#IStandWithAhmed (or Inventing While Muslim is a thing?)

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

And yes, the guy in the video should have added the time taken to remove the screws. So, add about 1 minute to the length of the video. BFD.

Also, the LED display is mounted and looks different.

 

[angelo]

And yes, the guy in the video should have added the time taken to remove the screws. So, add about 1 minute to the length of the video. BFD.

Also, the LED display is mounted and looks different.

It's just an example isn't it?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Also, the LED display is mounted and looks different.

It's just an example isn't it?

No. if you want to reproduce what he did and measure the amount of time it took as well as say, "well it must have been brand X," then you'll have to know why the LED display looks different and include mounting the display.

 

[dismal]

I just watched that video. I wonder if anyone else noticed that the person who posted it either forgot or didn't realize that if he closes the pencil box he's going to shear the power cord, rendering the clock parts inoperative.

I think we can accept this as evidence that Ahmed is smarter than at least one of his critics.

How is that any different than Ahmed's clock?

View attachment 4985

In reality, the power cord likely won't get sheared by a little pencil box. It will get pinched, and the case may not shut all the way, but it will still be operational. Doesn't mean its not a crappy design though. Standard design techniques here are that the power cord should be routed through a hole (with a rubber grommet) in the side of the case, and the power cord secured to the case with a strain relief clamp inside. Ahmed didn't do that, and that's very basic stuff. That is about item number 74 on the top 100 things that are crappy about this clock in a pencil case. So, no he is definitely not smarter than his critics.

And yes, the guy in the video should have added the time taken to remove the screws. So, add about 1 minute to the length of the video. BFD.

The clock he started with was about a 100 times better design than the clock he "invented". Among other things, the display could be read from the outside of the case. Usable buttons/controls, secure and unexposed power supply, etc, etc.

Not surprising as he started with a functional commercial clock.

 

[dismal]

It's just an example isn't it?

No. if you want to reproduce what he did and measure the amount of time it took as well as say, "well it must have been brand X," then you'll have to know why the LED display looks different and include mounting the display.

Way to go Sherlock, you have fully busted that guy on not finding the exact model of Radio Shack Micronta clock from the 1970'/80's that clock boy unscrewed and dumped in a case.

 

[barbos]

It's just an example isn't it?

No. if you want to reproduce what he did and measure the amount of time it took as well as say, "well it must have been brand X," then you'll have to know why the LED display looks different and include mounting the display.

You are having fun trolling people, aren't you?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

No. if you want to reproduce what he did and measure the amount of time it took as well as say, "well it must have been brand X," then you'll have to know why the LED display looks different and include mounting the display.

Way to go Sherlock, you have fully busted that guy on not finding the exact model of Radio Shack Micronta clock from the 1970'/80's that clock boy unscrewed and dumped in a case.

Normally when people make claims like knowing it is a 1986 version of Micronta, they try to reproduce it to confirm the claim. It isn't my fault the confirmation did not quite work. It isn't my fault either that the video was deceptive in the sense of omitting differences and misleading the audience to think it could be done in 20 seconds. Now, did Ahmed, actually add or change parts? Without proving your hypothesis, we can't say for sure if he added a mount and if he changed the LED display. But the process certainly did not take 20 seconds.

 

[dismal]

Way to go Sherlock, you have fully busted that guy on not finding the exact model of Radio Shack Micronta clock from the 1970'/80's that clock boy unscrewed and dumped in a case.

Normally when people make claims like knowing it is a 1986 version of Micronta, they try to reproduce it to confirm the claim. It isn't my fault the confirmation did not quite work. It isn't my fault either that the video was deceptive in the sense of omitting differences and misleading the audience to think it could be done in 20 seconds. Now, did Ahmed, actually add or change parts? Without proving your hypothesis, we can't say for sure if he added a mount and if he changed the LED display. But the process certainly did not take 20 seconds.

I would think that over the years Radio Shack made the Micronta clock the part vendors and specs may have changed somewhat. But it still seems pretty clear that there is pretty much a 1-to-1 matching of parts from a Micronta clock to the clock boy clock. The differences in the parts are trivial and far more easily explained by variation in the production run than anything Clockboy is likely to have done. Only the truly desperate, ignorant or ideologically blind would see anything other than a commercial clock that was unscrewed and dumped in a case. Though, to be fair, Clockboy may have taken the additional step of screwing the display to the inside of the case.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Normally when people make claims like knowing it is a 1986 version of Micronta, they try to reproduce it to confirm the claim. It isn't my fault the confirmation did not quite work. It isn't my fault either that the video was deceptive in the sense of omitting differences and misleading the audience to think it could be done in 20 seconds. Now, did Ahmed, actually add or change parts? Without proving your hypothesis, we can't say for sure if he added a mount and if he changed the LED display. But the process certainly did not take 20 seconds.

I would think that over the years Radio Shack made the Micronta clock the part vendors and specs may have changed somewhat. But it still seems pretty clear that there is pretty much a 1-to-1 matching of parts from a Micronta clock to the clock boy clock.

There does seem to be a lot of matching. I never disputed that even before this video. I think it is possible that Ahmed could have made small modifications.

If you really want to prove that Ahmed did not make small modifications using parts from around the house, you can't just assume it into being. That isn't convincing to people who would like to see a proof.

Further if you do prove it, then people around here like myself will accept the proof.

The differences in the parts are trivial and far more easily explained by variation in the production run than anything Clockboy is likely to have done.

This is an assertion but the actual attempt at verifying the hypothesis had some problems.

Only the truly desperate, ignorant or ideologically blind would see anything other than a commercial clock that was unscrewed and dumped in a case. Though, to be fair, Clockboy may have taken the additional step of screwing the display to the inside of the case.

You have substituted failure to reproduce what Ahmed did with argumentum ad hominem. That isn't very convincing.

I will add that the video attempting to show what Ahmed did only took 20 seconds is very misleading for the reasons we have discussed.

 

[dismal]

I would think that over the years Radio Shack made the Micronta clock the part vendors and specs may have changed somewhat. But it still seems pretty clear that there is pretty much a 1-to-1 matching of parts from a Micronta clock to the clock boy clock.

There does seem to be a lot of matching. I never disputed that even before this video. I think it is possible that Ahmed could have made small modifications.

If you really want to prove that Ahmed did not make small modifications using parts from around the house, you can't just assume it into being. That isn't convincing to people who would like to see a proof.

Further if you do prove it, then people around here like myself will accept the proof.

The differences in the parts are trivial and far more easily explained by variation in the production run than anything Clockboy is likely to have done.

This is an assertion but the actual attempt at verifying the hypothesis had some problems.

Only the truly desperate, ignorant or ideologically blind would see anything other than a commercial clock that was unscrewed and dumped in a case. Though, to be fair, Clockboy may have taken the additional step of screwing the display to the inside of the case.

You have substituted failure to reproduce what Ahmed did with argumentum ad hominem. That isn't very convincing.

I will add that the video attempting to show what Ahmed did only took 20 seconds is very misleading for the reasons we have discussed.

No I have ap[plied basic common sense to the situation.

The thing Clockboy invented looks, except for superficial differences, very much like someone took the parts of a commercial clock (a Micronta clock in particular) and dumped them in a case. Based on reports we have the device functions no differently than if it were a bunch of parts from a Micronta clock thrown in a case. There is exactly 0.000000 evidence at this point of Clockboy's device having any parts or functions that would require additional explanation beyond he took a bunch of parts from a Micronta clock and threw them in a case.

While it's more than 0% possible there was a second clock on the grassy knoll or that Clockboy spliced DNA from space aliens to make the display glow brighter, there is no evidence of these things.

Everything we know and see is adequately explained by the hypothesis he got his hands on a commercial clock, unscrewed a few screws, and dumped the parts in a case.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Based on reports we have the device functions no differently than if it were a bunch of parts from a Micronta clock thrown in a case. There is exactly 0.000000 evidence at this point of Clockboy's device having any parts or functions that would require additional explanation beyond he took a bunch of parts from a Micronta clock and threw them in a case.

There is no evidence that the LED display and mount are the same as in a Micronta product. They very well could be though. The video is also context-less. Where did it come from? Is it real? What Micronta clock are they using? There is no accompanying analysis. Are the components really equivalent? Maybe they are but let's see a side-by-side with more information so we can make a better informed opinion.

 

[dismal]

Based on reports we have the device functions no differently than if it were a bunch of parts from a Micronta clock thrown in a case. There is exactly 0.000000 evidence at this point of Clockboy's device having any parts or functions that would require additional explanation beyond he took a bunch of parts from a Micronta clock and threw them in a case.

There is no evidence that the LED display and mount are the same as in a Micronta product. They very well could be though. The video is also context-less. Where did it come from? Is it real? What Micronta clock are they using? There is no accompanying analysis. Are the components really equivalent? Maybe they are but let's see a side-by-side with more information so we can make a better informed opinion.

If you start with the premise he had access to a commercial clock, what basis do you have to speculate that the LED display did not come from the same clock?

I suppose it's possible that he unscrewed the case of a commercial clock and dumped the parts in a case, and then proceeded to detached the LED display from the first clock and attached a LED display from another clock that just happened to be compatible with the first clock's LED display. But why that seems more plausible to you than him just leaving the original LED that came with the first clock in place I have no idea.

I repeat: there is no evidence that is not consistent with him unscrewing a single commercial clock and dumping the parts in a case.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

There is no evidence that the LED display and mount are the same as in a Micronta product. They very well could be though. The video is also context-less. Where did it come from? Is it real? What Micronta clock are they using? There is no accompanying analysis. Are the components really equivalent? Maybe they are but let's see a side-by-side with more information so we can make a better informed opinion.

If you start with the premise he had access to a commercial clock, what basis do you have to speculate that the LED display did not come from the same clock?

I suppose it's possible that he unscrewed the case of a commercial clock and dumped the parts in a case, and then proceeded to detached the LED display from the first clock and attached a LED display from another clock that just happened to be compatible with the first clock's LED display. But why that seems more plausible to you than him just leaving the original LED that came with the first clock in place I have no idea.

I repeat: there is no evidence that is not consistent with him unscrewing a single commercial clock and dumping the parts in a case.

I read a post by some guy who said he was an expert. He claimed the whole thing was from the 70's. Then one of his followers said it was actually from 1986 and gave an ad from radio shack with some different models. The so-called expert who claimed it came from the 70's then backed down and agreed it was from 1986 or 1989 or whatever year the follower said. Presumably if you look at the specs from that advertisement page you can determine which one it allegedly is. Now, if someone is going to go to the trouble of trying to reproduce what Ahmed allegedly did, then I'd expect that they would start with that model. If the LED display is different, then it bears an explanation. I'm not saying that is the only difference either. I'd like to see a side-by-side comparison against the claimed 1986/1989/whatever model. As I look more at it, I do see the circuit board may also be different. I am wondering if the guy in the video put it in backward? If it is backward it is harder to compare components. Why would someone go through the trouble and then put it in backward, assuming that is even the case? Is the video even real? How do we know?

As to why or how Ahmed could have done this. Perhaps he had a broken LED display in clock A. Perhaps he then took LED display from clock B, one that no longer worked for other reasons. Perhaps, he also added some mounts for the display. I don't know.

I'd still like to see a side-by-side comparison and know where the video comes from.

 

[dismal]

If you start with the premise he had access to a commercial clock, what basis do you have to speculate that the LED display did not come from the same clock?

I suppose it's possible that he unscrewed the case of a commercial clock and dumped the parts in a case, and then proceeded to detached the LED display from the first clock and attached a LED display from another clock that just happened to be compatible with the first clock's LED display. But why that seems more plausible to you than him just leaving the original LED that came with the first clock in place I have no idea.

I repeat: there is no evidence that is not consistent with him unscrewing a single commercial clock and dumping the parts in a case.

I read a post by some guy who said he was an expert. He claimed the whole thing was from the 70's. Then one of his followers said it was actually from 1986 and gave an ad from radio shack with some different models. The so-called expert who claimed it came from the 70's then backed down and agreed it was from 1986 or 1989 or whatever year the follower said. Presumably if you look at the specs from that advertisement page you can determine which one it allegedly is. Now, if someone is going to go to the trouble of trying to reproduce what Ahmed allegedly did, then I'd expect that they would start with that model. If the LED display is different, then it bears an explanation. I'm not saying that is the only difference either. I'd like to see a side-by-side comparison against the claimed 1986/1989/whatever model. As I look more at it, I do see the circuit board may also be different. I am wondering if the guy in the video put it in backward? If it is backward it is harder to compare components. Why would someone go through the trouble and then put it in backward, assuming that is even the case? Is the video even real? How do we know?

As to why or how Ahmed could have done this. Perhaps he had a broken LED display in clock A. Perhaps he then took LED display from clock B, one that no longer worked for other reasons. Perhaps, he also added some mounts for the display. I don't know.

I'd still like to see a side-by-side comparison and know where the video comes from.

Sounds like you have some good arguments that these guys have yet to produce the exact model of clock that Ahmed unscrewed and dumped into a case.

Perhaps not surprising given the general lack of surviving Micronta clocks from the 1970's/80's available to them and the rate at which electronic components can change across production runs.

What I still don't see is any facts or evidence that are not explained by the hypothesis that Ahmed took a single clock, unscrewed it and dumped the parts in a case. Or any hypothesis more plausible than that.

 

[zorq]

I read a post by some guy who said he was an expert. He claimed the whole thing was from the 70's. Then one of his followers said it was actually from 1986 and gave an ad from radio shack with some different models. The so-called expert who claimed it came from the 70's then backed down and agreed it was from 1986 or 1989 or whatever year the follower said. Presumably if you look at the specs from that advertisement page you can determine which one it allegedly is. Now, if someone is going to go to the trouble of trying to reproduce what Ahmed allegedly did, then I'd expect that they would start with that model. If the LED display is different, then it bears an explanation. I'm not saying that is the only difference either. I'd like to see a side-by-side comparison against the claimed 1986/1989/whatever model. As I look more at it, I do see the circuit board may also be different. I am wondering if the guy in the video put it in backward? If it is backward it is harder to compare components. Why would someone go through the trouble and then put it in backward, assuming that is even the case? Is the video even real? How do we know?

As to why or how Ahmed could have done this. Perhaps he had a broken LED display in clock A. Perhaps he then took LED display from clock B, one that no longer worked for other reasons. Perhaps, he also added some mounts for the display. I don't know.

I'd still like to see a side-by-side comparison and know where the video comes from.

Sounds like you have some good arguments that these guys have yet to produce the exact model of clock that Ahmed unscrewed and dumped into a case.

Perhaps not surprising given the general lack of surviving Micronta clocks from the 1970's/80's available to them and the rate at which electronic components can change across production runs.

What I still don't see is any facts or evidence that are not explained by the hypothesis that Ahmed took a single clock, unscrewed it and dumped the parts in a case. Or any hypothesis more plausible than that.

I take issue with your continued assertions that the only steps involved were unscrewing and "dumping" the parts in the case. Once again. Ahmed's pencilcase clock appears to be securely mounted to the pencil case (which BTW was never designed to secure clock parts). It's rather sloppy and/or deceptive of you to continuously ignore what may have been the most intricate step in the process when the very subject of this current tangent of discussion is the difficulty of completing the project.

I agree with you that while there may have been other enhancements or repairs to the clock I also find that prospect unlikely, but not impossible. Of course that has always been my opinion and I don't actually see anyone arguing with you that there WERE other enhancements, only that there could be.

 

[angelo]

And the saga is still argued.

 

[barbos]

Clockboy admitted that it took him half an hour to "make" that clock. Yet some people continue to sing "He is a genius" song.

 

[Arctish]

Clockboy admitted that it took him half an hour to "make" that clock. Yet some people continue to sing "He is a genius" song.

The only people making that claim are peddling the Ahmed the Criminal Mastermind story. It's far-fetched and rather stupid, but some people seem to be very fond of telling it. You should call them out on it if you disagree so strongly.

The only ones claiming Ahmed's supporters are making that claim have constructed a straw man argument so they can have the pleasure of knocking it down.

The overwhelming majority of people talking about this issue understand that the clock was a simple device Ahmed put together in less than half an hour, the design and construction of which are neither remarkable nor relevant to the issue of his being taken from his school in handcuffs for the not-crime of bringing a pencil case clock to school.

 

[Jayjay]

Sounds like you have some good arguments that these guys have yet to produce the exact model of clock that Ahmed unscrewed and dumped into a case.

Perhaps not surprising given the general lack of surviving Micronta clocks from the 1970's/80's available to them and the rate at which electronic components can change across production runs.

What I still don't see is any facts or evidence that are not explained by the hypothesis that Ahmed took a single clock, unscrewed it and dumped the parts in a case. Or any hypothesis more plausible than that.

I take issue with your continued assertions that the only steps involved were unscrewing and "dumping" the parts in the case. Once again. Ahmed's pencilcase clock appears to be securely mounted to the pencil case (which BTW was never designed to secure clock parts). It's rather sloppy and/or deceptive of you to continuously ignore what may have been the most intricate step in the process when the very subject of this current tangent of discussion is the difficulty of completing the project.

What's intricate about screwing two screws into a pencil case? We don't even know if he actually screwed them all the way through, or just through the lining, but either way, it doesn't require more skill than using a screwdriver.

I agree with you that while there may have been other enhancements or repairs to the clock I also find that prospect unlikely, but not impossible. Of course that has always been my opinion and I don't actually see anyone arguing with you that there WERE other enhancements, only that there could be.

One possible "enhancement" is that the power cord coming out of the transformer seems to be taped which migth indicate that he had replaced it (or maybe he just taped an exposed part of the wire). But as far as the clock parts go, the circuit board looks factory made and doesn't seem to have any extra parts, any parts missing, or any other visible sign of being touched in any way beyond just dumping them on the case.

 

[barbos]

Clockboy admitted that it took him half an hour to "make" that clock. Yet some people continue to sing "He is a genius" song.

The only people making that claim are peddling the Ahmed the Criminal Mastermind story. It's far-fetched and rather stupid, but some people seem to be very fond of telling it. You should call them out on it if you disagree so strongly.

Nobody claims that, certainly not here.

The only ones claiming Ahmed's supporters are making that claim have constructed a straw man argument so they can have the pleasure of knocking it down.

The overwhelming majority of people talking about this issue understand that the clock was a simple device Ahmed put together in less than half an hour, the design and construction of which are neither remarkable nor relevant to the issue of his being taken from his school in handcuffs for the not-crime of bringing a pencil case clock to school.

Read the title of this very thread. And read how was media presenting it.