Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #596358 > unrolled thread

Strange peer review editorial policy.

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  Strange peer review editorial policy. Chan Rasjid <chanrasjid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 16:57 +0800
    Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-09-09 22:09 +1000
      Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 06:06 -0700
        Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 06:21 -0700
          Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 08:48 -0500
            Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-09 17:35 -0400
              Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 14:39 -0700
                Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 17:00 -0500
                  Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-09 20:04 -0400
                    Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 18:02 -0500
                  Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. Chan Rasjid <chanrasjid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-10 08:33 +0800
                    Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-11 18:06 -0500
                      Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 03:08 -0400
                        Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-12 17:56 +0000
                          Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-12 22:13 -0400
                            Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-12 21:21 -0500
                              Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-12 23:35 -0400
                                Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-13 05:35 +0000
                            Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-13 02:50 +0000
                              Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-13 19:19 -0400
                                Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-14 00:09 +0000
                                  Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-13 22:19 -0400
                                    Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-14 05:21 +0000
                                      Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-15 17:55 -0400
                                        Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 00:55 +0000
                                          Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-15 21:55 -0400
                                            Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 04:19 +0000
                                              Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 17:03 -0400
                                                Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2016-09-16 21:44 +0000
                                                  Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-16 20:59 -0400
                  Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 20:42 -0700
                    Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 21:10 -0700
                    Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-12 21:52 -0400
                Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-09-09 20:19 -0700
              Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 16:58 -0500
                Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2016-09-09 20:01 -0400
                Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. Rgiose <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-09-10 08:59 -0500
      Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. Chan Rasjid <chanrasjid@gmail.com> - 2016-09-09 22:16 +0800
    Re: Strange peer review editorial policy. edprochak@gmail.com - 2016-09-09 06:20 -0700

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#596884

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 9/12/2016 10:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>> On 9/12/2016 1:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On 09/11/2016 07:06 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/9/2016 7:33 PM, Chan Rasjid wrote:
>>>>>>> In the ancient days of the Yellow Emperor the gods and the spirits were
>>>>>>> near to man. Man just keeps calm within his self and don't do - or do
>>>>>>> "nothing". Within "nothing" everything exists and for those who are
>>>>>>> blessed with favor with Heaven, things would "spring up" from within his
>>>>>>> mind - all mysteries under the Heaven and Earth are all revealed. No
>>>>>>> reading, no experimentation, "don't argue with me"! Pure knowledge
>>>>>>> validated by the gods. No need of "guidance" about the equivalence
>>>>>>> principle!  No need of two postulates! No need of nothing!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> No teacher - the wise teaches himself through himself.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Then what you discuss has nothing to do with science. Anyone who says
>>>>>> truth can be found without experimentation and study is not doing science.
>>>>>
>>>>> And anyone who thinks it is possible to find all truth through science
>>>>> knows not what science is. We are talking about you Boinker.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hint: The answer to the halting problem shows that what I say is true
>>>>> and proven. Understand? Didn't think so. Just call me a kook then.
>>>>
>>>> The halting problem was proved to be undecidable by Turing using
>>>> mathematics, a branch of science, in the 1930's.
>>>
>>> Absolutely correct Jimbo and exactly the point. Means that science
>>> cannot discover all truth and it was proven by mathematics.
>>
>> That is a childish way to look at it.
> 
> Glad you think that mathematician, professor and author Casti is 
> childish. But then I"m sure that no mere human is ever going to make it 
> up to your level of maturity and knowledge.
 
You mean the guy that wrote Mathematical Mountaintops, which was recalled
by Oxford University Press due to rampant plagiarism and just a couple
of years later had to retract a journal artical for plagiarism?

What about him?


-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596898

On 9/13/2016 8:09 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>> On 9/12/2016 10:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>> On 9/12/2016 1:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 09/11/2016 07:06 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>> On 9/9/2016 7:33 PM, Chan Rasjid wrote:
>>>>>>>> In the ancient days of the Yellow Emperor the gods and the spirits were
>>>>>>>> near to man. Man just keeps calm within his self and don't do - or do
>>>>>>>> "nothing". Within "nothing" everything exists and for those who are
>>>>>>>> blessed with favor with Heaven, things would "spring up" from within his
>>>>>>>> mind - all mysteries under the Heaven and Earth are all revealed. No
>>>>>>>> reading, no experimentation, "don't argue with me"! Pure knowledge
>>>>>>>> validated by the gods. No need of "guidance" about the equivalence
>>>>>>>> principle!  No need of two postulates! No need of nothing!
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No teacher - the wise teaches himself through himself.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Then what you discuss has nothing to do with science. Anyone who says
>>>>>>> truth can be found without experimentation and study is not doing science.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And anyone who thinks it is possible to find all truth through science
>>>>>> knows not what science is. We are talking about you Boinker.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hint: The answer to the halting problem shows that what I say is true
>>>>>> and proven. Understand? Didn't think so. Just call me a kook then.
>>>>>
>>>>> The halting problem was proved to be undecidable by Turing using
>>>>> mathematics, a branch of science, in the 1930's.
>>>>
>>>> Absolutely correct Jimbo and exactly the point. Means that science
>>>> cannot discover all truth and it was proven by mathematics.
>>>
>>> That is a childish way to look at it.
>>
>> Glad you think that mathematician, professor and author Casti is
>> childish. But then I"m sure that no mere human is ever going to make it
>> up to your level of maturity and knowledge.
>
> You mean the guy that wrote Mathematical Mountaintops, which was recalled
> by Oxford University Press due to rampant plagiarism and just a couple
> of years later had to retract a journal artical for plagiarism?
>
> What about him?

Yeah, that's the guy! Hey sometimes when your book isn't going so well 
you need a bit of help to give it a "jump start"!

Hey, according to Wikipedia: "Casti apologized to Klarreich, as well as 
to Paul Davies, for plagiarizing their work"

He said he was sorry! That all most journalists want to hear!
You want more?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596907

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 9/13/2016 8:09 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>> On 9/12/2016 10:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 9/12/2016 1:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 09/11/2016 07:06 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 9/9/2016 7:33 PM, Chan Rasjid wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In the ancient days of the Yellow Emperor the gods and the spirits were
>>>>>>>>> near to man. Man just keeps calm within his self and don't do - or do
>>>>>>>>> "nothing". Within "nothing" everything exists and for those who are
>>>>>>>>> blessed with favor with Heaven, things would "spring up" from within his
>>>>>>>>> mind - all mysteries under the Heaven and Earth are all revealed. No
>>>>>>>>> reading, no experimentation, "don't argue with me"! Pure knowledge
>>>>>>>>> validated by the gods. No need of "guidance" about the equivalence
>>>>>>>>> principle!  No need of two postulates! No need of nothing!
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> No teacher - the wise teaches himself through himself.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Then what you discuss has nothing to do with science. Anyone who says
>>>>>>>> truth can be found without experimentation and study is not doing science.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And anyone who thinks it is possible to find all truth through science
>>>>>>> knows not what science is. We are talking about you Boinker.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hint: The answer to the halting problem shows that what I say is true
>>>>>>> and proven. Understand? Didn't think so. Just call me a kook then.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The halting problem was proved to be undecidable by Turing using
>>>>>> mathematics, a branch of science, in the 1930's.
>>>>>
>>>>> Absolutely correct Jimbo and exactly the point. Means that science
>>>>> cannot discover all truth and it was proven by mathematics.
>>>>
>>>> That is a childish way to look at it.
>>>
>>> Glad you think that mathematician, professor and author Casti is
>>> childish. But then I"m sure that no mere human is ever going to make it
>>> up to your level of maturity and knowledge.
>>
>> You mean the guy that wrote Mathematical Mountaintops, which was recalled
>> by Oxford University Press due to rampant plagiarism and just a couple
>> of years later had to retract a journal artical for plagiarism?
>>
>> What about him?
> 
> Yeah, that's the guy! Hey sometimes when your book isn't going so well 
> you need a bit of help to give it a "jump start"!
> 
> Hey, according to Wikipedia: "Casti apologized to Klarreich, as well as 
> to Paul Davies, for plagiarizing their work"

And well he should.

> He said he was sorry! That all most journalists want to hear!
> You want more?

More what, apologies?
 

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597096

On 9/14/2016 1:21 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>> On 9/13/2016 8:09 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>> On 9/12/2016 10:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/12/2016 1:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>> benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 09/11/2016 07:06 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 9/9/2016 7:33 PM, Chan Rasjid wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In the ancient days of the Yellow Emperor the gods and the spirits were
>>>>>>>>>> near to man. Man just keeps calm within his self and don't do - or do
>>>>>>>>>> "nothing". Within "nothing" everything exists and for those who are
>>>>>>>>>> blessed with favor with Heaven, things would "spring up" from within his
>>>>>>>>>> mind - all mysteries under the Heaven and Earth are all revealed. No
>>>>>>>>>> reading, no experimentation, "don't argue with me"! Pure knowledge
>>>>>>>>>> validated by the gods. No need of "guidance" about the equivalence
>>>>>>>>>> principle!  No need of two postulates! No need of nothing!
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> No teacher - the wise teaches himself through himself.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Then what you discuss has nothing to do with science. Anyone who says
>>>>>>>>> truth can be found without experimentation and study is not doing science.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> And anyone who thinks it is possible to find all truth through science
>>>>>>>> knows not what science is. We are talking about you Boinker.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hint: The answer to the halting problem shows that what I say is true
>>>>>>>> and proven. Understand? Didn't think so. Just call me a kook then.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The halting problem was proved to be undecidable by Turing using
>>>>>>> mathematics, a branch of science, in the 1930's.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Absolutely correct Jimbo and exactly the point. Means that science
>>>>>> cannot discover all truth and it was proven by mathematics.
>>>>>
>>>>> That is a childish way to look at it.
>>>>
>>>> Glad you think that mathematician, professor and author Casti is
>>>> childish. But then I"m sure that no mere human is ever going to make it
>>>> up to your level of maturity and knowledge.
>>>
>>> You mean the guy that wrote Mathematical Mountaintops, which was recalled
>>> by Oxford University Press due to rampant plagiarism and just a couple
>>> of years later had to retract a journal artical for plagiarism?
>>>
>>> What about him?
>>
>> Yeah, that's the guy! Hey sometimes when your book isn't going so well
>> you need a bit of help to give it a "jump start"!
>>
>> Hey, according to Wikipedia: "Casti apologized to Klarreich, as well as
>> to Paul Davies, for plagiarizing their work"
>
> And well he should.
>
>> He said he was sorry! That all most journalists want to hear!
>> You want more?
>
> More what, apologies?
>

Sure, apologies. I always love it when TV journalists shove a mic in 
some serial killer's face as ask him if he really murdered all those 
women! What do they expect him to say? And when he's found guilty they 
all make a big deal of whether he said he was sorry or not! Yeah a 
psychopath saying he's sorry for torturing and killing women! Yeah that 
is sure to mean a lot!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597104

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 9/14/2016 1:21 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>> On 9/13/2016 8:09 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>>> On 9/12/2016 10:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 9/12/2016 1:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>> benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 09/11/2016 07:06 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 9/9/2016 7:33 PM, Chan Rasjid wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In the ancient days of the Yellow Emperor the gods and the spirits were
>>>>>>>>>>> near to man. Man just keeps calm within his self and don't do - or do
>>>>>>>>>>> "nothing". Within "nothing" everything exists and for those who are
>>>>>>>>>>> blessed with favor with Heaven, things would "spring up" from within his
>>>>>>>>>>> mind - all mysteries under the Heaven and Earth are all revealed. No
>>>>>>>>>>> reading, no experimentation, "don't argue with me"! Pure knowledge
>>>>>>>>>>> validated by the gods. No need of "guidance" about the equivalence
>>>>>>>>>>> principle!  No need of two postulates! No need of nothing!
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> No teacher - the wise teaches himself through himself.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Then what you discuss has nothing to do with science. Anyone who says
>>>>>>>>>> truth can be found without experimentation and study is not doing science.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> And anyone who thinks it is possible to find all truth through science
>>>>>>>>> knows not what science is. We are talking about you Boinker.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hint: The answer to the halting problem shows that what I say is true
>>>>>>>>> and proven. Understand? Didn't think so. Just call me a kook then.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The halting problem was proved to be undecidable by Turing using
>>>>>>>> mathematics, a branch of science, in the 1930's.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Absolutely correct Jimbo and exactly the point. Means that science
>>>>>>> cannot discover all truth and it was proven by mathematics.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is a childish way to look at it.
>>>>>
>>>>> Glad you think that mathematician, professor and author Casti is
>>>>> childish. But then I"m sure that no mere human is ever going to make it
>>>>> up to your level of maturity and knowledge.
>>>>
>>>> You mean the guy that wrote Mathematical Mountaintops, which was recalled
>>>> by Oxford University Press due to rampant plagiarism and just a couple
>>>> of years later had to retract a journal artical for plagiarism?
>>>>
>>>> What about him?
>>>
>>> Yeah, that's the guy! Hey sometimes when your book isn't going so well
>>> you need a bit of help to give it a "jump start"!
>>>
>>> Hey, according to Wikipedia: "Casti apologized to Klarreich, as well as
>>> to Paul Davies, for plagiarizing their work"
>>
>> And well he should.
>>
>>> He said he was sorry! That all most journalists want to hear!
>>> You want more?
>>
>> More what, apologies?
>>
> 
> Sure, apologies. I always love it when TV journalists shove a mic in 
> some serial killer's face as ask him if he really murdered all those 
> women! What do they expect him to say? And when he's found guilty they 
> all make a big deal of whether he said he was sorry or not! Yeah a 
> psychopath saying he's sorry for torturing and killing women! Yeah that 
> is sure to mean a lot!
 
What a bizarre comment. 

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597116

On 9/15/2016 8:55 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>> On 9/14/2016 1:21 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>> On 9/13/2016 8:09 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>>>> On 9/12/2016 10:50 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 9/12/2016 1:56 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>>>>>>> benj <nobody@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 09/11/2016 07:06 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 9/9/2016 7:33 PM, Chan Rasjid wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In the ancient days of the Yellow Emperor the gods and the spirits were
>>>>>>>>>>>> near to man. Man just keeps calm within his self and don't do - or do
>>>>>>>>>>>> "nothing". Within "nothing" everything exists and for those who are
>>>>>>>>>>>> blessed with favor with Heaven, things would "spring up" from within his
>>>>>>>>>>>> mind - all mysteries under the Heaven and Earth are all revealed. No
>>>>>>>>>>>> reading, no experimentation, "don't argue with me"! Pure knowledge
>>>>>>>>>>>> validated by the gods. No need of "guidance" about the equivalence
>>>>>>>>>>>> principle!  No need of two postulates! No need of nothing!
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> No teacher - the wise teaches himself through himself.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Then what you discuss has nothing to do with science. Anyone who says
>>>>>>>>>>> truth can be found without experimentation and study is not doing science.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And anyone who thinks it is possible to find all truth through science
>>>>>>>>>> knows not what science is. We are talking about you Boinker.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hint: The answer to the halting problem shows that what I say is true
>>>>>>>>>> and proven. Understand? Didn't think so. Just call me a kook then.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The halting problem was proved to be undecidable by Turing using
>>>>>>>>> mathematics, a branch of science, in the 1930's.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Absolutely correct Jimbo and exactly the point. Means that science
>>>>>>>> cannot discover all truth and it was proven by mathematics.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That is a childish way to look at it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Glad you think that mathematician, professor and author Casti is
>>>>>> childish. But then I"m sure that no mere human is ever going to make it
>>>>>> up to your level of maturity and knowledge.
>>>>>
>>>>> You mean the guy that wrote Mathematical Mountaintops, which was recalled
>>>>> by Oxford University Press due to rampant plagiarism and just a couple
>>>>> of years later had to retract a journal artical for plagiarism?
>>>>>
>>>>> What about him?
>>>>
>>>> Yeah, that's the guy! Hey sometimes when your book isn't going so well
>>>> you need a bit of help to give it a "jump start"!
>>>>
>>>> Hey, according to Wikipedia: "Casti apologized to Klarreich, as well as
>>>> to Paul Davies, for plagiarizing their work"
>>>
>>> And well he should.
>>>
>>>> He said he was sorry! That all most journalists want to hear!
>>>> You want more?
>>>
>>> More what, apologies?
>>>
>>
>> Sure, apologies. I always love it when TV journalists shove a mic in
>> some serial killer's face as ask him if he really murdered all those
>> women! What do they expect him to say? And when he's found guilty they
>> all make a big deal of whether he said he was sorry or not! Yeah a
>> psychopath saying he's sorry for torturing and killing women! Yeah that
>> is sure to mean a lot!
>
> What a bizarre comment.
>
All of life is clearly "bizarre" in your mind.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597122

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 9/15/2016 8:55 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:

<snip>

>>> Sure, apologies. I always love it when TV journalists shove a mic in
>>> some serial killer's face as ask him if he really murdered all those
>>> women! What do they expect him to say? And when he's found guilty they
>>> all make a big deal of whether he said he was sorry or not! Yeah a
>>> psychopath saying he's sorry for torturing and killing women! Yeah that
>>> is sure to mean a lot!
>>
>> What a bizarre comment.
>>
> All of life is clearly "bizarre" in your mind.

Nope, just long winded babble about serial killers in a discussion of
peer review.

Was your father ever known to have said "That boy just ain't right"?

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597219

On 9/16/2016 12:19 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>> On 9/15/2016 8:55 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>>>> Sure, apologies. I always love it when TV journalists shove a mic in
>>>> some serial killer's face as ask him if he really murdered all those
>>>> women! What do they expect him to say? And when he's found guilty they
>>>> all make a big deal of whether he said he was sorry or not! Yeah a
>>>> psychopath saying he's sorry for torturing and killing women! Yeah that
>>>> is sure to mean a lot!
>>>
>>> What a bizarre comment.
>>>
>> All of life is clearly "bizarre" in your mind.
>
> Nope, just long winded babble about serial killers in a discussion of
> peer review.

Folks, what chimp is saying is that he HE does not understand the 
relevance of a statement then obviously nobody else can understand it 
because he knows everything.

> Was your father ever known to have said "That boy just ain't right"?

Quite the contrary. He was known to have said, "If you can get into 
college I'll pay for your first year" Check Google, chimp, to find out 
what a "college" is.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597242

benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
> On 9/16/2016 12:19 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>> On 9/15/2016 8:55 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>
>> <snip>
>>
>>>>> Sure, apologies. I always love it when TV journalists shove a mic in
>>>>> some serial killer's face as ask him if he really murdered all those
>>>>> women! What do they expect him to say? And when he's found guilty they
>>>>> all make a big deal of whether he said he was sorry or not! Yeah a
>>>>> psychopath saying he's sorry for torturing and killing women! Yeah that
>>>>> is sure to mean a lot!
>>>>
>>>> What a bizarre comment.
>>>>
>>> All of life is clearly "bizarre" in your mind.
>>
>> Nope, just long winded babble about serial killers in a discussion of
>> peer review.
> 
> Folks, what chimp is saying is that he HE does not understand the 
> relevance of a statement then obviously nobody else can understand it 
> because he knows everything.

Nope, I'm saying you are prone to long winded, off topic babble.

>> Was your father ever known to have said "That boy just ain't right"?
> 
> Quite the contrary. He was known to have said, "If you can get into 
> college I'll pay for your first year"

Sounds like attempting to get you out of the house as soon as possible
while looking like the good guy doing it.

-- 
Jim Pennino

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#597264

On 9/16/2016 5:44 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>> On 9/16/2016 12:19 AM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>> benj <benj@nobody.net> wrote:
>>>> On 9/15/2016 8:55 PM, jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com wrote:
>>>
>>> <snip>
>>>
>>>>>> Sure, apologies. I always love it when TV journalists shove a mic in
>>>>>> some serial killer's face as ask him if he really murdered all those
>>>>>> women! What do they expect him to say? And when he's found guilty they
>>>>>> all make a big deal of whether he said he was sorry or not! Yeah a
>>>>>> psychopath saying he's sorry for torturing and killing women! Yeah that
>>>>>> is sure to mean a lot!
>>>>>
>>>>> What a bizarre comment.
>>>>>
>>>> All of life is clearly "bizarre" in your mind.
>>>
>>> Nope, just long winded babble about serial killers in a discussion of
>>> peer review.
>>
>> Folks, what chimp is saying is that he HE does not understand the
>> relevance of a statement then obviously nobody else can understand it
>> because he knows everything.
>
> Nope, I'm saying you are prone to long winded, off topic babble.
>
>>> Was your father ever known to have said "That boy just ain't right"?
>>
>> Quite the contrary. He was known to have said, "If you can get into
>> college I'll pay for your first year"
>
> Sounds like attempting to get you out of the house as soon as possible
> while looking like the good guy doing it.

Would have worked for me. Too bad dad died and I ended up staying at 
home to go to college. (not recommended)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596469

On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 3:00:45 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 9/9/2016 4:39 PM, john wrote:
> > Knowledge is power.
> >
> 
> Precisely, which is why you should read.
> Knowledge comes from reading and from experiment, not from what springs 
> up in your own mind.

Feynman would disagree.


> 
> Those who think that what they dream up is knowledge -- those are the 
> crippled idiots who pore through the supermarket tabloids.

Poor Einstein, Poor Isaac Newton, Poor Galileo

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596471

Knowledge is power, which is why
new knowledge is being 
controlled,hidden, and debunked.
Tesla's ideas threatened JPMorgan
so JP shut him down.
Rife's ideas threatened Big Pharma
and the AMA, so they sabotaged him.
And so it goes.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596742

On 9/9/2016 11:42 PM, James McGinn wrote:
> On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 3:00:45 PM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 9/9/2016 4:39 PM, john wrote:
>>> Knowledge is power.
>>>
>>
>> Precisely, which is why you should read.
>> Knowledge comes from reading and from experiment, not from what springs
>> up in your own mind.
>
> Feynman would disagree.

Einstein would also disagree!

“A theory can be proved by experiment; but no path leads from experiment 
to the birth of a theory.” AE

>>
>> Those who think that what they dream up is knowledge -- those are the
>> crippled idiots who pore through the supermarket tabloids.
>
> Poor Einstein, Poor Isaac Newton, Poor Galileo
>

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596468

On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 5:39:11 PM UTC-4, john wrote:
> Knowledge is power.

What a set up line! but I''l be good and refrain
from describing your lack of power.  :)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596408

On 9/9/2016 4:35 PM, benj wrote:
> On 9/9/2016 9:48 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> On 9/9/2016 8:21 AM, john wrote:
>>> The only place you'll see new
>>> Science is in the tabloids, Odd!!
>>
>> I've always said that's the news you value.
>>
>>> Better stay away from supermarkets.
>>
>> I certainly don't treat supermarkets as libraries, John.
>
> Which is why you are so ignorant of actual achievements in science. You
> always have to wait until they are finally allowed into official press
> releases.

LOL. OK, so I'll scan those supermarket tabloids for the "actual 
achievements in science", on your recommendation.

>
>> Notice that the tabloids are always in the "impulse aisles"? That's
>> because they know what customers can't help themselves.
>
> Humans love to learn the truth about things, especially when all the
> offical propaganda sources are trying to keep it covered up!
>

And boy howdy, those supermarket tabloids have all the REAL truth in 
them, don't they? Like Angelina Jolie's alien baby.


-- 
Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596432

On 9/9/2016 5:58 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 9/9/2016 4:35 PM, benj wrote:
>> On 9/9/2016 9:48 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> On 9/9/2016 8:21 AM, john wrote:
>>>> The only place you'll see new
>>>> Science is in the tabloids, Odd!!
>>>
>>> I've always said that's the news you value.
>>>
>>>> Better stay away from supermarkets.
>>>
>>> I certainly don't treat supermarkets as libraries, John.
>>
>> Which is why you are so ignorant of actual achievements in science. You
>> always have to wait until they are finally allowed into official press
>> releases.
>
> LOL. OK, so I'll scan those supermarket tabloids for the "actual
> achievements in science", on your recommendation.
>
>>
>>> Notice that the tabloids are always in the "impulse aisles"? That's
>>> because they know what customers can't help themselves.
>>
>> Humans love to learn the truth about things, especially when all the
>> offical propaganda sources are trying to keep it covered up!
>>
>
> And boy howdy, those supermarket tabloids have all the REAL truth in
> them, don't they? Like Angelina Jolie's alien baby.

Didn't you see the movie "Men in Black"? Those agents knew enough to 
ALWAYS check the tabloids for REAL information about renegade aliens!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596485

On 9/9/2016 4:58 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 9/9/2016 4:35 PM, benj wrote:

>>>> Better stay away from supermarkets.
>>>
>>> I certainly don't treat supermarkets as libraries, John.

>> Which is why you are so ignorant of actual achievements in science. You
>> always have to wait until they are finally allowed into official press
>> releases.
>
> LOL. OK, so I'll scan those supermarket tabloids for the "actual
> achievements in science", on your recommendation.
>
>>
>>> Notice that the tabloids are always in the "impulse aisles"? That's
>>> because they know what customers can't help themselves.

>> Humans love to learn the truth about things, especially when all the
>> offical propaganda sources are trying to keep it covered up!
>>
>
> And boy howdy, those supermarket tabloids have all the REAL truth in
> them, don't they? Like Angelina Jolie's alien baby.
>
>

"Alien Votes For Trump"  Midnight News

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596377

Yes!  Just within this group, we could easily pick up crackpotery.  But 
it is not difficult to throw out "crackpotery". I know of people who 
make a great noise about vixra.org to be a crackpot sites - I agree many 
of the articles there are downright  crackpot; but it is actually the 
natural result of unnatural selection in the real world. I could just 
browse through an article in vixra with my mind elsewhere  and pick up 
cases of article to throw out. As I am a little more in SR, I'll do a 
test in recent vixra articles:

1)There is Only Life. Living Beings as Proof of Only One Element in the 
Universe, Included is a Discourse on the Energetic Seed of Life Forming 
All Dna.
Authors: Royan Rosche
Comments: 6 Pages.
- reject: reason, title.
2) ?
3) ?

OPP! I retract my statement about vixra, it really has very good 
articles on SR/GR, cosmological/illogical constants etc... that I could 
not throw out - beyond me.  So a success rate of 1: 20 means vixra has 
only 5% of article considered crackpotery - I expected at least 50%,  I 
am wrong.


On 09/09/2016 08:09 PM, Sylvia Else wrote:
> On 9/09/2016 6:57 PM, Chan Rasjid wrote:
>> American Journal of physics, editorial policy:
>> "Manuscripts announcing new theoretical or experimental results, or
>> manuscripts questioning well-established and successful theories, are
>> not acceptable and should be submitted to an archival research journal
>> for evaluation by specialists. "
>>
>> It's a strange world we live in. The journal caters to mainly students
>> and teachers in university. If a "well established and successful
>> theory" is found to be wrong, they are not interested. Should not a
>> general policy be : "I look at the article, if it is clear crackpotism,
>> just delete; else do a review if it is within scope - i.e  physics and
>> not yoga meditation."
>>
>> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
>
> You only have to look at this group to see the extent of crackpotery,
> and even a superficial examination of a manuscript takes time.
>
> Sylvia.

--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#596368

On Friday, September 9, 2016 at 4:57:24 AM UTC-4, Chan Rasjid wrote:
> American Journal of physics, editorial policy:
> "Manuscripts announcing new theoretical or experimental results, or 
> manuscripts questioning well-established and successful theories, are 
> not acceptable and should be submitted to an archival research journal 
> for evaluation by specialists. "
> 
> It's a strange world we live in. The journal caters to mainly students 
> and teachers in university. If a "well established and successful 
> theory" is found to be wrong, they are not interested. Should not a 
> general policy be : "I look at the article, if it is clear crackpotism, 
> just delete; else do a review if it is within scope - i.e  physics and 
> not yoga meditation."
> 
> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---

If all journals had that policy, then you might say "strange world".

If the main audience consists of students, then this may not be
the proper place to publish a leading edge paper. It seems reasonable
to me.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web