Weekly Discussion - Science

[Brandon1]

You know, you're throwing in quotes from more than one person, that gets tricky, leads to that backpedaling.

Yes I did do that genius. I did that on purpose. That was the point. It was not a secret. To show that there were many different quotes from bitter people who wish to condemn scientists for stupid reasons as if they are all one person, instead of acknowledging the countless contributions they have made to life as we know it and take for granted. Very tricky. Now we are all confused.

I still think its funny that you thought scientists don't share their findings with the rest of the public. Not true at all.

 

[Brandon1]

You know, you're throwing in quotes from more than one person, that gets tricky, leads to that backpedaling.

Let me make something totally clear that was totally clear before your week criticism. It was a list of different quotes.

 

[Len]

One last request for civility before I lock this thread.

 

[Brandon1]

I say CAN be equally qualified...what do you do for a living anyways...??? Are you one of those "scientist" that refuse to believe anyone outside of a degree can be an equal??? kinda arrogant and egotistical if that is the case...so in my humble opinion you arent a contributor to this topic...

Am I "one of those scientists?" HaHaHa.. that's funny. Some out side of a degree CAN be qualified and accurate, of course. It just not likely. That's obvious. Its about very hard work for decades, being in an environment with other smart people who challenge you and inspire you, studying the many subjects science as a whole has to offer, and on and on.

Its also funny that you attempted to convince me that no one had been "talking down scientists" and that to say so was b.s., and here you are putting them in a bad light with a generalization based on nothing that has happened. I do not think in this discussion any scary scientists has announced his presence and then proceed to declare that no one who is not a scientist as he is could equal the gold bricks he sh*ts. If you are referring to something you have experienced, site your evidence. If you are just pretty sure that some of those dorky scientists guys probably think that they are better than you, then you are making an assumption that say more about your own feelings of self worth than reality.

In my humble opinion someone doesn't have to make you feel good about yourself to contribute to this topic. I diversified the opinions in the discussion and made many good points that had not been stated. Hey dood, that's a contribution.

I am not a scientist at all. I have studied many different areas of science but have never aspired to be a scientist, and who I am and what I do has nothing to do with my statements. I base none of my statements on elitist ideology, I have nothing to gain or loose from insulting or complimenting scientists. I simply articulating common sense.

 

[Brandon1]

One last request for civility before I lock this thread.

I assume that you have the ability to do that, but seems ridiculous. A debate is not harmful or scary. I am not being uncivil, I am responding to critics. Nothing outrageous is happening, its just people disagreeing.

 

[Brandon1]

Scientists all have their noses in the air, I used to work for one, they think they know everything and hate to be told otherwise.

Thank you for making many argument even more relevant. Had a bad experience? Bitter? Fine. Why do you say "all" scientists? Its not just you, many (not all) people that are into reef keeping are the type that love to feel smarter than all those stupid sheep stumbling around K-mart. We love to feel so smart about our machines and chemistry sets, we resent the fact that we are not always the highest form of intelligence... there are always people that studied more than you, that are more intelligent than you, that have more scientific experience than you... we really hate to admit it. To attack scientists because they are always thinking that they are smarter than everyone else is projection. We love to feel like that. Its the reason we are attacking them. Maybe our time would be better spent reading a scientific journal (they do exist "seamaiden").

 

[Len]

Brandon, I agree there's nothing wrong with a debate, but if you are unaware you are being uncivil, I will be forced to close this thread. You have persistently mocked and used deragotory adjectives which have no place in a constructive discussion. All I'm asking of everyone is to refrain from the unnecessary personal exchanges and deragatory descriptions (calling people's ideas stupid, for example).

 

[Len]

Just to clarify so I'm not ambigious in my request, I see a big difference between the following two statements meant to reflect the same idea:
"I disagree with your opinion because ....."
and
"Your idea is stupid, genius ....."

I hope you don't feel like I'm just singly you out. My request applies to everyone in this thread (and in our community in general).

 

[melanotaenia1]

I am just saying that while I do give praise to those scientists who have put their work into many experiments relevant to our industry, I think that someone who follows something in their own tank can gather a hypothesis and conclusion from what they observe in their own ecosystem.

As I said before, I would take advice from any scientist OR any regular reefkeeper as long as the advice brings me to some type of solution, so there, that is what we have to contribute to this industry.....the ability to help eachother keep reefs alive inside of glass cases........isn't that all what we are here to do anyways?

And by the way it is not that I am bitter about scientists, I just think they should not think of themselves any better than anyone else in terms of what they can contribute to reefkeeping

 

[Anonymous]

Brandon, when you used the quote function, you left one person's name up there, which, to the eye of anyone else reading the thread, would indicate that this person said all that. It has nothing to do with intelligence, just an understanding of the quote function and how to use it properly. That being said, if I were the person to whom you attributed those remarks, I'd be a bit more than perturbed.

 

[Anonymous]

thank you melanotaenia...you prove my point...

 

[melanotaenia1]

thank you melanotaenia...you prove my point...


LordNikon, you are welcome, just so long as our little creatures are happy that is all that matters to me :lol:

 

[Brandon1]

Brandon, when you used the quote function, you left one person's name up there, which, to the eye of anyone else reading the thread, would indicate that this person said all that. It has nothing to do with intelligence, just an understanding of the quote function and how to use it properly. That being said, if I were the person to whom you attributed those remarks, I'd be a bit more than perturbed.

You have come out on the losing end of every exchange we have had, making false statements, week arguments and pretending not to understand simple things that I have said is now your way to feel right... this is the latest example of that. Anyone who has read this thread would know that that was a list of different quotes from different people (that proved my point very well, which is the larger issue you are directing our conversation away from). It not a big deal. Infact I doubt anyone at all was horribly mislead. You saw a small opening and went for it.

"I'd be a bit more than perturbed."
Haha what is a bit more than perturbed? maybe very perturbed? outraged? Let them speak for themeless. You seem to be the only one who has an issue with it. Lets end this nonsense and talk about reefs.

 

[Brandon1]

And by the way it is not that I am bitter about scientists, I just think they should not think of themselves any better than anyone else in terms of what they can contribute to reefkeeping

What if "they" are? Should "they" then still pretend that "they" are not? "They" are not one person. Some may be annoyingly arrogant, its ridiculous to say that they all think a certain way though. We don't know each other. These people involved in this discussion might be more arrogant than the average scientist... you never know. My guess is that the average scientist who studies reef keeping is in a better position to make scientific observations/hypothesis/solutions than the average hobbyist. No, thats not an insult to you, no need to be defensive. Because hobbyists are not one person either, some are very smart and put in a lot of energy into what they do. Buts lets just end this, its so obvious, the AVERAGE scientist who studies reef keeping is in a better possession to make scientific observations/hypothesis/solutions than the AVERAGE hobbyist. Because the subject is scientific in nature. And the scientist has decades of experience with........ SCIENCE! I'm really sorry that some of you don't like the sound of this. Lying to yourself is your business. I'm sure we could convince ourselves that we would make a much greater politician than any given senator/governor/president, even those of us who nothing about the practical responsibilities a politician has, and a few days in their shoes would give us a much greater respect for their accomplishments, abilities and responsibilities. Its ok, go top off your tank and grumble lies to yourself about that elitist single organism called the scientists who don't know as much as they think they do.

 

[Anonymous]

Actually our government was designed to let just about an american citizen run the country...with a few minor stipulations...but it doesnt take a politician to run the country better...there is 200 + years of proof on that...

 

[Brandon1]

Actually our government was designed to let just about an american citizen run the country...with a few minor stipulations...but it doesnt take a politician to run the country better...there is 200 + years of proof on that...

I'll bet you think we have a democracy too. Its a representative republic. hey dood, you can't be serious. Now you are trying to tell me that just about anyone can run the country, where to start... first of all one politician doesn't run the country, even the president. Second, a citizen becomes a politician the moment they are elected, so citizen's don't "run the country" in the context which we are discussing this phrase, politicians do, so I guess we’ll never know if a citizen could do a better job. Once you have that respectability your perspective would change from your days of casually judging politicians as being collectively so much stupider than you and your friends. Depending on the position a politician holds there are things you actually have to know to do you job effectively (not that all politicians know everything that they should or that would help them make their discussions, but there is a basic level of history/knowledge of issues/ability to work with people/decisiveness, ect. that allows a politician to be effective). Now we could all write a 20 page paper on this and still not cover everything, but you get the point. Many politicians are inadequate, thats another discussion, but I brought it up as a metaphor intended to make the point that its easy to judge someone's responsibilities, accomplishments and even integrity when you are not in their shoes. Thats something to think about.

you wrote,"but it doesn't take a politician to run the country better." Politicians are not another species. They are individuals who have achieved the authority to represent citizens, and like scientists there are "good" ones "bad" ones and everything in between which is not the point. They have a specific job which requires specific responsibilities/abilities, and in most cases its EASIER to judge them than it is do their job better than they do. Thats my point. Don't get to hung up on it, its just a metaphor. But if you would like an illustration of what I am talking about watch the movie Thirteen days, its pretty good.

 

[Anonymous]

:|

 

[hdtran]

Back on track, folks, please...

Weekly Discussion - Science

Do you think it is possible for hobbyists to contribute to the scientific community regarding husbandry and methodology of reef keeping, or are hobbyists experiences anecdotal? How? Why?

About the RDO Weekly Discussion:
This discussion is meant to get at your experience and to share information that is in your head, so don't necessarily treat it as information gathering. State your opinion and, if available, use material, anecdotal or otherwise, that will back up your opinion.
Past weekly discussions will be archived in the archives.
If you have topics that you think would be helpful for the RDO community to discuss, please send me a pm or start your own thread! :mrgreen:

In my opinion, yes. Amateurs can contribute to the scientific community. It is, of course, possible for amateurs to make less than useful observations (uncontrolled or poorly controlled experiments; poor understanding of the difference between causality and correlation).

There are many other fields where dedicated amateurs do make significant scientific contributions, for example, amateur astronomy.

Regards,

Hy (deliberately avoiding alphabet soup)

 

[melanotaenia1]

Well I still stand by my statement Brandon, and I think many here are in agreement with what I stated earlier...........we contribute to a greater end, to understand the way the reefs of the world work, just as scientists choose something about the world to study. We choose reefkeeping because that is our passion, and that is why we, as hobbyists, regardless of who we are, have the ability to understand these ecosystems better by understanding what goes on every day in our little pieces of the sea....that tank in our living room.

And here is something else to consider since we are still circumventing the topic of a scientist versus a reefkeeper. (I was a philosophy/cell developmental bio major in college)

According to Webser science is quote: "the state of knowing: knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding" And to this end, it would then lead to defining a scientist as one who is quote "a person learned in science" meaning someone who is learned in a "state of knowing", in other words, has the ability to know something as being correct versus something that is not, i.e. a misunderstanding or an ignorant conclusion. This would then conclude that all of us here are scientists since we all are in the state of knowing SOMETHING, whether it be something as simple as how to mix saltwater. And that we have that knowledge and have a factual conclusion from that knowledge, it has to be recognized as true.

So then I guess the real answer is since we are all scientists here, what is the point in even comparing eachother when we are all on the same level.

.(period)

What a great thread, I never knew my little reef and my interest in how it works would ever lead me here :wink:

 

[Anonymous]

ok Brandon has the answers to the worlds problems..he knows all and is mighty...Let me guess "dood" we still need an electoral college right...Yes the constitution was written so anyone could run as a president...HELLO....3rd grade social science....nonetheless...everyone seems to argue the fact against what you are saying about this topic...the fact is hobbyist can contribute to science...fact is hobbyist do contribute to science..if it wasnt for the hobbyist there would be no science...so yes brandon you can quote me...