dec-05, 05:49 PM
There are some people over there that are scientific although they are usually drowned out. I think one of the biggest drawbacks to GLP is the A/C (you can post anonymously), it makes any kind of board etiquette impossible to enforce (even if Elaine tried). Speaking of idol harobed, I PM'd her a week or so ago and found her to be a quite pleasant non-woowoo. She is a member of this board as well. Notice I said "she."

pteranodon
2003-Dec-06, 05:28 PM
:-? People, beware of stereotyping.

There are lots of good posters at GLP, including many BABBers. I'm not talking about those who post there only to provoke woowoo's wrath, I'm talking about serious posters.

pteranodon
2003-Dec-06, 05:36 PM
Speaking of GLP, what's the story with idol_harobed? does the avatar tell the tale? Some GLP posters claim this is a male or, at the very least, not the real deal. Sour grapes or substance? Whoever this poster is, they don't appear to be loved by the woowoo mainstream, which, in itself, is a good thing. Any factual information will be included in my soon-to-be-published book, Avatars and Reality: The Connection :^o :wink:

There are some other GLP posters with real pictures of themselves for their avatars such as Duncan Kunz, Anon-e-moose and Love-2-girls.

pteranodon
2003-Dec-06, 05:47 PM
People, care not to what IDW says. This person is not even respected by other woowoos there.

Lycus
2003-Dec-06, 07:42 PM
:-? People, beware of stereotyping.

There are lots of good posters at GLP, including many BABBers. I'm not talking about those who post there only to provoke woowoo's wrath, I'm talking about serious posters.

You're right, pteranodon. I was recently debating with the poster, Baobab, about the amount of stereotyping that I see on both sides of the fence. GLP has quite a few cliques, and some of them include some smart people.

Though the Phil-bashing troubles me to no end. People don't talk about Elaine like that here, and Phil wouldn't allow it.

pteranodon
2003-Dec-06, 11:12 PM
:-? People, beware of stereotyping.

There are lots of good posters at GLP, including many BABBers. I'm not talking about those who post there only to provoke woowoo's wrath, I'm talking about serious posters.

You're right, pteranodon. I was recently debating with the poster, Baobab, about the amount of stereotyping that I see on both sides of the fence. GLP has quite a few cliques, and some of them include some smart people.

Though the Phil-bashing troubles me to no end. People don't talk about Elaine like that here, and Phil wouldn't allow it.

Many reasonable people take a lot of beating there too. It happens that Phil, being eminent, naturally becomes a high priority target.

pteranodon
2003-Dec-07, 12:09 AM
...So if you get 90% negative comments, you're probably okay...

You are quite right, Phillip. That is what you can expect when people have to overcome their natural mental inertia to understand your point. Obviously, the majority of them is too lazy to move and prefer to resort to attacks.

Alex W.
2003-Dec-07, 12:30 AM
I was really into woo-woo stuff as a kid, too. I suppose that's what inevitably led me to places like this. :D