|
Post by theropod on Jul 31, 2013 15:26:44 GMT 5
So all his work is just supposed to be sarcasm? I don't understand why it is being posted here then. And is it really carelessness if one doesn't assume that and doesn't see it if one simply doesn't speak the language he writes in?
I think Cau should be the one actually giving reasons why his methods are better. In several of his posts he makes comments like "end of discussion" or "this is much more likely". But of course, if that was all just irony...
What proposals did he make about Giganotosaurus? I only recall one post about skull lenght, were he correctly (tough by incorrect means) found the 1,8-1,95m figures to be exagerated.
|
|
stomatopod
Junior Member
Gluttonous Auchenipterid
Posts: 182
|
Post by stomatopod on Jul 31, 2013 19:01:10 GMT 5
So all his work is just supposed to be sarcasm? I don't understand why it is being posted here then. And is it really carelessness if one doesn't assume that and doesn't see it if one simply doesn't speak the language he writes in? I think Cau should be the one actually giving reasons why his methods are better. In several of his posts he makes comments like "end of discussion" or "this is much more likely". But of course, if that was all just irony... What proposals did he make about Giganotosaurus? I only recall one post about skull lenght, were he correctly (tough by incorrect means) found the 1,8-1,95m figures to be exagerated. No, not all his work, but the most recent post on Spinosaurus are surely. And the Sarcasm even comes over when reading in English? Is breathing fire not obvious enough? I doubt that it has to with not understanding the language, because then you should not have commented at all. And why is it posted here? To show how ridiculous and unscientific some of the estimates made by certain persons are and that by similar methodologies you can arrive at outright funny stuff. Sarcasm is a stylistic device, or not? And you are the one who is claiming that his methods are inferior, the burden of proof is on you. Which is impossible to overcome as he uses the same BS methods to come to his results. I can also predict the outcome if you would engage with him in a discussion on that matter. Not wanting to appeal in authority, but he has a M.S. in his field and has published in high profile journals, which have a really high standard for peer-review. Something is telling me that he aint an internet lunatic. Cau has written enough about the shortcomings of certain estimates to make his standpoint clear. And yes, he was ironic when he said that his weird proposals are actually better. They are the same crap.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 1, 2013 16:23:46 GMT 5
The problem with this small estimate is that Irritator have different proportions than Spinosaurus in the skull. What does that have to do with what I posted there? It's Cau's Sauropod-Spinosaurus "reconstruction", not his ~1.3-meter skull claims.
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 3, 2013 0:39:21 GMT 5
No, not all his work, but the most recent post on Spinosaurus are surely. And the Sarcasm even comes over when reading in English? Is breathing fire not obvious enough? I doubt that it has to with not understanding the language, because then you should not have commented at all. And why is it posted here? To show how ridiculous and unscientific some of the estimates made by certain persons are and that by similar methodologies you can arrive at outright funny stuff. Sarcasm is a stylistic device, or not? And you are the one who is claiming that his methods are inferior, the burden of proof is on you. Which is impossible to overcome as he uses the same BS methods to come to his results. I can also predict the outcome if you would engage with him in a discussion on that matter. Not wanting to appeal in authority, but he has a M.S. in his field and has published in high profile journals, which have a really high standard for peer-review. Something is telling me that he aint an internet lunatic. Cau has written enough about the shortcomings of certain estimates to make his standpoint clear. And yes, he was ironic when he said that his weird proposals are actually better. They are the same crap. Making some jokes in it doesn't mean the whole post is intended as mere sarcasm. Cau's the one claiming his methods to be superior, he should be the one to provide proof, no? svpow.com/2012/08/05/where-peer-review-went-wrong/on the peer review issue. It is, if you are right, impossible to tell apart where and when something Cau proposes has to be taken fully seriously and where it is just a joke. I don't really understand what this changes, many people still think they can rely on his opinion.
|
|
stomatopod
Junior Member
Gluttonous Auchenipterid
Posts: 182
|
Post by stomatopod on Aug 3, 2013 15:13:51 GMT 5
Sorry but it is inherently funny when someone does not see extremely obvious sarcasm. Either you have some real problems discerning sarcasm or you are trolling/unwilling to read. If its the first case then I am sorry and will not inquire further into this, if it is the latter than I will be forced to ignore you alltogether. Saying that it has the voice of Sean Connery is pretty damn obvious.
Cau´s post are not totally serious on this issue, as they are extremely sarcastic. They are made by the same crap methodology, and he mimmics the behaviour of certain people claiming that their own work is inherently. You are the one making the claims on THIS Forum, so you should reinforce your point.
This is one opinion on a complicated matter. Peer review aint perfect but without it we would have people like D.P. distributing their BS on a much wider level.
If one does not have the cognitive capabilities to understand sarcasm, then yes. In the comments he posted what one actually has to know of Spinosaurus: He posted a list conteining most if not all papers on it.
|
|
|
Post by coherentsheaf on Aug 3, 2013 16:37:12 GMT 5
Regarding peer review: To say that is not perfect is kind of an understatement. gwern has made a compilation of links discussing its failings: news.ycombinator.com/item?id=3212503Given the enormous waste caused by this system, I think it does far more harm than good.
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 3, 2013 16:46:11 GMT 5
Funny enough David peters has published some papers in the peer reviewed literature, and wasn't it for people like Darren Naish who informed the wide public about the bullshit DP states, who knows how much more?
For the last time. That there are jokes in his posts doesn't mean everything in them is sarcasm. You cannot tell from just using Google Translate, not how much exactly is joking, and I don't have to time to learn italian just because you are not content with how I interpret Cau's blog.
If you are right, and everything we are talking about (just ignore the obvious jokes for a tiny little moment please!) is mere sarcasm (eg. Cau's radical criticism of a Spinosaurus in excess of 15m, Spinosaurus' skull in excess of 1,5m...and at least pretended dismissal of those in favour of much more speculative stuff), why do people keep posting links to theropoda.blogspot and considering the there-expressed opinion relevant? Apparently the relevant parts are merely sarcasm! Can you explain this to me in a non-hostile way?
Let's face it, some of the proposals he made are so outlandish and then claimed to be near-factual that they certainly are not fully serious. Either way that doesn't interest me, just that many people take it at face value and don't allow criticism.
Read my posts, read Blaze's posts, read broly's postsm, read fragillimus posts; we all have given arguments against various proposals of Cau, serious or not. Stop ridiculing me for fun.
|
|
|
Post by Grey on Aug 4, 2013 1:07:34 GMT 5
Blaze arguments were not biased and were more contribution than total hostility to Cau's article.
Don't start to place Blaze arguments and yours on the same step... You hate Cau because he does not show interest in discussions about 17 m spinosaurids. But once he describes a 15 m carcharodontosaurid, you'll love him.
|
|
stomatopod
Junior Member
Gluttonous Auchenipterid
Posts: 182
|
Post by stomatopod on Aug 4, 2013 14:30:50 GMT 5
theropod:
Sorry, but the whole thing boils down to the fact that some people do not understand Cau´s posting style(fragillimus actually did and stated that he dislikes it, which is up to taste I think). You surely should read the disclaimer of the site and read all post on a single topic and not just a part of it out of the context. So please do not comment on something you have not researched properly, as this is sloppy work. And if you have problems with the language, you sould be cautious with your comments, as you easily get things wrong. So I do not understand why you started squaking about this matter at all.
The point is, be more cautious with your assertions.
If I were you, I would also be cautious to accuse Grey, have you forgot the episode where you attacked him behind his back on a German Forum? I think the link on CF is still there.
On an entirely different note, Cau once made an illustration of Sauroniops at around 16 meters, next to a 17 meter Spinosaurus. Just for the fun of it and to bait the usual suspects.
Coherentsheaf: I think there are more aspects of peer review that are not as one sided, but I think we should open a seperate thread on that matter.
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 4, 2013 15:51:06 GMT 5
There are no links on CF to other forums. I never attacked him, I warned other people about him. Even there others had notet the same things I did before. You surely wouldn't write that had you seen his PM's or one of his last posts before it was edited. Also make sure you properly read his last post on this topic; and then decide who's the one attacking!
I read Cau's posts. Apart from a few obviously joking lines, you cannot tell what's sarcasm and what's not--unless you speak italian. So answer my question, what exactly are his claims for, and what are they posted for, if alltogether they are just jokes?
What I don't like about his style of posting applies to all those claims and rebuttals claimed to be definite. If all of these are mere sarcasm, fine. Then we shouldn't talk about this blog any longer. It is beyond obvious some are; which doesn't mean he is joking all the time. Either way tis manner of bashing on fanboys half of the time in his entries (funny enough I never saw him adressing the 14-17m T. rex floating around on the web), just with the purpose of showing; "spinosaurus wasn't that large!" (and seeing it as a roughly upscaled version of its relatives is soooo wrong!) is annoying, even toughsome of his posts are amusing indeed.
But what actually disturbs me is when some members the take those at face value, and then lash on people criticising it. I disagree with that for the exact same reasons others have done before me
|
|
|
Post by creature386 on Aug 4, 2013 16:02:28 GMT 5
There are no links on CF to other forums. He maybe meant the quotes Ursus has shown.
|
|
stomatopod
Junior Member
Gluttonous Auchenipterid
Posts: 182
|
Post by stomatopod on Aug 4, 2013 18:07:50 GMT 5
There are no links on CF to other forums. I never attacked him, I warned other people about him. Even there others had notet the same things I did before. You surely wouldn't write that had you seen his PM's or one of his last posts before it was edited. Also make sure you properly read his last post on this topic; and then decide who's the one attacking! Huh? Warned people? what you wrote was just badmouthing him just because he does not acccept sauropods larger than blue whales at face value. some orther posters (or shall I call them dreamers?) jumped on your band wagon, while jingfeng/creature tried to deescalate the situation. I even saw one of his post unedited, and I can understand his feelings because sometimes you are just as thick headed as a pachycephalosaur, we is anoying especially when you dismiis arguments without further adressing them. I read Cau's posts. Apart from a few obviously joking lines, you cannot tell what's sarcasm and what's not--unless you speak italian. So answer my question, what exactly are his claims for, and what are they posted for, if alltogether they are just jokes? What are they? Reminders that estimates require care and most on the internet are garbage? I reeally is not that hard to understand. Those joking lines are a grave indicator of sarcasm, so again, think and analyse before you write. I understood the sarcasm even on "English" because I read his earlier post and the disclaimer and can together 1+1. But maybe I am especially gifted in languages(this is sarcasm). If you problems to discern things, then do not talk about them or wait till things are clearer. period. What I don't like about his style of posting applies to all those claims and rebuttals claimed to be definite. If all of these are mere sarcasm, fine. Then we shouldn't talk about this blog any longer. It is beyond obvious some are; which doesn't mean he is joking all the time. Either way tis manner of bashing on fanboys half of the time in his entries (funny enough I never saw him adressing the 14-17m T. rex floating around on the web), just with the purpose of showing; "spinosaurus wasn't that large!" (and seeing it as a roughly upscaled version of its relatives is soooo wrong!) is annoying, even toughsome of his posts are amusing indeed. Well, it is not my problem or his that people fail to understand. He also never worked with Tyrannosaurus, but he had direct access to the large Spinosaurus rostrum. And most of time people were crying of his blog because of Spinosaurus. And I think that most of the crap around gigantic T. rex revolved around a few persons (not to say that T. rex is not more famous), but there are several crap reconstructions of Spinosaurus and consort on the web. If you do not want to talk about this blog then shut up, but do not dictate others what do talk about and what not.
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 4, 2013 18:26:46 GMT 5
It is apparent you didn't properly read the posts in question, do you have the link or shall I send it to you?
This was not a debate about him not agreeing with something, I've never had a problem with that. It was a debate about prematurely dismissing things, and you will find this notion not just in my posts.
Cau is not just demonstrating most of the figures on the internet are garbage. Jokes aside he is trying to show scientific estimates are ("17m spinosaurus is a myth"), and by any means to get lower figures and different reconstructions. If this is not your problem, stop discussing it with me! It is my problem tough, since those people like to call me a biased little *insert insult here* once I dare to disagree.
|
|
stomatopod
Junior Member
Gluttonous Auchenipterid
Posts: 182
|
Post by stomatopod on Aug 4, 2013 18:52:04 GMT 5
It is apparent you didn't properly read the posts in question, do you have the link or shall I send it to you? Which post? Even when someone gets verbally agressive it might have been an overreaction, you know? Even when he would have wrote that he would come over to your house and smack your head this would have been due to frustration This was not a debate about him not agreeing with something, I've never had a problem with that. It was a debate about prematurely dismissing things, and you will find this notion not just in my posts. Ahem, you literally flamed him in several posts and there was an intervention by an Admin. But no, you are an angel and he is the devil himself. Sorry but this is just an extreme dubble standart. Don´t lie to yourself. Cau is not just demonstrating most of the figures on the internet are garbage. Jokes aside he is trying to show scientific estimates are ("17m spinosaurus is a myth"), and by any means to get lower figures and different reconstructions. If this is not your problem, stop discussing it with me! It is my problem tough, since those people like to call me a biased little *insert insult here* once I dare to disagree. Those people? And if you would actually post evidence for your standpoint and not just post your oh-so-valuable opinion I think there would be fewer problems. Sometimes your behaviuour is borderline Gish-Galloping, you still have not given evidence for several things and I asked for. And can you show me one actual publication by Cau where he argues the same stuff that you despise? You still did not read his relevant post and his discalimer so please do so beforehand. And yes, a 17 meter Spinosaurus is a myth, or have you already seen one?
|
|
|
Post by theropod on Aug 4, 2013 19:24:43 GMT 5
The posts you were talking about all the time, apparently without having properly understood their meaning And what intervention by an admin. Have I missed something? Those people? And if you would actually post evidence for your standpoint and not just post your oh-so-valuable opinion I think there would be fewer problems. Sometimes your behaviuour is borderline Gish-Galloping, you still have not given evidence for several things and I asked for. And can you show me one actual publication by Cau where he argues the same stuff that you despise? You still did not read his relevant post and his discalimer so please do so beforehand. I have posted evidence for my standpoint a long time ago, so of course did the people Cau dismisses (I'm talking about people such as Dal Sasso and Hartman), you didn't ever read it, and without even a question to reply to I won't repeat myself. Cau as far as I know has made no publications on Spinosaurus, and of course he wouldn't publish the stuff he writes on his blog in any journal. In case by publication you mean his blog posts (which would be a very strange wording), those have been posted on this exact thread, and as you arrogate a judgement about what I "despise" and how pachycephalosaur-headed I am to yourself, I'm sure you should have read both those and my corresponding replies before. That they won't satisfy you appears likely based on the way you have flamed me here, but that's irrelevant. Maybe a question for you for a change; Do you agree with Spinosaurus being <15m with a 1,4m skull composed of one massive deep rostrum and a tiny expansion in the back, other publications having been far too simplistic about Spinosaurus' morphology and "Spinitator" or a guesstimate based on unrelated megalosauroidean's proportions being a better far gauge? If you consider everything you cannot see as a myth (very funny, but not helpful), all members of this forum are myths, so is your own face. The question you should then pose is "what's the bigger myth". And that's not what Cau did, but what would be better to do than dismissing a myth (17m Spinosaurus) in favour of an even bigger one (12,5m Spinosaurus). If you too start to mimic the problematic you started this debate for now, you'd better not post at all.
|
|