we Have A New Freak On The Board, & Is He A Dilly!

Meet phybre.
He thinks that ionizing radiation is good for you! :eek: :eek: :eek:

And everybody in the world, except him & a few fringe thinkers, is wrong wrong wrong!

He may or may not be a complete dingbat, but I rather enjoy his style of writing. “I now wield my cluestick.” Heh.

Wow.

At least he isn’t of the “my post is my cite” mentality. Close, but he does have some cites to offer (I don’t know how good they are, but still)

WHEE!

Lookit him rant, Ma! :smack: :smiley: :wally

fiber.
what makes you poop.
:slight_smile:

Actually it appears to be you that’s doing the ranting… He’s corrected you several times and I’ve yet to see a cite from you backing your statements…

Yeah, I’m afraid I’m not seeing it. He may or may not be wrong, but he’s arguing his position well.

Time will tell if he’s a nut. Even if he is, we could use more nuts who actually try to argue their case and use facts.

He’s posting long arguments, and cites, and discussing his points rationally.

You’re using multiple colors, insulting smilies, large font sizes, and making fun of his name.

And you’re pitting him?

No, Bosda, actually you are having your ass handed to you in that debate. I dunno if he’s correct or not, but he’s got cites stating why he believes Cecil to be in error.

Your only cite has been a Cecil column, when it is Cecil’s knowledge of nuclear physics that phybre is disputing.

As usual, you are doing your typical bang up job of making arguments, not presenting cites and then getting belligerent when people disagree with you. Given my previous encounters with you, I’m betting that he’s right and you’re wrong - since you usually are.

I must admit, I laughed at this. Long and loud.

Disclaimer: I don’t know dick about radiation. But I know a fallacious argument when I see one. To wit, in relation to the number of countries regulating radiation exposure:

I responded:

Dickless phybreresponds: “The things you are unaware of could probably fill volumes.”

He’s a militant freak, and a jerk to boot. I can’t wait until his trial membership is over.

Sorry. For the moment, it’s you ranting and him being calm. You may not get the results from this Pitting that you wanted.

If you pit someone, aren’t you supposed to link to the pit thread? I thought it was just good manners.

At any rate, I really hope that “I now wield my cluestick” becomes common parlance. It could be great.

Ravenman, just because he tossed a tiny insult your way while explaining his point doesn’t make it any less true. I think he’s doing a damn good job of defending his position. And he’s making you guys look like big crybabies.

I for one welcome our newbie overlords.

I’ve been saying for years that radiation is good for you, I can even prove it, if I could get funding for the health study. It prevents Alzheimer’s Disease. Give me a population of about 1000 subjects, and I’ll expose about half of them to 500 REM dose, and leave the other half unexposed. I guarantee that in the unexposed population there will be far more incidents of Alzheimer’s Disease 30-40 years later. :wink: (Tongue very firmly in cheek)
Seriously, he’s not saying that large acute doses are good for people, only that the no-threshold model of radiation damage is wrong, and that there seem to be some health benefits to low level ionizing radiation. Mind you, the moment he starts advocating trips to those mines that are open now as ‘health spas’ to allow people to flood themselves with radon and radon decay daughters, I’ll be a bit more skeptical.

I don’t care about his point. As I said before, I don’t know squat about the science in this area, and I don’t care. But holding his own in a debate doesn’t give him license to be a jerk.

I’m thinking that the rhetorical technique of starting a Pit thread about a new poster who is thrashing you in a debate is not particularly effective.

If it was a boxing match, and I was the referee, I think I would have stopped the fight by now. As I read it Bosda, he is handing you your ass with that clusestick of his.

phibre is not being a Jerk. He may well be completely and utterly wrong, but he is arguing well and defending his position in a decent though slightly abbrasive manner.
Bosda you realy look worse than phibre in the linked thread. I hope you don’t frighten away what seems to be a promising guest from becoming a member.

This is a lame pitting. Bosda, it wpould do more for your credibility if you responded with reason and cites to support your assertions instead of throwing a hissy fit.

Phybre verges on the edge of crankdom (cites from 1928 and 1909?), but he’s not necessarily wrong. Hormesis is an apparently real phenomenon that has been demonstrated to occur in some studies, but it is still highly controversial and not yet widely accepted by the medical community. The argument seems to be that low doses of ionizing radiation set off repair systems in cells, thus acting as a sort of prophylactic against carcinogens and thus lowering one’s chances of cancer. Here’s a link to a Scientific American article that gives a brief overview that is comprehensible to non-scientists.