I'm only ten whole minutes in and he's poked his rusty screwdriver between most ribs already and twisted several times (so let that be a warning to readers and potential viewers of a more delicate disposition) - does the trashtalk reach "most punchably smug face since since Martin Shkreli" levels later?
accompanied by the caption "typical Zionist fraud" and arrow pointing at a picture of Loeb go way beyond robust evidence-based criticism.External Quote:
I honestly can't stand the guy, too much anger and aggression.
I think good debunking content should avoid ad hominem, this sometimes has actually reinforced the conspiracy theorists in their beliefs, but regardless of that, it's really just not very productive in my opinion.
It's not that Avi has engaged in the sort of behavior we normally associate with fraud. But he has both the training and the experience to recognize that his rash of claims about ETs based on interstellar comets and sea floor particles have been unjustified speculation. While he may be getting more funding because of it, he's produced nothing of scientific value in this area. Contrast that to his previous work in astrophysics and it's hard to say that society has seen any benefit from his excursion into the realms of woo.
I'm glad you asked, because I can now quote what I read on Wikipedia a minute ago.
Article: According to Loeb, the "fundamental question" is if the Ark of Covenant was a device used to communicate with extraterrestrials and if the Jewish people were chosen by a race of aliens and imbued with "information from beyond our planet".[94] As reported by The Forward, Loeb contends that Earth may not be safe for the Jewish people and leaving Earth could be advantageous due to the absence of antisemitism in outer space.[95] Writing on his Medium blog, he has posited that "with long-term thinking, Jewish eschatology could be extended to trillions of years if a Jewish community with its synagogues and extraterrestrial Temple is established".[96]
In 2024, Loeb delivered a speech in which he declared his view that the Messiah will be an alien who arrives from outer space.[97]
AARO was not tasked with finding the desired answer.
Agreed, I'm surprised Shermer quoted this but didn't challenge it.
Strongly agree.
What word would you suggest be used in the sense that Grusch uses the term?
Well part of the problem with Grusch using that term is we don't know the sense in which he is using it
They have "biopharmaceutical", why do they need an additional term?
-- https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22955152/External Quote:
Yes, "biologic" is a well-established term in medicine and pharmacology.
I'm glad you asked, because I can now quote what I read on Wikipedia a minute ago.
Article: According to Loeb, the "fundamental question" is if the Ark of Covenant was a device used to communicate with extraterrestrials and if the Jewish people were chosen by a race of aliens and imbued with "information from beyond our planet".[94] As reported by The Forward, Loeb contends that Earth may not be safe for the Jewish people and leaving Earth could be advantageous due to the absence of antisemitism in outer space.[95] Writing on his Medium blog, he has posited that "with long-term thinking, Jewish eschatology could be extended to trillions of years if a Jewish community with its synagogues and extraterrestrial Temple is established".[96]
In 2024, Loeb delivered a speech in which he declared his view that the Messiah will be an alien who arrives from outer space.[97]
Those whose cognitive dissonance damping circuits are most active don't need to worry about such things. It's quite literally baffling!
A fine question, and one which is getting harder to answer.
This is the very definition of fanaticism. For some, blind faith in various UFO stories is a substitute for religion, and for others it is an extension of it, where it plugs into a wider paranormal belief framework, as in the case of Avi Loeb, relayed by Mendel in post #91.
External Quote:
And how would you simplify the term "biological material"? That's right, "biologics". Language is descriptive, not prescriptive.
You don't need to simplify it, especially when you are trying to communicate what Grusch is, you should be clear and not inventing slang in your official statements.
Show me this "real" meaning as a deliberate and precise definition in a well-established reference source. I don't think it exists.
I'd simplify it as "biomatter".
It doesn't need one. -y -> -ic is a perfectly standard production in english, e.g. geology -> geologic, pedagogy -> pedagogic. If you object to rampant nounification of adjectives, you're going to have to stop snooker players potting reds before you address the current trend in that direction. And promise to never pop out for an indian or a chinese after drinking a bellyful of stout. And never speak english, I guess. Language is as language does.
I agree that that is an absolutely perfect word, I can't conceive how to improve on it. However, that would not satisfy the single property that Grusch needs it to have. As @MapperGuy said above: "Groups like to have control of the jargon/vocabulary they use when describing their topic of interest. It allows them to feel they are in control of the dialog.". It's asserting dominance. (Not forgetting the creation of an in-group/out-group distinction.) Shermer's alpha move would to doggedly stick to "biomatter", and not give them their little power trip.
It would be simpler if it was that way, but language, and scientists, are untameable beasts:
Psi has been in there for some time -- at least since 1994 with Dr. Mack and his psychic messages questions to Ariel School students.
External Quote:
Source: https://threedollarkit.weebly.com/ariel-mack.htmlExternal Quote:
NOTE: Fungai was named Francis by Cynthia Hind.
...
These eyes, did you look at them?
Yes
What feeling did that give you, when you looked in the eyes?
It made me shake a little.
Made you shake?
A terrifying feeling.
What made it terrifying?
The way he was looking at me.
How did he look at you?
Strangely like an old woman who hasn't seen a kid before. He stares like this.
...
Why did you keep looking?
I don't know, something just attracted me to look at him.
Something attracted you huh.
Yes.
[cut]
What do you imagine is his reason for visiting Earth? [cut] Fungai, what do you imagine is his reason for this anger?
Hmm, I think it's about something that's gonna happen.
Something that's gonna happen, like what?
Hmm… Pollution or something.
Pollution?
Yes
And how did he get that idea of pollution across to you?
[unsure] The way he was staring?
Somehow there was a message about pollution from the way he was staring?
Yes.
[cut]
How did that get communicated to you?
Had this feeling just popped up in my head.
I'm not the one using the word; the UFOlogists are. And, as with the term "orbs", our criticism of the terms they use is simply whistling in the wind. We cannot declare their lexicon to be null and void; it is what it is, and we are powerless to change it. We simply need to be able to interpret their meaning, and I can think of no instance where their use of the word "biologics" could possibly be confused with that of the pharmaceutical establishment.
But these are still materials of biological origin used in a therapeutic context. Medical blood products are sometimes described as biologics, spilt blood from a nosebleed is not a biologic.
Me neither, but that was never my concern.
Hubbard, '50s? Scientology's got aliens and it's got telepathy:
-- https://www.mentalfloss.com/culture/religion/7-superpowers-available-scientologistsExternal Quote:
-- https://auxiliarymemory.com/2015/02/17/has-telepathy-become-an-extinct-idea-in-science-fiction/External Quote:
Which are respectively 1895-ish and 1912-ish.External Quote:
