Kavik Kang wrote:

"Robert Wolfe" <me@example.com> wrote in message
news:f15a3cccf05b6f2ac2893963d05de97e@free.teranews.com...

: There is no reason to avoid the great wall debate, although that has

been

: the general response from the very beginning, other than that, in the

backs

: of their minds at the very least, they know that this is proof that

their

: evidencial standards are flawed in some way. Notice that I do not

attempt to

: identify the flaw, it is my hope that a real scientist type (they read

this

: stuff now and then) will someday see this and explain, in detail,

exactly

: where all the flaws in this type of "science" are. The flaws are

obviously

: there, since no evidence can be presented for the great wall by those
: standards.

Most of it comes down to Heuristics and the understanding of what that

*is* and

what it is *not*.  Again, good luck trying to get these doofuses to stop

using

Occam's Razor to "prove" anything.

Heuristics, eh? You know, the last time I ran the Great Great Wall debate it
ended with a first. At the very end a very reasonable, rational, sceptical
scientific kind of woman stepped in too point out that much of what I was
doing was called "Sophistry". I was amazed, because that type of thing was
exactly what I had set out to accomplish with the Great Great Wall Debate.

Perhaps, to save these people gathered here with an interest in the subject
a lot of trouble in learning of this subject themselves, there may be
another well-trained and educated scientific type that might be willing to
respond here with a well-written explanation of this concept of Heurisitics.
We can only hope, but imagine the things that we might learn about these
tactics... and how science had already invalidated them centuries before any
of these raving lunatics were even born. I am not an expert, so I attempt to
inspire those who are:-)

You may well have started the most thought provoking thread in these NG's in
the last 3 years, so hopefully that should inspire something.
Maybe?

http://www.ce.umn.edu/~voller/UHC2002/webpages/dora/hueristics.html

"1.Heuristics do not guarantee a solution
 2.Two heuristics may contradict or give different answers to the same problem
and still be useful
 3.Heuristics permit the solving of unsolvable problems or reduce the search
time to find a satisfactory solution
 4.The heuristic depends on the immediate context instead of absolute truth as
a standard of validity"