He said: “No one else has sensed this probably, since everyone on SD seems to be only a slight variation of everyone else…”
So, I said: “That sounds very close to what I would say.”
See, by saying that what he said sounds very close to what I would say juxtaposed with his observation that everyone is only a slight variation of everyone else, it raises an irony that the statement I made appears to corroborate the statement he made, when in fact it is well known that I am a renegade and quite unlike practically anyone else on the board.
Not funny? Well, when the punchline has to be explained, it never is. One suggestion, if I may… Relax off that hair-trigger just a bit that you seem to fire almost every time I post in the Pit. Maybe sit on your hands for a bit while you think. Don’t automatically assume the worst. Try not to see me through the caricature that you’ve drawn from your perceptions. This is something that I’m actually trying to do with you, which is why I haven’t snapped at you in a while, and why I stopped in a thread to defend you against an attacker. Whatever you decide, I hope it brings you peace.
So let me get this straight. You want to assign the people here months-long original research projects, and get them to do hundreds of hours of work on the questions you pull out of your ass…all for free. And then post the results here on the message board. You’ll read the answer, and then pull a new question out of your ass for the rest of us to research?
That’s the fucking plan? How about you ask a question you want to know the answer to, and see if somebody on the message board knows the answer, or knows how to find the answer? People might do extended unpaid research projects on subjects they find interesting…but why would they do unpaid research projects on projects YOU find interesting?
Take your phytochemical question. Do you have any idea how much research it would take to determine that the phytochemicals in orange juice provide health benefits? Tell me good sir, how exactly would you set up the experiment? How many subjects would you need? How would you control the experiment? How much and what kind of juice would the test group get, compared to how much flavored sugar water the control group got? How long will the experiment run? And most importantly how the fuck do you determine these elusive health benefits? Annual physicals for all members of the trial? Actuarial data? What health benefits are you expecting? You can’t just run the experiment for 20 years and search every type of data collected for some benefit, because if you collect 100 metrics, then by the laws of statistics your juice drinkers will probably show a benefit in 5 of those metrics at the 95% confidence level.
Determining whether natural phytochemicals in juice provide a health benefit would be a massive undertaking, requiring huge numbers of people in the trial, huge commitments of doctors, and a vast data gathering organization, all operating for at least a decade. And you want people here on the dope to do this research in their spare time? For free?
Okey-dokey. Now I get it. I suppose it was just a bit too arcane for me when I was only on my first cup of coffee.
Well, I wasn’t assuming anything this time. (I think.) I was bewildered, as was completely appropriate for a joke I didn’t get. Thanks for unbewildering me!
Generally, if I post in GQ it’s to offer an answer based on my life experience and my expertise in some areas. I rarely go to the Internet, unless I need some additional information to bolster my post, that I may be a bit fuzzy on. I’m pretty sure that most other posters there do the same. The ones that don’t, that post bullshit opinion or Internet glurge, are pretty quickly taken to task.
I dislike the arrogance of the OP. Why is a question about the shape of toothpicks any less important than a question about quantum physics? The purpose is knowledge, which makes you better in almost all cases.
Yeah, no kidding. hauss dislikes us pulling books off shelves and using the knowledge that science has acquired because it runs contrary to the superstitions of the fringier members of the alternative medicine movement.
You misunderstand. This dude - despite how he poses the question - is emphatically uninterested in scientific answers. It’s true that this place leans that way, and I for one see that as an essentially positive thing. Look at the threads he’s started - hauss is, well, eccentric. He’s one of our beloved misunderstood genius types, like lekatt. He’s so certain that he’s right that, when science disagrees with him, it’s a clear signal that science is consumed with its own biases and is obstructing the search for truth.
This is a common idea among the nuttier adherents of UFO “research”, paranormal nonsense, non-Western medicine, spirit channelers, and so on. Not that I think those subjects cannot or should not be approached scientifically, and I’m not particularly disinclined to think that science could demonstrate the validity of certain ideas that are currently non-mainstream. However, when you approach a problem certain of the answer, or certain of the truth of its precepts, it’s easy to decide that the answer must be wrong if it disagrees with you. This is a type of lax, lazy thinking and I for one am quite happy that it’s generally not present in GQ. hauss, for instance, feels that the intangible tooth-cleaning benefits of “natural” celery and carrots are superior to the well-known, well-quantified, and well-studied results of science - namely, toothpaste. Is this a question that merits reexamination nowadays, when the answers are so certain? Of course not.
I certainly hope GQ doesn’t get overrun with folks like hauss and lekatt. I hold no animosity towards non-mainstream beliefs, but I object when people stubbornly defend ideas that are shown to be false. hauss thinks we cling too much to the biased ideas of science, but I believe in the ideas of objective truth and objective reality, and I’m happier in the company of those who share my beliefs. I think it’s worse than useless to try to forge entirely new ideas about things like nutrition or dental health, as hauss does, because I am not so caught up in my own abilities to think that the learning of people who came before me is useless. hauss would probably be happier on a different message board. I think an examination of his ideas would demonstrate that indeed most of them are not supported by reality - but they are so firmly-held that they are not amenable to disproof by those more knowledgable than he. If he remakes GQ in his own image, it’s to everyone’s detriment.
Hauss doesn’t like it when we give the standard answers because those lying scientists just fill our heads with lies. They won’t tell the truth about crystals, they won’t tell the truth about circumcision, they won’t tell the truth about UFOs, they won’t tell the truth about phytochemicals. So therefore, every scientific “fact” proposed by those damn scientists must be thrown out, we have to start the whole scientific revolution over again from scratch. And this time when we do research objectively…instead of being biased like today’s scientific establishment…we’ll reveal the real truth, which just so happens to correspond exactly with Hauss’s current beliefs.
That makes much more sense, thanks for the explanation, Excalibre.
I think the Straight Dope is an invaluable resource in the internet world. There is so much information available to everyone with a computer and a modem that our poor wee heads can’t make any sense of it. The function the Straight Dope performs in my world is acting as an interface to all that information for me, and presenting it in a form that I can digest. As the world of computers and internet get more complex, an interface like this will become even more important.
People here aren’t doing hard research? That’s not what I come here for. People need help finding their way in a complex, complicated world? This is an excellent tool for that. Look at it this way; a computer will only answer the question you ask it. Another human being will look at the context, the person who asked the question, the question itself, wonder about why you want to know that, ask you questions to clarify what question you are actually trying to ask, and do all of that in a couple of sentences. We are absolutely invaluable to each other here.
Many, maybe most, of the GQ threads could be answered with a simple google search or a peek into wikipedia. But I’m constantly amazed at how quick one can often find the answer to the most arcane questions. Plus, with knowledgeable posters like Colibri who frequent GQ, I’m always learning new stuff.
All I can say is: It’s the internet, dumbass. Learn to filter out the noise.
Not only that, but with something like Wikipedia you never know how authoritative it is. Here, if you ask a question, chances are that an expert and/or someone with significant life experience bearing on the issue will step up to the plate and give a thorough answer. And then the person who opened the thread can say, “well what about this aspect, or that possibility?” You can’t do that with Wikipedia.
Nor does Wikipedia have the interesting little side trips this place has. Half the fun of reading an encyclopedia is random referencing things. Here, they do it for you, and you learn the answers to questions you never even thought to ask.
Yes and no. Wiki has some bogus stuff, for sure, but I’m still surprised how many dumb shits post erroneous info in GD. Sometimes it’s obviously wrong, but othertimes it’s subtle. The good thing, though, is that someone usually comes along and points out the bogus stuff. But wiki is somewhat self correcting, too.
The boards aren’t soft. They are filled with doctors, lawyers, and professionals of virtually EVERY occupation and hobby. When someone makes a claim, we ask for a cite to back it. Why? Because someone has, more than likely, already done the personal research to provide that data. No need for each one of us to do fucking science fair projects so we can prove that drinking Drano is bad. If we had to had to start over on all knowledge we’d never get anywhere. You wouldn’t even be typing on your computer because humans would still be trying to prove to you that rubbing two sticks together could eventually lead to fire.
Sorry hauss, I’ve read some of your other threads provided from the link above. I think there are some problems with the philosophy you guide you life by. The people on this board now what they are talking about. For you to dismiss facts as hearsay is fucking stupid. Believe what you want to believe, but one concept of a society is to build up from what has been built before you, not start from fucking scratch every generation. Doctors are doctors because they went to school for a LONG time to learn their practice and therefore know a fuck load more about health than you and your “natural body philosophy”.
Wikipedia is self-correcting in that people like me take the time to correct it. There are a lot of people like me throughout the world, from all walks of life and with all kinds of backgrounds and life experience.
Traditional encyclopedias reflect the biases of the small group of editors who put them together, and are not changed as new material comes to light. (Mainly because they’re physically printed and distributed.) Wikipedia is the work of so many people any one bias has a hard time remaining in the flurry of edits and revisions, and all of the articles are subject to revision at any time to reflect new knowledge.
A lot of you make some good points. Some of them however are not based on facts. But, the nature of a message board comes with a multitude of misunderstandings every time (especially when the issue my mind is immersed in is bigger than can be thoroughly explained given the communication medium and the unknown audience - and of course my lack of competence in written communication.). I have learned a little from this thread though, thanks.
It’s just that I know what is knowledge/truth and what is speculation and I demand knowledge when most people would settle for supported speculation. This is creating problems for me on this board, and I should probably just use this board for what it offers and nothing more.
By the way, I eat the whole orange when I have time and feel like it. (Just one of the many many misunderstandings…)
Also, don’t get me wrong, this site is a Godsend and I owe a lot to it. That’s why I want to hold it to such a high standard. but, whatever, some of you are right, I present questions and demand answers which are probably outside the scope of the function of this medium.
Man, the orange juice thread just gets funnier with time. I wonder if we should tell him that “phytochemicals” just means “plant chemicals.” Hey, I’ve heard that belladonna has some interesting phytochemicals with a dramatic impact on health!
Thanks for unbewildering me!