Topic: Cant find your thread here? Look in...

[Beleth]

...Alternative Hypotheses Ongoing Discussions Global Warming.

GW's mission is to provide a place to discuss global warming at length.

Threads may move there without warning, so please look there before you conclude that your thread has been deleted.  (Deleting threads is something I avoid doing at almost all costs.)

I'll leave this thread unlocked so you can express joy or outrage, as you will, at this new setup. 

[Joe B]

I browse the forum via the "Show unread posts since last visit" so it doesn't effect me, but it sounds like a good idea.

[Sordid]

Why is my communism thread not there? This blows.

[♫♪ FX ♪♫]

I protest this move!

[♫♪ FX ♪♫]

How do you get to the sub forum?

[♫♪ FX ♪♫]

Never mind, I see it now.

[seaotter]

I'm skeptical. Doesn't the alternative hypothesis of science qualify in the skepticism talk in this section?

[Beleth]

I'm skeptical. Doesn't the alternative hypothesis of science qualify in the skepticism talk in this section?

Yes, which is why AH is a child board of Skep/Sci instead of a totally separate board.

When presented with objective, scientific data, there are three ways of treating it:

1) Decide that it's insufficient to come to a conclusion.
2) Conclude that the mainstream conclusion is correct.
3) Conclude that another conclusion besides the mainstream one is correct.

The first two belong in Skep/Sci. The third goes in AH.

[MisterMarc]

I'm skeptical. Doesn't the alternative hypothesis of science qualify in the skepticism talk in this section?

Yes, which is why AH is a child board of Skep/Sci instead of a totally separate board.

When presented with objective, scientific data, there are three ways of treating it:

1) Decide that it's insufficient to come to a conclusion.
2) Conclude that the mainstream conclusion is correct.
3) Conclude that another conclusion besides the mainstream one is correct.

The first two belong in Skep/Sci. The third goes in AH.

Is this about how the OP treats the subject matter, or about how the source material (ie. link, article, etc.) treats the subject matter? For example, I might post an article that claims dinosaurs walked with men, but I would not agree with that hypothesis.

[Beleth]

Is this about how the OP treats the subject matter, or about how the source material (ie. link, article, etc.) treats the subject matter? For example, I might post an article that claims dinosaurs walked with men, but I would not agree with that hypothesis.

It's about the subject matter itself.  Since the mainstream conclusion is "dinosaurs did not walk with man", a thread presenting a conclusion that dinosaurs walked with man would go into AH whether the thread starter agreed with that conclusion or not.


This is probably a good place to say that this is division is going to be more subjective than usual here, and that there will be a lot of threads that don't get moved into AH that probably should.  It's a complicated issue.

And I fully understand the negative connotations of being called "alternative" in this context.  I don't want threads there to be looked down on, but I'm enough of a realist to know that it's probably inevitable.  I want AH to be a place where people can more freely discuss controversial scientific issues.  I see it developing the same sort of atmosphere that Politics has: full of outspoken, well-read, opinionated folks calling each other on their half-baked conclusions. 

[Beleth]

Upon review, we have decided to tweak the child board of Skepticism/Science a little.

It's not going to house just alternative hypotheses.  It's going to house all skeptical/scientific topics that have led to a long-term discussion.

This means that some mainstream threads (like the ones that say global warming is indeed anthropogenic) will move into it... and some non-mainstream but short-term threads will be moving back into Skep/Sci.

This might take a few days to sort out, so please be patient while this process happens!

[♫♪ FX ♪♫]

Oh no.  I know what this means ....

[Trinoc]

Will post-whoring, twitter, etc., count as ongoing discussions? It would be nice if I could exclude those from the daily new posts page.

[Beleth]

Will post-whoring, twitter, etc., count as ongoing discussions? It would be nice if I could exclude those from the daily new posts page.

Sorry; I was a bit vague on that.  OD will only house ongoing discussions that fall into the Skepticism/Science category.  Nothing in General or Politics or other areas will be moved into OD.

I have now edited my post above to reflect that.

[♫♪ FX ♪♫]

All the complaints do wear on one.