Doggerel Suggestions, Anyone?

Sorry I’ve been quiet for the past couple of weeks. I’ve been busy with the fleshy side of my life, and thus neglected teh internets side.

For the fans of the original Doggerel Index, I’m doing a bit of reorganizing, and I’ve decided to put some of the more “elemental” doggerel entries at the top of the list. There’s plenty of variety in the subject, but a lot of them can be boiled down to some general bad ideas that can become the foundation for specific bad ideas. Let me know what you think deserves a place up front. I’m thinking about making #7 “You’re Just an Anonymous Blogger!” to cover how a lot of trolls use that ad hominem, though one version is a cry of “Shill!” It’ll also cover a bit about why I choose to blog under a pseudonym.

Of course, if you’d like me to write posts about anything else, let me know. I’m thinking about randomly picking out another Bruce Lipton article to dissect, since I get the feeling he’s got plenty of silly ideas.

9 responses to “Doggerel Suggestions, Anyone?

  1. Yes, I’ve had that too — anonymous commenter complains that I’m “hiding behind a fake name”, usually after running through all the other standard tricks.

    I’d certainly be happy to see some more on Lipton. I’ve been thinking of getting hold of his book The Biology of Belief and blogging it. There should be more criticism of him, but the big guns don’t seem to want to touch him. I notice even PZ backed off from going into any detail about him a while ago, preferring to describe one of his talks as “a place where reason goes to die”.

    I can understand why they don’t want to wade into that swamp, but I get hits on my site every day from people searching for “Bruce Lipton quack”, so people clearly want to know if he’s for real.


    One doggerel-type topic which has been appearing for me a lot is the argument that a particular woo-meister has “helped millions of people” therefore it’s okay if they also happened to have killed the few along the way.

    Some idiot said this on facebook, for example, about 4 time killer James Ray: “He is a great man and has done more good for millions than bad. How many people are trying to help others in this world like he does?” The guy clearly knows that Ray is in prison at the moment for his crimes, but still tallies up “millions helped/4 dead = positive effects”. (Of course he hasn’t helped milllions either, he just screwed them over, but that is at least a point for debate.)

    I’ve had the same reasoning for assorted cancer quacks and loons.

  2. So, I don’t actually have anything /relevant/ to say, but I figured this was the best place to stick something random and off-topic: Remember that game stuff from a while back? I can actually do some coding now, and will only get better. If you’re still interested, we can try to actually work on that.

      • If you feel like “willing” is a better descriptor for your state of mind on the subject than “interested”, then I wouldn’t bother; was just a random idea that came to mind. If you don’t have a particular desire to do it, then don’t. After all, nothing fun happens if the inspiration’s gone, and I’m not invested so much in the idea that I wouldn’t be willing to not bother with it if you don’t feel like it.

        (I have absolutely no idea how to put all that in better words, but I really feel like I should be able to…)

      • I’ll let you know when I’ve got less stuff to deal with. I’d really like to get the idea somewhere, but stuff’s happening right now.

  3. Dunno if this is the level of Doggerel you’re talking about, but I’ve recently had occasion to rant about the abuse of the word “chemicals.” Mind you, I may have suggested that as a Doggerel subject on the old blog, so it’s a long-standing pet peeve of mine. (I posted as “Rhoadan.”)

    BTW, any chance you could find a template with a larger type size, or increase the type size on this template? I find the small type hard to read.

  4. On further consideration, it occurs to me that the “Chemicals” issue falls under a general category of “Words have meanings; learn them and use them correctly.” Maybe there needs to be a Doggerel about abuse of words in general.

    • It’s okay. “Chemicals” was in the original list, and it was mostly focused on the medical abuse, as was “toxins” IIRC.

      I’ll try getting around to some posting this week. Dredmor keeps pulling me back in.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s