Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #60 on: May 05, 2015, 11:19:57 AM »
had better prove to the me that G-d DOESN'T exist.

That one is easy. He doesn't

I expect proof.

He was only listed as an MD, not a surgeon.

Have you got a reference for Rowbotham being listed as a MD?


Now you are saying he wasn't?
« Last Edit: May 05, 2015, 11:21:49 AM by Yaakov ben Avraham »

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 7849
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #62 on: May 05, 2015, 12:40:07 PM »
I am not required or able to prove a negative.
You are if you made that claim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof#Proving_a_negative

Then I expect the atheists here, who assert that no G-d exists, to prove that claim.

Rama Set

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #63 on: May 05, 2015, 01:24:05 PM »
I am not required or able to prove a negative.
You are if you made that claim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof#Proving_a_negative

Then I expect the atheists here, who assert that no G-d exists, to prove that claim.

That would be profoundly off-topic for this thread. Have taken 20 minutes to search your emails yet?

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #64 on: May 05, 2015, 03:00:24 PM »
I am not required or able to prove a negative.
You are if you made that claim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof#Proving_a_negative

Then I expect the atheists here, who assert that no G-d exists, to prove that claim.

That would be profoundly off-topic for this thread. Have taken 20 minutes to search your emails yet?

I don't mean in this thread. One of the other threads is fine. 20 minutes through a year's worth of e-mails in 4 different accounts? Are you high? I suspect I probably didn't even keep said e-mails, (at least I haven't found them in a preliminary search) as they were irrelevant to my purpose after proving my point in previous threads. Incidentally, I am still waiting for more than a newspaper article to prove this huckster was an MD. I am preparing to get a friend to write a letter for the newspaper about me being a doctor, and then I want you all to start taking my medical advice, and to pay me top dollar for it.

That should ease my financial problems considerably, I would think.

Rama Set

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #65 on: May 05, 2015, 03:24:32 PM »
I am not required or able to prove a negative.
You are if you made that claim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof#Proving_a_negative

Then I expect the atheists here, who assert that no G-d exists, to prove that claim.

That would be profoundly off-topic for this thread. Have taken 20 minutes to search your emails yet?

I don't mean in this thread. One of the other threads is fine.

Find me a thread where I claimed God did not exist and I will be happy to oblige.

Quote
20 minutes through a year's worth of e-mails in 4 different accounts? Are you high?

No, I just know how to use a search function.

Quote
I suspect I probably didn't even keep said e-mails, (at least I haven't found them in a preliminary search) as they were irrelevant to my purpose after proving my point in previous threads.

So you are just expecting people to take your word for it?

Quote
Incidentally, I am still waiting for more than a newspaper article to prove this huckster was an MD. I am preparing to get a friend to write a letter for the newspaper about me being a doctor, and then I want you all to start taking my medical advice, and to pay me top dollar for it.

That should ease my financial problems considerably, I would think.

I think there is a patent application that lists him as an MD. Maybe Thork or Jroa knows?

*

Offline markjo

  • *
  • Posts: 7849
  • Zetetic Council runner-up
    • View Profile
Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #66 on: May 05, 2015, 07:09:47 PM »
Incidentally, I am still waiting for more than a newspaper article to prove this huckster was an MD. I am preparing to get a friend to write a letter for the newspaper about me being a doctor, and then I want you all to start taking my medical advice, and to pay me top dollar for it.

That should ease my financial problems considerably, I would think.

I think there is a patent application that lists him as an MD. Maybe Thork or Jroa knows?
Well, the GMC does maintain a database of registered medical practitioners going back to about 1859 or so.  I would that that would be about as authoritative as it gets.
http://www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/register/LRMP.asp
Abandon hope all ye who press enter here.

Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge. -- Charles Darwin

If you can't demonstrate it, then you shouldn't believe it.

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #67 on: May 05, 2015, 08:36:40 PM »
Whether he is listed there or not, which I doubt, does not indicate that he held a degree. It indicates he called himself a doctor. And people believed him to the point that no one questioned it enough to get him arrested. It can occasionally be done today. Just recently, there was a woman in CA who passed herself off as an attorney for 10 yrs. Made partner in a firm, & had never been to law school! If she could do it it 2005-2015 w/ all the background checks we do, just think what that sheister could get away with!

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #68 on: May 05, 2015, 08:45:57 PM »
Whether he is listed there or not, which I doubt, does not indicate that he held a degree. It indicates he called himself a doctor. And people believed him to the point that no one questioned it enough to get him arrested. It can occasionally be done today. Just recently, there was a woman in CA who passed herself off as an attorney for 10 yrs. Made partner in a firm, & had never been to law school! If she could do it it 2005-2015 w/ all the background checks we do, just think what that sheister could get away with!

Do you have a reference he said he was an MD or he was listed as an MD?  You made the claim.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16148
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #69 on: May 05, 2015, 10:13:55 PM »
Well, the GMC does maintain a database of registered medical practitioners going back to about 1859 or so.  I would that that would be about as authoritative as it gets.
http://www.gmc-uk.org/doctors/register/LRMP.asp
Looks like they have a copy in the National Library of Wales. If this isn't settled by then, I might pay them a visit the next time I'm in Aberystwyth... which will probably be in a few months.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #70 on: May 05, 2015, 10:33:25 PM »
By all means look, PIZAA, although it still won't settle much.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16148
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #71 on: May 05, 2015, 11:30:04 PM »
By all means look, PIZAA, although it still won't settle much.
Of course it will. If he's on the register of medical practitioners, we will know that he was one. You might still choose to deny it, but we'll just know not to take you seriously.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #72 on: May 05, 2015, 11:36:49 PM »
Whether he is listed there or not, which I doubt, does not indicate that he held a degree. It indicates he called himself a doctor. And people believed him to the point that no one questioned it enough to get him arrested. It can occasionally be done today. Just recently, there was a woman in CA who passed herself off as an attorney for 10 yrs. Made partner in a firm, & had never been to law school! If she could do it it 2005-2015 w/ all the background checks we do, just think what that sheister could get away with!

Do you have a reference he said he was an MD or he was listed as an MD?  You made the claim.

When a man permits a newspaper article to be written about him, or patents in his name, that include calling him an MD, that makes him essentially calling himself such. That should answer your question. For that matter, if its on his tombstone, one can assume he called himself that in life. His wife would certainly have been the one to authorise said tombstone, as his nearest living relative. So, there you are.

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #73 on: May 05, 2015, 11:38:41 PM »
By all means look, PIZAA, although it still won't settle much.
Of course it will. If he's on the register of medical practitioners, we will know that he was one. You might still choose to deny it, but we'll just know not to take you seriously.

It won't help at all. It will just prove that he called himself a doctor and was reputed as such, as MANY people were in the USA and the UK in those days, without actually having degrees. It happened a lot.

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #74 on: May 05, 2015, 11:40:42 PM »
I recommend any good history book on the history of the medical profession in English speaking countries. I can't think of any good titles at the moment, but there are several that would tell you this just as I am.

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #75 on: May 05, 2015, 11:42:27 PM »
And we still haven't resolved his supposed PhD, for that matter.

Rama Set

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #76 on: May 05, 2015, 11:45:32 PM »
We can't wait for you to find your email.

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #77 on: May 05, 2015, 11:49:32 PM »
We can't wait for you to find your email.

Oh, no. I encourage you to look. I am just saying it doesn't prove he has a degree. In fact, stop at Edinburgh. What I did by e-mail, and probably dumped, you can easily do, and more effectively do, in person. Please, by all means. The fact that you are going to come up with no records at Edinburgh is fine with me. And the fact that being called a Doctor in the 1800s is no evidence of holding a degree is fine with me too. By all means visit Wales. Seems like a good idea to me. The fact that the guy is still a schmuck and a liar won't change. I've already told you what the historical conditions were for being called a doctor were in England at the time. Go back through the thread and look, as I am not minded to  repeat myself.

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 16148
  • (◕˽ ◕ ✿)
    • View Profile
Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #78 on: May 06, 2015, 12:58:10 AM »
The fact that the guy is still a schmuck and a liar won't change.
Right, so no matter what evidence might hypothetically be out there, you are not willing to consider it, because what you think is objective fact.

If that's your stance, then I think we should stop entertaining your cries and focus on the subject at hand without your further participation.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

If we are not speculating then we must assume

Yaakov ben Avraham

Re: The qualifications of Rowbotham as a problem for REers accepting FET
« Reply #79 on: May 06, 2015, 02:14:02 AM »
Like I said. Feel free. I am particularly interested to hear what comes up @ Edinburgh. Now I'm still waiting for proof that G-d doesn't exist. Since I've been asked to prove a negative, I expect every atheist here to do likewise.