On the Notion of Dr. Samuel Rowbotham

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on October 26, 2011, 10:53:22 PM

The reason it's not significant is that you have no evidence whatsoever (nor any reason, really) to believe that Dr Rowbotham wasn't an actual doctor.  It makes your significance number 1 rather humorously ironic, 2 and 3 completely baseless, and 5... just wrong (4 is irrelevant one way or the other).

Let me know when you are able to find evidence that Dr Rowbotham didn't legitimately earn the title with which he has been credited.  Until then... yawn.

How about the fact that "Dr." Birley was best known for selling his patent medicine, a questionable, if not all too common, practice of the time.

So what?  Real doctors sold patent medicines.

Quote from: markjo on October 27, 2011, 06:08:41 AM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on October 26, 2011, 10:53:22 PM

The reason it's not significant is that you have no evidence whatsoever (nor any reason, really) to believe that Dr Rowbotham wasn't an actual doctor.  It makes your significance number 1 rather humorously ironic, 2 and 3 completely baseless, and 5... just wrong (4 is irrelevant one way or the other).

Let me know when you are able to find evidence that Dr Rowbotham didn't legitimately earn the title with which he has been credited.  Until then... yawn.

How about the fact that "Dr." Birley was best known for selling his patent medicine, a questionable, if not all too common, practice of the time.

So what?  Real doctors sold patent medicines.

Lots of fake doctors sold patent medicines too. 

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on October 27, 2011, 07:34:17 AM

Quote from: markjo on October 27, 2011, 06:08:41 AM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on October 26, 2011, 10:53:22 PM

The reason it's not significant is that you have no evidence whatsoever (nor any reason, really) to believe that Dr Rowbotham wasn't an actual doctor.  It makes your significance number 1 rather humorously ironic, 2 and 3 completely baseless, and 5... just wrong (4 is irrelevant one way or the other).

Let me know when you are able to find evidence that Dr Rowbotham didn't legitimately earn the title with which he has been credited.  Until then... yawn.

How about the fact that "Dr." Birley was best known for selling his patent medicine, a questionable, if not all too common, practice of the time.

So what?  Real doctors sold patent medicines.

Lots of fake doctors sold patent medicines too.

So I guess we can agree that the fact that Dr Rowbotham sold patent medicines is irrelevant, since it's utterly inconclusive as evidence one way or the other.

Not that I think SBR was a doctor, he definitely seems more or a snake oil merchant to me than a prima facie doctor.

But even if he is a doctor, so what?  Doesn't make his claims anymore legitimate.  Let's look at just a few dodgy doctors down the ages:

Dr. Joseph Goebbels
Dr  Jayant Patel
Dr. Conrad Murray
Dr Walter Freeman
Dr Harry Howard Holmes
Dr  Carl Clauberg
Dr John Bodkin Adams
Dr Harold Shipman
Dr  Josef Mengele
Dr Karl Brandt
Dr George Chapman
Dr Radovan Karadžić
Dr Richard J. Schmidt

So I hardly think Dr in front of SBR, whether earned or not, really means much at all.

Let's look at just a few dodgy doctors down the ages:

Dr. Joseph Goebbels
Dr  Jayant Patel
Dr. Conrad Murray
Dr Walter Freeman
Dr Harry Howard Holmes
Dr  Carl Clauberg
Dr John Bodkin Adams
Dr Harold Shipman
Dr  Josef Mengele
Dr Karl Brandt
Dr George Chapman
Dr Radovan Karadžić
Dr Richard J. Schmidt

Being evil does not take away the fact that they went to school for half of their life, received an advanced education in the sciences, and were distinguished as a PhD/MD.

Being evil does not take away the fact that they went to school for half of their life, received an advanced education in the sciences, and were distinguished as a PhD/MD.

Would you like to present some evidence that this happened? All that has been presented so far is that a few people and his gravestone called him a doctor, no mention of schooling.

Quote from: Science, Volume 5 by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, January-June 1885

— We observe this note in a late number of the Athenaeum: '• ' РАRRALAX' is dead! Dr. Samuel Rowbotham used this name as the author of ' Zetetic astronomy,' and he was well known by it as a lecturer on such subjects as 'the earth not a globe.' The doctor, some years before his death, directed his 'seeking philosophy' to chemistry; but we never heard of any discovery resulting from his search."

Clearly his contemporary detractors were more fair than the like of you. Even they did not do him the disservice of removing his rightful appellation.

You continue to ignore all historical evidence.

The reason it's not significant is that you have no evidence whatsoever (nor any reason, really) to believe that Dr Rowbotham wasn't an actual doctor.  It makes your significance number 1 rather humorously ironic, 2 and 3 completely baseless, and 5... just wrong (4 is irrelevant one way or the other).

Let me know when you are able to find evidence that Dr Rowbotham didn't legitimately earn the title with which he has been credited.  Until then... yawn.

you FE zealots are dense.

The reason it IS significant is that you have no evidence whatsoever to believe SBR WAS a doctor. When someone makes a claim it is up to them to show evidence. FE and SBR fanboys on this site make the claim that SBR was a Dr.. Even TB earlier in this thread agreed that the peices of evidence FE proponents have does not amount to any certainty of his education.

FE proponents and SBR followers alike have not been able to provide a shred  of suitabel evidence for his education.

The reason it IS significant is that you have no evidence whatsoever to believe SBR WAS a doctor.

I don't believe his detractors, while mocking him as an idiot or charlatan, would have given him the appellation of doctor if he had not earned it. They would have used it as further evidence of fraud, in the same way you are trying to do. That not one of his contemporaries ever contested the title is evidence that he held it legitimately.

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on October 28, 2011, 11:48:20 AM

The reason it IS significant is that you have no evidence whatsoever to believe SBR WAS a doctor.

I don't believe his detractors, while mocking him as an idiot or charlatan, would have given him the appellation of doctor if he had not earned it. They would have used it as further evidence of fraud, in the same way you are trying to do. That not one of his contemporaries ever contested the title is evidence that he held it legitimately.

Bingo.  Further, I would say that it's extremely likely just based on what we know that he achieved at least some level of higher education.  He was obviously very intelligent, as both his writing and his time on the lecture circuit suggest.  Honestly I think this whole "Rowbotham wasn't a real doctor! You have no proof!" thing is nothing more than REers looking for a made-up excuse to be contrary, as they tend to do.

Quote from: Ski on October 28, 2011, 12:04:42 PM

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on October 28, 2011, 11:48:20 AM

The reason it IS significant is that you have no evidence whatsoever to believe SBR WAS a doctor.

I don't believe his detractors, while mocking him as an idiot or charlatan, would have given him the appellation of doctor if he had not earned it. They would have used it as further evidence of fraud, in the same way you are trying to do. That not one of his contemporaries ever contested the title is evidence that he held it legitimately.

Bingo.  Further, I would say that it's extremely likely just based on what we know that he achieved at least some level of higher education.  He was obviously very intelligent, as both his writing and his time on the lecture circuit suggest.  Honestly I think this whole "Rowbotham wasn't a real doctor! You have no proof!" thing is nothing more than REers looking for a made-up excuse to be contrary, as they tend to do.

I disagree.  It is an attempt to discredit his qualifications in order to try to get the FE'ers to stop using his silly ancient experiments as proof.  I have read ENaG and I do not feel any smarter than I did before I read the thing.

So you're besmirching a man without evidence, in spite of the testimony of his peers (most of whom thought he was wrong) to try to change my mind? Now that we know it's a character assassination for the purpose of simply winning you points, will you still mind terribly if we ignore you?

Is this thread still going on? FErs have provided several sources referring to Dr Rowbotham as a doctor. His gravestone also confirms this.

Not one source has been produced saying he isn't a doctor. Its case closed. The fact RErs are still barking up this tree shows only how unsuccessful they must have been at arguing against FET as of late. If they are trying to pour doubt on Dr Rowbotham's credentials because they are all out of science, then I call that 

Another win for Flat Earth !!!

Quote from: Ski on October 28, 2011, 12:04:42 PM

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on October 28, 2011, 11:48:20 AM

The reason it IS significant is that you have no evidence whatsoever to believe SBR WAS a doctor.

I don't believe his detractors, while mocking him as an idiot or charlatan, would have given him the appellation of doctor if he had not earned it. They would have used it as further evidence of fraud, in the same way you are trying to do. That not one of his contemporaries ever contested the title is evidence that he held it legitimately.

Bingo.  Further, I would say that it's extremely likely just based on what we know that he achieved at least some level of higher education.  He was obviously very intelligent, as both his writing and his time on the lecture circuit suggest.  Honestly I think this whole "Rowbotham wasn't a real doctor! You have no proof!" thing is nothing more than REers looking for a made-up excuse to be contrary, as they tend to do.

I don't believe that Rowbotham was any more a PhD than P.T. Barnum was, but it does sound that he was at least as much a showman.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on October 28, 2011, 02:39:09 PM

Quote from: Ski on October 28, 2011, 12:04:42 PM

Quote from: Sentient Pizza on October 28, 2011, 11:48:20 AM

The reason it IS significant is that you have no evidence whatsoever to believe SBR WAS a doctor.

I don't believe his detractors, while mocking him as an idiot or charlatan, would have given him the appellation of doctor if he had not earned it. They would have used it as further evidence of fraud, in the same way you are trying to do. That not one of his contemporaries ever contested the title is evidence that he held it legitimately.

Bingo.  Further, I would say that it's extremely likely just based on what we know that he achieved at least some level of higher education.  He was obviously very intelligent, as both his writing and his time on the lecture circuit suggest.  Honestly I think this whole "Rowbotham wasn't a real doctor! You have no proof!" thing is nothing more than REers looking for a made-up excuse to be contrary, as they tend to do.

I don't believe that Rowbotham was any more a PhD than P.T. Barnum was, but it does sound that he was at least as much a showman.

You're entitled to your opinion; just keep in mind that it's just an opinion, and it contradicts what evidence we have.

It's ok guys, even if he had earned a doctorate, he would still be capable of coming to the wrong conclusion about an experiment because of inadequate controls.

You're entitled to your opinion; just keep in mind that it's just an opinion, and it contradicts what evidence we have.

Evidence?  What evidence?  When you dig up a copy of Rowbotham's diploma or academic records, then you'll have evidence.  Until then you just have say so.  After all, I can have MD, PhD and any other letters I want engraved on my tombstone, but that doesn't mean that I've earned those letters.

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on October 28, 2011, 04:15:53 PM

You're entitled to your opinion; just keep in mind that it's just an opinion, and it contradicts what evidence we have.

Evidence?  What evidence?  When you dig up a copy of Rowbotham's diploma or academic records, then you'll have evidence.  Until then you just have say so.  After all, I can have MD, PhD and any other letters I want engraved on my tombstone, but that doesn't mean that I've earned those letters.

See, you're blathering.  The pain of admitting that you're wrong about this is too much for you to bear.  It's time to let this silly, pointless little argument rest, isn't it?  After all, it ultimately means absolutely nothing about the shape of the Earth.

Quote

Let's look at just a few dodgy doctors down the ages:

Dr. Joseph Goebbels
Dr  Jayant Patel
Dr. Conrad Murray
Dr Walter Freeman
Dr Harry Howard Holmes
Dr  Carl Clauberg
Dr John Bodkin Adams
Dr Harold Shipman
Dr  Josef Mengele
Dr Karl Brandt
Dr George Chapman
Dr Radovan Karadžić
Dr Richard J. Schmidt

Being evil does not take away the fact that they went to school for half of their life, received an advanced education in the sciences, and were distinguished as a PhD/MD.

The point is being a doctor doesn't automatically make you right about something.  Or are you going to say, Josef Mengele conducted inhumane experiments on concentration camp victims, but it's okay because he was a doctor?

Even if SBR was a doctor, so what?  It doesn't make his claims any more legitimate.

Noone has ever said that. Not one person has said, "It has to be true. Rowbotham was a doctor."  The only thing said on the matter was to deny the baseless assertions of a smear campaign.

It is an attempt to discredit his qualifications in order to try to get the FE'ers to stop using his silly ancient experiments as proof.

Atleast he was honest. It is as if I said, "There is no evidence that pitdroidtech ever completed primary school" simply to discredit you to avoid addressing your salient points.

Noone has ever said that. Not one person has said, "It has to be true. Rowbotham was a doctor."  The only thing said on the matter was to deny the baseless assertions of a smear campaign.

Quote from: jroa on October 28, 2011, 02:51:10 PM

It is an attempt to discredit his qualifications in order to try to get the FE'ers to stop using his silly ancient experiments as proof.

Atleast he was honest. It is as if I said, "There is no evidence that pitdroidtech ever completed primary school" simply to discredit you to avoid addressing your salient points.

Actually I didn't complete primary school.  I only completed about 5 and a half years of 7 years total due to my parents travelling.  However I did go to high school, got dux of year 10 finishing in the top 5% of the state in mathematics and top 20% in english.  I completed senior having missed my last terms exams due to injury, sat for QSAT and got top 1 percent of the state in both english and maths (scoring in the top 100 applicants out of 10,000 who sat the test).

So completing the requisite schooling isn't always proof of much either.....

So completing the requisite schooling isn't always proof of much either.....

So why are you all trying to strip Dr Rowbotham of his?

Quote from: pitdroidtech on October 29, 2011, 02:57:15 AM

So completing the requisite schooling isn't always proof of much either.....

So why are you all trying to strip Dr Rowbotham of his?

I personally have not once claimed or proposed that Samuel Rowbotham wasn't a doctor.  I'm saying it's irrelevant whether he was or not.

If other people feel it important to clarify the uncertainty of  Rowbotham's title then that's their business.

Quote from: pitdroidtech on October 29, 2011, 02:57:15 AM

So completing the requisite schooling isn't always proof of much either.....

So why are you all trying to strip Dr Rowbotham of his?

How can you strip something that has never been granted?

Also, like we are saying,

 

It's ok guys, even if he had earned a doctorate, he would still be capable of coming to the wrong conclusion about an experiment because of inadequate controls.

Quote from: markjo on October 28, 2011, 07:36:58 PM

Quote from: Roundy the Truthinessist on October 28, 2011, 04:15:53 PM

You're entitled to your opinion; just keep in mind that it's just an opinion, and it contradicts what evidence we have.

Evidence?  What evidence?  When you dig up a copy of Rowbotham's diploma or academic records, then you'll have evidence.  Until then you just have say so.  After all, I can have MD, PhD and any other letters I want engraved on my tombstone, but that doesn't mean that I've earned those letters.

See, you're blathering.  The pain of admitting that you're wrong about this is too much for you to bear.  It's time to let this silly, pointless little argument rest, isn't it?  After all, it ultimately means absolutely nothing about the shape of the Earth.

Actually, it does.  It goes to Rowbotham's credibility.  If he lied about earning a PhD in medicine (or anything else), then why is it such a stretch that he might lie about the shape of the earth?

This is page 6. Do you have a shred of evidence to suggest Dr Rowbotham was lying Markjo? You have been shown several sources confirming his full title. This mucky rumourmongering does RErs a disservice.

Actually, it does.  It goes to Rowbotham's credibility.  If he lied about earning a PhD in medicine (or anything else), then why is it such a stretch that he might lie about the shape of the earth?

Right, and if Einstein murdered the person who actually formulated the theories of relativity and falsely claimed them as his own it would go to his credibility too, but since neither scenario seems to have any evidence what sense is there in arguing them?

Quote from: Ski on October 29, 2011, 02:07:21 AM

Noone has ever said that. Not one person has said, "It has to be true. Rowbotham was a doctor."  The only thing said on the matter was to deny the baseless assertions of a smear campaign.

Quote from: jroa on October 28, 2011, 02:51:10 PM

It is an attempt to discredit his qualifications in order to try to get the FE'ers to stop using his silly ancient experiments as proof.

Atleast he was honest. It is as if I said, "There is no evidence that pitdroidtech ever completed primary school" simply to discredit you to avoid addressing your salient points.

Actually I didn't complete primary school.

So why should we be wasting our time here listening to someone who didn't even finish primary school?

Your posts are obviously invalid because you didn't pass primary school.

Seems to be a theme among you RE'ers....

Even if SBR was a doctor, so what?  It doesn't make his claims any more legitimate.

That is correct. It also doesn't make his claims any less legitimate, as pointed out numerous times.

I dont see how this is still going on.

A tombstone, and self proclaiming educational status/achievement is not evidence. Even Tom B. agrees that the evidence for his being a doctor is not enough.

sirTheMore proclaims to be a "Sir" but has presented no evidence of his knighting(this is just an example stm no offence is intended here). Giving yourslef a name does not make you that. It does help keep people from figuring out who you are which is why SBR used all those alts. I doubt General Dissaray is actually a general. And I am by no means a pizza.

SBR was many things. Some good some not so good. A Doctor of any form was not one of those things.

As evident in his 'scientific' publiciations, SBR gravely misunderstood perspective, and vanishing points, geography, and simpole trig.
He did greatly understand how to trick people and take advantage of people. His 'free  phosphorus' potion had no phosphorus in it. He sold that under the name Dr. Birley.

SBR was a 'scientist' by day and a confidence man by night. He used his obvious showmanship abilities to wow people at lectures, and sell potions to unwitting customers.

SBR WAS A FRAUD. FET needs a new diety. The Fanatical unrelenting devotion to such a clearly flawed character both in practice and in life only makes FE believers look silly.