PDA

View Full Version : OT threads on PM



Carld
10-23-2009, 06:08 PM
There was two threads on PM that was very irritating. Don posted about not liking to talk to foreigners that he could not understand. Me and some others pointed out it was his problem and I told him to quit using the phone. Since I didn't say what he wanted to hear he went off on me.

The other post was about questions posted on the site that went astray or did not get the answer the poster wanted. He chimed in with his always venomous posts to me and others.

Well, I have had enough of Don and his acidic remarks and since he is better than anyone else and knows everything I told him what to do with him and his site. I will not go back to his site any more.

I don't know what has happened to him and his site in the past year but he and it has changed drastically in the past year. I would much rather be here and at the Home Machinist than anywhere. It's not the other posters on his site that have changed but Don has gotten more caustic than before for some reason.

I deleted his site from my favorites and will no longer post there which will make Don very happy and me too.

Thank you for allowing me to vent about Don and I hope I can have a good relationship here with all of you.

Evan
10-23-2009, 06:21 PM
When I get phone calls in heavily Hindi accented British English asking "may I peleese speek to Eben Willims" I answer "no" and hang up. Problem solved. If I am in the shop I don't answer the phone at all.

A good friend of mine had a trick he used with his 5 daughters. He had a hidden switch that turned off the phone signal to the one phone in the house with a ringer (it was in his shop).

John Stevenson
10-23-2009, 06:41 PM
When I had the dedicated fax line it was the only line that was in the book.
The house line, Gets own and the shop line are both ex-directory, in fact the business isn't listed in any directory or agency, no phone listed, no sign up other than on the truck and that's to stop getting pulled in roadside checks, they always pull the plain vans first, so like all the best whore I'm ex-directory.

So we used to get calls on the fax line, if busy just ignore it as no one called on them, if slack or just wanting a laugh I used to answer in a croaky voice "hello? "

then I get some guy, usually from abroad trying to give me a new mobile phone.
I used to tell them I had a phone and why did I need a new one and they slowed right down to tell me it was a mobile phone.
After 10 minutes explaining about new contracts I's ask again why i needed one because I had the one I was speaking on.
Finally when I'd had enough i say I don't want a mobile, I don't getout.
"I'm 84 you know "

End of conversation.

pressurerelief
10-23-2009, 06:50 PM
Carld, I have to agree with you on Don. He is more caustic lately and with his attitude a real turn off. I rarely go on PM except for the Haas section. The guy has 29,000+ plus posts. Does he really have that much to say or have any quality to add when he posts? Some people just seem to have to be heard and let everyone know their opinion. You would think he could turn some of his time into something useful like selling equipment.

P/R

HSS
10-23-2009, 06:53 PM
Carld,
Paula of South Bend in PM and Don must exchange ideas on how to be caustic and generally aggravating. If she doesn't like your post it goes into the crapper without so much as a kiss my butt. I don't go there anymore either. I know I have some stupid ideas and questions at times but they aren't meant to be stupid, I just come across that way, sometimes. I got CMC real bad here lately. (Can't 'Member Crap) And it ain't gettin' any better, either.

As Sir John would say, "I'll get me coat"

Patrick

John Stevenson
10-23-2009, 06:56 PM
The guy has 29,000+ plus posts. Does he really have that much to say or have any quality to add when he posts?

P/R

Remind you of anyone on here ? :D

Weston Bye
10-23-2009, 07:04 PM
Remind you of anyone on here ? :D

Mmpf..heh heh, shame on you, John.... giggle..:D

JoeFin
10-23-2009, 07:20 PM
When I get an Indian Help Desk Operator from some 1-800 number I immediately ask to be transfered to an American Help Desk operator

It isn't worth wasting my time attempting to disseminate their accent

Carld
10-23-2009, 07:32 PM
The only thing I did was point out that he was whining about something he could change by removing his phone number but he wanted to continue whining about how he could not understand what they said. As far as I can determine he don't want the truth, just someone to agree with him.

The past 6 months I have found more interesting threads here and better posts than PM has had for over a year. I considered just not going there several times but he finally convinced me to leave. He is happy and I am extremely happy.

I wish Don well but he does have a problem, at least I think he does. Other opinions may vary.

Evan
10-23-2009, 07:34 PM
Remind you of anyone on here ?

Yep. Somebody who has been trying to catch up for years. Lotsa luck.

Mike Burdick
10-23-2009, 07:38 PM
Hmmmm...I guess I'm old and have developed a little more patience with people. It may take a second or two but I can usually figure out what they are saying and we can communicate just fine. The really nice thing about this is I usually get what I want and they usually get what they want. And life goes on....

John Stevenson
10-23-2009, 07:39 PM
Yep. Somebody who has been trying to catch up for years. Lotsa luck.

Whooooooooooshhhhhh :D

beanbag
10-23-2009, 07:44 PM
Hmmmm...I guess I'm old and have a developed a little more patience with people. It may take a second or two but I can usually figure out what they are saying and we can communicate just fine. The really nice thing about this is I usually get what I want and they usually get what they want. And life goes on....

Hooray for positive inter-personal relations!

Evan
10-23-2009, 07:44 PM
AN ENGLISHMAN, roused by a Scot's scorn of his race, protested that he was born an Englishman and hoped to die an Englishman. 'Man,' scoffed the Scot, 'Hiv ye nae ambition?'

lakeside53
10-23-2009, 09:11 PM
I'm on the "don't call list" (USA). Yep...works 99.9% of the time, and I'm particularly rude to those that ignore it, including the idiot political calls that say they are "exempt" (they are, but..):D

tmarks11
10-23-2009, 09:46 PM
I am not rude; I just hang up on the caller as soon as it becomes apparent that they are trying to sell me something... or if I don't recognize their voice after 10 seconds or so.

Although I sometimes get rude with the callers of the "get them to say yes three times before you start the sales pictch" school of thought. They don't make it past question #1.

I pay for my phone for my own convenience, not to make it convenient for someone else.

Of course this is somewhat OT, since it more relates to cold callers and not inividuals with a foreign accents.

JoeFin
10-23-2009, 10:10 PM
Of course this is somewhat OT, since it more relates to cold callers and not inividuals with a foreign accents.

Or people who think they know it all and can't admit when they are wrong

mochinist
10-23-2009, 10:13 PM
I'm on a do not call list also, but the occasional ones sneak through. I mostly have fun with them though, I like to go off on tangents and just start rambling on about nothing, or if it is a girl caller, I will start flirting with them, asking them how they look and stuff. I'm glad I'm not one of those people that gets upset about stupid sh!t

Bmyers
10-23-2009, 10:37 PM
I had a girl call me one time selling magazines. She would not take no for an answer. She insisted she had a magazine that would interest me. She finally ask what my hobby was, when I told her I like to F%$K she hung up.

tattoomike68
10-23-2009, 10:52 PM
There was two threads on PM that was very irritating. Don posted about not liking to talk to foreigners that he could not understand. Me and some others pointed out it was his problem and I told him to quit using the phone. Since I didn't say what he wanted to hear he went off on me.

The other post was about questions posted on the site that went astray or did not get the answer the poster wanted. He chimed in with his always venomous posts to me and others.

Well, I have had enough of Don and his acidic remarks and since he is better than anyone else and knows everything I told him what to do with him and his site. I will not go back to his site any more.

I don't know what has happened to him and his site in the past year but he and it has changed drastically in the past year. I would much rather be here and at the Home Machinist than anywhere. It's not the other posters on his site that have changed but Don has gotten more caustic than before for some reason.

I deleted his site from my favorites and will no longer post there which will make Don very happy and me too.

Thank you for allowing me to vent about Don and I hope I can have a good relationship here with all of you.

Don is a PRICK, he must be a 5'2" runt with small mans syndrome. He thinks he need to control everything, the guy is nuts.

He is by far the most arrogant and snotty machine shop web site administator by far. Myself I vote with my clicks and just dont go there.

This site is mellow, George lets stuff go till it turns into BS and namecalling then he locks a thread and we all move on. This site is better run by far.

Evan
10-23-2009, 10:54 PM
Or people who think they know it all and can't admit when they are wrong

Nobody knows it all. That's why there are many threads that I don't contribute to since there are many aspects of machining that I have never done or even seen. Unlike John I don't feel compelled to say something anyway regardless of how meaningless it is. Then there is the "Google Child" which can be none other than .....(.....). Just loves to flood a thread with long quotes from frequently unrelated or only marginally related sources that are his first exposure to the material under discussion.

I wish my memory was as good as it used to be. When I was in school I had most of the encyclopedia Britannica memorized. Now I have to look things up to make sure I remember them correctly.

dp
10-23-2009, 10:59 PM
I wish my memory was as good as it used to be. When I was in school I had most of the encyclopedia Britannica memorized. Now I have to look things up to make sure I remember them correctly.

I may have mentioned that when I was a kid in Hawaii all I had to read was the Encyclopedia Americana including the Lands And People and Science books. Read every one of them several times. When I came back to the states I was 12, living in California. They gave us all what we called "IQ" tests and I got the highest score in CA. It surprised them because I was a crappy student. I was bored to death with lessons.

Evan
10-23-2009, 11:07 PM
I failed my way up the grades in high school. I also scored in the top 2 percent on the SAT. My teachers were always pissed at me because they would try to catch me out during a class while I was reading something. They didn't know that I could replay the last thing they said in a second and then answer.

dneufell
10-23-2009, 11:42 PM
I like PM and HMS forums both:) but I can not view PM because I am on dialup service.(i live in the woods) What bothered me about Don (I normally would not post anything personal...I like to say things mano a mano)...is that he jumped on all the newcomers. (I know...I know...its his sandbox). Then he asked me to delete my avatar (scrat- 1/2 squirrel-1/2 rat) because it was not machine-related or a pic of me....(it does look LIKE me and that is the way i chase work for the shop!) and then when threads started to be deleted by the almighty..(didn't Edie Armine start out like that?) Don is a member here and might read these threads. I have read and reread many of his posts. I believe in Karma. (Don...chill out...live is short) :) Dean

dneufell
10-23-2009, 11:47 PM
Oh ya.....John.....good zinger! Evan....good return serve.....I love it here:)

Mcgyver
10-23-2009, 11:59 PM
There was two threads on PM that was very irritating. Don posted about not liking to talk to foreigners that he could not understand. Me and some others pointed out it was his problem and I told him to quit using the phone. Since I didn't say what he wanted to hear he went off on me.

The other post was about questions posted on the site that went astray or did not get the answer the poster wanted. He chimed in with his always venomous posts to me and others.

Well, I have had enough of Don and his acidic remarks and since he is better than anyone else and knows everything I told him what to do with him and his site. I will not go back to his site any more.

I don't know what has happened to him and his site in the past year but he and it has changed drastically in the past year. I would much rather be here and at the Home Machinist than anywhere. It's not the other posters on his site that have changed but Don has gotten more caustic than before for some reason.

I deleted his site from my favorites and will no longer post there which will make Don very happy and me too.

Thank you for allowing me to vent about Don and I hope I can have a good relationship here with all of you.

ok but posting all that here accomplishes nothing, just display sour grapes. if you're finished, you're finished, no need to broadcast. remember what mom used to say, "if you've not got something nice to say dont say anything at all" :)

Ken_Shea
10-24-2009, 12:13 AM
remember what mom used to say, "if you've not got something nice to say dont say anything at all" :)

Well, my experience is that most Moms say that with out the practicing part :D

JoeFin
10-24-2009, 12:18 AM
Then there is the "Google Child" which can be none other than .....(.....). Just loves to flood a thread with long quotes from frequently unrelated or only marginally related sources that are his first exposure to the material under discussion.

Never did mind references given the nature of the Internet. I mean seriously - would you believe every thing you read posted in an Internet forum.

Posting referenced materials of reliable sources to support one's position is considered Internet edicate amongst the blogosphere. Works for me a whole lot better then the "Because I said so" mentality

J Tiers
10-24-2009, 01:24 AM
There sure is a lot of "Don hating" on here..... he is what he is, and has his reasons.

That guy on PM about the OT posts probably 'went off" on me too, but I don't care...

I get pretty irritated myself when a serious question about something does NOT get an answer because it is full of people suggesting something way off what he is doing and what he has availalable to do the job.

OTOH, there are cases where that is the only possible answer, ("that won't work, try this...."). In those cases, bitching about people not staying within the narrow limits of the question is plain stupid.

bob ward
10-24-2009, 01:32 AM
Or people who think they know it all and can't admit when they are wrong

Used to work with a bloke 30 years who was absolutely brilliant, hardly ever made a mistake, but like all of us was occasionally fallible.

The best you could get out of him in those situations was, "I may not be right, but I am never ever WRONG."

Metalmelter
10-24-2009, 01:34 AM
The past 6 months I have found more interesting threads here and better posts than PM has had for over a year. I considered just not going there several times but he finally convinced me to leave. He is happy and I am extremely happy.

I wish Don well but he does have a problem, at least I think he does. Other opinions may vary.

The reason you have more interesting threads here is simple I think - MANY of the folks with good knowledge, manners and plain decency have moved away from PM altogether. Put them all in a group and it just blossoms!

Why in the world would anyone want to post there while walking Don's or Paula's minefield of sarcastic comebacks or insults. I was there about a week ago, and before that almost a year has gone by. Can't say I miss it one bit. I've come across so many more decent folks on this board that I deleted the PM bookmark as well. :cool:

JoeFin
10-24-2009, 01:41 AM
"I may not be right, but I am never ever WRONG."

I like it - I may have to add that one

"I thought I was wrong once - but I made a mistake"

dp
10-24-2009, 02:04 AM
The reason you have more interesting threads here is simple I think - MANY of the folks with good knowledge, manners and plain decency have moved away from PM altogether.

I think a big plus for hsm is that topics that are fully professional are completely acceptable here but so too are topics that are clearly of interest to home shop owners and amateurs. PM discourages the non-commercial machinist's contributions. What is left is a large number of stressed out work-short shop owners and employees who are struggling to be relevant in the current Chinese oriented manufacturing world. There's a lot of really pissed off people there. There's also a lot of people there whose attitude is amplified by Don's gruff personification and limited tolerance. You can see a gang mentality in a good number of forums and threads.

There is an awful herd mentality on both PM and HSM and it is plain for all to witness. Here's an example - in the drywall thread only Evan and I (sorry if I've left anyone out - I didn't read every post) stood up for principles of science and refused to accept the dominant "conventional wisdom" view of things. It was suggested that we were "adventitious" in this. We were two against the masses, but one mental midget found that we two were adventitious. Not the masses aligned against our position of solid scientific rigor - just we two. Count the names: Two for science, all else for conventional wisdom. And only we two formed an adventitious alliance.

How ignorant is that claim? That is pretty damned ignorant.

So my take is, both PM and HSM have very high highs, but both have very low lows. The spread goes to HSM where the middle ground is far more broad and congenial. And unlike PM, there are no moderators here who will call you a douche bag and worse if they disagree with you.

chief
10-24-2009, 04:17 AM
Don has always attacked or vilified others who disagree with him. He is a s**thead imo. I'd buy chinese junk before I would buy from him.

beanbag
10-24-2009, 05:26 AM
in the drywall thread only Evan and I stood up for principles of science and refused to accept the dominant "conventional wisdom" view of things. the masses aligned against our position of solid scientific rigor - just we two. Count the names: Two for science, all else for conventional wisdom. And only we two formed an adventitious alliance.


That's very noble and clear-headed of you. Don't forget, you also stood up for "critical thinking".

beanbag
10-24-2009, 05:35 AM
When I get phone calls in heavily Hindi accented British English asking "may I peleese speek to Eben Willims" I answer "no" and hang up. Problem solved. If I am in the shop I don't answer the phone at all.



What is it about Hindi accented British English speakers that makes it worth avoiding all of them?

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 06:03 AM
Joe wrote


Or people who think they know it all and can't admit when they are wrong
and Evan replied


Nobody knows it all. That's why there are many threads that I don't contribute to since there are many aspects of machining that I have never done or even seen. Unlike John I don't feel compelled to say something anyway regardless of how meaningless it is. Then there is the "Google Child" which can be none other than .....(.....). Just loves to flood a thread with long quotes from frequently unrelated or only marginally related sources that are his first exposure to the material under discussion.



But Joe didn't mention Evan and only Evan rose to defend himself, I find this freeking hilarious.

And Evan if I wasn't here to keep you in check where would the forum go?
Look at recent threads Swine flue, dry wall, red dust, the Glacern thread, hijacked into reams of Google related statistics, all OT and in all of them you have been proven to be holding the wrong end.

.

Evan
10-24-2009, 07:33 AM
Look at recent threads Swine flue, dry wall, red dust, the Glacern thread, hijacked into reams of Google related statistics, all OT and in all of them you have been proven to be holding the wrong end.


???? Wrong end? I conclusively demonstrated the correctness of my position in each of those threads. In particular in the dry wall thread I have shown now it is obviously a scam by the Florida Government et al and there is no trace of doubt remaining. The document I found is no less than a smoking gun.

Of course perhaps you are still "joking". If that is the case then I have underestimated the degree to which my presence here has made you feel inadequate. Sorry about that.

Evan
10-24-2009, 07:52 AM
What is it about Hindi accented British English speakers that makes it worth avoiding all of them?

It makes it easy for me to determine that I don't want to speak to them since I don't know anybody with that particular type of accent. Same applies to those that call with a Dogrib, Ho or Romblomanon accent. However, if they have a Slaishan, Shuswap or Chilcotin accent I might consider speaking to them, or not. A lot of the time I don't answer the phone.

oldtiffie
10-24-2009, 08:03 AM
As both seem driven to "prey" ("pray") on each other - like Praying Mantises - I'd like to know which is "Father" and which is "Mother" in this context:


Sexual cannibalism is common among mantises in captivity, and under some circumstances may also be observed in the field. The female may start feeding by biting off the male’s head (as with any prey), and if mating had begun, the male’s movements may become even more vigorous in its delivery of sperm. Early researchers thought that because copulatory movement is controlled by ganglion in the abdomen, not the head, removal of the male’s head was a reproductive strategy by females to enhance fertilisation while obtaining sustenance.

From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Praying_mantis

I really don't know - and don't care - what the "issue" has been to date but I could put up with being spared knowing about the "issue" that may eventuate from the "mating of mantises" (see above).

Evan
10-24-2009, 08:40 AM
John is the instigator Tiffie. I sometimes respond. Sometimes not.

lazlo
10-24-2009, 09:05 AM
There is an awful herd mentality on both PM and HSM and it is plain for all to witness. Here's an example - in the drywall thread only Evan and I (sorry if I've left anyone out - I didn't read every post) stood up for principles of science and refused to accept the dominant "conventional wisdom" view of things.

That's a funny view on that thread coming from a guy who brags on an Internet forum that he has a high IQ.

Everyone else read that thread as Evan vehemently defending China despite a preponderance of evidence, as usual, and you blindly coming to Evan's aid, as usual.

lazlo
10-24-2009, 09:11 AM
I really don't know - and don't care - what the "issue" has been to date but I could put up with being spared knowing about the "issue"

'Tiff, for the record, when people here refer to "Google Child", they mean Evan, not you.

Ironically, as Evan pointed out, it's blatantly obvious when someone is getting first exposure to a topic from Wikipedia.

lazlo
10-24-2009, 09:23 AM
I conclusively demonstrated the correctness of my position in each of those threads. In particular in the dry wall thread I have shown now it is obviously a scam by the Florida Government et al and there is no trace of doubt remaining.

LOL! Do you really believe that Cliffy?

Have you found the rascal who was going around the Internet altering all the Australian Dust Storm photos?

How'd your Wife make out with the Swine Flu? Did she turn into a zombie, or did she just have a fever for two days like everyone else?

oldtiffie
10-24-2009, 09:31 AM
Lazlo,

perhaps for "issue" read "off-spring".

But never the less, if people want to "get personal" and carry on like chattering Laundry maids or Washer Women with their "dirty linen/laundry" it may be better all round if that were conducted "in private" (email and PM) so that they can get on with it as they wish and spare the rest of us the embarrassment and indecency of it "in public".

Rightly or wrongly, this is the original post:


There was two threads on PM that was very irritating. Don posted about not liking to talk to foreigners that he could not understand. Me and some others pointed out it was his problem and I told him to quit using the phone. Since I didn't say what he wanted to hear he went off on me.

The other post was about questions posted on the site that went astray or did not get the answer the poster wanted. He chimed in with his always venomous posts to me and others.

Well, I have had enough of Don and his acidic remarks and since he is better than anyone else and knows everything I told him what to do with him and his site. I will not go back to his site any more.

I don't know what has happened to him and his site in the past year but he and it has changed drastically in the past year. I would much rather be here and at the Home Machinist than anywhere. It's not the other posters on his site that have changed but Don has gotten more caustic than before for some reason.

I deleted his site from my favorites and will no longer post there which will make Don very happy and me too.

Thank you for allowing me to vent about Don and I hope I can have a good relationship here with all of you.

This is heading the same way as a similar recent post when George admonished some here and locked that thread.

I hope he uses that as sufficient reason and precedent to lock or delete this thread as well.

Carld
10-24-2009, 10:42 AM
I started the thread as an info only about Don but in hind sight everyone knows he is a jerk so pointing it out again was pointless. The thing about Don is when he asks for answers or opinions and others reply he always makes light of them or belittles them. If you don't completely agree with him your in trouble if you reply to his thread. There is no middle ground or black and white with him, it's his way or the highway and I told him what he could do with him and his site. He promptly deleted that post which I knew he would.

I won't go to PM anymore and don't recommend anyone else going there but that is my opinion Tiffle so as far as I am concerned close this thread. It has gotten of topic anyway. Why would George want to delete a thread that is truthful and not vulgar in context? Close maybe, delete no.

Evan
10-24-2009, 10:52 AM
You sure have easy to push buttons Robert. And yes, I really do believe that Google Child. I wasn't refering to tiffie.

Just pointing out how much we have in common with Don over here.

oldtiffie
10-24-2009, 10:59 AM
Thanks Carld.

I don't really have a problem with a "bitch" about a BBS/forum - this one included - provided that it is objective and informative without being unnecessarily derogatory.

You seem to have met those criteria.

Its the unnecessarily "personal" bits that get the thread "off-topic" and hi-jacked for no useful purpose that is a bit annoying.

I have no brief or concern either way with PM as I only "look" infrequently and never post on there.

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 11:01 AM
Just for the record, Evan is the Google Child [ ™ ] and Tiffie is the holder of Tiffiepedia [ ™ ]


.

PixMan
10-24-2009, 11:04 AM
I new to this particular site but not the other. Without getting personal I'll say that my main issue there is that of tolerance...or lack thereof.

To quickly close any discussion of a Chinese-made machine tool for no other reason than it's origin of manufacture seems silly to me. I say let the comments about the demise of our own machine tool manufacturing base fly. It is what it is.

There are still an overwhelming number of good, level-headed people making worthwhile contributions to that site, as there are here. I won't let one personality affect my attitude, I'm just playing by "the rules" wherever I go as you know what "they say" about arguing on the internet. ;)

...absolute power corrupts, absolutely.

- Lord Acton, in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton, 1887

Evan
10-24-2009, 11:08 AM
I knew that would bring John back out of hiding. Thought you were sulking John.

davidfe
10-24-2009, 11:08 AM
I pay for my phone for my own convenience, not to make it convenient for someone else.

Of course this is somewhat OT, since it more relates to cold callers and not inividuals with a foreign accents.

Unsolicited Calls

I don't answer when I do not know the caller on the ID.

Instead, I call back. I ask their name, address and inquire where
the crematory might deliver their relatives remains.

All very respectfully and I seldom get any call again from that number.

HTH

Evan
10-24-2009, 11:14 AM
Here is a hint about unsolicited calls. The machine that places the call listens to how the call is answered. If the answer is a short burst of sound it is a home residence. If the answer is a prolonged series of sounds it is a business and the call is dropped immediately unless it is a business that is targeted. Some of the more sophisticated dialers look for a short burst followed by a silence and a second short burst before the call is passed to telemarketer rep (hello?...............Hello?).

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 11:25 AM
I knew that would bring John back out of hiding. Thought you were sulking John.

No not me, don't sulk over differences of opinion when I know I'm right :D

Been busy playing with a new CNC control, post about it in a couple of weeks if I get the OK.

.

Carld
10-24-2009, 11:30 AM
That's true PixMan and I should have known better than to reply to Dons question because for some reason he always came down on me even though I tried to make reasonable replies even though I disagreed with him at times. Disagreeing is fine but making smart aleck replies or belittling replies serves no real benefit to anyone.

I guess I let him wind me up and I fell into his trap.

JoeFin
10-24-2009, 11:35 AM
From my experiences Don has severely missed the point.

He riled on about not wanting to deal with an English speaking Hindi accent during the course of performing his day to day sales for his used machinery business. From past experiences I refrain from giving out my phone number for very different reasons.

Anyone can develop amnesia after a phone call. Sure a lawyer will tell you verbal agreements during the course of a contract are legally binding but who assumes the burden of proof? Emails however ARE LEGALLY BINDING and have passed the Supreme Court's evidentiary rules long ago.

Sure it could be some thing as simple as an Ebone sale, but why expose yourself to all shinanigans that goes on there?

I gave out my phone number 1 time to some fellow who disputed my shipping all the items. Turns out he was upset over a linear scale with no warrenty implied I sold him. He ended up attempting to illicit my help in scamming the UPS insurance. When I refused to answer his calls and only respond via email he replied with a negative feedback. - Nice Guy!

I also recieve phones calls from internet sellers where they insist upon an email to complete the transaction. Obviously to protect theirself

Carld
10-24-2009, 11:41 AM
The thing about Don's thread about calls he couldn't understand the person was he was complaining about having to talk to those people and was wondering why they called him in the first place. He wanted to know why people called him.

Well, in so many words I told him he was in business and had his number listed and should expect the calls and if he didn't want to be called to remove his number from his contact list. He didn't want to hear that and said, in effect, that was a stupid idea. It just went down hill from there.

The fact is if he don't want to talk to them he should not publish his phone number and that goes for anyone in that situation. I got the impression he just wanted to complain while continuing to take the callers he could not understand.

I told him he needed to contact a psychologist to get an answer to his question and I don't think he liked that reply either.

J Tiers
10-24-2009, 11:45 AM
To quickly close any discussion of a Chinese-made machine tool for no other reason than it's origin of manufacture seems silly to me. I say let the comments about the demise of our own machine tool manufacturing base fly. It is what it is.



Which of course has not ONE thing to do with anything that goes on over at PM....

You have totally misunderstood the policy, or just haven't been paying attention.

if you ask ANYTHING about a 9 x 20, it will be closed immediately The 9 x 20 has no particular utility outside of the newbies workshop.... (Yes I know you CAN use it in blah.. blah...)

if you are asking something about a larger machine, chinese or not, it will stay.

The difference is that one is useful in a commercial shop, the other is not. The point of the site is for generally commercial shops. I've seen all sorts of machines in the 12"+ sizes in commercial shops. Jet, Enco, Grizzly, whatever. Never seen a "Busy bee", but there must be one in a commercial shop North of the border.

More to the point, the site advertisers are PAYING for the fact that it IS a commercial shop site.....

because of that, the posts of any sort which are hobby-oriented, and "how do I do this simple day 1 of shop class operation?" questions will be closed and drop off the page.

You'd get just as closed asking about a US-made "109" lathe as a chinese "cheap hobby machine". Both are useless trash to most commercial shops.

gnm109
10-24-2009, 11:49 AM
In my former professional work, I would often receive calls from people whose English skills were sorely lacking. I would invariably be polite but if I was unable to understand them, I would tell them so. In many cases, I would have to ask them to have someone else call for them to speak to me and explain the issue at hand. Many of them did so.

By remaining calm and polite I got many excellent clients who spoke poor English but whose checks cleared the bank regularly after I coaxed them into my office.

As to Don, well, Don's just being Don. Who really cares how he reacts? It's his liver, kidneys and bladder that he's damaging with all of the excess stomach acid. LOL. I have another ID over there and I will mostly lurk because my machinery, other than the Lincoln and Miller Welders, is either Chi-com or Taiwanese. Sorry Don, it's all I could find. :D

Forgetting Don, there are a lot of posters over there who have good information from which I can benefit and who, from time to time, ask questions in my areas of expertise that I can answer.

You folks need to remember that this is not reality. This is only the internet. This is really just an electronic world that has been created for us. Worrying about what someone says here is a waste of precious life.

Timleech
10-24-2009, 11:58 AM
Here is a hint about unsolicited calls. The machine that places the call listens to how the call is answered. If the answer is a short burst of sound it is a home residence. If the answer is a prolonged series of sounds it is a business and the call is dropped immediately unless it is a business that is targeted. Some of the more sophisticated dialers look for a short burst followed by a silence and a second short burst before the call is passed to telemarketer rep (hello?...............Hello?).

I find saying nothing at all usually leads them to hang up pretty quickly. I do that if I get a call flagged as 'International' or 'Unavailable', 99% of those are unsolicited sales calls.

Tim

Evan
10-24-2009, 12:04 PM
I don't subscribe to any of the special services such as caller ID so I don't have the advantage of knowing where the call is coming from. I already pay far to much for all of the various telecommunications services that I use.

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 12:05 PM
I like the withheld ones,
I clear my throat, answer and say in my poshest voice I can manage [ that's one with less than 7 swear words ] "This telephone will not accept withheld numbers ", then put the phone down, usually then rings again with a known number displayed, usually from some arsehole who you don't want to speak to anyway.
.

Roy Andrews
10-24-2009, 12:08 PM
Joe wrote


and Evan replied



But Joe didn't mention Evan and only Evan rose to defend himself, I find this freeking hilarious.

And Evan if I wasn't here to keep you in check where would the forum go?
Look at recent threads Swine flue, dry wall, red dust, the Glacern thread, hijacked into reams of Google related statistics, all OT and in all of them you have been proven to be holding the wrong end.

.

the Great Louis L'Amour had a saying "You throw a rock into a pack of dogs the one that yelps is the one that got hit":D

i want to start by saying i have a lot of respect for the knowledge and contributions of Evan and John but i find it kind of tedious to wade through all their back and forth bickering and thread hijacking. i have quite an ego to, but have learned over the years that i also have my share of problems and faults. if you two want to have your back and forth pissing contests do it in private. or wont that get you the attention you seek?:confused:

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 12:10 PM
I don't subscribe to any of the special services such as caller ID so I don't have the advantage of knowing where the call is coming from. I already pay far to much for all of the various telecommunications services that I use.

Talktalk in the UK £24.00 a month, unlimited broadband and phone, phone has Unlimited national and International calls for free at anytime. Been on the phone to China for nearly an hour this morning.

I think the broadband is OK, we only use it as a backup as we have twin fibre connections for the main servers, they are billed extra by Virgin.

lazlo
10-24-2009, 12:11 PM
To quickly close any discussion of a Chinese-made machine tool for no other reason than it's origin of manufacture seems silly to me.

But there's a sound financial reason he does that.

PracticalMachinist is a professional machinist forum, paid for by advertisers. So while Don doesn't mind participation by hobbyists, he doesn't want the forums full of posts asking about Harbor Freight machines. For those questions, you should come here, or Chaski, or the Yahoo groups.

That's probably also why Don doen't want a Clausing or a shaper sub-forum -- that's not the machinery that pro shops are using.

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 12:16 PM
the Great Louis L'Amour had a saying "You throw a rock into a pack of dogs the one that yelps is the one that got hit":D

i want to start by saying i have a lot of respect for the knowledge and contributions of Evan and John but i find it kind of tedious to wade through all their back and forth bickering and thread hijacking. i have quite an ego to, but have learned over the years that i also have my share of problems and faults. if you two want to have your back and forth pissing contests do it in private. or wont that get you the attention you seek?:confused:

So if I stop posting about Evan that will stop his incessant Google Child rants with the wrong information ? Swine flue?, Red dust?, etc

Right.........................

.

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 12:20 PM
That's probably also why Don doen't want a Clausing or a shaper sub-forum -- that's not the machinery that pro shops are using.

Hang on isn't Clausing the US arm of Colchester ? they are in many pro shops in the UK, but Don has a South Bend forum which is hobby shop style machines?

The lack of a shaper forum I can understand as not being a pro machine but they are useful for holding the corner of the shop down from curling up :D

.

loose nut
10-24-2009, 12:49 PM
Nobody knows it all. That's why there are many threads that I don't contribute to since there are many aspects of machining that I have never done or even seen. .


Did you guys miss the most important part of this thread.

Evan admitted that he doesn't know everything.:eek: :eek: :eek:

Quick someone call the Vatican and see if hell has frozen, life as we know it has changed forever!

loose nut
10-24-2009, 12:53 PM
The best way to handle unsolicited calls isn't to hang up on them but lay the phone down for an hour and then hang up, it puts them out of action for a while and is a very satisfying if meaningless bit of payback.

They annoy you so you annoy them.

lazlo
10-24-2009, 01:12 PM
That's probably also why Don doen't want a Clausing or a shaper sub-forum -- that's not the machinery that pro shops are using.
Hang on isn't Clausing the US arm of Colchester ?

That's a great idea John! I never thought to ask Don for a Colchester forum. There's a bunch of Clausing 5914's being used in pro shops, and many of the regulars on PM have them...


Don has a South Bend forum which is hobby shop style machines?

That's a legacy of the initial exodus from Chaski. The South Bend forum has nearly twice as many posts as the next nearest brand forum (Bridgeport) :)

psomero
10-24-2009, 01:16 PM
When I get an Indian Help Desk Operator from some 1-800 number I immediately ask to be transfered to an American Help Desk operator

It isn't worth wasting my time attempting to disseminate their accent


i never seem to have a problem understanding what they're saying. they speak perfect english with a heavy british accent.

it just seems to me that they never comprehend the stuff they're reading off the script or anything i try to tell them...

Evan
10-24-2009, 02:11 PM
Quick someone call the Vatican and see if hell has frozen, life as we know it has changed forever!


Don't count on it.

The biggest mistake many on this board make is to confuse what they know with what they believe. Knowledge is a matter of fact. Belief is a matter of opinion. They aren't the same thing.

chrisfournier
10-24-2009, 02:54 PM
I frequent both sites but I have noticed a migration of posters over to HSM.

Quite frankly I enjoy and use both forums and I have to filter out some "noise" on both of them. I am in a position to accept help from most posters due to my level of proficiency...

I will say this: some posters offer information in an attempt to help and to be of service, others offer information in an attempt to solidify a position as purveyors of the definitive truth; which on occasion they are!

The posters who leave their personality out of their posts are gold to me and they never seem to engage in the "I said you said" threads other than to offer their insights. I'll read threads that are not of particular interest to me if I see that they have posted. These guys are the gold standard on our forums.

Now the guys that get into the personality "I'm right you're demented..." contests are very often informative and entertaining but they all seem to cut off their noses to spite their faces in the end. When you make a total boob of yourself making your point, well, the real point driven home is rarely the machining issue. Nonetheless I can't help but have a good laugh at the clever jests.

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 02:54 PM
Don't count on it.

The biggest mistake many on this board make is to confuse what they know with what they believe. Knowledge is a matter of fact. Belief is a matter of opinion. They aren't the same thing.

So do you believe in knowledge ?

MrSleepy
10-24-2009, 03:13 PM
quote .."Nonetheless I can't help but have a good laugh at the clever jests."

And thats this difference between here and PM...

EW and JS have reached an equilibrium where they sink to a certain level ,then remain there with intelligence and wit..

Sometimes they hijack threads...and maybe they should have there own sticky to play together.

But they always provide insights that make this one of the places to be..

ON PM recently I was shocked with the Sodick thread..

Rob

Carld
10-24-2009, 03:28 PM
Yes that's a big difference here. While there is some bantering back and forth it seldom turns into a verbal put down that Don uses on his PM site.

I rather enjoy Evan and John when they start to getting it on.;) :D

dp
10-24-2009, 03:30 PM
It makes it easy for me to determine that I don't want to speak to them since I don't know anybody with that particular type of accent. Same applies to those that call with a Dogrib, Ho or Romblomanon accent. However, if they have a Slaishan, Shuswap or Chilcotin accent I might consider speaking to them, or not. A lot of the time I don't answer the phone.

I'm a sucker for island nation accents. If some sales babe with a thick Tristan da Cunha accent calls me with a bocce ball pitch, she's got a sale.

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 03:33 PM
I'm a sucker for island nation accents. If some sales babe with a thick Tristan da Cunha accent calls me with a bocce ball pitch, she's got a sale.

Hey Dennis, I'm from an island, what do you want to buy ? :D

.

dp
10-24-2009, 03:41 PM
That's a funny view on that thread coming from a guy who brags on an Internet forum that he has a high IQ.

That wasn't a brag, just an experience in life. I doubt I still have it :). I doubt in fact that I ever did. My point was it was a consequence of having spent the previous four years reading the complete encyclopedia several times.


Everyone else read that thread as Evan vehemently defending China despite a preponderance of evidence, as usual, and you blindly coming to Evan's aid, as usual.

You and I had this conversation in a PM. He and I upheld a common ideal. Neither of us defended the other, neither of us defended China. We defended principles of science and law. China actually had no important role in the pursuit of good science. It was always about science and chemistry.

And in case you missed it, Evan has no need for third-party defense. Your position seems to be if any two people agree on a principle they are in a mutual defense mode. Most of us left that degree of immature rationalizing behind in High School.

Carld
10-24-2009, 03:41 PM
:D John, you don't have the quality of sound in your voice to do it. When I was a teenager my best friend had a cousin from South Carolina and she had a voice that would make you want to marry her instantly.

I told him to have her call me any time she felt like talking and sometimes she did. God, I loved her voice and she was very pleasing to the eye as well. I haven't seen her for years and you know what time does :eek: but I bet her voice is just as good as ever. :D Man I love them Southern Girls and their "Hi Ya'll", s**t, I just melt on the spot.

dp
10-24-2009, 03:42 PM
Hey Dennis, I'm from an island, what do you want to buy ? :D

.

I'd like a set of Quorn castings, please :)

Evan
10-24-2009, 04:22 PM
if you two want to have your back and forth pissing contests do it in private. or wont that get you the attention you seek?


I would rather they not start. Since that isn't by my choice you will have to talk to sombody else.

I have a small test for John since you have brought this up several times yet again. In your infinite wisdom regarding Australian dust can you identify the source for the orange colouration in the astrophoto? It's an entirely unretouched image.

If Robert has some insight he is welcome to contribute.

http://ixian.ca/pics6/skyimage.jpg

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 04:33 PM
I would rather they not start. Since that isn't by my choice you will have to talk to sombody else.

I have a small test for John since you have brought this up several times yet again. In your infinite wisdom regarding Australian dust can you identify the source for the orange colouration in the astrophoto? It's an entirely unretouched image.

If Robert has some insight he is welcome to contribute.

http://ixian.ca/pics6/skyimage.jpg

No................................................ .................


.

philbur
10-24-2009, 06:35 PM
I thought IQ and knowledge where not the same thing.

Phil:)


That wasn't a brag, just an experience in life. I doubt I still have it :). I doubt in fact that I ever did. My point was it was a consequence of having spent the previous four years reading the complete encyclopedia several times.

J Tiers
10-24-2009, 06:50 PM
The Southbend forum is actually a more recent introduction, I think,

But, An S-B is not a guarantee of "hobby" anyway. Why wouldn't they be used in a commercial or maintenance shop?

A heavy 10 is a perfectly good small machine, same size as some Regals, and in any case, Southbend made plenty of much larger machines....

Model shop at old work had a CNC bridgy, and a 13" short bed small spindle Southbend. They got the job done.

And they seem to have been just behind Atlas in quantity.

beanbag
10-24-2009, 06:58 PM
John is the instigator Tiffie. I sometimes respond. Sometimes not.

He seems to enjoy poking at you more than you enjoy poking back

dp
10-24-2009, 07:03 PM
I thought IQ and knowledge where not the same thing.

Phil:)

IQ tests at that time were intended to reveal your ability to learn and retain. Didn't seem to matter if you actually knew anything or not. Knowledge is what you have actually learned. It is entirely possible to have a very high IQ but no knowledge of specific things. Einstein likely had a high IQ but no idea how to silkscreen Harley t-shirts, for example.

Evaluating IQ test results is iffy stuff. One has to take into consideration cultural differences, for example. In some parts of the world even the most intelligent people have never seen an elevator or know how they work or why they exist.

beanbag
10-24-2009, 07:07 PM
That's a funny view on that thread coming from a guy who brags on an Internet forum that he has a high IQ.

Everyone else read that thread as Evan vehemently defending China despite a preponderance of evidence, as usual, and you blindly coming to Evan's aid, as usual.

From the bits of thread I read, it seemed to me that Evan was unconvinced that the correlation between houses with problematic drywall and corroded pipes PROVED that the drywall itself was causing problems. And then he pointed out some studies as flawed. If there wasn't so much flaming in that thread, then I would say this was a reasonable skeptical viewpoint to take.

lazlo
10-24-2009, 07:07 PM
The Southbend forum is actually a more recent introduction, I think

I just checked, and the first post was from Russ Kepler, February 11, 2004.


A heavy 10 is a perfectly good small machine, same size as some Regals, and in any case, Southbend made plenty of much larger machines...

Agreed, although the 5914 is a considerably heavier, more rigid, and more modern lathe than the Heavy 10. Also agree with the LeBlonde Regal comment, but there's not a LeBlonde forum either, probably for the same reason.

lazlo
10-24-2009, 07:13 PM
From the bits of thread I read, it seemed to me that Evan was unconvinced that the correlation between houses with problematic drywall and corroded pipes PROVED that the drywall itself was causing problems.

1. Put a piece of Chinese drywall in a jar with a piece of copper.
2. Copper turns black, and corrodes

1. Put a piece of drywall made from any other vendor on Earth in a jar with a piece of copper.
2. Copper doesn't corrode.

Results confirmed by the EPA, the Florida DOH, many independent testing labs, the builder in question (Lennar), and the insurance industry.

Virtually nobody here cares about Chinese Drywall, but as we all know, Evan will steadfastly maintain an opinion like an inbred pitbull on a tire-swing...

beanbag
10-24-2009, 07:16 PM
There was two threads on PM that was very irritating. Don posted about not liking to talk to foreigners that he could not understand. Me and some others pointed out it was his problem and I told him to quit using the phone. Since I didn't say what he wanted to hear he went off on me.


Is there such a thing as a paid position for "Internet Referee"? :)

Anyways, it seems that he doesn't really need you (since business is supposedly fine) and therefore he can be an ass towards you. Sucks, but there are a lot of people like that. You did the right thing by moving on.

beanbag
10-24-2009, 07:25 PM
1. Put a piece of Chinese drywall in a jar with a piece of copper.
2. Copper turns black, and corrodes

1. Put a piece of drywall made from any other vendor on Earth in a jar with a piece of copper.
2. Copper doesn't corrode.

Results confirmed by the EPA, the Florida DOH, many independent testing labs, the builder in question (Lennar), and the insurance industry.

Virtually nobody here cares about Chinese Drywall, but as we all know, Evan will steadfastly maintain an opinion like an inbred pitbull on a tire-swing...

OK, before Evan replies to this, I'll say that I hope you guys worked this issue out in that other thread.....
But then again, I remember pictures of jars being posted multiple times...
which seems to imply that a point needed to be made repeatedly, which means the issue didn't get worked out ... :(

Evan
10-24-2009, 07:31 PM
1. Put a piece of Chinese drywall in a jar with a piece of copper.
2. Copper turns black, and corrodes

1. Put a piece of drywall made from any other vendor on Earth in a jar with a piece of copper.
2. Copper doesn't corrode.
Results confirmed by the EPA, the Florida DOH, many independent testing labs, the builder in question (Lennar), and the insurance industry.


That has not been confirmed at all by anybody according to the released results. All that you can see and all that has been reported is that it doesn't turn black. Copper attacked by acid stays bright at first. The test performed by the Florida Dept of Health shows that the US made drywall has up to three times the corrosive compounds as the Chinese drywall. Also, if you missed the footnote on the analysis the investigator actually cheated and added an extra significant digit to the test result that his equipment couldn't reliably produce according to another note on the same document. This was so he didn't have to mark the Chinese sample as having zero of a particular substance.

You have a very strange idea of what constitutes evidence. It's much the same as the belief that the ornate writing on the paper hanging on the wall is somehow evidence of knowledge.

JoeFin
10-24-2009, 07:34 PM
Weren't we talking about PM here..............

Evan
10-24-2009, 07:37 PM
We were until John sidetracked in post #6.

beanbag
10-24-2009, 07:41 PM
OK, before Evan replies to this.....


Damn, too late

Evan
10-24-2009, 07:47 PM
No way am I going to sit by and let anyone spread unfounded and unsubstantiated BS on the board regardless of the subject. What I am defending is Science and how Science must be practiced in order to be meaningful. Anybody that thinks I am defending any particular country is sadly mistaken. I don't give a sh1t about countries and borders except when and if they cause me inconvenience.

JoeFin
10-24-2009, 07:50 PM
We were until John sidetracked in post #6.

Seems to me we do a good deal of bickering here amongst ourselves as well. Perhaps we don't have quite the high moral ground we thought we did to be commenting/condemming others.

As long as we keep the demeaning, condemnation, belittleing, and name calling to a minimum, AND at the end of the thread bygones can be bygones, then perhaps HSM could set an example PM could learn by

Just Sayin.....

dp
10-24-2009, 07:54 PM
No way am I going to sit by and let anyone spread unfounded and unsubstantiated BS on the board regardless of the subject. What I am defending is Science and how Science must be practiced in order to be meaningful. Anybody that thinks I am defending any particular country is sadly mistaken. I don't give a sh1t about countries and borders except when and if they cause me inconvenience.

Holy cr@p, batman! Did Lazlo pm you with my last reply to his PM? That's pretty much verbatim what I wrote.

Evan
10-24-2009, 08:02 PM
No. I just wrote that because it is how I think.

dp
10-24-2009, 08:05 PM
No. I just wrote that because it is how I think.

Same here - I don't think he's going to believe it though :)

Evan
10-24-2009, 08:10 PM
He is free to believe what he likes. It doesn't make it knowledge though.

John Stevenson
10-24-2009, 08:13 PM
It doesn't make it knowledge though.

Must be belief then ?

.

Evan
10-24-2009, 08:21 PM
Are you trying to make a point John?

Carld
10-24-2009, 08:40 PM
Ok, I'll get suckered into this drywall fiasco. With the reputation and history the Chinese have for exporting poisonous materials I have a hard time believing the drywall is safe. That is my opinion and I firmly believe it until proven beyond a doubt.

It's like the boy that cried wolf one to many times. Tests say it's safe and tests say it's not. This is a machinist site, not a construction workers site or building material site.

Just out of curiosity I would like to know the truth but who to believe. Everyone espousing whether it's dangerous or not dangerous don't have first hand experience or so it seems.

On the other hand, what difference does it make unless the Chinese drywall is in your home. Personally I think it's time to agree to disagree and move on to some other important rant, I mean thread.

EDIT: Oh, and who's to say the American drywall is not toxic.

tattoomike68
10-24-2009, 09:13 PM
Ok, I'll get suckered into this drywall fiasco. With the reputation and history the Chinese have for exporting poisonous materials I have a hard time believing the drywall is safe. That is my opinion and I firmly believe it until proven beyond a doubt.

It's like the boy that cried wolf one to many times. Tests say it's safe and tests say it's not. This is a machinist site, not a construction workers site or building material site.

Just out of curiosity I would like to know the truth but who to believe. Everyone espousing whether it's dangerous or not dangerous don't have first hand experience or so it seems.

On the other hand, what difference does it make unless the Chinese drywall is in your home. Personally I think it's time to agree to disagree and move on to some other important rant, I mean thread.

EDIT: Oh, and who's to say the American drywall is not toxic.

I hire mexicans to do drywall and if its toxic thats just too damn bad.

lazlo
10-24-2009, 09:23 PM
With the reputation and history the Chinese have for exporting poisonous materials I have a hard time believing the drywall is safe.

That's the amusing part -- the drywall thread started it's downward spiral when Evan claimed that there's no proof that melamine was toxic either.

Despite thousands of pets and Chinese babies dying from melamine in their baby formula...

How very scientific :rolleyes:

oldtiffie
10-24-2009, 09:38 PM
This is another case of "high-jacking" that is completely unrelated to the topic in/by the OP.

For those that have either forgotten or choose to ignore it, here is the OP:


There was two threads on PM that was very irritating. Don posted about not liking to talk to foreigners that he could not understand. Me and some others pointed out it was his problem and I told him to quit using the phone. Since I didn't say what he wanted to hear he went off on me.

The other post was about questions posted on the site that went astray or did not get the answer the poster wanted. He chimed in with his always venomous posts to me and others.

Well, I have had enough of Don and his acidic remarks and since he is better than anyone else and knows everything I told him what to do with him and his site. I will not go back to his site any more.

I don't know what has happened to him and his site in the past year but he and it has changed drastically in the past year. I would much rather be here and at the Home Machinist than anywhere. It's not the other posters on his site that have changed but Don has gotten more caustic than before for some reason.

I deleted his site from my favorites and will no longer post there which will make Don very happy and me too.

Thank you for allowing me to vent about Don and I hope I can have a good relationship here with all of you.

JoeFin encapsulated it nicely but he too got ignored as those who were all too anxious to "get in for their licks" just pressed on regardless in their selfish childish "slagging" - as they do.


Seems to me we do a good deal of bickering here amongst ourselves as well. Perhaps we don't have quite the high moral ground we thought we did to be commenting/condemming others.

As long as we keep the demeaning, condemnation, belittleing, and name calling to a minimum, AND at the end of the thread bygones can be bygones, then perhaps HSM could set an example PM could learn by

Just Sayin.....

Many thanks Joe for the good intent that was doomed to be ignored.

Some here could do with a session as "Brat Camp".
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brat_Camp

Carld
10-24-2009, 09:41 PM
Hi Tiff, well, I figured if I can't beat 'em I'll join 'em. ;) It's ok though because I made my point long ago and it was totally ignored in post 57 on page 6.

dp
10-24-2009, 09:49 PM
That's the amusing part -- the drywall thread started it's downward spiral when Evan claimed that there's no proof that melamine was toxic either.

Despite thousands of pets and Chinese babies dying from melamine in their baby formula...

How very scientific :rolleyes:

Pets and babies were dying but I've not found any site that specifically identifies melamine as the cause. In fact I found a number of sites that suggest melamine is not normally toxic though it can lead to kidney stones. One site speaking of animal deaths could not understand how melamine could be the killer. All sites I visited continue to use weasel words just as is the case with the Chinese drywall. That doesn't mean there's not a site out there that has tied the ribbons on this - but if it's there I've not found it.

oldtiffie
10-24-2009, 09:52 PM
[Edit]

Insert Carld's post:


Hi Tiff, well, I figured if I can't beat 'em I'll join 'em. ;) It's ok though because I made my point long ago and it was totally ignored in post 57 on page 6.
[End edit]


Well, I'm not so sure Carld.

The way its going some are going to be - willingly or otherwise - "dog-knotted" (as they should be). That way they'd have the best of all worlds as they'd get it coming and going (as it were).

I'd have great pleasure in tipping the bucket of cold water over 'em - or the fire hose!!!.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canine_tying#Tying

JoeFin
10-24-2009, 09:58 PM
Pets and babies were dying but I've not found any site that specifically identifies melamine as the cause.

This was touted as scientific study



Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigation Vol. 19 Issue 6, 616-624
Assessment of melamine and cyanuric acid toxicity in cats
Birgit Puschner1, Robert H. Poppenga, Linda J. Lowenstine, Michael S. Filigenzi and Patricia A. Pesavento

Correspondence: 1Corresponding Author: Birgit Puschner, California Animal Health and Food Safety Laboratory System, Toxicology Laboratory, University of California, West Health Science Drive, Davis, CA, e-mail: bpuschner@ucdavis.edu


The major pet food recall associated with acute renal failure in dogs and cats focused initially on melamine as the suspect toxicant. In the course of the investigation, cyanuric acid was identified in addition to melamine in the offending food. The purpose of this study was to characterize the toxicity potential of melamine, cyanuric acid, and a combination of melamine and cyanuric acid in cats. In this pilot study, melamine was added to the diet of 2 cats at 0.5% and 1%, respectively. Cyanuric acid was added to the diet of 1 cat at increasing doses of 0.2%, 0.5%, and 1% over the course of 10 days. Melamine and cyanuric acid were administered together at 0%, 0.2%, 0.5%, and 1% to 1 cat per dose group. No effect on renal function was observed in cats fed with melamine or cyanuric acid alone. Cats dosed with a combination were euthanized at 48 hours after dosing because of acute renal failure. Urine and touch impressions of kidneys from all cats dosed with the combination revealed the presence of fan-shaped, birefringent crystals. Histopathologic findings were limited to the kidneys and included crystals primarily within tubules of the distal nephron, severe renal interstitial edema, and hemorrhage at the corticomedullary junction. The kidneys contained estimated melamine concentrations of 496 to 734 mg/kg wet weight and estimated cyanuric acid concentrations of 487 to 690 mg/kg wet weight. The results demonstrate that the combination of melamine and cyanuric acid is responsible for acute renal failure in cats.

J Tiers
10-24-2009, 10:10 PM
I just checked, and the first post was from Russ Kepler, February 11, 2004.



Agreed, although the 5914 is a considerably heavier, more rigid, and more modern lathe than the Heavy 10. Also agree with the LeBlonde Regal comment, but there's not a LeBlonde forum either, probably for the same reason.

Where is the start of the SB sub-forum relative to PM entirely?

BOTH SB and Leblond made bigger machines, but there are probably 5 times as many SB as LeBlond.... 5 times as many still in commercial/maintenance shops, and likely 25 x more in home shops.

Anyhow, PM is what it is, and it needs to be. "Milacron" keeps it from becoming a romper room with intermixed whining, vitriolic attacks, debating contest rule reviews, and so forth.

If I want certain questions answered, I would never even consider asking here, I ask there. For other questions it's the reverse.

dp
10-24-2009, 10:17 PM
This was touted as scientific study

I wonder what the relative amounts of melamine and cyanuric acid was in the pet food. This suggests that melamine alone is non-toxic but in combination with another agent the two of them can kill cats. I wonder if it can also kill dogs.

philbur
10-24-2009, 10:26 PM
Exactly, so I don't understand why your high IQ was a "consequence of spent four years reading the complete encyclopedia several times".

Phil:)


IQ tests at that time were intended to reveal your ability to learn and retain. Didn't seem to matter if you actually knew anything or not. Knowledge is what you have actually learned. It is entirely possible to have a very high IQ but no knowledge of specific things. Einstein likely had a high IQ but no idea how to silkscreen Harley t-shirts, for example.

Evaluating IQ test results is iffy stuff. One has to take into consideration cultural differences, for example. In some parts of the world even the most intelligent people have never seen an elevator or know how they work or why they exist.

JoeFin
10-24-2009, 10:27 PM
I wonder what the relative amounts of melamine and cyanuric acid was in the pet food. This suggests that melamine alone is non-toxic but in combination with another agent the two of them can kill cats. I wonder if it can also kill dogs.

I've often wondered if that is why i had to have my Gallbladder removed. It happened about 6 months prior to the pet food scare and I was working out at the gym and drinking all that Hi-Protein junk

Evan
10-24-2009, 10:35 PM
That's the amusing part -- the drywall thread started it's downward spiral when Evan claimed that there's no proof that melamine was toxic either.


You are lying Robert. I never said that.

pressurerelief
10-24-2009, 10:41 PM
Carld

If you really want to get Don up from the wrong side of the bed refer to him as "Dick" and not Don. I have witnessed several posters over the years do this and it ruffles his feathers. Not that it might have been intentional.

I read the PM thread you referred to and that is the first time I have seen the "Moderator" add "Shut TFU" to a thread. I do have to agree with the one poster that it is simply a rant and no value was ever to come of it as far as any solution.

P/R

dp
10-24-2009, 10:54 PM
Carld

I read the PM thread you referred to and that is the first time I have seen the "Moderator" add "Shut TFU" to a thread. I do have to agree with the one poster that it is simply a rant and no value was ever to come of it as far as any solution.

P/R

That is very mild compared to another moderator there. Extremely mild, in fact.

J Tiers
10-25-2009, 12:03 AM
Dunno. I AM a moderator there, and I haven't had to do any nasty stuff.

Apparently VFDs and RPCs are not controversial.....

"Milacron" wanted me to moderate the "Manufacturing in America and Europe" subforum..... YOWZA :eek:

I wa puzzled how to answer without basically saying "NFW nohow!". So I said, truthfully, that I usually stayed away from that area........ which I do, and which is why there truly IS NFW I'd want to moderate it.

I've dumped, I think maybe two posts/threads in a couple years. Both cases were basically due to "I ain't reading no stinkin rules"...... So I closed them. Got a rant in return, but I deleted that too. Life's short, who needs that crap?

I've moved a few.

Jim Shaper
10-25-2009, 12:57 AM
No way am I going to sit by and let anyone spread unfounded and unsubstantiated BS on the board regardless of the subject. What I am defending is Science and how Science must be practiced in order to be meaningful.

Yet you think people evolved from a mud puddle after a star exploded (how did the star get there, and what caused it to explode?). Yeah, that's scientific. :rolleyes:

Evan
10-25-2009, 01:01 AM
So I am going to guess you have a better explanation that involves magic, right?

dp
10-25-2009, 02:03 AM
Exactly, so I don't understand why your high IQ was a "consequence of spent four years reading the complete encyclopedia several times".

Phil:)

Perhaps the test was flawed in that it was not designed to test bookworms. I don't know - it's all speculation on my part. It did lead to subsequent testing for quite a long time and it was not particularly pleasant as they accused me of cheating the original tests and wanted to know how I did it. They left me alone finally after I aced the rest of their stupid tests.

Maybe I really do have a very high IQ. It would not surprise my family (they nicknamed me "the brain") but it's hard to know from the inside looking out. I was never taught the secret handshake :)

dp
10-25-2009, 02:04 AM
Yet you think people evolved from a mud puddle after a star exploded (how did the star get there, and what caused it to explode?). Yeah, that's scientific. :rolleyes:

What would keep that from being possible?

Jim Shaper
10-25-2009, 02:13 AM
All of it defies what Evan would consider scientific laws. Your theory of order coming from chaos is what I would consider voodoo.


I don't have an answer. I choose to not address the question as there isn't any proof of what came first (chicken, egg, or amoeba). I can say with 100% certainty that macro evolution is NOT how we got here as it hasn't been observed either (not in fossil, nor in real-time). Life has never been proven to come from non-life, so right there the theory fails as a non-starter.

Somehow "scientific" minds overlook the obvious, and preach it as truth.

oldtiffie
10-25-2009, 02:17 AM
Dunno. I AM a moderator there, and I haven't had to do any nasty stuff.

Apparently VFDs and RPCs are not controversial.....

"Milacron" wanted me to moderate the "Manufacturing in America and Europe" subforum..... YOWZA :eek:

I wa puzzled how to answer without basically saying "NFW nohow!". So I said, truthfully, that I usually stayed away from that area........ which I do, and which is why there truly IS NFW I'd want to moderate it.

I've dumped, I think maybe two posts/threads in a couple years. Both cases were basically due to "I ain't reading no stinkin rules"...... So I closed them. Got a rant in return, but I deleted that too. Life's short, who needs that crap?

I've moved a few.

Wow JT - you and John Stevenson as Moderators on/at PM!!.

You sure are exulted people!!!

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

You must be "right up there" talking to and for "God".

You and John must be Arch-Bishops at least - probably Cardinals - or Saints!!!

Is Don at PM really God or is he just the Pope - or is he both?

What are your "prospects"?

Do we of the "great unwashed" have to bathe to approval and take off our shoes, bow in humility and burn incense and myrrh in your presence?

My voice is not quite up to doing the "Hallelujah Chorus" justice - will the "Grand March" (Aida) and the "March of the (Hebrew??) Slaves" do for starters?

Does Don really have the PM "Rules" (aka "Ten Commandments") cut in two stone tablets ands kept in a Tabernacle guarded by Angels (aka Moderators)?

I can appreciate why they come down from their ethereal heights on the cloud that rest of us must labour under - just to "bless" us.

Now why do you think that I can feel a cross on my shoulder and that I am on the way via the stations of the cross via (the) Via Dolorosa or Way of Sorrows - to Calvary??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stations_of_the_Cross

Oh dear - I think that I meant that the "Stations of the Crass" is more "me" - don't you think?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stations_of_the_Crass

Oh well - back to the "Pit" and the "Inferno" - again!!! I am running around all nine damned circles - not just one!!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inferno_(Dante)

Will it help if I genuflect when logging on to PM?

Must I pass through Purgatory and Limbo (me? a lost soul???) - again.

Do they give "free sins" or must I pay my way (plenary indulgence/s)??
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plenary_indulgence

Can I use a 666 as a pass-word at PM?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_the_Beast

Hmmm - I rather thought not.

Oh well.

dp
10-25-2009, 02:33 AM
Wow JT - you and John Stevenson as Moderators on/at PM!!.

You sure are exulted people!!!

Follow the bouncing ball:

Jerry comes from Jerold which comes from Herold which is from Har'el -> which means "mountain of God" in Hebrew.

And it also explains the Chaski bbs.

dp
10-25-2009, 02:46 AM
Somehow "scientific" minds overlook the obvious, and preach it as truth.

I think that is not a characteristic unique to scientists.

oldtiffie
10-25-2009, 03:05 AM
We - me anyway - are a bit "backward" here in this part of OZ.

"Jerry" was either:
- a nick-name for a German; and
- the "chamber pot" (under the bed) - the sounds that issued there from were "discordant" at best and certainly not what you'd expect at a Conservatorium by way of "Chamber Music".

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

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

"John" (as in Stevenson) has other connotations:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special%3ASearch&search=the+john

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_is_the_term_john_used_for_toilet

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/574/why-do-we-call-it-the-john

Do "Gerry Builders" build "Johns" too??

Perhaps us mere mortals are not "privy" to such things - and just as well too!!!

All things in moderation - Moderators at PM 'n' all.

My apologies to Evan. My guess is that this is one time (the only time??) that he was and does not mind being left "out in the cold" (as it were).

Evan
10-25-2009, 03:20 AM
Your theory of order coming from chaos is what I would consider voodoo.


That only applies to systems as a whole. Try pouring a bunch of marbles into a sloping tray. They will automatically arrange themselves in an ordered array of nearest neighbours. Variations in entropy occur depending on local energy inputs. The entropy of a local region may be reversed at the expense of the entire system. This is normal, very ordinary and extremely common.


I can say with 100% certainty that macro evolution is NOT how we got here as it hasn't been observed either (not in fossil, nor in real-time). Life has never been proven to come from non-life, so right there the theory fails as a non-starter.



We have prima facie evidence that it happens. We are here. Any other explanation merely begs the question by removing it a step.

Stir together the basic elements that we are composed from in a sealed container. Apply an electric arc at intermittent intervals. Within a few days the non living elements will have combined to form all of the organic compounds called amino acids that are required to make a living cell.

Mix and match the conditions, ratios and quantities every minute or two for half a billion years and then see what is possible. Even lotteries with long odds are usually won by somebody.
Take a billion mud puddles with each of them full of the chemicals of life and that gives the opportunity to try 720,000,000,000,000,000,000 possibilities. In reality each puddle can try far more than that.

However, that is a simplistic and very like wrong and unnecessary explanation. Much more likely is that the basic elements will be attracted to self arrange in patterns that automatically favour the emergence of self replication. This isn't supposition. we have the evidence down to the level of the most common sort of organized but non replicating parasite, the virus.

All it takes is an uneven distribution of energy in the universe and that is a self evident existing condition.

Evan
10-25-2009, 03:23 AM
My apologies to Evan. My guess is that this is one time (the only time??) that he was and does not mind being left "out in the cold" (as it were).


Me moderate? Not in this life or any other.

John Stevenson
10-25-2009, 07:56 AM
Moderating on PM is an easy job, because I chose a subject of interest, actually thinking about it Don emailed me and asked, I go there everyday and read the posts.

If they are on on topic and relevant which 99% are I do nothing,
Very occasionally it develops into a heated argument but very rarely as none of the posters has a wish to be right 100% of the time and prove it, just life I guess, different subject, different posters, who knows ?

If it develops into a slanging match that doesn't expire after 5 or 6 posts, I delete the posts that started it, that usually passes the message play nice, if it doesn't stop I delete the post, no messing.

I have had to do this about 4 or 5 times, all related to a poster who has been banned from about 5 or 6 user names.

I can place users on moderation, never had to do it, I can ban them and their ISP if needed, used twice.

I don't post much as to be honest with this being more of a pro group they are using software I have never seen or could afford but I can follow the threads which is all a moderator has to do.

Do I allow posts on hobby style software? sure because these guys are often one man home shops, doesn't matter to me, all that matters is everyone plays nice.

Does Don intervene ? no, he just leaves it to run it's own way, I hardly post on general preferring to be here.

I also moderate on 3 or 4 Yahoo groups, again play nice and no problems.

I used to moderate on Chaski but left as I am not comfortable in the way it runs now. Marty ran it very well and we were good friends, lets just say Harold on Chaski and Evan would make good bed partners.

.

Evan
10-25-2009, 09:00 AM
I used to moderate on Chaski but left as I am not comfortable in the way it runs now. Marty ran it very well and we were good friends, lets just say Harold on Chaski and Evan would make good bed partners.




It's starting to make more sense now. It's that minor god complex you have going on. That explains the compulsive need to belittle others. It's the only way you have to make yourself feel superior.

The only trouble is that it never really works, does it John? Your Sig is a perfect example. Inside you somehow wish it were real. I was going to write "deep inside" but then realized that would be an oxymoron for somebody as shallow as you.

John Stevenson
10-25-2009, 09:35 AM
It's starting to make more sense now. It's that minor god complex you have going on.

Of course it's a minor god complex, I have to agree with you there 100%, I can never get promoted whilst you are still God.



I was going to write "deep inside" but then realized that would be an oxymoron for somebody as shallow as you.

Is an oxymoron someone who can't gas weld ?

.

Rustybolt
10-25-2009, 11:15 AM
I'm going to go make popcorn. Anybody want any?

loose nut
10-25-2009, 11:34 AM
I'll take some, you got any beer, reading this is thirsty work

Carld
10-25-2009, 11:36 AM
You think your having trouble, well I started the thread on an entirely different topic and look at what a mess it has turned into. :rolleyes:

loose nut
10-25-2009, 11:47 AM
You think it's bad for you, I haven't had a beer since 1985 now look what they have done to me.

Evan
10-25-2009, 11:54 AM
Of course it's a minor god complex, I have to agree with you there 100%, I can never get promoted whilst you are still God.


Undoubtedly completely without realizing it, you have proven my off the cuff analysis correct.

Sad.

Your Old Dog
10-25-2009, 11:54 AM
If I couldn't get on this site for free, I'd pay good money to watch the games people play :D It's a bit like CB radio but without all the cussing. Seems like everyone is Conan the Barbarian when they pick up a microphone or tickle a keyboard.

I've never felt myself to be a very bright bulb but I enjoy being folks who are. I live in the hopes that some knowledge rubs off on me. I worked with a tv reporter (Ray Finch) whom I believe to be the brightest person I've ever known. I'd pick aruguments with him just to see what big words he'd throw at me that I'd never heard before. I'd look up the obscure words in a dictionary and find out he had used them in the precise manner for which they were intended.

You guys go on and verbally duke it out, it makes great entertainment for me to watch you match wits as long as it don't get raw. :D

I've said it before, I'll say it again. To me this place is like a McDonalds Restaurant about 10AM in the morning when all the retiree's show up to kibitz with one another! Great entertainment with like minded people. John, you're up.

J Tiers
10-25-2009, 12:06 PM
Follow the bouncing ball:

Jerry comes from Jerold which comes from Herold which is from Har'el -> which means "mountain of God" in Hebrew.

And it also explains the Chaski bbs.

Actually, I believe the derivation is an old Norse language, in which it is something on the order of "spear carrier". "spear carrier" is not "terribly complimentary" to say the least......

There may be a rather large step from Herold to Har'el, other than the sound of it.

There are some words in english which are perfectly fine words but are rather rude in Croatian..... And some fine US english words and even names which would be quite rude in UK english.

To a decent frenchman, english is nothing but the hissing of snakes in its sound. Which could be appropriate, considering the english speaking world and it's behavior.

Sound ain't everything.

Evan
10-25-2009, 12:06 PM
Sorry to disappoint anybody but I have had my say. I am really quite serious. It's not a game.

J Tiers
10-25-2009, 12:13 PM
Wow JT - you and John Stevenson as Moderators on/at PM!!.

You sure are exulted people!!!


I was not particularly "exulted" to be chosen... I simply decided it disn't look too hard and why not?


exult [ɪgˈzʌlt]
vb (intr)
1. to be joyful or jubilant, esp because of triumph or success; rejoice

Sorry, couldn't resist ;)

lazlo
10-25-2009, 12:37 PM
That's the amusing part -- the drywall thread started it's downward spiral when Evan claimed that there's no proof that melamine was toxic either.You are lying Robert. I never said that.



http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u15/rtgeorge_album/nutter.gif


http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/showpost.php?p=477790&postcount=34


Evan, if you recall, you went through the same denial about the Chinese spiking pet food with melamine.

As for melamine that still hasn't been proven to be the cause of the pet health problems. They have shifted away from that as a direct cause and are now invoking a more complex and even less likely interaction.

lazlo
10-25-2009, 12:42 PM
I found a number of sites that suggest melamine is not normally toxic though it can lead to kidney stones.

The pets worldwide, and the Chinese babies, died from kidney stones. Think about that for a second -- the melamine the Chinese were using is waste ash from coal refining, and it's so toxic that it causes kidney stones in infants.

By the way, the spiked infant formula was sold only in China, and only Chinese infants died.

But Evan is a Chinese appologist, and this is just another Western conspiracy to disparage Communist China, which is really a peaceful country with good intention that treats their citizens well :rolleyes:

Chinese dairy giant recalls milk powder after baby death (http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/12/china)


Batch of formula tainted with melamine discovered after hospitals report 59 cases of kidney stones in infants.

Why was melamine added into milk and powdered infant formula?

In China, where adulteration has occurred, water has been added to raw milk to increase its volume. As a result of this dilution the milk has a lower protein concentration. Companies using the milk for further production (e.g. of powdered infant formula) normally check the protein level through a test measuring nitrogen content. The addition of melamine increases the nitrogen content of the milk and therefore its apparent protein content.

Addition of melamine into food is not approved by the FAO/WHO Codex Alimentarius (food standard commission), or by any national authorities.

lazlo
10-25-2009, 12:52 PM
My apologies to Evan. My guess is that this is one time (the only time??) that he was and does not mind being left "out in the cold" (as it were).

Evan used to participate on PracticalMachinist, but left because he wasn't an Alpha there.

DFMiller
10-25-2009, 01:10 PM
This is getting good :-)
My CNC is still broke and I am waiting for parts.
Now I have something to read. ;-)
Better than painting my FIL's pink bathroom

pressurerelief
10-25-2009, 01:28 PM
I will throw out the first of the PM Commandments between games here.

#1. We will not discuss Machinery originating in Mainland China or it's value versus rebuilding Old American Iron.

P/R

dp
10-25-2009, 02:00 PM
The pets worldwide, and the Chinese babies, died from kidney stones. Think about that for a second -- the melamine the Chinese were using is waste ash from coal refining, and it's so toxic that it causes kidney stones in infants.

Are you sure it was not melamine in combination with cyanuric acid? Neither alone is normally toxic but the combination is deadly.

The rest of your post is undignified.

lazlo
10-25-2009, 02:09 PM
The rest of your post is undignified.

Claiming that everyone in the drywall thread who disagreed with Evan (i.e., everyone else except you) had "awful herd mentality" and was "pretty damned ignorant" was dignified Dennis?

dp
10-25-2009, 02:18 PM
Claiming that everyone in the drywall thread who disagreed with Evan (i.e., everyone else except you) had "awful herd mentality" and was "pretty damned ignorant" was dignified Dennis?

You will find no quote of mine claiming everyone but Evan and I form a herd mentality. But if you think a herd mentality does not rise and fall here you are in denial. It does not and has never included everyone here but there is a subset of members who come and go from the herd.

Regarding the "pretty damned ignorant" quote - the context was a claim was made that two participants formed an adventitious association but the rest of the group did not form another. That claim is based on ignorance, not to mention impossible.

Evan
10-25-2009, 02:47 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Evan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazlo
That's the amusing part -- the drywall thread started it's downward spiral when Evan claimed that there's no proof that melamine was toxic either.

You are lying Robert. I never said that.





http://bbs.homeshopmachinist.net/sho...0&postcount=34

Quote:
Originally Posted by Evan
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lazlo
Evan, if you recall, you went through the same denial about the Chinese spiking pet food with melamine.


As for melamine that still hasn't been proven to be the cause of the pet health problems. They have shifted away from that as a direct cause and are now invoking a more complex and even less likely interaction.



Thanks for saving me the trouble. So, in your warped reasoning what I said equals saying it wasn't toxic? If I meant it wasn't toxic I would have written that. The fact is that it wasn't the proximate cause of death.

Either you are entirely unable to comprehend the difference, which I doubt, or you are entirely willing to twist other people's meaning to the point of outright prevarication. Since you claim to be a logic designer you know the difference and should not be granted any leeway when anyone judges the intent of your writing.

In the future I will consider your writing suspect until proven otherwise, especially anything you attribute to anybody else. I think that would be a wise course of action for all to follow as you have proven you can't be trusted.


Evan used to participate on PracticalMachinist, but left because he wasn't an Alpha there.

I still post from time to time. The site is too slow to load with my very slow connection. It can take up to 5 minutes. I quit most of my posting when I closed my business since that is when I lost my high speed connection.

Appropriate to this topic, I have never had a problem with Don even though I have jabbed at him a time or two. Example:


He started a thread complaining about the ugliest machine he had seen and posted this machine as an example. It was orange in a flyer ad so I took it and placed it in this setting with a more appropriate colour. Nothing was said.

http://metalshopborealis.ca/pics/ugly.jpg

lazlo
10-25-2009, 03:01 PM
Since you claim to be a logic designer

You caught me Evan -- it's a massive coverup. I'm actually a photocopier repairman.

http://i164.photobucket.com/albums/u15/rtgeorge_album/IntelCard.gif
As many here know, I was hired away by a major graphics card company about a year ago, so feel free to call ;)


In the future I will consider your writing suspect until proven otherwise, especially anything you attribute to anybody else.

My gosh -- how am I going to sleep at night! :D

J Tiers
10-25-2009, 03:23 PM
You folks are going to have to decide if you will operate by strict proof-based logic, or by "common interpretation".

Since even Evan , who chooses 'strict logic" sometimes (particularly when it bolsters a weak position), does not operate that way ALL the time, I think it would be unwise for anyone to demand that.

Evan
10-25-2009, 03:52 PM
As many here know, I was hired away by a major graphics card company about a year ago, so feel free to call



That must be why my graphics card driver keeps crashing under heavy load.

Evan
10-25-2009, 03:53 PM
Since even Evan , who chooses 'strict logic" sometimes (particularly when it bolsters a weak position), does not operate that way ALL the time, I think it would be unwise for anyone to demand that.


Demand it in respect of what Jerry?

John Stevenson
10-25-2009, 03:59 PM
That must be why my graphics card driver keeps crashing under heavy load.

Repeat after me I am Evan the Champ [ AKA God on weekdays except Wednesday early closing ]
I do not run sub standard equipment, everything I own is perfect/ better than anyone else's/ unique [ delete as required ]

.

Evan
10-25-2009, 04:02 PM
You really should seek help for that inferiority complex John. You will feel much better, really.

Jim Shaper
10-25-2009, 04:17 PM
That only applies to systems as a whole. Try pouring a bunch of marbles into a sloping tray. They will automatically arrange themselves in an ordered array of nearest neighbours. Variations in entropy occur depending on local energy inputs. The entropy of a local region may be reversed at the expense of the entire system. This is normal, very ordinary and extremely common.



We have prima facie evidence that it happens. We are here. Any other explanation merely begs the question by removing it a step.

Stir together the basic elements that we are composed from in a sealed container. Apply an electric arc at intermittent intervals. Within a few days the non living elements will have combined to form all of the organic compounds called amino acids that are required to make a living cell.

Mix and match the conditions, ratios and quantities every minute or two for half a billion years and then see what is possible. Even lotteries with long odds are usually won by somebody.
Take a billion mud puddles with each of them full of the chemicals of life and that gives the opportunity to try 720,000,000,000,000,000,000 possibilities. In reality each puddle can try far more than that.

However, that is a simplistic and very like wrong and unnecessary explanation. Much more likely is that the basic elements will be attracted to self arrange in patterns that automatically favour the emergence of self replication. This isn't supposition. we have the evidence down to the level of the most common sort of organized but non replicating parasite, the virus.

All it takes is an uneven distribution of energy in the universe and that is a self evident existing condition.


Your very premise of experimentation requires outside influence to become even remotely possible let alone probable. Take away the start, and you have nothing. I contend you have nothing. Without an origin, you have no marbles to have a pattern created from them falling into line. You cannot replicate an explosion creating order, so your entire theory fails. That offering even credits you one beyond the how the item got there and what caused it to explode - a huge gimme. So your theory steps two or three orders away from the actual beginning and then lumps a giant assertion that for no other reason than "it happened" (no cause and effect as in Newton's Third Law) a bang occurred, and from that bang spurred a planet, solar system, amoeba puddle, and from that puddle intelligent life "willed" itself into creation. This is comedy at a scientific level. Absurd.

Prima facia isn't enough to convict murder on in some cases, yet you contend it's enough to base the theory of all existence? Macro evolution fails modus ponens. None of it's repeatable, so it's exact origin cannot be observed and you have no prima facie event to support or deny. Nothing but guesses. Those guesses stack upon other violations of observable science and as a collective whole have enough molestation of scientific law to make a logical thinker vomit.

John Stevenson
10-25-2009, 04:23 PM
We are all inferior God.

dp
10-25-2009, 04:35 PM
Your very premise of experimentation requires outside influence to become even remotely possible let alone probable. Take away the start, and you have nothing. I contend you have nothing. Without an origin, you have no marbles to have a pattern created from them falling into line.

There is a problem in all models of the universe that begin with the beginning, oddly enough. And that assumes there was a beginning which in itself is an odd concept. As odd is the concept that the universe has always been. This last part nullifies questions like "what created the universe" and I'm not hinting at any religious perspectives here - just logic.

If it has always been then it had no creation event. If it hasn't always been then there was a creation event, but because we exist in the post-event time frame we can only guess at what led up to that event. If our universe contains evidence of what created it, we've not found it. Again, I'm using only logic and not hinting at religious interpretations.

In addition it leaves us with a nagging question - what created the conditions that led up to the creation event? There are no scientific answers.

I'm reminded of the question: "Does God have a belly button" in that it shows an awareness that we are not comfortable with the notion that anything can have always been. And we're not comfortable with the awareness that all this will end.

Jim Shaper
10-25-2009, 04:52 PM
I'm content with not claiming to know. That relieves me from the burden of trying to pass my fairy tale off as truth on others.

There's enough lack of evidence in the modern world to relegate macro evolution to as plausible as goblins and buckets of gold at the end of rainbows. It isn't being observed, so it either stopped, or never was. Having not observed it, I contend the latter.

Evan
10-25-2009, 05:20 PM
I'm content with not claiming to know. That relieves me from the burden of trying to pass my fairy tale off as truth on others.

There's enough lack of evidence in the modern world to relegate macro evolution to as plausible as goblins and buckets of gold at the end of rainbows. It isn't being observed, so it either stopped, or never was. Having not observed it, I contend the latter.

Evolution doesn't deal with how the universe came to be so any argument based on that is irrelevant. All that matters when dealing with how life arose are the rules in the universe AFTER it formed regardless of how it came into existence.

Within that context there are no contradictions nor is there any logic that demands that the context be expanded to include the origin of the universe. That is a separate matter.

Jim Shaper
10-25-2009, 06:15 PM
You still lack empirical proof of concept. Never being observed (naturally, or otherwise) is a real issue for FACTS.

Even the mutant cross breeding experiments tend to suffer premature mortality. None of them comes out better off than had they bred naturally within their own species.

Everything evolutionary you try to assert happened naturally, fails in laboratory situations. If it can't be done under ideal circumstances, the odds are quite large that it could've ever happened in the wild. You attempt to refute this with the fallacy of "time." "Oh, we just don't have long enough to wait around for it to happen again." The problem with that argument is that not only would it have to happen once, it would have to happen trillions of times in unison to even approach the number of unique creatures we have in this day and age - and that doesn't even account for the ones which have become extinct. Were it plausible once, it would still be happening before us today, but it's not. The fact that it's not now, is the very reason I contest it ever did.

darryl
10-25-2009, 06:19 PM
Now I understand why they are called praying mantises- 'honey, please don't bite my head (or ----) off.

Axlemoron
10-25-2009, 06:42 PM
A man in India has just completed his training to work at a call service. The instructor tells him, "You have done well. Now all you need to do is take this one final test and you will be ready for employment. Here is the test: Use the words, 'yellow, green and pink' in the same sentence."

The man thinks hard. A frown crosses his face. But then, after a bit, his face brightens. "Yes, yes. I can do that.", he says.

"Give me your answer." says the instructor.

The man says, "The phone goes 'green, green' and I pink it up and say 'Yellow'".

dp
10-25-2009, 06:46 PM
Everything evolutionary you try to assert happened naturally, fails in laboratory situations.

Nature is by, well, nature, the largest laboratory we have. On the island of Hawaii near Kilauea crater is a mountain called Pu`u Huluhulu (means mountain with hair, or fuzzy mountain because it has trees on it). Near there is a crater called Mauna Ulu. It last erupted in 1974. In the lava flows is now found a berry plant common to Hawaii. But in the plants found in the flows are different than others of their specie. It has morphed - adapted, as it were, or what some may call evolved, to survive in this new environment. There is also a nearly flightless goose, the nene, that lives there. Unique to Hawaii but incapable of migrating.

http://www.instanthawaii.com/cgi-bin/hawaii?Hikes.mulu

On the peak of Mauna Kea there is an inchworm type caterpillar. It is unique in the islands in that it is a meat eater. It's foreleg pairs that others of its type use for travel are used to grab bugs.

http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/good-bad/eupethecia.html

That seems evolutionary to me.

Speaking of bugs - it has been suggested that critters that pupate are actually the genetic merger of individual species, and that each specie lives out its life sequentially. The death of the first creates the birthing place for the development of the second.

I don't know how it all came to be, but it is fascinating to discover how life adapts and exploits the local environment.

TECHSHOP
10-25-2009, 07:03 PM
Fascinating, yes - but the end of life, the universe, and everything is in 2012!

dp
10-25-2009, 07:05 PM
Fascinating, yes - but the end of life, the universe, and everthing is in 2012!

Yeah - I'm going to miss you guys :p

Jim Shaper
10-25-2009, 09:04 PM
Nature is by, well, nature, the largest laboratory we have. On the island of Hawaii near Kilauea crater is a mountain called Pu`u Huluhulu (means mountain with hair, or fuzzy mountain because it has trees on it). Near there is a crater called Mauna Ulu. It last erupted in 1974. In the lava flows is now found a berry plant common to Hawaii. But in the plants found in the flows are different than others of their specie. It has morphed - adapted, as it were, or what some may call evolved, to survive in this new environment. There is also a nearly flightless goose, the nene, that lives there. Unique to Hawaii but incapable of migrating.

http://www.instanthawaii.com/cgi-bin/hawaii?Hikes.mulu

On the peak of Mauna Kea there is an inchworm type caterpillar. It is unique in the islands in that it is a meat eater. It's foreleg pairs that others of its type use for travel are used to grab bugs.

http://hbs.bishopmuseum.org/good-bad/eupethecia.html

That seems evolutionary to me.

Speaking of bugs - it has been suggested that critters that pupate are actually the genetic merger of individual species, and that each specie lives out its life sequentially. The death of the first creates the birthing place for the development of the second.

I don't know how it all came to be, but it is fascinating to discover how life adapts and exploits the local environment.

When that plant grows flippers and swims to another island, you'll make me a believer.

Every example is adaptation - things adapt, people change, Europeans are different than Asians in their genes, but NONE of them has given birth to something different than human that was better suited to living on Earth.

Macro evolution (something entirely new coming from something else) has yet to be observed. Even the fossil records of apes and what not all fall within specific species. None of them is caught in-between (which would be the missing link). In all the fossil records, you'd think one (1) or 200,000 (actually, you'd have much more than that) would have died half way between genomes. Find me One, one lowly example. It hasn't been done.

How many people spending how many collective years of life looking for these missing links is it going to take before you awaken to the obvious in that they aren't out there? If they were out there, we'd be seeing them come to fruition regularly, as in a daily event, not once every 100 years or so.

Look at the sheer number of varieties of living things on this planet. Every single one of them would've had to originate through different amoeba coming to life in the mystic mud puddle. After all, every one of them has "evolved" to what they are due to adapting to their various environments right? So all of them would've had to start off in different conditions.

What I can't get past for this to be plausible, is that somehow a single cell organism would have to do something and knowingly have it's genetics reproduce itself. It just came to life, and all of a sudden it knows that it needs to reproduce to survive? What are the odds? Then have that happen billions upon billions of times. Yet in nature or laboratory, none of this is able to be reproduced so we can watch it happen.

philbur
10-25-2009, 09:32 PM
So what's your proposal for the origin of species.

Phil:)


When that plant grows flippers and swims to another island, you'll make me a believer.

Every example is adaptation - things adapt, people change, Europeans are different than Asians in their genes, but NONE of them has given birth to something different than human that was better suited to living on Earth.

Macro evolution (something entirely new coming from something else) has yet to be observed. Even the fossil records of apes and what not all fall within specific species. None of them is caught in-between (which would be the missing link). In all the fossil records, you'd think one (1) or 200,000 (actually, you'd have much more than that) would have died half way between genomes. Find me One, one lowly example. It hasn't been done.

How many people spending how many collective years of life looking for these missing links is it going to take before you awaken to the obvious in that they aren't out there? If they were out there, we'd be seeing them come to fruition regularly, as in a daily event, not once every 100 years or so.

Look at the sheer number of varieties of living things on this planet. Every single one of them would've had to originate through different amoeba coming to life in the mystic mud puddle. After all, every one of them has "evolved" to what they are due to adapting to their various environments right? So all of them would've had to start off in different conditions.

What I can't get past for this to be plausible, is that somehow a single cell organism would have to do something and knowingly have it's genetics reproduce itself. It just came to life, and all of a sudden it knows that it needs to reproduce to survive? What are the odds? Then have that happen billions upon billions of times. Yet in nature or laboratory, none of this is able to be reproduced so we can watch it happen.

J Tiers
10-25-2009, 09:55 PM
Evolution doesn't deal with how the universe came to be so any argument based on that is irrelevant.

Perhaps, if you happen to have your "strict logic" hat on at present.....

but, of course, everything comes back to that. Trying to avoid it is simply an admission of having no clue about it, and therefore saying "we'll just throw that out"..... It is begging off the question.

The origin also set up the rules, ALL the rules. they all flow from the conditions created by the origin. Understanding the "real" rules would naturally require understanding the origin.

Otherwise, all you are doing is basically holding the elephant's tail and saying "as far as we can determine, an elephant is like a snake". With more knowledge, you might incorporate another part of the elephant in your 'what it is like" description.

But even having the whole image in mind is a far cry from being able to understand it and create another elephant from available raw material.

What you are having is an 'evolution vs creation' argument. That is an argument which is un-concludable, because there is no way to prove anything of importance with respect to it.

Even finding links for the 'chassis' is not very useful. We already know that the chassis are similar. Cats I know for instance, have kneecaps, as we do, and similar feet, fingernails, skulls, etc. And we have tails, as cats do, ours are a bit shorter, that's all. Details are a bit different, but the idea is quite obviously the same, you can line up parts and relate them.

if the argument is "atheists" vs "believers", the chassis is of very little importance. We have a few different types of critters, some based on our chassis, some have exoskeletons, and some have no skeleton at all. Anything you can find in the Bible etc, in terms of similarities is not "chassis-based" in any case, so you need to find, not similar chassis, but similar features which are somewhat non-corporeal.

That will be a bit of a challenge, I suspect. You may as well give it up.

Evan
10-25-2009, 09:57 PM
If it can't be done under ideal circumstances, the odds are quite large that it could've ever happened in the wild.

Since when is a sterile laboratory "ideal circumstances"? Further, our inability to make a life form reflects only on our ability, not the course of nature. It doesn't make any difference to "odds" and even that presupposed that chance plays a part. I think it more likely, and this is my own hypothesis, that life is inevitable given the right conditions. One of our problems is that we don't know what the conditions were when life began. On thing we can be quite sure of is that it was anaerobic since there wouldn't have been any free oxygen. Right away invalidates any attempts to create life in a lab if there is oxygen present. Free oxygen tends to destroy life since it is highly reactive.


It's problems like this that have so far prevented us from creating artificial life. I personally don't think it advisable to carry out such experiments. The life that exists on earth is incredibly tenacious and adaptable. I wouldn't want to add an unknown competitor to the balance.

Evolution has been demonstrated to operate. How it operates it widely misunderstood. Life forms don't change in order to meet a challenge to their existence. Really Hard times for any particular life form often means extinction. This opens up a niche for some other life form that was able to survive whatever killed the other(s). The survivors may not be well suited to the new niche but there is always variation within a species. Some will fare better than others and will eventually dominate the new environment. As the environment changes so does the nature of the survivors. It's called genetic drift. After sufficient time has passed this drift results in the survivors being different enough from the original species that the survivors constitute a new species.

Evolution doesn't result in the sudden appearance of an entirely new species due to some incredibly advantageous mutation. It relies on the expression of existing traits to become the dominant traits among the breeding population. The remaining progenitors may die or they may still compete or they may occupy a different niche than the progeny. They may even give rise to other progeny through the same process but under different conditions in a different time and place with the result eventually being another species that can be traced back to that progenitor species.

We know this is so by direct examination of the DNA of various species. We are only 2% different in our DNA than a chimpanzee. We are not descended from the apes though, that is another common misapprehension. The apes and humans have a common ancestor somewhere back in time. That ancestor wasn't a modern human and it wasn't an ape. It was something in between that produced offspring with range of abilities that made some better survivors than others. That is why it is called "Survival of the Fittest".

Evan
10-25-2009, 10:16 PM
Perhaps, if you happen to have your "strict logic" hat on at present.....

but, of course, everything comes back to that. Trying to avoid it is simply an admission of having no clue about it, and therefore saying "we'll just throw that out"..... It is begging off the question.


Not at all Jerry. The universe provides a very wide range of conditions, most of which are hostile to our kind of life. We have adapted to the present conditions, it is not adapted to us. The kind of universe we live in shows strong indications of being extraodinarily well balanced in a number of ways. It has zones in which life can flourish. The fact that life exists proves that. It does not however place any restrictions on the way that the laws of physics may have "frozen out" of the original malestrom.

There are about 25 currently identified universal dimensionless constants that must be exactly as they are for this universe to exist. Change any one by even a minute fraction and the result would be an entirely different universe or no universe at all. Currently there is no understanding of why the constants have the values they do except for the circular reasoning that we wouldn't be here to observe the values of the constants if they were different.

Given that this is the universe that resulted from whatever process took place to enable it in the first place we can then ask and discover perhaps how life came to be. We can't answer the question of how the universe began but we may be able to answer the question of how life began. They are different questions.

Jim Shaper
10-25-2009, 10:42 PM
So what's your proposal for the origin of species.

Phil:)

I don't have one, but I do strongly disagree with the viability of both macro evolution and big bang theory.

Claiming either is true negates the validity of all other known sciences that we can prove - because both of them violate other "laws." Saying one instance of bending the rules is acceptable negates the rule entirely.

What gets me is that everyone seems to think they need a fairy tale to stick in that "blank." The origin of the universe in my book has a "?" in it. Honestly, I don't feel its a question that needs answering. We've got far more pressing matters before us to have reasonably intelligent folks tied up trying to make a square peg fit a round hole.

J Tiers
10-25-2009, 10:46 PM
Evan, none of the wonderful stuff you posted has any bearing on the fact that ignoring/avoiding the "original why" question is just evading the issue.

if anything, most of what you posted is support for that position.

Say "you" have discovered what we would call a wrench.... it has a specific form, the reason for which you don't know other than a lot of other things of all sorts of shapes seem to fit inside its features, and that it has an odd shape.

Without knowing more about the background of the creation of that wrench, "you", as a hypothetical naive person, would not be able to understand it, its purpose, its form, and so forth. You might come to any hypothesis about it.

A few things which fit it rather better than other things would, given your total lack of knowledge about it, not impress you much, they just randomly "happen" to fit better than many other things. And you have no knowledge that allows you to see that 'fit" is even important.

Only with an understanding of the complete background can you understand the wrench, (without prior knowledge).

Without understanding the background of the universe, you cannot understand the bits and pieces either. The origin is somewhat important..... but unreachable from within the universe.

the universe must have come from something..... we have no experience of something from nothing.

if another set of laws DOES allow that, within which the universe was made, then there is a greater cause for the universe...... something existing OUTSIDE of the universe, in which frame of reference the universe exists.

Alternately, if the 'something" always existed, before there WAS a "universe", again it must itself have existed within an outer frame of reference. A place where the 'something" could exist separately from the universe.

Either way, you end up with an "inside" and an "outside". A tough philosophical question.

In fact, it is impossible, or nearly so, to make sense of the matter... but without doing so, you find no answers to basic questions....

That makes the whole argument un-concludable.

And, anything that is important as far as evolution, must come up with the mechanism with which we think about and discuss these questions. You might say we are NOT talking about the computer here, we are talking about the "software". Similar computers exist, but they seem to have far different programming.

dp
10-25-2009, 11:04 PM
I don't have one, but I do strongly disagree with the viability of both macro evolution and big bang theory.

Claiming either is true negates the validity of all other known sciences that we can prove - because both of them violate other "laws." Saying one instance of bending the rules is acceptable negates the rule entirely.

What gets me is that everyone seems to think they need a fairy tale to stick in that "blank." The origin of the universe in my book has a "?" in it. Honestly, I don't feel its a question that needs answering. We've got far more pressing matters before us to have reasonably intelligent folks tied up trying to make a square peg fit a round hole.

I think it's the nature of humans to wonder why regarding the mysteries of the universe. I also don't care for the big bang idea. It needs a big banger and leaves a larger question - who pays these bangers and do they have bellybuttons?

And now that the universe's expansion has been deemed to be accelerating, the universe we know will grow infinitely sparse. "Overhead, without any fuss, the stars were going out" - Arthur C. Clarke. Seems a lot to do about nothing if that's the case. What are the chances we come along in time to watch all this wind down?

I'm in the undecided camp on a lot of this as well. An awful lot of theories have been forwarded to explain that which has no explanation - these are crutches. Einstein himself used a crutch to avoid problems with relativity. He slipped a constant into the math so it would solve. And the math has become impossible for me to follow so some of the fun has gone out of cosmology as a result.

Evan
10-25-2009, 11:21 PM
Evan, none of the wonderful stuff you posted has any bearing on the fact that ignoring/avoiding the "original why" question is just evading the issue.


One can't be accused of evading answering a question that doesn't admit to an answer. We must take the exisitence of the universe as we see it to be axiomatic in the same way the we accept the axioms of mathematics.

Given that as the framework the question of why it all exists becomes moot but the question of how life may arise remains (possibly) answerable. Life did not arise in the first moments of the existence of the universe. Even the Bible makes that very clear. Oddly, the Bible describes in Genesis a sequence of events that corresponds very well with the big bang hypothesis. Taking into account the limited vocabulary to describe such events the description is easy to derive from the narrative.

lazlo
10-25-2009, 11:33 PM
I do strongly disagree with the viability of both macro evolution and big bang theory.

Jim, you might be interested in trying the National Geographic/IBM Human Genographic project. You send in a DNA swab, and (depending on your haplogroup) they track your DNA back 200,000 years to Mitochondrial Eve in Africa -- the most-recent common ancestor of all humans alive on Earth today with respect to matrilineal descent. Essentially, she was one of the first humans, or possibly even an "archaic homo sapiens":

https://genographic.nationalgeographic.com/genographic/participate.html

I sent in mine, and my daughters (to get my Wife's genetic family tree), and the accuracy going back at least the last 400 years (knowing our family histories) is amazing. My maternal grandmother was adopted, and although the rest of our family is predominantly Italian, my grandmother had light skin. The mitochondrial DNA (which follows the female lineage) showed her to come from Northern Italy. The results also correctly traced my daughter's (1/8th) Cherokee bloodline.

It's a very humbling experience.

Your Old Dog
10-25-2009, 11:34 PM
I'm going for another coffee and a burger. Anybody want anything?

dp
10-25-2009, 11:40 PM
I'm going for another coffee and a burger. Anybody want anything?

Popcorn, please, no butter.

Evan
10-25-2009, 11:41 PM
I'm going off line. I have stuff to build.

J Tiers
10-25-2009, 11:41 PM
Even the Bible makes that very clear. Oddly, the Bible describes in Genesis a sequence of events that corresponds very well with the big bang hypothesis. Taking into account the limited vocabulary to describe such events the description is easy to derive from the narrative.

I had considered mentioning that, but decided against it for this discussion.

The origins issue has an influence on the "how" but it COULD have a definite influence on a "why".

The wrench was an example for that.... if someone finds a book that explains that the wrench is to turn some of the myriad things that fit in various ways up against it, they may well be derided as silly.

"That thing has so many other things it fits, why would anyone think it is supposed to be used with just a certain type of things only? it only even fits THOSE loosely, and you don't even know why that is important anyway!"

Knowing the origins and the why (and if there is or can be a why) is rather important.

but for the universe, it is unanswerable with perfect provable logic from within the universe.

Carld
10-25-2009, 11:43 PM
George, Please Close This Thread, Now. Thank You

Jim Shaper
10-25-2009, 11:48 PM
Lazlo, my mom already submitted my swab a few years back in conjunction with trying to track down her ancestry (her father is unknown).

I don't wake up every morning and ask "How did I get here?" (although there were a couple days I did - but that was back in college :D ) It's simply not something that concerns me. Who I came from also doesn't concern me much as that's not what I draw my personal identity from.

Ken_Shea
10-25-2009, 11:48 PM
I'm going for another coffee and a burger. Anybody want anything?

No, I'm still sticking around for an answer to my broiler ? :D

dp
10-25-2009, 11:50 PM
but for the universe, it is unanswerable with perfect provable logic from within the universe.

The information needed to understand the end of the universe may be found within the universe even if its beginning will always remain a mystery. It may be found that it has no end in which case we'd better load up on beer.

lazlo
10-25-2009, 11:52 PM
Oddly, the Bible describes in Genesis a sequence of events that corresponds very well with the big bang hypothesis.

But if Genesis is describing the Big Bang, then what are the 6 days? There's no Sun yet :)

If God is omnipotent, why did he need to rest of the 7th day? :p

My 6 year-old daughter asked a couple of good ones the other day: if God created the Big Bang, where was he when he did it (since he was presumably not inside the singularity)? Where does God go after the Big Shrink, when the universe collapses back into the singularity?

Arcane
10-25-2009, 11:58 PM
The information needed to understand the end of the universe may be found within the universe even if its beginning will always remain a mystery. It may be found that it has no end in which case we'd better load up on beer.

I heard a long time ago that one only needed to contemplate his own navel in order to understand the Universe. I tried it.... but the only enlightenment I achieved was that I needed to clean the lint out of my bellybutton! :D

Ken_Shea
10-26-2009, 12:03 AM
George, Please Close This Thread, Now. Thank You

No doubt about it, George has to be a good guy :)

dp
10-26-2009, 12:21 AM
But if Genesis is describing the Big Bang, then what are the 6 days? There's no Sun yet :)

If God is omnipotent, why did he need to rest of the 7th day? :p

My 6 year-old daughter asked a couple of good ones the other day: if God created the Big Bang, where was he when he did it (since he was presumably not inside the singularity)? Where does God go after the Big Shrink, when the universe collapses back into the singularity?

Sounds like you have a daughter with a good head on her shoulders. When her interests turn to earthly pursuits you'd better be ready! :)

Greg Menke
10-26-2009, 12:38 AM
My daughter is about 4. She's not using it yet but I regularly watch makeup and fashion techniques on youtube, along with the Elmo et al and am working on being the household seamstress..err seamster??? She likes to hang out with me in the basement but I have to be able to compete in whats to come as she gets older.

Gotta make yourself relevant or you're the flying gravel behind their wheels.

Greg

Doc Nickel
10-26-2009, 01:04 AM
I don't have one, but I do strongly disagree with the viability of both macro evolution[...]

-And that sentence right there tells me you don't understand evolution, period.

There is no such thing as "macro" evolution or "micro" evolution. That's a buzzword that creationists came up with when the evidence of evolution became undeniable.

"Oh sure, little changes happen- the finchs' beaks change length when they have different seeds available, and the moths' color patterns adapt to smog-darkened tree bark. But that's micro evolution! Not macro evolution, where a chimp turns into a human or a wolf turns into a poodle! That just can't happen!"

The problem there is there's no difference. What you're calling "macro" evolution is simply cumulative 'micro' evolution.

Two analogies: Did Da Vinci paint the Mona Lisa with a single brushstroke? Of course not- the finished painting is the work of thousands of smaller, individual changes. Can a 5-axis CNC mill out a 3D helicopter transmission mount with a single pass of an endmill? Of course not- it took thousands of passes, each making individual changes.

You're trying to deny the idea that whole paintings can be made from multiple small strokes, while apparently not denying that the small strokes are being made.

The other aspect to consider is that evolution is not "targeted". There is no "end point", no "blueprint", no "final version". Evolution was not a process intending to wind up as Modern Man. We, as we are, are simply the result of some two billion years of endless, chaotic changes.

Put it this way: Throw a handful of sand on a clean kitchen floor. Now sweep it up, and throw it again- but this time, try to get every single grain back into the original configuration. Get every single grain back in place, in relation to every other grain.

Impossible? No it's not, you already did it. It was as easy as throwing a handful of dirt. You could have done it with your eyes closed, as you reached for the coffeepot with your other hand.

The difference is that in the first case, there was no set order. Any result was acceptable, any order, any position. Completely random.

Which is evolution: Changes happen, you've already agreed on that. Beneficial changes help that species flourish, neutral changes occur but don't affect the species, and negative changes tend to lead to those individuals or even species dying out. The beneficial changes, therefore, propogate the most.

Write that over and over for a billion years, and "micro" becomes "macro"- they are one and the same.

Doc.

darryl
10-26-2009, 02:28 AM
'the big shrink' - that made me laugh. Then I realized that as I'm getting older, that aint so funny anymore :)

Evan
10-26-2009, 02:49 AM
The proper term is the Big Gnab. :D

Evidence recently say it won't do that. If the universe is absolutely flat then it is equivalent to being parabolic. The initial rapidly developing curve flattens out to a close approximation of parallel lines which becomes perfectly parallel in an infinite amount of time. It grows to infinite size but it takes infinite time. During that duration the universe dies a heat death where all turbulences dissipate and all thermodynamic slopes become level. Everything approaches absolute zero and eventually the universe becomes an Einstein-Bose condensate where everything in it has the same quantum state. When that happens it ceases to exist.

If the universe is accelerating in it's expansion and the acceleration continues to accelerate then the universe is hyperbolic. The curves become straight but never parallel. As time goes on all parts of the universe lose communication with all other parts since eventually all regions are moving away from all other regions at the speed of light. When that happens the universe ceases to exist.

If the universe is closed then it is elliptical. The curve is closed at a finite future time and the mass of the universe is sufficient to stop the expansion and reverse it to contraction. The contraction will take at least as long as the expansion but during that time the temperature of the universe will rise. There is some doubt as to how far the contraction may proceed. It may halt in a "big bounce" if the radiation pressure is great enough producing the mother of all supernovas. If this sounds like a big bang that may not be a coincidence.

Jim Shaper
10-26-2009, 03:16 AM
Doc, You misinterpret Darwin's observations (as does pretty much everyone who tries to use them to defend macro changes in species). What he saw as adaptation, was actually just a breeding cycle where one variant was more successful at reproduction than another. Had adaptation actually occurred, or evolution as you would - the birds all would've grown to thrive on the food available. Oops that didn't happen.

What Chuck D saw was one group of traits flourish under one season's food offerings and then when the food source changed, the other group's physical traits became more prominent. Had they been evolving, all the birds would've become adept at eating any food source or developing yet another food option that they were more capable of procuring.

So IMO, survival of the fittest doesn't even correspond with adaptation. Nothing adapted.

Also, as was previously addressed - there aren't cumulative changes that can be observed as one species becoming another. It simply doesn't happen, because if it did we could watch it happening, because surely they wouldn't come to a designed end as you say, now would they? It'd be happening right now, yet where is it?

When you throw the sand on your kitchen floor, and a turtle comes out of it. Let me know. ;)

bob ward
10-26-2009, 04:40 AM
While we are way way off topic on this OT thread, what about the 'Russian Doll' theory of the universe, as explained in the Lobsang Rampa books?

The universe is both infinitely large and infinitely small, it goes without end in both directions, layer upon infinite layer.

Earth is just a short lived subatomic particle in someone else's larger universe, the whole of the universe that we see could be just a spark flying up a chimney in another world. The big bang could be someone letting off a fire cracker in a larger universe.

Going in the other direction, atomic and sub atomic particles are actually complete universes, which have their own sub atomic particles which have their own universes etc etc.

Strike a match and watch the flame burn. In those few seconds, in the subworlds of the flame, eons have passed, stars planets and solar systems have coalesced, dinosuars have evolved (yes evolved) and died out, wars have been fought, people have argued on machining forums. And when you blow out the match it is all gone.

Evan
10-26-2009, 05:19 AM
When you throw the sand on your kitchen floor, and a turtle comes out of it. Let me know

It's never going to happen. That isn't how evolution works. Adaption depends on the genetic variability that exists within a species. This exists within humans as well as all other life forms. People of African descent have a gene that predisposes them to sickle cell anemia. That is by itself a counter survival trait. But it isn't for an important reason. The sickle cell defect only weakens the person if only one such gene is expressed but it confers strong resistance to malaria which would otherwise kill much of the population. This is an example of a minor mutation that took place sometime in the past. It didn't happen because of the presence of malaria. It's a recessive trait which means it is hidden more often than not. When malaria arrived on the scene some people were able to survive because they had "half strength" sickle cell anemia. They had more children than those the malaria killed with the result that sickle cell anemia is still very common in Africa.

Adaption is the way that such changes become dominant. We have far more coded in our genes that what we see expressed. Adaption is NOT caused by evolutionary pressure. If you don't have a gene for webbed feet then no amount of swimming to catch your meal is going to make one appear. But, if you do have such a gene then the members of the species that express that gene will be better off than those that don't. If, and it's a big if, evolution is allowed to proceed then within a short time the gene for webbed feet appears within nearly all members of the surviving population and webbed feet are the norm. If the gene for non-webbed feet is eliminated from the gene pool then removing the pressure for webbed feet does not result in the characterisitc going away.

Once again, organisms do NOT change in order to survive. Environmental pressure DOES NOT cause organisms to change.
It selects for those that are best equipped to survive.
Small changes derive from existing characteristics or sometimes from small pre-existing mutations that have already occured and were largely harmless and recessive.
Large changes result from the accumulation of small changes.

philbur
10-26-2009, 05:21 AM
So let me get this straight. On the one hand we have hundreds if not thousands of the top scientific minds on the planet who are adamant that the theory of origin of species and the theory of the big bang are a done deal. And on the other hand we have a home shop machinist who says they are all wrong but has no alternative theory.

Mmmmmm, interesting.

Phil:)


I don't have one, but I do strongly disagree with the viability of both macro evolution and big bang theory.

Jim Shaper
10-26-2009, 05:21 AM
While we are way way off topic on this OT thread, what about the 'Russian Doll' theory of the universe, as explained in the Lobsang Rampa books?

The universe is both infinitely large and infinitely small, it goes without end in both directions, layer upon infinite layer.

Earth is just a short lived subatomic particle in someone else's larger universe, the whole of the universe that we see could be just a spark flying up a chimney in another world. The big bang could be someone letting off a fire cracker in a larger universe.

Going in the other direction, atomic and sub atomic particles are actually complete universes, which have their own sub atomic particles which have their own universes etc etc.

Strike a match and watch the flame burn. In those few seconds, in the subworlds of the flame, eons have passed, stars planets and solar systems have coalesced, dinosuars have evolved (yes evolved) and died out, wars have been fought, people have argued on machining forums. And when you blow out the match it is all gone.

If that's the fairy tale you want to believe, I think it's more elegant and logical than the big bang. Doesn't make it any more true, but it does have nicer innuendos. :)

Machtool
10-26-2009, 05:33 AM
Don’t mind me, while you guys sort out the creation of the world, the dust storms that didn’t happen, etc etc.. I’d just like a quite word with Carl. Pardon us to talk on the side.

What are you getting so pissy about? I notice you didn’t link the thread that’s got you so hot under the collar. So people here can get a true view of what went on, rather than your one sided / slanted version.
http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/showthread.php/ot-why-do-foreigners-190855.html (http://www.practicalmachinist.com/vb/showthread.php/ot-why-do-foreigners-190855.html)

Don starts a thread, named “Why do foreigners love to call me rather than use email ?

Partial text. (Which I assume you didn’t read, emphasised in bold for the bits you missed.). Don said “It never ceases to amaze me the people from other countries that call me on the phone about business matters rather than emailing.<--à to understand the printed word versus an Indian, Taiwanese, Mexican (Spanish) and even English (UK) accent.------ Just had a call from some woman with an (Far East)<--à etc etc etc.”

Now when I read that, I was under the understanding, he was asking about the propensity of foreigners to call, rather than email, in a higher proportion than dealing with citizens of the North American continent. Seemed fairly straight forward to me. He’s wondering why people from other countries have a habit of, ringing him far more often than North Americans. Despite the language difficulty’s it presents.

It rolls along for 14 posts with out problem, then you get there at post #15

Sentence one.

If doing business by phone is a problem then make it mandatory that all business is done by email or fax and nothing else
Where do you see him saying anything about a problem doing business on the phone? The question was “Why do foreigners love to call me rather than use email ?” Your suggestion that “all business” is conducted by email or fax is just stupid.

Sentence two.

It's not hard, just refuse to do any business on the phone, of course you'll loose a lot of business but since it is very distracting to use the phone then just put a message on your phone that you do not accept business calls by phone and give your email address and/or fax number.
So your advice is to turn off the phone period. Dont do phone conversations with any one, ever, never?. Even though the problem of foreigners / people he has a hard time of understanding verbally probably amount to about 5% - %10 of his telephone conversations. Good one Einstien. Once again, where did he say one word about having difficulty about conducting a telephone conversation with any body else than the few foreigners that seem to call him, over every body else.

Sentences three to six. Lets skip then as more get the post count up, dribble.

Sentence seven.

However, that's how I like to do business. and a beer don't hurt, after the deal.
That’s about the most intelligible thing you said. Perhaps you needed a beer, or had had too many all ready. Had you actually read the question, instead of just blurting out the first thought that came into your head, there wouldn’t have been a problem.

If it’s still a mystery why he climbed all over you. You wont be missed over there.

Phil.

Jim Shaper
10-26-2009, 05:36 AM
So let me get this straight. On the one hand we have hundreds if not thousands of the top scientific minds on the planet who are adamant that the theory of origin of species and the theory of the big bang are a done deal. And on the other hand we have a home shop machinist who says they are all wrong but has no alternative theory.

Mmmmmm, interesting.

Phil:)

Technically, I'm a Bacheloriate degreed business owner who's working on his second degree (a lowly AAS) in cnc machining (but I'm on the presidents list 2 semesters running). I did a lot of my BA in hard sciences and physics, so I think I can contest with their own laws the validity of the claims these so-called top scientists like to make.

Ever study Logic? There's a whole slew of equations that can be used to refute the validity of the claims made by such evolutionists. Frankly, I could use modus ponens to defeat pretty much every assertion. It all goes back to what happened in the past defied the laws of the present, so if you apply the laws of the present, what they insist happened in the past is impossible. Evolution fails. I've thought this since High School, and even nearly got kicked out of my advanced science class for arguing with my teacher back then. His problem - he couldn't refute what I contested. :D Nearly blew a vein yelling at me about it. Yeah, that's solid theory eh? A 17 yr old can blow holes in it for an entire semester without trying.

Doc Nickel
10-26-2009, 06:39 AM
What he saw as adaptation, was actually just a breeding cycle where one variant was more successful at reproduction than another.

-Um... just what do you think "evolution" is?

If one species- or even small isolated group of a species- is "more successful at reproduction" than another, then they have, by definition, passed on their genes better than the other groups.

That's what Evan said in his reply, in a nutshell.

There's no "plan", there's no "blueprint". If the peacock with the larger tailfeathers manages to breed, while the one with the smaller feathers doesn't, the one with the genes for the flashier feathers passes on the genes for those feathers.

No one was standing around saying "okay, keep that one, kill the rest." It was- here's a term you might have heard- natural selection.

The wolves chase the herd and weed out the weak and the sick? That's a given, everyone knows that. Did the wolves intentionally cull the weak to strengthen the herd? No, of course not. The weak and sick were simply slower, less able to outrun, and easier to catch.

Natural selection.

If the weakness was due to illness, the ones that were more resistant to that illness survived, and likely passed on that resistance. If the weakness was due to a poor mutation, chances are that individual was eaten or died before it could pass on those bad genes.

"Evolution" is not a single-definition term. It doesn't only mean or only encompass one certain kind of adaptation. It defines the entirety of the process, anything and everything that causes a species (or even isolated group) to change or adapt to it's environment.

Mutation is the mechanism, but it's the outside forces- such as food sources, predators, environmental conditions, ad nauseum- that determine if those mutations are beneficial or detrimental- or just neutral.


Also, as was previously addressed - there aren't cumulative changes that can be observed as one species becoming another. It simply doesn't happen, because if it did we could watch it happening[,]

-We are watching it happen. You've heard of the H1N1 virus? It mutated from an earlier version of "swine flu".

Besides other modern examples such as the aforementioned moths and the like (that have very short lifespans and this an accellerated evolutionary cycle) there's things like the fossil record which lets us see, to various degrees, literally hundreds of millions of years' worth of changes.


[...]because surely they wouldn't come to a designed end as you say, now would they? It'd be happening right now, yet where is it?

-Ah, the supposed "gotcha" question so favored by the creationists. :D

"Hey, you can't show me a process that takes hundreds if not thousands of generations, in a way that I can watch it happen in a two-minute YouTube clip, so therefore you're wrong!"

But, as a fairly recent example, how about this kid (http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Science/2004/06/24/512617.html)? That may prove to be a highly beneficial mutation. Or this kid (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20070530/strong_toddler_070530/20070530).

Again, you're assuming that major changes happen within a generation or two- IE, a wolf will give birth to a litter of poodle puppies. Sorry, it doesn't work that way. It takes thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of generations, for those changes to occur- and because I can't show you 100,000 generations of wolves breeding in the wild, doesn't mean the theory is wrong.


When you throw the sand on your kitchen floor, and a turtle comes out of it. Let me know. ;)

-And in that one sentence, you conclusively prove you have no idea how actual evolution works- and worse, like most creationists, you're conflating abiogenesis with evolution. Typically you guys mix in the Big Bang too, as if being unable to prove the Big Bang occurred somehow, by extension, disproves evolution.

Doc.

beanbag
10-26-2009, 07:39 AM
You guys need to read this comic strip.

http://www.chick.com/reading/tracts/0055/0055_01.asp

conclusion: Jesus = strong force

philbur
10-26-2009, 08:04 AM
A Nobel Prize in the making then.

The fact that your high school teacher may not have had a full grasp of evolution theory should not be construed as evidence that the theory is wrong.

Now let me see what shall I do today - 1) Make some more widgets on my 9x20 HF lathe, 2) Irrefutably prove that Darwin’s theory on evolution of species is wrong. Tough choice I guess, those widgets sure do look nice and shiny.

Phil:)


Ever study Logic? There's a whole slew of equations that can be used to refute the validity of the claims made by such evolutionists. Frankly, I could use modus ponens to defeat pretty much every assertion. It all goes back to what happened in the past defied the laws of the present, so if you apply the laws of the present, what they insist happened in the past is impossible. Evolution fails. I've thought this since High School, and even nearly got kicked out of my advanced science class for arguing with my teacher back then. His problem - he couldn't refute what I contested. :D Nearly blew a vein yelling at me about it. Yeah, that's solid theory eh? A 17 yr old can blow holes in it for an entire semester without trying.

Doc Nickel
10-26-2009, 09:06 AM
There's a whole slew of equations that can be used to refute the validity of the claims made by such evolutionists.

-Such as...? Let's have a couple of examples.


It all goes back to what happened in the past defied the laws of the present[...]

-Oh? How, exactly? Where, precisely, does evolutionary theory- the actual theory, not just your interpretation of it- "defy" the laws of physics? (One presumes you meant 'physics' and not 'the present', as the latter is meaningless.)


[...]so if you apply the laws of the present, what they insist happened in the past is impossible.

-Oh? Just how, precisely?

And before you answer that, again, try not to conflate abiogenesis with evolutionary theory.

Doc.

deeman
10-26-2009, 09:09 AM
LOL Beanbag...we could just replace a few of the characters there with some of our own ...hmm i wonder who we could get to play the roles.