Thousands Calling For Apology To Founder Of Computer Science

Gizmodo Australia / BBC ^ | 1 Sept., 2009 | By Joanna Stern

[Mojave]

André Bormanis, the Star Trek “consultant” who was born in 1959? The guy who explained that telepathy within the Star Trek universe works via a “psionic field”?

Rhiner (did you mean Rhine?), the father of failed ESP experimentation?

Zener, the guy who created the cards used in Rhine’s failed experiments?

Jung, the inventor of the “collective unconscious” and promoter of trance medium channeling?

Metzger, the father of “parapsychology”?

Crackpots all. And no quotes, naturally.

[Drawsing]

This isn’t about Turing at all. It’s about justifying the “normalcy” of homosexual lifestyles.

Very true. The left specializes in greasy logic. Thus: Smart guy happens to be a practicing homosexual, therefore we should celebrate and normalize homosexuality.

[antiRepublicrat]

I'm sure he would find castrating a few more fags to be sufficient compensation.

Huh? Turing? He was the one who was chemically castrated. Turing was just gay, that's it. I didn't find out he was gay until long after I knew of his contributions, so I really never cared when I did find out. His contributions speak for themselves.

[Nathan Zachary]

Sorry, the guy was not the "founder of computer science" in any way shape or form, not even the software that runs on a computer.

I've more than proved it several times over.

You loose,

bye now

( Ps don't go do any perverted things now, or you might end up castrated)

[TomOnTheRun]

And since what you are insisting can only be called a computer didn’t exist at the time this guy lived, he couldn’t have been the founder of the science that eventually created it, could he.

The Pilot ACE computer was built as a result of that 1946 paper he wrote which was the first detailed design of a stored-program computer. He didn't get to participate in actually building it because they had him working on other projects that they thought might be more important. He also helped write the software for the Manchester Mark I which was one of the first stored program computers. He was there for as much of the ground floor of the new computational model as his other work permitted.

[antiRepublicrat]

I think he would be better called the father of modern computational theory. But given that pretty much the entire industry calls him the father of computer sciences, it’s probably an apt moniker. And that came out before the whole gay movement, so it’s about his contributions, not about the gays hijacking his professional reputation for their own ends.

I think you like to look at the person rather than the accomplishments. An American officer doesn’t denounce Rommel because he was a Nazi, he recognizes Rommel as a brilliant tactician.

[krb]

The vaccum tube was also "the father of the modern resistor"

I beg to differ!

[TomOnTheRun]

I don't know a Bormanis from Star Trek. I know a Bormanis that worked at Stanford and did exceptional work in the field of Neurology. He eventually contributed to a paper demonstrating that telepathy would violate the currently understood laws about the conservation of energy. Carl Jung - yes the psychologist - also did not believe in the literal truth of telepathy. He thought that people should treat it as a psychological reality if they through that the thoughts of others were being projected into their heads. But that is just trying to get crazy people to make sense of what they think they are perceiving.

Zener, Metzger, and Rhiner were supposed to be a balance to Bormanis and Jung since both of them are traditionally considered hostile. They developed tests - and that is the point - they developed scientific testing that was verifiable and reproducable to get to the bottom of this. If there was not a perception that something was going on then no tests would have been developed.

[TomOnTheRun]

Sorry. Forgot to address Rhiner. I was thinking of the woman. Child psychologist. She studied poltergeist activity in children thinking it might be evidence of telekinesis. She decided that there was neither telekinesis nor poltergeist activity happening but she did meet a lot of disturbed children.

Quotes are up to you. They've each written books. It's not hard - you don't even have to use a card catalogue anymore. I'm not here to educate you. Go and read them if you actually care.

[Mojave]

I know a Bormanis that worked at Stanford and did exceptional work in the field of Neurology. He eventually contributed to a paper demonstrating that telepathy would violate the currently understood laws about the conservation of energy.

So this "Bormanis" (no first name) refuted telepathy? Have you forgotten your original assertion?

Carl Jung - yes the psychologist - also did not believe in the literal truth of telepathy.

Have you forgotten your original assertion?

Zener, Metzger, and Rhiner were supposed to be a balance to Bormanis and Jung since both of them are traditionally considered hostile. They developed tests - and that is the point - they developed scientific testing that was verifiable and reproducable to get to the bottom of this

Their experiments failed.

If there was not a perception that something was going on then no tests would have been developed.

We've moved from the crackpot Turing's claim of "overwhelming" evidence (which did NOT exist) to "a perception."

That's some fancy dancing.

[Mojave]

Forgot to address Rhiner. I was thinking of the woman. Child psychologist. She studied poltergeist activity in children thinking it might be evidence of telekinesis.

There should be a Turing Award for that kind of "science."

Quotes are up to you.

You won't prove your assertions, so it's up to me to prove the negative. Gotcha.

[TomOnTheRun]

My original assertion was that a lot of reputable people, in addition to Turing, believed that telepathy was a reality on that time based on the evidence at hand. They then began to study and test it. The people that were still alive a decade later almost universally refuted it after testing and analysis. Turing died at 42 - he could have lived a lot longer and I also said earlier that I believed that if he stuck to scientific principles he would have turned his face away from it as well. I’ll stand by that. I think he would have abandoned those ideas after the research that followed.

[Mojave]

My original assertion was that a lot of reputable people, in addition to Turing, believed that telepathy was a reality on that time based on the evidence at hand.

None.

[antiRepublicrat]

Simple “programs” go back at least to the 1200s in instructing mechanical devices to do specific work. A music box is technically a program along these lines.

This is the modern stored-program computer with stores of instructions and data, and an execution unit to apply the instructions to the data. It didn’t exist before Turing, and the ones that were built follow his theory.

I wonder whether you’d be so dismissive of Turing if he hadn’t been gay.

[antiRepublicrat]

Sounds like this guy was the Father of IT Support.

I'll give you that one.

[antiRepublicrat]

Thus: Smart guy happens to be a practicing homosexual, therefore we should celebrate and normalize homosexuality.

Of course that's just the flip side of what we're seeing here: He was gay so he couldn't have made any significant contributions. Both are irrational.

[TomOnTheRun]

There should be a Turing Award for that kind of "science."What - you mean the type where you have an idea, subject it to testing, and then decide that the idea is wrong because the testing invalidated it?

You won't prove your assertions, so it's up to me to prove the negative

They've each produce books on the subject of ESP. The fact that they considered it at one time is easy enough to see.

Why mock people as freaks for coming up with testing methods that demonstrate that ESP isn't happening? All of those people have that in common BTW - they all considered it an rejected it after testing and consideration. Why demean them for deciding that it isn't reliable? That it violates the currently understood laws of conservation of energy? That it is usually attributable to statistical probability rather than paranormal forces? Isn't that what the scientific method is there for?

[TomOnTheRun]

None.

Why wouldn't the neurologist that demonstrated that telepathy couldn't be happening reputable? Or the child psychologist that demonstrated that neither poltergeists nor telekinesis were present in children but rather a lot of dementia? I understand that some don't consider Carl Jung to be reputable but he reamins a lion of a figure in his field and students continue to study him. That suggests reputability. The other two continued to believe but they developed reputable testing that was verifiable and repeatable.

[Mojave]

They've each produce books on the subject of ESP.

None of which contained "overwhelming" evidence. Or any real evidence at all. Which is why you can't post any.

Why mock people as freaks for coming up with testing methods that demonstrate that ESP isn't happening?

They were believers in those crackpot theories and their attempts to generate any evidence (much less "overwhelming" evidence) failed miserably.

They should have read Houdini, who thoroughly and regularly discredited such frauds back in the 1920's.

[Mojave]

I understand that some don't consider Carl Jung to be reputable but he reamins a lion of a figure

He was the the Ted Kennedy of pseudo-science.