I just skimmed over a recent article at Debunking the Debunkers about the curious case of Dr. Frank Greening, who originally supported the official accounts of the collapses of the WTC buildings on 9/11, but has since become more doubtful about them. This explains why I have seen his name on both papers supporting the offical versions and disputing them.
Apparently he has some rather nasty things to say about a particular forum that a friend of mine frequents, as well.
I actually don't frequent JREF, but very briefly participated there as an experiment in violating my own epistemological principles about how a layperson should adjudicate expert disputes.
ReplyDeleteAnd how do you feel now after your epistemological principles have been so violated?
ReplyDeleteI feel fine, since there are worse ways to waste one's time.
ReplyDeleteIt's one of the great things about epistemic norms. Violate a moral norm, you're really in trouble. But an epistemic norm? Then you're just irrational!
ReplyDeleteI was just afraid that maybe you felt dirty and used. Glad you haven't taken it so hard.
ReplyDeleteOnly used by myself. But perhaps a little dirty for interacting with individuals like that "beachnut" fellow.
ReplyDelete