Freethought & Rationalism Archive

youngalexander · 02-01-2008, 02:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by schilling.klaus

True theories are necessarily bizarre to average mankind,
as mankind lacks the necessary wisdom to understand them.

Thuis already Plato's Politeia compares the human who sees
the light of truth with a caveman who is exposed for the
first time to daylight, after having made many hilarious
speculations about flickering shadows in the dimming light.

He's not able to communicate appropriately with his
dumb and ignorant fellow humans who are trapped
in their naive folly.
Klaus Schilling

How sad! Noone, the copacetic naiveling.

jjramsey · 02-01-2008, 05:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Why is Schoch not credible? He is a tenured professor who has published on Egyptology.

The professor's Ph.D. is in geology and geophysics. That doesn't make him a credible authority on Egypt any more than having a Ph.D. in Engineering makes one an authority on biology.

schilling.klaus · 02-01-2008, 06:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjramsey

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Why is Schoch not credible? He is a tenured professor who has published on Egyptology.

The professor's Ph.D. is in geology and geophysics. That doesn't make him a credible authority on Egypt any more than having a Ph.D. in Engineering makes one an authority on biology.

academic degrees have absolutely nothing to do with credibility.

Klaus Schilling

ApostateAbe · 02-01-2008, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by schilling.klaus

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjramsey

The professor's Ph.D. is in geology and geophysics. That doesn't make him a credible authority on Egypt any more than having a Ph.D. in Engineering makes one an authority on biology.

academic degrees have absolutely nothing to do with credibility.

Klaus Schilling

Normally, people accept relevant degrees from accredited universities as a shortcut to finding out which ideas we can take seriously. Academic authorities are important, which is why Acharya S flaunts the recommendation from Dr. Schoch on her website and Dave31 brought it here. If academic authorities are not important to you, then that is taking critical thinking up a level, which is great. And, if the authority of an academic degree is introduced into the arena, then we'll play ball.

Solitary Man · 02-01-2008, 01:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjramsey

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

Why is Schoch not credible? He is a tenured professor who has published on Egyptology.

The professor's Ph.D. is in geology and geophysics. That doesn't make him a credible authority on Egypt any more than having a Ph.D. in Engineering makes one an authority on biology.

If it does, then of course Toto just legitimized creationists with degrees in philosophy!

Toto · 02-01-2008, 01:47 PM

But Schoch is a scientist, and presumably understands the basic need for skepticism in the face of sources, and the dangers of pareidolia.

There are creationists with degrees in biology, but their arguments are clearly based on their overriding ideological commitments. It's not obvious that Schoch has any ideological commitments that would cause him to endorse Acharya.

I really don't care if you take Schoch's review as positive evidence of anything. But I was concerned that Abe was a little too quick to defame him for no good reason.

jjramsey · 02-01-2008, 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

But Schoch is a scientist, and presumably understands the basic need for skepticism in the face of sources, and the dangers of pareidolia.

That doesn't mean that he's immune to having loopy theories about matters in which he has little expertise.

Solitary Man · 02-01-2008, 02:01 PM

I am reminded of Jim Deardorff, a professor emeritus of atmospheric physics from the Pacific Northwest (Oregon?) who was adamant about the Talmud Jmmanuel...which had been delivered to earth by aliens in the early 20th century. Certainly he would know about scientific skepticism?

No, what we see in both cases, with Schoch and Deardorff are scientists buying into crackpot theories, and others trying to legitimize those scientists with arguments from authority (which is all that Toto has done).

Toto · 02-01-2008, 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jjramsey

Quote:

Originally Posted by Toto

But Schoch is a scientist, and presumably understands the basic need for skepticism in the face of sources, and the dangers of pareidolia.

That doesn't mean that he's immune to having loopy theories about matters in which he has little expertise.

True, but that is true of anyone. Do you actually know anything about him?

Yellum Notnef · 02-01-2008, 02:50 PM

Schoch first became widely known after Dr. Anthony West (a fringe and a bit nutty Egyptologist) convinced him to go look at what he thought was water erosion on the walls surrounding the Sphinx. This was to supposably prove that the Sphinx (or at least the enclosure) was around 10,000 years old. Schoch went away determined it was water erosion and that West was correct about it's age. This was all over the History and Discovery channels a few years ago.
He went to some conference with mainstream Egyptologists who circled the wagons and told him he was 100% wrong.

Schoch (after getting most of his Muppet-like hair cut off) was then dragged to Japan to look at some alleged underwater monuments by West and Graham Hancock, but to their dismay he concluded that they were natural formations. This was also on TV a few years ago.

He seems like an honest guy who calls it like he sees it.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

02-01-2008, 01:47 PM	#46
Toto Contributor Join Date: Jun 2000 Location: Los Angeles area Posts: 40,549	But Schoch is a scientist, and presumably understands the basic need for skepticism in the face of sources, and the dangers of pareidolia. There are creationists with degrees in biology, but their arguments are clearly based on their overriding ideological commitments. It's not obvious that Schoch has any ideological commitments that would cause him to endorse Acharya. I really don't care if you take Schoch's review as positive evidence of anything. But I was concerned that Abe was a little too quick to defame him for no good reason.

02-01-2008, 02:01 PM	#48
Solitary Man Veteran Member Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: ירושלים Posts: 1,701	I am reminded of Jim Deardorff, a professor emeritus of atmospheric physics from the Pacific Northwest (Oregon?) who was adamant about the Talmud Jmmanuel...which had been delivered to earth by aliens in the early 20th century. Certainly he would know about scientific skepticism? No, what we see in both cases, with Schoch and Deardorff are scientists buying into crackpot theories, and others trying to legitimize those scientists with arguments from authority (which is all that Toto has done).

02-01-2008, 02:50 PM	#50
Yellum Notnef Banned Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Gone Posts: 4,676	Schoch first became widely known after Dr. Anthony West (a fringe and a bit nutty Egyptologist) convinced him to go look at what he thought was water erosion on the walls surrounding the Sphinx. This was to supposably prove that the Sphinx (or at least the enclosure) was around 10,000 years old. Schoch went away determined it was water erosion and that West was correct about it's age. This was all over the History and Discovery channels a few years ago. He went to some conference with mainstream Egyptologists who circled the wagons and told him he was 100% wrong. Schoch (after getting most of his Muppet-like hair cut off) was then dragged to Japan to look at some alleged underwater monuments by West and Graham Hancock, but to their dismay he concluded that they were natural formations. This was also on TV a few years ago. He seems like an honest guy who calls it like he sees it.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.