Freethought & Rationalism Archive

lpetrich · 05-12-2003, 02:23 AM

We've seen Jan Peczkis adopt the name John Woodmorappe -- and get itchy whenever exposed as doing that.

And it looks as if "Socrates" at TheologyWeb is really Jonathan Sarfati -- the two are suspiciously similar in personal details and in rhetoric.

Also, "laser_thing" at Usenet group talk.origins inadvertently revealed himself to be Walter ReMine.

I wonder what other such pseudonymous creationists there are.

But Andrew Snelling does not bother with a pseudonymous persona; instead, he has a split personality, one being a mainstream old-earth geologist and one being a young-earth Flood Geologist.

Kevbo · 05-12-2003, 04:14 AM

Those kinds of cretinists with the learning to know better than to prop up their dead monster of young-earth creationism on stilts are the ones that anger me the most. I can excuse ignorance, but not willfull, deliberate denial and deception. Is it any wonder why these people bemoan about not being funded like mainstream scientists and then spend all their money on a joke museum just to convince the ignorant public? If the creationist movement were an illegal crack market, these people would be the heads of the cartels.

MrDarwin · 05-12-2003, 06:55 AM

As somebody who posts under a pseudonym, I understand the desire of people to stay anonymous, or at least protect their privacy. I don't see anything dishonest or unethical about it, and I don't see why it's necessary to "out" somebody who is participating in online discussions under a pseudonym. I think there's a big difference between this and publishing papers or books under a pseudonym (especially when publishing papers or books under one's real name at the same time).

RufusAtticus · 05-12-2003, 07:59 AM

I use a handle, but I don't try to hide who I am.

Coragyps · 05-12-2003, 08:09 AM

The only really objectionable thing I see with pseudonyms is in cases like Woodmorappe citing Peczis as support for his position. That's bizarre.

Ed/Coragyps/mistered

Minnesota · 05-12-2003, 10:41 AM

Just about everyone uses an alias on the forums--good idea, really--but I find it disingenuous at the least and dishonest at the most to cite yourself under another name, particularly when that name has a certain standing (deserved or not) with others. The Socrates/ Sarfati dual identity a case in point.

Jimmy Higgins · 05-12-2003, 10:59 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by MrDarwin
As somebody who posts under a pseudonym, I understand the desire of people to stay anonymous, or at least protect their privacy. I don't see anything dishonest or unethical about it, and I don't see why it's necessary to "out" somebody who is participating in online discussions under a pseudonym. I think there's a big difference between this and publishing papers or books under a pseudonym (especially when publishing papers or books under one's real name at the same time).

There should be a rule about pseudonyms and online forums. They should properly reflect the person. Mine, Jimmy Higgins, reflects my progressive political and economic idealogy.

Socretes in no way reflects Safarti.

And besides, it is how Safarti argues that makes it seem unethical. He does nothing but base judgments on authority. He claims to be a chemist with great experience. Yet, he argues in every realm of science from Relativity to Geology. If it isn't unethical, it is certainly childish and unprofessional.

lpetrich · 05-12-2003, 03:32 PM

I will concede that appearing under a pseudonyn is not fundamentally objectionable.

However, as some of you others have pointed out, using a pseudonym for self-promotion is dishonest.

As Walter ReMine had done with his persona of "laser_thing".

Dr.GH · 05-12-2003, 05:55 PM

I don't use a pseudonym. I know people are saying, "Dr. GH" is not a name." True, sort of. My personal data/profile has a link to the Medical Library of the University of Utah, which has a large section devoted to forensic science, on which I have a short article, which has a link to a short bio and pic. The pic is crummy, but the best I had at the moment.

Minnesota · 05-31-2003, 07:01 PM

Just an update on the Socrates = Sarfati question.

A moderator on TW outed him on May 29. Post #3

http://www.theologyweb.com/forum/sho...?threadid=5339

Quote:

Edited by a moderator.

Moderator Notice:
Jimmy apparently wants to make a martyr out of himself. Oh infinitely cruel monster that I am, I will not do it, oh and Socrates is Sarfati.

05-12-2003, 02:23 AM	#1
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	Pseudonymous Creationists We've seen Jan Peczkis adopt the name John Woodmorappe -- and get itchy whenever exposed as doing that. And it looks as if "Socrates" at TheologyWeb is really Jonathan Sarfati -- the two are suspiciously similar in personal details and in rhetoric. Also, "laser_thing" at Usenet group talk.origins inadvertently revealed himself to be Walter ReMine. I wonder what other such pseudonymous creationists there are. But Andrew Snelling does not bother with a pseudonymous persona; instead, he has a split personality, one being a mainstream old-earth geologist and one being a young-earth Flood Geologist.

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

05-12-2003, 04:14 AM	#2
Kevbo Regular Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: NY Posts: 212	Those kinds of cretinists with the learning to know better than to prop up their dead monster of young-earth creationism on stilts are the ones that anger me the most. I can excuse ignorance, but not willfull, deliberate denial and deception. Is it any wonder why these people bemoan about not being funded like mainstream scientists and then spend all their money on a joke museum just to convince the ignorant public? If the creationist movement were an illegal crack market, these people would be the heads of the cartels.

05-12-2003, 06:55 AM	#3
MrDarwin Veteran Member Join Date: May 2001 Location: Washington, DC Posts: 4,140	As somebody who posts under a pseudonym, I understand the desire of people to stay anonymous, or at least protect their privacy. I don't see anything dishonest or unethical about it, and I don't see why it's necessary to "out" somebody who is participating in online discussions under a pseudonym. I think there's a big difference between this and publishing papers or books under a pseudonym (especially when publishing papers or books under one's real name at the same time).

05-12-2003, 07:59 AM	#4
RufusAtticus Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: NCSU Posts: 5,853	I use a handle, but I don't try to hide who I am.

05-12-2003, 08:09 AM	#5
Coragyps Veteran Join Date: Aug 2001 Location: Snyder,Texas,USA Posts: 4,411	The only really objectionable thing I see with pseudonyms is in cases like Woodmorappe citing Peczis as support for his position. That's bizarre. Ed/Coragyps/mistered

05-12-2003, 10:41 AM	#6
Minnesota Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Minnesota Posts: 172	Just about everyone uses an alias on the forums--good idea, really--but I find it disingenuous at the least and dishonest at the most to cite yourself under another name, particularly when that name has a certain standing (deserved or not) with others. The Socrates/ Sarfati dual identity a case in point.

05-12-2003, 03:32 PM	#8
lpetrich Contributor Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: Lebanon, OR, USA Posts: 16,829	I will concede that appearing under a pseudonyn is not fundamentally objectionable. However, as some of you others have pointed out, using a pseudonym for self-promotion is dishonest. As Walter ReMine had done with his persona of "laser_thing".

05-12-2003, 05:55 PM	#9
Dr.GH Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Dana Point, Ca, USA Posts: 2,115	I don't use a pseudonym. I know people are saying, "Dr. GH" is not a name." True, sort of. My personal data/profile has a link to the Medical Library of the University of Utah, which has a large section devoted to forensic science, on which I have a short article, which has a link to a short bio and pic. The pic is crummy, but the best I had at the moment.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.