Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 11:43:54 09/04/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 04, 2002 at 12:03:38, Roger D Davis wrote: the accusation is backed up with loads of evidence and a proof the chance it was a 'mistake' is less then 0.0000000000000000000000000000000001 First the human aspect was dealt with and that was a talk with Bob. I have posted it already 4 times here what happened. So it is very relevant to accuse bob publicly, after he doing such stupid statemetns everywhere on deep blue. it shows the big picture. 9 out of 10 of his statements are based without knowing that statistics proof something in science. Bob clearly doesn't know about it, as all his publications show. I focus upon this publication because this is the publication that concerns me. I lack the time to analyze the other publications for you but you will not like the outcome... >Actually, we are talking about you, Vincent. WE ARE TALKING VERY MUCH ABOUT YOU. >You have chosen to accuse someone of fraud in a public forum. This is far >different in nature that simply saying that a mistake was make, or even saying >that you don't respect someone's intelligence, or even saying that someone is >stupid, because this goes to INTENTIONALITY and to character. Such accusations >are not to be made lightly, particularly where the charge involved is scientific >dishonesty. > >If you're going to make such severe charges, particularly in a public forum, >then you have to accept the fact that others are going to inspect your motives >in doing so. They are going to look at what interests you might be furthering by >making such charges, they're going to look at your own level of maturity, and >they're going to look at the history of the interaction between you and the >person you've accused. > >That's just life. Science doesn't exist in a vacuum...science is just a part of >life. > >So the spotlight is on you, too. We have a saying: If you can stand the heat, >get out of the kitchen. > >Roger > > > >> >>We are not talking about me here but about Hyatt. How important is it >>that a professor of good standing is writing down the truth in an >>official article he writes? >> >>I mean if you, just released from prison or madhouse, >>to just give an example, write down some faked results and submit it >>to ICCA and they post it, then i can understand if it is not getting >>taken serious. >> >>Now how important is it that a government official with a professor >>in front of his name is writing down the truth? >>
This page took 0.01 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.