I was Michael Mozina'd.

[Kerr Metric]

Another in the long line of his victims.

[01101001]

Another in the long line of his victims.

So sorry.

Care to explain the details?

[Kerr Metric]

So sorry.

Care to explain the details?

The usual - completely bogus or misunderstood basic physics followed by dozens of pleas to analyse his "running difference images" and other photos that I have no means to assess the processing/raw data that went into them.

I'm not wasting time hypothesising from 300x300 pixel public release images or home grown photoshop tomfoolery.

Of course when I stated this the following were utlised:

a) I was part of the science community conspiracy

b) I was an ad hominem insulter

c) I was not really what I said I was

d) I was unable to see the truth

e) Because I refused to perform a scientific critique of the pictures he was obviously right

[BigDon]

There's a story here...

[Musashi]

Mozina is the iron sun guy, right? And he reached that conclusion by "analyzing" some photos?

[davidlpf]

Mozina is the iron sun guy, right? And he reached that conclusion by "analyzing" some photos?
upriver is either him or on of his repesentives then.

[upriver]

upriver is either him or on of his repesentives then.

You dont know what you are talking about.

I just happen to agree that the sun has a solid surface and that the coronal loops are indicators of electric current flow.

I have my ideas. They are more based in reality than magnetic fields without current flow, dark matter, blackholes. neutron stars, and all the other malarkey.


So please dont use my name unless you know what my ideas are.

Brant Callahan
AKA upriver

[davidlpf]

So please dont use my name unless you know what my ideas are.

Brant Callahan
AKA upriver
sorry I stand corrected

[Van Rijn]

Mozina is the iron sun guy, right? And he reached that conclusion by "analyzing" some photos?

Yes. For example, he'd look at a running difference image, and, because processing made it look shiny and sort of metallic, declare that it was a solid iron surface, complete with shadows. No amount of discussion about the creation of the image, etc. would change that. He took what he saw in images literally, with no concept of image interpretation.

[Van Rijn]

Of course when I stated this the following were utlised:

a) I was part of the science community conspiracy

b) I was an ad hominem insulter

c) I was not really what I said I was

d) I was unable to see the truth

e) Because I refused to perform a scientific critique of the pictures he was obviously right

I'm familiar with B, C, D, and E, but A is new to me. He didn't get into conspiracy much when he was here.

[EDG_]

Yes. For example, he'd look at a running difference image, and, because processing made it look shiny and sort of metallic, declare that it was a solid iron surface, complete with shadows. No amount of discussion about the creation of the image, etc. would change that. He took what he saw in images literally, with no concept of image interpretation.

Faced with that kind of stupidity (and what Upriver said earlier), I do sometimes wonder if it's actually worth me trying to get into Science Outreach. I guess we just have to get to the public before these idiots do.

[davidlpf]

I guess we just have to get to the public before these idiots do.
That is good enough reason right there to get into a science outreach.

[Van Rijn]

Faced with that kind of stupidity (and what Upriver said earlier), I do sometimes wonder if it's actually worth me trying to get into Science Outreach. I guess we just have to get to the public before these idiots do.

Well, you're never going to get anywhere with somebody like MM, but it is instructive to see how some folks like him think, so you can head off misconceptions that would never occur to you. For example, it may seem obvious (even intuitive) to you that you can't simply interpret an astronomical image like a picture of your yard, but that won't be obvious to many. Heck, many people think Hubble images look just the way they would see things, if they were just close enough.

[EDG_]

Yeah... I think most people (especially those who actually go to places like observatories) are ignorant but curious, which is a good combination. They come because they're willing to learn.

But these people that think the sun has a solid surface (or is even made of iron?!) when we know for absolutely certain that it doesn't, and all this other conspiracy/fantasy pseudoscience nonsense... I just don't get their motivation for peddling that crap. And I don't get why some people would actually even believe it in preference to what science actually says about it.

[Eta C]

Well, Mike was one of the more obstinately wrong posters ever to post here although he did avoid the conspiracist twaddle of DavidC (aka Rocky on ApolloHoax). As an ATM advocate he was up there with Soupdragon (who others here may remember as the dancer of the Soupdragon two step). For those relatively new here, anytime a poster dismisses an argument as a "look at the picture" one, he is referring to Mike's favorite tactic.

Nonetheless, Mike did manage to make it into my personal vocabulary. I still have a tendency to respond to the most obviously wrong (or not even wrong) posts with the line:

"Holy Michael Mozina Batman!!! What now?!!!"

[Maksutov]

Another in the long line of his victims.Oh, the irony!

[Fazor]

Faced with that kind of stupidity (and what Upriver said earlier), I do sometimes wonder if it's actually worth me trying to get into Science Outreach. I guess we just have to get to the public before these idiots do.

I always thought I'd like to get into doing something like that. I don't want to be a teacher full time--it's just not what I want to do. But I would love to teach science for a summer-camp or after-school program. I really think critical thinking and scientific method need a much bigger focus in school. At least, when I was in HS, science seemed to always take a back-seat to english and math, because the other two "you use everyday at your job". Of course, I think we use reasoning skills more than the other two combined. But what do I know? :-P

[Gillianren]

I tend to describe Solid Solar Surface when I'm explaining "not even wrong" to my friends. They invariably get the concept at that point.