biffer Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 ...apparently there are people who don't think the International Space Station exists. Prof Brian Cox has used the term shitwits and ####nozzles to describe such people, which I feel is being kind to them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iainmac1 Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 (edited) There are people who believe all sorts of stuff. There is a website and forum called flat earth where they believe the earth is flat and it's a big conspiracy that it's round. Why it's a conspiracy they don't really know though. Edited December 18, 2015 by iainmac1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Professor Brian cox is a boring khunt that makes me want to go do something else when he talks about science. In fact every time i see the khunt i have to go watch a Feynman lecture, to maintain my keen interest in science. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biffer Posted December 18, 2015 Author Share Posted December 18, 2015 Professor Brian cox is a boring khunt that makes me want to go do something else when he talks about science. In fact every time i see the khunt i have to go watch a Feynman lecture, to maintain my keen interest in science. That doesn't negate his entirely correct description of people in this case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 That doesn't negate his entirely correct description of people in this case. what description? combining two pejoratives together then spending time on deciding which one is the best in some communal twitter group. are they "shitwits" or "####nozzles", pressing questions in science. He's meant to be the face of science education or one of them anyway. I'm reminded of a letter to Richard Feynman in which the person said he had noticed a new force (and wanted it called after himself) to do with winding a bit of yarn round a pencil. Now Feynman could have got together with like minded folk and decided on a label for that person, or he could write a detailed reply explaining that the change in potential energy by winding the pencil up in yarn was enough to propel the pencil. Fully explained and thanking him for bringing this "interesting phenomena" to his attention. Guess what path was taken by the great educator. If folk don't believe in the space station show them how they can actually see it. As that is very possible. Science should be accessible to all, everything we hold as true will most likely be shown in the future to be a unimaginative, inaccurate imprecise caricature of what reality is really like. I just don't see the doubt in Cox like i did other presenters, it rubs me up the wrong way, as evidenced by this lengthy post Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 (edited) Professor Brian cox is a boring khunt that makes me want to go do something else when he talks about science. In fact every time i see the khunt i have to go watch a Feynman lecture, to maintain my keen interest in science. Thank you. I was beginning to think I was the only one. He is such a smarmy boring khunt it is an instant channel change. No wonder the BBC love him he just the kind of know it all boring khunt they go for and put on TV in a near loop of incredible boringness. The boring khunt. Edited December 18, 2015 by thplinth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 (edited) Thank you. I was beginning to think I was the only one. He is such a smarmy boring khunt it is an instant channel change. No wonder the BBC love him he just the kind of know it all boring khunt they go for and put on TV in a near loop of incredible boringness. The boring khunt. 3 definitions of the scientific method one with Cox one with feynman, with Neil degreassie in middle as neutral comparison. Common sense? that's a human invention no place in science. Wonder who Cox is copying here? Edited December 18, 2015 by phart Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Toepoke Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 ...apparently there are people who don't think the International Space Station exists. What's happened to poor Tim then? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thplinth Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 (edited) 3 definitions of the scientific method one with Cox one with feynman, with Neil degreassie in middle as neutral comparison. Common sense? that's a human invention no place in science. Wonder who Cox is copying here? I’ve seen him in a few things (including a Christmas lecture I think it was which I normally enjoy). As you point out he is really fecking boring and despite being a big shot professor completely fails to animate any topic he is describing. In fact he routinely sucks the life out of anything he is windbagging on. There is also a big streak of whank running through him as he regularly denigrates people who believe in things of which he disapproves. Really vitriolic sneering stuff. The combination of deeply boring veering into utter whankiness puts him up there with that other great BBC hall of famer whank of whanks Dara O'Whankien. Edited December 18, 2015 by thplinth Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biffer Posted December 18, 2015 Author Share Posted December 18, 2015 Bloody hell, some people got up grumpy today Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glasgow jock Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Neil deGrasse Tyson, Michio Kaku & the superb Lawrence Krauss - thats the guys that hold my interest in all things space & time (& i'm not academic at all) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boynze Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 what description? combining two pejoratives together then spending time on deciding which one is the best in some communal twitter group. are they "shitwits" or "####nozzles", pressing questions in science. He's meant to be the face of science education or one of them anyway. I'm reminded of a letter to Richard Feynman in which the person said he had noticed a new force (and wanted it called after himself) to do with winding a bit of yarn round a pencil. Now Feynman could have got together with like minded folk and decided on a label for that person, or he could write a detailed reply explaining that the change in potential energy by winding the pencil up in yarn was enough to propel the pencil. Fully explained and thanking him for bringing this "interesting phenomena" to his attention. Guess what path was taken by the great educator. If folk don't believe in the space station show them how they can actually see it. As that is very possible. Science should be accessible to all, everything we hold as true will most likely be shown in the future to be a unimaginative, inaccurate imprecise caricature of what reality is really like. I just don't see the doubt in Cox like i did other presenters, it rubs me up the wrong way, as evidenced by this lengthy post Surely you're joking Mr phart!!?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Bloody hell, some people got up grumpy today Can't be denied. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
biffer Posted December 18, 2015 Author Share Posted December 18, 2015 Can't be denied. I'm no fan of Brian Cox either, but I can't get my head round people not believing the ISS exists. You can see the shape of it with a pair of binoculars! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Damo Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 So you're saying the binocular manufacturers are in on it as well - jeez this goes higher than I thought.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
phart Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 It's probably some trolls saying they don't believe in it anyway. Poe's law and all that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobby Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 So you're saying the binocular manufacturers are in on it as well - jeez this goes higher than I thought.... I had a job there once putting little black space station shaped stickers on the lenses so its definitley true Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brassrubber Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 and Santa ??? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bzzzz Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 "God"? "Santa"? "United" Kingdom "Great" Britain Democracy in the UK Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 what description? combining two pejoratives together then spending time on deciding which one is the best in some communal twitter group. are they "shitwits" or "####nozzles", pressing questions in science. He's meant to be the face of science education or one of them anyway. I'm reminded of a letter to Richard Feynman in which the person said he had noticed a new force (and wanted it called after himself) to do with winding a bit of yarn round a pencil. Now Feynman could have got together with like minded folk and decided on a label for that person, or he could write a detailed reply explaining that the change in potential energy by winding the pencil up in yarn was enough to propel the pencil. Fully explained and thanking him for bringing this "interesting phenomena" to his attention. Guess what path was taken by the great educator. If folk don't believe in the space station show them how they can actually see it. As that is very possible. Science should be accessible to all, everything we hold as true will most likely be shown in the future to be a unimaginative, inaccurate imprecise caricature of what reality is really like. I just don't see the doubt in Cox like i did other presenters, it rubs me up the wrong way, as evidenced by this lengthy post I know you've given me a red (or yellow?) card but don't recall if the terms included not responding to/quoting your posts? And I happen to agree with this one.We should admire Prof Cox for being made entirely of wax and yet still being able to find his way around a casio keyboard while lipsynching through the rictus grin permanently embossed on his pus. That takes some doing. Less attractive is the fact that he is utterly middle of the road, unchallenging and fiercly dogmatic in his views on the universe. He brings no original insights to any debate in any area of life as we imagine it to be. That's why he's a media darling and the chosen mouthpiece of the mediocre for the masses - when science should be anything but. Did I mention he was also made of wax? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dillinger Posted December 18, 2015 Share Posted December 18, 2015 Confusing to see Phart so wound up in this thread, I read a few weeks ago that he was right into Cox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Bloody hell, some people got up grumpy today I think you'll find that it was you that started it. Although it has been taken to a new level. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Orraloon Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 But, the burdz love him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishcumnock Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Bet ye grumpy wizny happy ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stokesy Posted December 19, 2015 Share Posted December 19, 2015 Buzz Aldrin's response to being told that the moon landings were faked. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.