tjhairball's big education bluff - LOL

[tjhairball]

Hi. This is TJHairball, aka the guy you shit yourselves worrying about whenever you remember my thrashing you in debate in the summer of 2004 - using the analysis of Stardestroyer.net at that - and again in the summer of 2005. Some of you may remember when I demonstrated that the community is collectively inconsistent as well as Wong's analysis in particular.

As you may recall from the identifier attached to my Juno e-mail address and traces run on my IP address(es), my real name is Thomas MacIntee and I am resident of North Carolina; the latter is also known on NationStates, and the moderation staff there all know my real name, as I was one of them before retiring from active presence there.

There are approximately 1.0 Thomas MacIntee in the United States using that spelling, and you can find a great deal of information on me simply through Google as a result.

At the time of my last posts here, I had completed the first three years of study of a five year program that culminated in bachelor's degrees in mathematics, physics, philosophy & religion [technically, although my course work for that degree program was almost exclusively philosophy; a separate philosophy degree is only now being offered] from Appalachian State University, i.e., already had equal or superior math, physics, logic, et cetera coursework to that presumably completed by Michael Wong. That I have completed that program and begun graduate studies is trivially easy to verify.

(The above link will show my presence on various lists of alumni, graduates, dean's lists, in addition to my abortive music career and fencing rankings within the state of North Carolina and, curiously higher in the search algorithm, selected commentary about and to Islamophobes.)

My various advising professors in each of the three departments seemed optimistic about my ability to handle graduate work in their field, as a matter of fact, in the event that you should consider me spread too thin to possibly know what I'm talking about.

From my lofty vantage point, having approximately three times the relevant education as Michael Wong, and probably more than any of the individuals seen posting in the last 49 pages, I reiterate again that his analysis is inconsistent and in almost all regards inferior in every case to the corresponding articles on ST-v-SW.net regardless of the education of its author.

Even his "analysis" on creationtheory.org mostly demonstrates at best how poor logic and error-filled commentary can lead to the correct answer. He has, of course, done reasonably well to copy from lists of fallacies, but his lack of education in logic is plainly evident to someone who has taken several courses dedicated to logic.

You have challenged anyone with a science degree who thinks Star Trek could possibly win; I challenge you to find anyone who meets or exceeds my credentials in all my fields of study who agrees with your inconsistent and error-riddled analysis. By the standards offered, Wong is not worth my time.

Nor, in my opinion, is Stardestroyer.net on the whole (with my incidental apologies to C'tan), which is why I gave up on ever getting y'all to see sense.

For the most part, few highly educated and highly intelligent people are willing to touch the VS debate with a stick because of the evident irrationality of most of the participants, and the ultimate futility of the argument when, as my brother (nearly complete with his first master's degree himself, in computer science) pointed out, the result of any VS scenario will depend on who is exercising creative control.

In fact, many well educated and intelligent folks, such as my father, who has master's degrees in computer science and mathematics, or several of the professors who I mentioned the behavior of this community in, initially had difficulty believing in the VS community as I described it to them during these debates - although not after reviewing the websites.

That said, I've wasted a perfectly good half hour telling that to you. I hope it furthers your educations, folks.

[Stark]

Wow, I'm shitting myself already. I hear posturing with no real content = win on thar internets? PS poison the well more!

I enjoy the part where you think education > reasoned arguments, though. I mean, saying Mike might be wrong is one thing (of course you offer no examples, just vague accusations) but saying ST-vs-SW is better or best is simply ridiculous and removes any chance anyone will take you seriously. When you close with 'some guys who never heard of x were surprised to hear x exists therefore you suck', that's awesome.

Also, I unquestioningly believe all claims of apditude and experience made on the internet. That it took you half an hour to write that post is fascinating, for someone of your towering intellect and diverse education (who is thus automatically right).

[Darth Lucifer]

Did this guy ever go by the handle BigHairyMountainMan??

[Ritterin Sophia]

Waiting for alma mater and all that other junk, if you don't mind.

[brianeyci]

For the most part, few highly educated and highly intelligent people are willing to touch the VS debate with a stick because of the evident irrationality of most of the participants

Well you got that right.

I don't remember you but maybe I haven't been around long enough. So... you were three out of five when you started, and now you have your diploma and you haven't changed your view? Maybe you should look at the debate again before you go back with nostalgia for something when you were three out of five or two out of four in most colleges.

How do you have three times the education of Mike with a mere Bachelor's degree? I smell bullshit: just because you major in three things, or major and two minors, that doesn't mean three times. Do you have three times the quality of his education, three times the time, three times the grades, what the fuck is that supposed to mean? Three times would mean Ph.D. or equivalent to most, and it sounds like you either have no idea what you're talking about or you're inflating your ego. You even admit you are working on graduate studies, so no Ph.D. yet. If you have a Bachelor, then you meet Mike's at best, if it was a rigorous physics and mathematics program. But it is not: you admit majority of work was philosophy.

You haven't even met Mike's challenge yet for a scan of your diploma. So if someone finds someone with greater qualifications than you, you will debate him? Or did you just come here for some chest thumping?

[Darwin]

Hi. This is TJHairball, aka the guy you shit yourselves worrying about whenever you remember my thrashing you in debate in the summer of 2004 - using the analysis of Stardestroyer.net at that - and again in the summer of 2005. Some of you may remember when I demonstrated that the community is collectively inconsistent as well as Wong's analysis in particular.

I thought you demonstrated that you were at best a condescending, dishonest debater, and at worst a nonsensical troll and asshole who hid his dishonesties under a thin veneer of cultured civility, distractions, and laziness for not actually doing the work required to prove your barely-intelligible assertions.

I'm sure when called on your latest assertions, you'll claim, just as before, that you you have much more important things to do than to waste time debating on this 'little board'.

[Stark]

Remember, it's impossible for anyone educated to hold irrational or incorrect attitudes. It's impossible for him to be a graduate who just likes fucking with people. There's no reason to assess his arguments on their own merits (which WOULD be hard, since I didn't see any actual arguments, just bluster) because he's educated ergo he wins.

Clearly he's trying that old hobby-horse, the 'Mike pays out uneducated idiots, this means he thinks he's right due to his education and not the soundness of his reasoning'.

[brianeyci]

Mike wasn't going that he was right because he is educated.

He went, he wants to only debate educated people. There's a huge difference... Mike isn't appealing to his degree. He just wants to debate people who are at his level.

I actually want to see at TJ Hairball vs Mike debate it'd be fun. Maybe if everybody except Mike and Hairball keep out of it, it'd be enough time for the the time strapped intrepid researcher of philosophy.

I just looked at Hairball's prior posts and I'm not impressed at all. He made the "good guys always win" claim... if you're going to say that, might as well throw out any pretense of using science to win the debate at all. What a dishonest turd. He said 100 megaton torpedoes, based on Voyager Rise... I remember Rise, it was an artificial asteroid with Chakotay saying "vaporized"... why do these guys always insist on taking the literal interpretation of a man's words when people in real life never talk like that. Even 100 megaton torpedoes isn't enough: it's just a high yield nuclear device.

[Vympel]

Ah yes, tjhairball really schooled everyone here.

This is also the same intellectual leading light who claimed that Data in "Ensigns of Command" caused the pipes in the aqueduct system to deform from the heat of his phaser blast*- but more importantly claimed that binding energy wasn't a negative quantity, but something you could actually release (it was in the midst of a Death Star argument)

And what's with your inaccuracy on the issue of nuclear potential energy? Nuclear potential energy not only exists, but is useable... Hiroshima demonstrated that quite well. By shifting final nuclear configurations around, everything but iron-56 has potential energy. If you can cause the nuclei to all dissassociate and then reassemble later in their lowest energy state, then you can squeeze plenty of energy out of matter.

and

Incorrect. Fission and fusion processes overcome particular forces - the nuclear binding force aka the "strong nuclear force" in the former case - and release the nuclear binding energy.
You may, of course, choose to continue not to take me at my word... I recommend you educate yourself on the matter by reading a few articles on nuclear binding energy and fission before continuing to disagree, however. You may note the frequent iteration of how fission releases nuclear binding energy.

and

The precise value does not matter. What matters for releasing energy is the change in value. I could claim a positive value associated with the binding energy - perhaps we should label it "freedom energy" in this case - of nucleons theoretically, and it would be equivalent mathematically provided I maintained the shape of the curve. We prefer, however, to label the free state of nucleons as the base [zero] value, and speak of binding energy as negative, because it's much more convenient for us. (And, for that matter, rather habitual on our part.)

(he used semantics from google to make this argument, of course).

It's a pity that board is gone now, so his idiocy is only quoted elsewhere.

Oh- and then there's this:-

A stationary planet the mass of the Earth has 5.3x10^43 J of energy lying around. E=mc^2 for a stationary object, and the Earth has a mass of ~5.9x10^24 kg, with c being roughly 3x10^8. This is quite enough energy to blow lots of crap up.

Proof complete.

*Of course, he was going from a matte painting which was identical in the "before" shot to the "after" shot in every respect, so it's amazing how he was able to pick up on that. Maybe that philosophy degree helped him out on that, I dunno.

At least I know where the "hair" thing comes from now

[Kane Starkiller]

I've said it before: TJHairball/BigHairyMountainMan/SharpThorn is JMSpock. Starfleetjedi trekkies create a thread about Michael Wong's comment on education and coincidentally tjhairball comes out of the woodworks 3 years later. Yeah sure.

[Coiler]

I've said it before: TJHairball/BigHairyMountainMan/SharpThorn is JMSpock. Starfleetjedi trekkies create a thread about Michael Wong's comment on education and coincidentally tjhairball comes out of the woodworks 3 years later. Yeah sure.

Any way to check their respective IP adresses or something like that?

[Vympel]

No, because only hairball was ever here. However, Sharp Thorn/ BigHairyMountainMan were the same person, Alyeska confirmed that on SB.com.

[Kane Starkiller]

Since Alyeska was also a mod here maybe he could find out for sure whether tjhairball is the same as those two although I have little doubt.

[Zablorg]

They certainly seem to be of the same breed.

In all that six paragraph post, did he actually... post anything?

[Coiler]

No, because only hairball was ever here. However, Sharp Thorn/ BigHairyMountainMan were the same person, Alyeska confirmed that on SB.com.

Ok.

If the theory is correct, it would explain a lot. Like why Spock has turned down every single one of my invitations to come over and debate either here or at SB.com. Or like why he considers the SB moderation staff to be biased.

Of course, it could be that he's just repeating what RSA told him.

[Vympel]

In all that six paragraph post, did he actually... post anything?

Course not. Apologies for the large number of edits in my previous post, but this raving imbecile's posts on strek-v-swars should really have been preserved for posterity, but unfortunately we only have fragments of Moron-Wisdom, and they're haphazardly lying around in quote form.

Like this one:

Lucas wrote at a time when the conversion of matter into energy and the rhetoric of destroying planets was fresh in everybody's mind. The Death Star is a very clear analogue in SW to the nuke... that mysterious chain reaction based mass-energy conversion weapon capable of wiping out cities in less time than one can hold one's breath

See? The Death Star is just like a nuke, because of the time when Lucas wrote Star Wars! (wow, he wrote Star Wars a lonnng time ago)

[Kane Starkiller]

See? The Death Star is just like a nuke, because of the time when Lucas wrote Star Wars! (wow, he wrote Star Wars a lonnng time ago)

Not to mention that his analogy is completely invalid since he is suggesting that Death Star causes chain reaction on the target while a nuke causes chain reaction inside itself which has nothing to do with the target. "His lofty vantage point" indeed. Fucking moron.

[Stark]

Maybe he's suggesting that a nuke is like his idea of the Death Star: it magics energy from the target. Because the yield comes from the city you drop it on, not the fissionable material inside it, right? Chain reaction lololololololololool!

[Coiler]

After reading tjhairball's post again, I do have to say that him and JMSpock share similar styles of composition.

That pseudo-academic tone is very familiar to me after debating him for so long.

[Kane Starkiller]

Maybe he's suggesting that a nuke is like his idea of the Death Star: it magics energy from the target. Because the yield comes from the city you drop it on, not the fissionable material inside it, right? Chain reaction lololololololololool!

I hear Russians make for excellent fuel source. This probably explains US nuclear superiority during the cold war.

[Vympel]

I hear Russians make for excellent fuel source. This probably explains US nuclear superiority during the cold war.

It's all the alcohol. But really, his antics in the HoS thread linked above make for good fodder. It's a tragedy his admirable body of work on strek-v-swars is gone.

(Just so you know, what started it all was that other master intellect, GStone, making this comment and getting pilloried for it:-

but you keep proving you don't even know your weight in spit about science. Hell, you either don't want to mention or couldn't care less about the fact that the STRONG NUCLEAR FORCE is not only one of the four fundamental forces of the universe, but is also the strongest and they are within each atom. Why not looking that up in your dictionary. Just as Big H [aka tjhairball- Vym] said, releasing energy of that magnitude when you have a large mass, like a planet is powerful shit.

[Stark]

'Powerful shit' INDEED.

[Kane Starkiller]

Well obviously someone "worth in spit" regarding science should know when something is "powerful shit". Of course this powerful shit attracts nucleons rather than repelling so one must wonder what the moron is talking about.

Further on TJhairball's identity. I remembered that a while ago I stumbled upon this thread where JMSpock lists the "main spots" on the net. Among his "Fun things" list there is the following entry:

There's a quiz (rated 3.95).

As you can immediately see the author is none other than TJhairball. Of course this in itself is still not bulletproof evidence but really, this piece of shit quiz which to this date has been used by 555 people is not a "main spot" and it is unlikely to be found unless you just happen to be the author.

[Darwin]

Well obviously someone "worth in spit" regarding science should know when something is "powerful shit". Of course this powerful shit attracts nucleons rather than repelling so one must wonder what the moron is talking about.

Further on TJhairball's identity. I remembered that a while ago I stumbled upon this thread where JMSpock lists the "main spots" on the net. Among his "Fun things" list there is the following entry:

There's a quiz (rated 3.95).

As you can immediately see the author is none other than TJhairball. Of course this in itself is still not bulletproof evidence but really, this piece of shit quiz which to this date has been used by 555 people is not a "main spot" and it is unlikely to be found unless you just happen to be the author.

completely unreadable yellow on light blue text. Yet another piece of evidence that hairball is a moron.

[Dark Hellion]

Wait, so TJhairball thinks that completing a singular 5 year program that results in what is basically a Major and two minors from an unheard of school (and one is a Religion minor, which I nearly have because I go to a fucking lutheran school) makes him better than us. I can also prove that I have nearly completed two different Majors in both Philosophy and Physics (oh, that makes me better than him, woops) and I am woefully under-qualified when compared with Mr. Wong. Because, actually working with the science is much fucking harder than completing the degree from Bumfuck Uni.

If he is BHMM this is also the guy who argued that Worf would beat up a Space Marine in unarmed combat. Yes. That is right.

Hint, just because you completed higher education, doesn't mean you aren't a dumbass. I know people with Masters who work at fucking Applebees.