2011-01-11 00:03:55Published Rebuttals - When do they show up on the list of all arguments?
BaerbelW

baerbel-for-350@email...
93.231.154.29

I've created a kind of interactive index (http://webbrain.com/u/11s4) to help me keep track of translations. The starting point is the list of rebuttals we have in the forum (http://www.skepticalscience.com/arg_list.php) as this shows a fixed number for each rebuttal. This listing shows many already published arguments like eg. #151 (headed into cooling), #152 (Plant stomata) and #153 (name change). In the corresponding (?) list of arguments by fixed number (http://www.skepticalscience.com/fixednum.php) #152 is missing and none of these three shows up on the "official" list of arguments (http://www.skepticalscience.com/argument.php). Is the latter happening because these arguments haven't yet come up in real life and therefore don't make it into the list of rebuttals by revelance yet?

 

And, a note about the Webbrain I link to above: this is the online displayable version of a "brain" I put together on my PC. I realize that this might look rather confusing on first sight but "The Brain" is a neat mindmapping tool to collect and sort ideas (or skeptic arguments as it were!). You can click on any of the "thoughts" and see it move into the brain's center. You'll then also see what is below and above the current thought or if there are any connected thoughts. If a thought has an embedded hyperlink, the relevant webpage can be displayed right from the brain (it will open just below the brain-pane). It is also possible to include documents within a brain (or - for local use on one's PC - links to document folders).

Cheers
Baerbel

2011-01-11 08:46:39The reason for inconsistency
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.100.112
The reason there's inconsistency is because of my dodgy code. I didn't create the database or code the argument pages keeping in mind it would grow to what it is now. So I need to rejig the database to make the system more robust and consistent. Will do that shortly!

Baerbel, the brain site is amazing! Can I ask two things? Firstly, when you deem it ready, could you do a blog post promoting it and explaining how it works? Secondly, a suggestion. When you click on arguments, what do you think of instead of listing ALL the arguments, it just shows the parent arguments (not happening, not us, etc). So you can gradually drill down thru the subcategories.

2011-01-11 21:24:35Webbrain
BaerbelW

baerbel-for-350@email...
93.231.176.218

The brain you have in mind would be for a different purpose than the one I created mine for. What I needed to keep track of the translations was one list where drill-down wouldn't really help me see where eg. a translation is still missing. Come to think of it, the thing with the parent-arguments could be added as additional hierarchies (like the To-do ones I already have), but it needs to be done manually which is rather timeconsuming. A pre-requisite to somewhat make it faster to create would be that the argument list sorted by taxonomy would need to show each argument's fixed number. Otherwise the hierarchical links would need to be searched manually and this can lead to some hit-or-miss cases where the titles have been changed (and it would be very timeconsuming to do). Could you create a kind of list (eg in Excel) based on the taxonomy list which shows the hierarchy plus the argument-number?

Have you checked out the homepage of "TheBrain"? TheBrain is really a neat tool, but the really powerful professional version doesn't come cheap.

One other question: are there plans that Mila creates something for SkS on zvon.org? If he does, it might make something like an SkS-Webbrain rather redundant.

Cheers
Baerbel


2011-01-11 22:37:04SkS and zvon.org
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.100.112
Mila has already programmed something. He's just putting the finishing touches on it. What he wanted was all the peer reviewed papers in my database. So I whipped up for him an XML page of all the skeptic arguments and every peer reviewed paper listed under each argument. He imported it into his database and then applied DOI links to each paper and is now adding even more papers. The man is a machine! When it's done, I'm hoping to grab his list of extra papers and add them back into my database. I may also change all my irks to DOI which I understand is more stable than what I currently use which is often temporary full papers that go stale over time.

He also assigned keywords to each skeptic argument. I find that metadata very interesting and may look to import that into my database too. Now that i think about it, Mila and I are two peas in a pod.

2011-01-11 22:38:16Zvon vs brain
John Cook

john@skepticalscience...
121.222.100.112
Btw, Mila's work doesn't make the brain redundant. They're quite independent and different in emphasis.
2011-01-11 23:04:34Webbrain by taxonomy
BaerbelW

baerbel-for-350@email...
93.231.176.218

Okay, I'm playing with my brain (the virtual not the real one!) and creating additional links for the hierarchical view by taxonomy is going faster than I thought.

Here is how this could look like with "It's not happening" --> "Temp record is unreliable" as an example:

How does this look like?

Btw, I don't have to re-create the thoughts already in the brain, I'm basically only adding additional links and highlighting them with their own linkage-category (which makes the lines between the thoughts stand out in orange).

Update: I've uploaded the latest version to the Webbrain and here is the link to the view by taxonomy: http://webbrain.com/u/11sM . If you don't like this "normal view"...

.... use the view-icon ....

.... to switch to "outline view":

Clicking on the SkS-icon on a thought will display the SkS-webpage below the webbrain.

Cheers
Baerbel