# Meet Pinguin **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [April 10, 2011, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/meet-pinguin/577881 "2011-04-10T18:13:28Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 7\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Morbo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/morbo/32/389_2.png) [@Morbo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Morbo)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2011, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/meet-pinguin/577881/101 "2011-04-20T00:57:28Z")
> [@pinguin](#): > > Oh yes. Torturing animals just for the fun of it, is part of the “scientific” research. My frogs were already dead. YMMV. ---
**Author:** ![Smeghead](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f1d935/32.png) [@Smeghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smeghead)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2011, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/meet-pinguin/577881/102 "2011-04-20T01:04:08Z")
> [@pinguin](#): > > I have not said science was wrong. I said guessing the population at contact isn’t science; it is gambling. Those schollars aren’t using scientific methods, or at least they pretend to find truths that aren’t there. Something not very strange at all in the study of the Americas, anyways, where you find the wildest claims you can imagine. Utter nonsense. There’s a vast difference between statistical analysis, which is what they use, and the crap you’re accusing them of. And despite many many repeated requests, you have YET to provide even a shred of evidence to back up your claims that is more substantial than “I reckon…” or “everybody knows that…” or “there’s no way this can be true”. > [@](#): > > Besides, why do you get annoyed because someone complain about certain scientists? Aren’t there corrupt scientists? Weren’t scientists involved in the development of weapons such as mustard gass, the agent orange, the nuclear bomb, and the experiments with Jews during WWII? > > So, please, don’t tell me science is a sacred field. We aren’t in the times of Auguste Comte anymore. Thanks God! (I am agnostic, anyways, but mainly skeptic) Ignoring the rampant Godwinizing there, my complaint is not that you’re criticizing science. My complaint is that your criticisms are total shit. I’m a grad student earning a PhD in molecular biology. If there’s one thing I’ve learned so far, it’s how to rip an argument to shreds. That’s one of the most important skills to have as a scientist, because there’s nothing scientists enjoy more than demolishing someone else’s carefully crafted argument that they’ve spent ten years crafting. If nothing else, you need to be able to rip your OWN arguments apart before publishing them, because if you don’t do it in private, it’s damn sure someone else will in public. So, if I may preempt your inevitable response, am I saying that only scientists are allowed to criticize other scientists? No. What I am saying is that your particular criticisms are so laughably bad that if they (the criticisms) were valid, those papers would have been discredited within seconds of publication, and the authors laughed into instant retirement. It’s like you’re attacking a Navy SEAL with a spitwad. I may not know the exact history of that particular SEAL, but I have an idea of what he’s had to go through to get to where he is, and I can be pretty damned sure that a spitwad isn’t going to be effective. ---
**Author:** ![pinguin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ac8455/32.png) [@pinguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pinguin)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2011, 1:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/meet-pinguin/577881/103 "2011-04-20T01:28:06Z")
> [@Smeghead](#): > > Utter nonsense. Just your oppinion. > [@Smeghead](#): > > There’s a vast difference between statistical analysis, which is what they use, and the crap you’re accusing them of. And despite many many repeated requests, you have YET to provide even a shred of evidence to back up your claims that is more substantial than “I reckon…” or “everybody knows that…” or “there’s no way this can be true”. You can use all the fancy math you wish, but if your data is wrong, the result is wrong. > [@Smeghead](#): > > My complaint is that your criticisms are total shit. No it is not!!! > [@Smeghead](#): > > I’m a grad student earning a PhD in molecular biology. Congrats for you, but never forget that “what natures doesn’t give, Salamanca won’t provide” 😃 > [@Smeghead](#): > > If there’s one thing I’ve learned so far, it’s how to rip an argument to shreds. That’s one of the most important skills to have as a scientist, because there’s nothing scientists enjoy more than demolishing someone else’s carefully crafted argument that they’ve spent ten years crafting. If nothing else, you need to be able to rip your OWN arguments apart before publishing them, because if you don’t do it in private, it’s damn sure someone else will in public. And so? > [@Smeghead](#): > > So, if I may preempt your inevitable response, am I saying that only scientists are allowed to criticize other scientists? No. What I am saying is that your particular criticisms are so laughably bad that if they (the criticisms) were valid, those papers would have been discredited within seconds of publication, and the authors laughed into instant retirement. It’s like you’re attacking a Navy SEAL with a spitwad. I may not know the exact history of that particular SEAL, but I have an idea of what he’s had to go through to get to where he is, and I can be pretty damned sure that a spitwad isn’t going to be effective. Laughably? Because I said these so called “scientists” have no idea what the actual population of the Americas at contact really was? You know very well they don’t have any idea. They play with models that have no feedback from hard evidence. In a sense they aren’t better than those ignorants that talk about Phoenicians in the Americas, or Egyptian mummies smoking crack! Please don’t protect those loosers, no matter they are yours colleagues. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![Darth\_Nader](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ad7895/32.png) [@Darth\_Nader](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Darth_Nader)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2011, 1:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/meet-pinguin/577881/104 "2011-04-20T01:33:22Z")
You don’t believe Egyptian mummies smoked crack? Wow. I’m speechless. ---
**Author:** ![pinguin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ac8455/32.png) [@pinguin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pinguin)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2011, 1:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/meet-pinguin/577881/105 "2011-04-20T01:34:55Z")
😃 ---
**Author:** ![Acsenray](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/acsenray/32/4519_2.png) [@Acsenray](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Acsenray)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2011, 4:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/meet-pinguin/577881/106 "2011-05-01T16:06:55Z")
Well, he got himself banned. I was hoping he would stick around long enough to learn something about critical thinking and rational discourse. ---
**Author:** ![Colibri](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/colibri/32/1841_2.png) [@Colibri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Colibri)\ **Post date:** [May 1, 2011, 4:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/meet-pinguin/577881/107 "2011-05-01T16:10:17Z")
> [@acsenray](#): > > Well, he got himself banned. I was hoping he would stick around long enough to learn something about critical thinking and rational discourse. I far as I could tell, he had no interest in that. Since he’s gone now, I am going to close this. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/meet-pinguin/577881.md?page=5)