Gravitational theory is a theory. What would you call it? The "Law of Gravity" is something else entirely (that's Newton's law which is really just a formulation).

This has been discussed extensively on the first page (in fact, the second post) of this thread.

I don't bash people of faith; I bash creationists, who are wrong. However, this is not the forum nor thread nor even the board to discuss this.

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com

Somehow I think rule 14 would be best off as simply "Be nice, or else!", all the things the current rule 14 mention also falls within this one, and it'll cover whatever new irritants posters can invent as well.
It also reflects well back to the (in my memory) rather harmonious time when it was the only rule there was (though the latter half wasn't explicit at the time)

__________________
An emperor without enemies, a king without a kingdom, supported in life by the willing tribute of a free people.

Phil Plait. Totally agree with your evaluation, but my friend, stop the bus.
Are not creationists people of faith? And is it not so that in any faith there
are ones who interpret their faith to fund their own desire?
With respect, Phil, think this forum is the antitheses of creation thinking,
in that it allows the exploration of new ideas, and questions old assumptions
about beliefs our forefathers held in their misguided search for understanding.
To that end, this forum holds a special place in Mans understanding of truth.
Nokton

Yes, but...
Not all "people of faith" are creationists!
Just as "all dachshunds are dogs" does not mean (or even imply) that "all dogs are dachshunds".

__________________
Any day you wake up on "the right side of the dirt" is a good day.

T. Anderson

Yup. My point exactly. I am not "bashing" all people of faith. I am taking on one very small subsect of them.

Enough of this here, please. It's off topic, and against the rules.

__________________
Phil Plait
The Bad Astronomer
http://www.badastronomy.com
badastro@badastronomy.com

Yes Fermats theorem has been proved, but not in the way Fermat
proved it, that is my contention, what method of evaluation did Fermat
realise his conclusion????
Nokton.

This is an older thread (not too old, but the discussion seems to have died out).

Fermat probably did not actually prove it, but thought he did--other mathematicians since have thought they've proven it as well only to find mistakes. We don't know anything at all about his approach, he left no real record of it, although he worked on similar problems.

Maybe it took some time in this case, but in the end there is proof.
Unless this proof is going to be proven wrong also, but then it was not proof.
But as I think of it, you do have a good point. Certainly when the proof is very complex. How can you be certain, the proof is correct then? Theoreticly it is possible to don't make mistakes though.

And maybe that is the difference with physics. Because in physics, it is theoreticly not possible to be sure there never will be an observation, which is going to disprove, your idea.

Once you proof something mathematicly the book is closed. While in physics there always will be an open end.

__________________
Not because it is easy, but because it is hard...

There is no way to happiness,
happiness is the way.

rule #15 - no catapults

I think this:

Noah's Ark

Noah's Ark

Noah's Ark

Noah's Ark

warrants discussion.

Obviously there was a misunderstanding, but I do think this requires some clarification for rule purposes. As I see it, a moderator made some comments in a thread (not what I would consider an official moderator action), a poster disagreed publically and got an official warning for being disrespectful. First, I don't see how that is an issue per the rules, and second, I wasn't aware that moderators couldn't be criticized.

Edited to add another relevant post.

__________________
I say there is an invisible elf in my backyard. How do you prove that I am wrong?

Disclaimer: Avatar is not an official NASA image and does not imply any specific interplanetary or interstellar capability.

The Leif Ericson Cruiser

Thanks for the post.

__________________
"All your bias are belong to us." Ara Pacis
"A witty saying proves nothing." Voltaire

Uh, yeah. I just read through that thread, and all my concerns about self-moderation have come right back to the forefront. The official warning antoniseb gave Erioica regarding IMO valid criticism regarding antoniseb was way out of line, IMO, and goes right to the core of my earlier concerns about self-moderation. If a warning in that instance was warranted (which I strongly feel it wasn't), it should not have come from antoniseb, but another moderator and confirmed by an admin.

When I expressed my concerns about moderator transparancy shortly after BAUT merged, I was asked (in my perception rather defensively) [paraphrased] "don't I trust the mod team" [/paraphrased]. I repeat my answer: trust must be earned. So must respect.

If anyone should choose to consider my expressing my very real concerns as disrespecting a mod, and choose to exercise the rule about no-public criticism, then I consider the matter important enough to gladly accept my suspension.

In any case: the admin should consider this my appeal and protest of what I see as Eroica's undeserved, and inappropriately delivered warning, and will trust in the admin that the situation will be corrected appropriately.

[Edit: I've used the "report post" feature to request the admins' attention to this matter.]

__________________
[Dr. Horrible]___________________________[Penny]
Listen close to everybody's heart________And you believe there's good in everybody's heart
And hear that breaking sound_____________Keep it safe and sound
Hopes and dreams are shattering apart____With hope you can do your part
And crashing to the ground_______________To turn a life around

I totally agree with Moose's first and last paragraphs, as well as his edit.

__________________
Hwæt! We Gardena in geardagum,
þeodcyninga, þrym gefrunon,
hu ða æþelingas ellen fremedon.

This will be in interesting discussion. I believe that Eroica's ad hom attack of me was completely out of place, and we have warned people for less.

Since then Eroica has explained that my original post was misread, and that caused Eroica's ad hom attack. I took that as an apology, and an effort to correct things. No further discussion has happened between myself and Eroica since then, but in other threads we've been interacting like any other two people on the forum.

That being the case, I'm taking your protest as more of a what-if kind of issue as opposed to genuine concern that a terrible miscarriage of justice has been done.

__________________
Forming opinions as we speak

Quadritto. Van Rijn and Moose make good points. I experienced a case in point recently and it could have been resolved a better way than it was (or wasn't). Moderators, imho, should have more tolerance, not less, and set an example by resolving within the thread...iow, rising to the occasion and letting capable people resolve the issue by themselves. I like the moderators here--they all seem like good, smart people--so I'd hate to see resentment build against them. They should let others mediate their disputes with others. Being able to delete a poster's comment is an unfair advantage, especially when it's unwarranted...these are things to think about.

I work for a corporation all day...I don't want to treat the admins like bosses and come here and feel there's this chain of command/rank and file/Indians and Chiefs thing here. Respect is earned and it should be a bit more fun than work.

__________________
Sunset

Die Sonne scheidet hinter dem Gebirge. In alle Täler steigt der Abend nieder
mit seinen Schatten, die voll Kühlung sind.

I've had a chance to read through the threads, and I think it's a series of miscommunications on top of each other. I'm happy to discuss this as transparently as you like.

At the same time, though, I think that when there are personality clashes, people have the right to deal with it personally. For example, if I've got a problem with someone at work, I'm not going to complain about them in public until I've given them a chance to respond and deal with the situation. Barring that, I'd go to the next stage and complain to their manager. When the conversation is public, it's unfair for the participants and generally makes the whole situation uglier.

Feel free to criticize the forum, our software, the general tone, or even the moderation team in general all you like. But as a favour to me, Phil, and to the volunteer team of moderators who generously give their personal time to make this forum a better place, I ask... no... beg that you don't undermine their morale by criticizing then specifically until we've had a chance to get to the bottom of it and deal with it.

Is that distinction clear enough? And does it explain why we have that info in the rules? If not, fire away, I'm at your disposal, and ready to earn your respect. But you're going to have convince me why you think criticizing people out in public on the forum is a positive thing, and generally improves the forum overall.

__________________
Fraser Cain
Publisher
Universe Today - Free space news delivered by email every weekday.

You may choose to see it that way, but I assure you I consider this a serious matter even if you don't, and have phrased my "report this post" protest to the admin accordingly.

You may consider your action completely under protest.

IMO, you owe Eroica an apology far more than he owed you one, if he owed you one at all. (And it just shows how much class he has that he offered you one. Given your response, I would have stood by the characterization, suspension or no. But then, I've never considered myself classy. So there it is.)

As such, I have asked the admin that the policy about self-moderation be looked into with mind to prevent repetitions, and Eroica's warning publically repealed.

[Edit for typo.]

__________________
[Dr. Horrible]___________________________[Penny]
Listen close to everybody's heart________And you believe there's good in everybody's heart
And hear that breaking sound_____________Keep it safe and sound
Hopes and dreams are shattering apart____With hope you can do your part
And crashing to the ground_______________To turn a life around

It's not an unfair request, but my requests stand: I want antoniseb to apologize to Eroica, and for the warning to be reversed.

Until this happens, I would prefer my protest be public to the extent I've made it.

__________________
[Dr. Horrible]___________________________[Penny]
Listen close to everybody's heart________And you believe there's good in everybody's heart
And hear that breaking sound_____________Keep it safe and sound
Hopes and dreams are shattering apart____With hope you can do your part
And crashing to the ground_______________To turn a life around

Well, as per the forum rules, Antoniseb was justified; and at the same time I can see why you and others would see it as out of line, considering the fact that he was the one being criticized. And I go back to my original comment that this is already blown way out of proportion.

Phil and I will discuss this over with the mods and figure out what's a clearer language for the forum rules, and then anything else that needs to be done from this point on.

__________________
Fraser Cain
Publisher
Universe Today - Free space news delivered by email every weekday.