CLOWN PRINCE OF PSEUDOSCIENTISTS -- Was: Why Established Science Has Given Truth the Boot
Ed Conrad
Sienkiewicz) wrote:
>"[|] jpturcaud" <true.ge...@atlantic.com> wrote in message news:<3f73eeb6$0$20952$7a62...@news.club-internet.fr>...
>> ~~Ignorance Is The Cosmic Sin, The One Never Forgiven ! ~~
>
>By whom?
>
>> "David Sienkiewicz" <david.si...@attbi.com> a écrit dans le message de
>> news:35fa3772.03092...@posting.google.com...
>> > "[ľ] Mining Pioneer" <true.ge...@atlantic.com> wrote in message
>> news:<3f729fa2$0$20947$7a62...@news.club-internet.fr>...
>> >
>> > > You are of a terrible bad faith David
>> >
>> > I am Jewish, Jean-Paul. Don't tell me that you are anti-semitic as
>> > well as a net loon!
>>
>> You are playing on words David !
>
>No, I responded to what you wrote.
>
>By the way, in changing your sign-on name, your reply was not
>immediately apparent to me. It appeared in a different thread, as
>well.
>
>That's a rather dishonest tactic, don't you think?
>
>> You knew what I meant by bad faith
>
>No, I did not know what you meant. I only knew what you wrote.
>
>< snip irrelevancies and demonstrations of historical ignorance >
>
>> > > Of course accepting Ed's findings brings down crumbling your whole set
>> of
>> > > beuliefs !
>> >
>> > Accepting Ed's "findings" is tantamount to stupidity. Ed's "findings"
>> > are nonsense, but that DOES remind me.
>> >
>> > You made some comments a bit back about how YOU identified Ed's some
>> > of Ed's "findings." I asked what you did to make the determinations
>> > that you did. I left for Poland shortly after that, but I did see
>> > that you didn't answer that.
>>
>> There is no point in answering your questions since
>> 1) You are becoming abusive when cornered
>
>I don't seem to recall any time that I have been cornered - certainly
>not by YOU. Care to be specific?
>
>> 2) You are systematically of bad faith too when cornered
>
>Again, do you have any specifics?
>
>> 3) You are completely clueless regarding Geology and Mineralogy ... and
>> probably Chemistry, Engineering, Industrial Process and finally basic
>> Physics
>
>Really!
>
>Of course, you can back this up, too, right?
>
>> 4) You are therefore an uncultured, ignorant, bigotted, short minded fool !
>
>I seem to recall some complaints from you about the name-calling. Do
>those standards not apply to you?
>
>> 5) You are a most sterile individual as well and anything you know is NOT of
>> your own finding but borrowed from others
>
>As opposed to what? To you?
>
>All of your knowledge, such as it is, was not taught to you by anyone
>else?
>
>> And I am very sorry to say, this is a mere professional constatation,
>> completely free of personal appreciation !
>
>I am am quite happy to say that you're full of shit.
>
>No, no, don't thank me. It's a mere "professional constatation."
>
>> However out of sympathy to you , David, I owe to you to take stock on your
>> present state of mental, intellectual, spiritual, aesthetic and moral
>> putrefaction
>
>You do?
>
>Why?
>
>> Yes poor David, you are a Retard I am afraid !
>
>Is this the best you can do?
>
>I mean, really! Is it the best you can do?
>
>Okay, now tell me Jean-Paul, now that you have all of this out of your
>system, just how is it you can claim that YOU identified some of Ed's
>specimens?
>
>That WAS your claim, you'll recall.
>
>I think my question is perfectly reasonable under the circumstances;
>and if you think your rather impotent attempts at flaming are going to
>dissaude me, you should consider that better and badder than you have
>tried and failed.
>
>So just answer the question, Jean-Paul.
>
>What are you afraid of?
>
>< snip >
Excuse the interruption.
The General Accounting Office has been contacted,
seeking documentation whether Attorney David Sienkiewicz
is on the payroll (even parttime) of either the Smithsonian
Institution or any other Pseudoscientific Establishment.
Let's see if the GAO does the job to which it is entrusted,
to protect the wasteful spending of taxpayers' money
and, particularly, prevent it from being used for fraudulent
purposes. That is, taxpayers' dollars used to pay Sienkiewicz
to defend the facetious, falsified Theory of Evolution of man.
In this case -- and it is UNMISTAKEABLE -- it is Sienkiewicz'
despicable attempt to discredit facts and physical evidence
that proves, BEYOND ALL DOUBT, that the Theory of Evolution
belongs in the landfill.
I mentioned from Day One that the Pseudoscientific
Establishment -- the institutions, the research
laboratories, the anthropological and paleontological
associations, why even the "great" museums -- are
participants in deceit, deception, collusion and conspiracy
in the coverup of a search for honest answers about man's
orgin and ancestry.
I have identified Attorney Sienkiewicz as "The Clown
Prince of Pseudoscientists." And he's confirming it
more and more with each and every posting.
Ed Conrad
> http://www.edconrad.com
<
> PETRIFIED BONES, TEETH AND SOFT ORGANS
> DISCOVERED BETWEEN ANTHRACITE VEINS
> Velikovsky: "Ridicule is the Argument of the Mob"
Here's a portion of the petrified human skull, identified as such
by no less than world famous bone expert Wilton Krogman. It's
a calvarium (a portion of a skull with the eye sockets broken off).
<
A CATscan was performed on it, revealing a hidden protrustion
that matches that of a human skull. Also, Haversian canals have
been found, confirming it indeed is bone. Meanwhile, dried
blood was discovered during testing by American Medical
Laboratories in Chantilly, Va.
<
> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/Smith/z11calv.jpg
<
Here's the petrified human femur still embedded in slate.
<
> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/Petrified/z8femur.jpg
<
Here's the petrified human finger, with fingernail:
<
> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/FINGER/MVC-008S.JPG
> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/FINGER/MVC-011S.JPG
<
Here's the petrified human toe (with toe nail), found only
10-15 feet from the petrified finger.
<
> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/Au29/MVC-017S.JPG
<
Here are the petrified human finger and the petrified human
toe shown together.
<
> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/Au29/MVC-016S.JPG
<
Here's the specimen that Krogman identified as a tibia. It contains
Haversian canals, proof of bone, and dried blood was found on it
during American Medical Laboratory testing. This is the specimen
that was fraudulently tested by Andrew MacRae (who produced
microscopic photos of the cell structure of a rock on the false
pretext that he was showing the cell structure of this specimen).
<
>> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/Petrified/newtibia.jpg
<
This is the boulder containing the complete human skull.
Testing has confirmed the presence of Haversian canals
and American Medical Laboratories discovered it contains
dried blood.
<
>> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/Petrified/skullb.jpg
<
Here's a petrified human mandible (frontal).
<
>> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/Newpix5/MVC-002S.JPG
<
=============
<
Here's a portion of a human mandible (side).
<
>> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/Bones/MVC-006S.JPG
<
=============
<
Here's a giant petrified tooth.
<
>> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/Petrified/1tooth.jpg
<
Here's the petrified dinosaur foot still embedded in slate.
<
>> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/Newpix3/z3dino.jpg
<
Ken Rode
> The General Accounting Office has been contacted,
> seeking documentation whether Attorney David Sienkiewicz
> is on the payroll (even parttime) of either the Smithsonian
> Institution or any other Pseudoscientific Establishment.
I'd love to see the letter, Ed.
> Let's see if the GAO does the job to which it is entrusted,
> to protect the wasteful spending of taxpayers' money
> and, particularly, prevent it from being used for fraudulent
> purposes. That is, taxpayers' dollars used to pay Sienkiewicz
> to defend the facetious, falsified Theory of Evolution of man.
Let's make sure that we are understanding the rules that you are playing by,
Ed. If the GAO confirms that David is being paid by taxpayers' money, then
that would confirm what you've been saying. But what happens if the GAO do
not confirm it? There are two choices:
a) David is not being paid by taxpayer's money, and you have been wrong
about this all along, or
b) The GAO is part of the conspiracy, but David is nevertheless being paid
by taxpayers' money.
You'll choose (b), won't you? So the point here must be to confirm that the
GAO is manipulated by the "Pseudoscientific Establishment", mustn't it? And
this really has nothing to do with David at all, right?
> In this case -- and it is UNMISTAKEABLE -- it is Sienkiewicz'
> despicable attempt to discredit facts and physical evidence
> that proves, BEYOND ALL DOUBT, that the Theory of Evolution
> belongs in the landfill.
Ed, you yourself have done far more to discredit that "evidence" than David
ever will. When you refuse to permit inspection of your finds and then rail
at people because they've never inspected your finds, when you publish
documents on your website and don't answer the questions that arise when
those documents are read, when you are confronted with contrary evidence and
refuse to even acknowledge it ... You are discredited primarily through your
own behaviors, Ed.
> I mentioned from Day One that the Pseudoscientific
> Establishment -- the institutions, the research
> laboratories, the anthropological and paleontological
> associations, why even the "great" museums -- are
> participants in deceit, deception, collusion and conspiracy
> in the coverup of a search for honest answers about man's
> orgin and ancestry.
>
> I have identified Attorney Sienkiewicz as "The Clown
> Prince of Pseudoscientists." And he's confirming it
> more and more with each and every posting.
>
I'm not so sure that David is deserving of that title, Ed.
Let's have a little competition between you and David, shall we, Ed? The
following items are considered to be hallmarks of pseudoscience.
(Specifically, I picked these up at
http://fp.bio.utk.edu/skeptic/handouts/science-pseudoscience.pdf.) Let's
figure out whether you or David fit each category better. Read through the
descriptions of the categories at that site, think >>critically<< about
events over the past year or two (or 20), and compare your results to mine
below.
1. Anachronistic thinking - doesn't seem to apply to either
2. Seeking mysteries - doesn't seem to apply to either
3. Appeals to myths - doesn't seem to apply to either
4. Casual approach to evidence - Ed, definitely.
5. Irrefutable hypotheses - Ed, definitely
6. Spurious similarities - Ed, most definitely
7. Explanation by scenario - Ed, definitely
8. Research by literary interpretation - Ed, definitely
9. Refusal to revise - Ed, most definitely
10. Shift the burder of proof on the other side - Ed, most definitely
11. A theory is legitimate simply because it's new, alternative, or daring -
Ed, definitely
Well, Ed, I'd have to say that if David is the Clown Prince, you're likely
the Clown Emperor of Pseudoscience! All hail!
On a more serious note, Ed, if you feel that I've misjudged any of the
categories above, let me know, and I'll explain my reasoning. But, please,
only do so if you're willing to think critically about things. If you
continue to be as closed-minded as you have been, there is really very
little point.
<snip remainder>
gen2rev
<edco...@verizon.net> wrote:
[snip Sienkiewicz & Turcaud]
> Excuse the interruption.
>
> The General Accounting Office has been contacted,
> seeking documentation whether Attorney David Sienkiewicz
> is on the payroll (even parttime) of either the Smithsonian
> Institution or any other Pseudoscientific Establishment.
Suuuure it has. We've heard this before.
> Let's see if the GAO does the job to which it is entrusted,
> to protect the wasteful spending of taxpayers' money
> and, particularly, prevent it from being used for fraudulent
> purposes. That is, taxpayers' dollars used to pay Sienkiewicz
> to defend the facetious, falsified Theory of Evolution of man.
Was Raymond Dart on the payroll as well? After all, he was a stanch
supporter of evolution.
> In this case -- and it is UNMISTAKEABLE -- it is Sienkiewicz'
> despicable attempt to discredit facts and physical evidence
> that proves, BEYOND ALL DOUBT, that the Theory of Evolution
> belongs in the landfill.
How so? Couldn't man have evolved twice?
> I mentioned from Day One that the Pseudoscientific
> Establishment -- the institutions, the research
> laboratories, the anthropological and paleontological
> associations, why even the "great" museums -- are
> participants in deceit, deception, collusion and conspiracy
> in the coverup of a search for honest answers about man's
> orgin and ancestry.
Ed, you don't care about man's origin and ancestry. You leave theories
to "the academia anemia". Remember?
> I have identified Attorney Sienkiewicz as "The Clown
> Prince of Pseudoscientists." And he's confirming it
> more and more with each and every posting.
I suspect you've been reading your own posts.
> Ed Conrad
> > http://www.edconrad.com
[snip the rest]
Ed Conrad
<kar...@sympatico.ca> wrote to talk.origins:
>< snip >
>
>> The General Accounting Office has been contacted,
>> seeking documentation whether Attorney David Sienkiewicz
>> is on the payroll (even parttime) of either the Smithsonian
>> Institution or any other Pseudoscientific Establishment.
>
>I'd love to see the letter, Ed.
==========================================
> http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/S22/MVC-034S.JPG
==========================================
Arne Vogel
--
Arne Vogel
David Sienkiewicz
< snip since Ed doesn't address anything I wrote >
> Excuse the interruption.
>
> The General Accounting Office has been contacted,
> seeking documentation whether Attorney David Sienkiewicz
> is on the payroll (even parttime) of either the Smithsonian
> Institution or any other Pseudoscientific Establishment.
>
> Let's see if the GAO does the job to which it is entrusted,
> to protect the wasteful spending of taxpayers' money
> and, particularly, prevent it from being used for fraudulent
> purposes. That is, taxpayers' dollars used to pay Sienkiewicz
> to defend the facetious, falsified Theory of Evolution of man.
Ed, more than a year ago, you made this claim. You said you wrote the
GAO and asked them about the salary that I am allegedly paid.
I asked about that several times because, as you know, I have a
contact in the GAO. I asked if they ever received such a request for
information and they never did, so I asked you several times about the
response and you never answered.
Here we are - more than a year later - and you're making the same
claim.
Oh, I saw later in the thread that you answered Ken with a picture of
a letter you allegedly sent. I have a couple of thoughts on that, Ed.
First, a posed picture of this letter means nothing.
Second, if you still have it, you never sent it. Right?
Third, the date on the letter is September 23, 2003 - THIS year! What
happened to the letter you allegedly sent LAST year?
Finally, Ed, I find it amusing that you have spent all of this time
(mostly trying to avoid me) claiming rather firmly that I work for the
Smithsonian, the "scientific establishment" or the "pseudoscientific
establishment." Yet, in this thread, you are asking the GAO *IF* I
am, indeed, such an employee, and you are telling the readers of this
thread that you are asking *IF* I am employed in this capacity.
Are you sure or aren't you? Do you have evidence for this or don't
you?
Frankly, Ed, you and I both know you don't have any evidence.
You made it up.
You lied, Ed.
> In this case -- and it is UNMISTAKEABLE -- it is Sienkiewicz'
> despicable attempt to discredit facts and physical evidence
> that proves, BEYOND ALL DOUBT, that the Theory of Evolution
> belongs in the landfill.
No, Ed, it is my honest attempt as a reader and interested party to
get you to support your claims with something other than loud
assertions, avoidance, evasion, lies and fraud.
> I mentioned from Day One that the Pseudoscientific
> Establishment -- the institutions, the research
> laboratories, the anthropological and paleontological
> associations, why even the "great" museums -- are
> participants in deceit, deception, collusion and conspiracy
> in the coverup of a search for honest answers about man's
> orgin and ancestry.
So you've been lying from "Day One."
There's no surprises there, Ed.
> I have identified Attorney Sienkiewicz as "The Clown
> Prince of Pseudoscientists." And he's confirming it
> more and more with each and every posting.
No, Ed, what I am confirming is that you are a coward, a liar, a fraud
and a loon - and I do that by poking at you as I do and getting these
kinds of responses.
You NEVER actually discuss the finds. You NEVER answered to
challenges. You NEVER will debate.
Instead, you demonstrate yourself to be a hypocritical fool by
responding with lies and ridicule (the "argument of the mob,"
remember, Ed?) and, in case you haven't noticed, none of it works.
< snip Ed's lies >
David Sienkiewicz
> On Sat, 27 Sep 2003 15:15:16 +0000 (UTC), "Ken Rode"
> <kar...@sympatico.ca> wrote to talk.origins:
>
> >< snip >
> >
> >> The General Accounting Office has been contacted,
> >> seeking documentation whether Attorney David Sienkiewicz
> >> is on the payroll (even parttime) of either the Smithsonian
> >> Institution or any other Pseudoscientific Establishment.
> >
> >I'd love to see the letter, Ed.
>
> ==========================================
>
> > http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/S22/MVC-034S.JPG
>
> ==========================================
This is a picture of a letter and the letter is dated September 23rd -
THIS year!
Ed, more than a year ago, you made your first assertion that you wrote
the GAO and demanded an accounting of my alleged "employment."
With no reference to that incident, you are telling us THIS year that
you are writing the GAO with the same intent. The letter you're
showing us is dated THIS year.
Last year, a representative of the GAO told me that they never
received such a request from you about which he was aware.
You never wrote them last year, did you, Ed?
You lied.
Now, as to the rest, Ken raises some very good points; and I noticed
that you quoted them but did not address any of them.
All that does, Ed, is provide more evidence of your intent.
You're a coward, Ed. Answer Ken's questions and points; and perhaps
some of us might revise that assessment.
Continue to avoid them, and you continue to appear to be a coward.
< snip >
Dana Tweedy
> <kar...@sympatico.ca> wrote to talk.origins:
>
> >< snip >
> >
> >> The General Accounting Office has been contacted,
> >> seeking documentation whether Attorney David Sienkiewicz
> >> is on the payroll (even parttime) of either the Smithsonian
> >> Institution or any other Pseudoscientific Establishment.
> >
> >I'd love to see the letter, Ed.
>
> ==========================================
>
> > http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/S22/MVC-034S.JPG
>
> ==========================================
up on the GAO's Crank File. Why don't you just ask David himself Ed? He
freely admits that he is not employed by anyone. No one is going to pay
anyone to discredit you Ed, you simply do too good a job of discrediting
yourself.
DJT
Ed Conrad
Dana Tweedy
So, it will end up in Arlen Spector and Tim Holden's crank file as well.
To answer your question Ed, it is indeed possible for you to find out if
David Seinkiewicz is in the employ of the Smithsonian, or any other
scientific institution. All you have to do is ask him. He has already told
you he isn't.
If you don't believe him, hire a private investigator, and find out for
yourself. You won't believe the GAO when they tell you no, anyway. Of
course you won't believe anyone who tells you what you don't want to hear.
DJT
David Sienkiewicz
> >This letter will no doubt (if Ed actually spent the $0.37 to send it) wind
> >up on the GAO's Crank File. Why don't you just ask David himself Ed? He
> >freely admits that he is not employed by anyone. No one is going to pay
> >anyone to discredit you Ed, you simply do too good a job of discrediting
> >yourself.
> >
> >DJT
> >
> In the GAO's Crank File?
> I doubt it.
> > http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/S23/MVC-011S.JPG
So you show us another picture.
Is that supposed to prove something, Ed?
The letter is dated September 23, 2003. Has it been sent yet?
Or are you just taking pictures of it?
And Ed, you told us over 15 months ago - it might even be more now -
that you had already written the GAO about this.
So why are you writing them again?
Oh, that's right! You never did write them before.
You lied.
St Cuthbert's Host
> In this case -- and it is UNMISTAKEABLE -- it is Sienkiewicz'
> despicable attempt to discredit facts and physical evidence
> that proves, BEYOND ALL DOUBT, that the Theory of Evolution
> belongs in the landfill.
oops I almost spilled coffee on my keyboard I did not realize that you
were now the Designated Loon for talk.origins.
Did you wind up your suspenders a little too tight or something?
Dana Tweedy
So, it will end up in Arlen Spector and Tim Holden's crank file as well.
Dana Tweedy
> <kar...@sympatico.ca> wrote to talk.origins:
>
> >< snip >
> >
> >> The General Accounting Office has been contacted,
> >> seeking documentation whether Attorney David Sienkiewicz
> >> is on the payroll (even parttime) of either the Smithsonian
> >> Institution or any other Pseudoscientific Establishment.
> >
> >I'd love to see the letter, Ed.
>
> ==========================================
>
> > http://www.edconrad.com/ebay/S22/MVC-034S.JPG
>
> ==========================================
Snipping
I bet the GAO puts this letter into their "Crank File". BTW Ed, why not
just ask David? He has already told you several times he is not in the
employ of anyone.
If you are really serious, why not hire a private investigator to look into
the matter?
DJT