Yes Brad is a mystery nearly as challenging as the topic of this board.
Sometimes Brad's posts almost make sense for a few lines and then suddenly they go haywire again. (Hi Brad
).
He uses the language of a vast number of fields that I am also interested in but uses it better than I can. It is only in fields I have specifically made myself an expert or semi-expert that I can out-jargon him.
Regardless of the field of topic he seems to know the names of researchers and their models. Crucially these are usually fields where I can't immediately verify the names off-hand. I often suspect that he doesn't understand what underlies them but I simply can't tell!
He frequently tries to use classic physical sciences exlanations to explain life sceinces phenomenon. And yet he claims to have studied primarily life sciences I think.
Here's evidence that he does actually respond to us:
* When I challenged him on habitual name dropping he once told me that he mentions a lot of researchers names (who most of us have never heard of mind you) becasue that is how he remembers their work.
* I challenged Brad to respond in point form to 4 questions I numbered. He did actually cite my point numbers although everything else only half made sense.
* On one discusion we had about something Brad actually agreed with me about something I had challenged him on and changed his tune for the next few posts (I think to do with the importance of protein folds etc).
So is Brad a hoax, a chat robot, a smart guy with an attention deficit ??? I'm not sure although he's probably the most sophisticated chat robot I've ever encountered if he is one. But I don't think I could say he quite passes the Turing test.
Brad, if your out there I hope you can accept this in the spirit of puzzlement it was written in! You and I have connected a few times and it was great. Come on Brad, clue us in.
[This message has been edited by Tranquility Base, 08-04-2002]