Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #585168 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Sven Andersson <pairwise.relations@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-16 12:09 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-06-18 13:45 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 26 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! Sven Andersson <pairwise.relations@hotmail.com> - 2016-06-16 12:09 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-06-16 12:34 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-06-16 21:17 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-06-16 22:52 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! trudi.schwander@gmail.com - 2016-06-16 23:27 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 16:46 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-06-17 17:32 +1000
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! trudi.schwander@gmail.com - 2016-06-17 01:04 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-06-18 12:54 +1000
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! trudi.schwander@gmail.com - 2016-06-17 22:01 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-06-18 15:06 +1000
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! trudi.schwander@gmail.com - 2016-06-17 23:37 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 17:06 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! Boris Mohar <borism_void_@sympatico.ca> - 2016-06-17 07:27 -0400
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! ClutterFreak <ClutterFreak@FakeAddress.com> - 2016-06-17 10:15 -0500
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-06-17 23:05 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-06-18 22:35 +1000
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! trudi.schwander@gmail.com - 2016-06-18 09:58 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-06-19 14:10 +1000
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! trudi.schwander@gmail.com - 2016-06-18 23:56 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-06-19 17:16 +1000
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! trudi.schwander@gmail.com - 2016-06-19 08:24 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 08:04 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-06-19 08:01 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! "reber g=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2016-06-18 13:12 -0700
Re: Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! pnalsing@gmail.com - 2016-06-18 13:45 -0700
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →
| From | Sven Andersson <pairwise.relations@hotmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 12:09 -0700 |
| Subject | Ridiculous, idiotic censorship on Physics Forums! |
| Message-ID | <ec5cfc7a-7f57-45a8-b813-79b9b8776b4e@googlegroups.com> |
The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: "Referees Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... Sven
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 12:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <42f465fb-9097-4c69-b860-49bfc37403b7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585168 |
Arp was cOOl > Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > > Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > > "Referees > > Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." > > The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > > Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > > Sven
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 21:17 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <42117aa6-e9aa-4e20-b00c-0a4b32e6edfc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585168 |
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 12:09:49 PM UTC-7, Sven Andersson wrote: > The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. Yes. I've experienced the same thing. Anything that questions the brain-dead orthodoxy is banned. > > Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! Einstein wouldn't have had a chance against these sheepish dolts. > > "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." > > After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! Meteorology forums are even worse. They have turned science into a religion. Their models are threatened. And many of them depend on the acceptance of the current model for their livelihood. It really is all about money and about feeding the public a false sense of certainty because ultimately it about the consensus. These dolts don't realize that consensus thinking was the reason the scientific methods (to which they pay lip service but don't actually use) were invented. > > "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! > > Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > > Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > > "Referees > > Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." Too many people have too much to lose if the truth about the lack of certainty of many commonly accepted notions is revealed. > > The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > > Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > > Sven 259 of what book?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 22:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <97745f8b-727a-47dd-bf38-8a5245c9f726@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585168 |
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:09:49 PM UTC+3, Sven Andersson wrote: > The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. > > Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! > > "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." > > After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! > > "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! > > Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > > Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > > "Referees > > Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." > > The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > > Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > > Sven ================================== you are well right !!! yet much worse than that SOMEOF THE MODERATORS ARE **PRIVATE BUSINESS MOTIVATED !! INMANY CAES YOU CAN CALLTHEM !!!**CRIMINALS AGAINST MANKIND ie MOTIVATED BY CRIMINAL MOTIVATIONS !! SCI PHYSICS RESEARCH IS one AXAMPLE ATB Yehiel Porat ==========================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | trudi.schwander@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-16 23:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <7a4c5a56-67ff-48e7-adb4-644755a24cf5@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585245 |
On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 7:52:05 AM UTC+2, Y.Porat wrote: > On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:09:49 PM UTC+3, Sven Andersson wrote: > > The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. > > > > Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! > > > > "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." > > > > After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! > > > > "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! > > > > Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > > > > Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > > > > "Referees > > > > Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." > > > > The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > > > > Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > > > > Sven > ================================== > you are well right !!! > yet much worse than that > > > SOMEOF THE MODERATORS ARE > **PRIVATE BUSINESS MOTIVATED !! > INMANY CAES YOU CAN CALLTHEM > > !!!**CRIMINALS AGAINST MANKIND > > ie MOTIVATED BY CRIMINAL MOTIVATIONS !! > > SCI PHYSICS RESEARCH IS one AXAMPLE > > ATB > Yehiel Porat > ========================== I am not surprised. We believe that science with its technology is the salvation of mankind. That makes scientists very arrogant, and arrogance is ignorance. Scientists are too specialized to appreciate and understand anything other than their own narrow field of interest. They are paid to study and prove whatever they are funded to find. Engineers produce products and gadgets for the profits of investors instead of for the benefits of the public. Science with its non-sense theories based on mathematics has become a religion where scientists blindly believe what the high priests of science claim to is truth and anything outside their dogma is considered blasphemy and those with more open minds are censored or ridiculed at best. You can see this here in this group by many of the want-to-be-scientists with their rude and at best arrogant responses. andrew vecsey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 16:46 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c6e69d97-5321-4a88-877a-d35d2740eff4@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585248 |
On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 11:27:43 PM UTC-7, trudi.s...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 7:52:05 AM UTC+2, Y.Porat wrote: > > On Thursday, June 16, 2016 at 10:09:49 PM UTC+3, Sven Andersson wrote: > > > The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. > > > > > > Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! > > > > > > "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." > > > > > > After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! > > > > > > "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! > > > > > > Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > > > > > > Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > > > > > > "Referees > > > > > > Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." > > > > > > The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > > > > > > Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > > > > > > Sven > > ================================== > > you are well right !!! > > yet much worse than that > > > > > > SOMEOF THE MODERATORS ARE > > **PRIVATE BUSINESS MOTIVATED !! > > INMANY CAES YOU CAN CALLTHEM > > > > !!!**CRIMINALS AGAINST MANKIND > > > > ie MOTIVATED BY CRIMINAL MOTIVATIONS !! > > > > SCI PHYSICS RESEARCH IS one AXAMPLE > > > > ATB > > Yehiel Porat > > ========================== > > I am not surprised. We believe that science with its technology is the salvation of mankind. That makes scientists very arrogant, and arrogance is ignorance. Scientists are too specialized to appreciate and understand anything other than their own narrow field of interest. They are paid to study and prove whatever they are funded to find. Engineers produce products and gadgets for the profits of investors instead of for the benefits of the public. Science with its non-sense theories based on mathematics has become a religion where scientists blindly believe what the high priests of science claim to is truth and anything outside their dogma is considered blasphemy and those with more open minds are censored or ridiculed at best. You can see this here in this group by many of the want-to-be-scientists with their rude and at best arrogant responses. > andrew vecsey Great response! Jim McGinn
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 17:32 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <dshnbvF2q25U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #585168 |
On 17/06/2016 5:09 AM, Sven Andersson wrote: > The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. > > Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! > > "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." > > After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! > > "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! > > Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > > Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > > "Referees > > Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." > > The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > > Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > > Sven > > > > > It's their forum, and they don't want nutters polluting it with junk. Nutters invariably think they have something to contribute, but equally invariably what they're spouting is just nonsense. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | trudi.schwander@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 01:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <5fa991dc-e0df-4d67-9e86-787933192fc1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585251 |
On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 9:32:20 AM UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 17/06/2016 5:09 AM, Sven Andersson wrote: > > The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. > > > > Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! > > > > "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." > > > > After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! > > > > "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! > > > > Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > > > > Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > > > > "Referees > > > > Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." > > > > The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > > > > Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > > > > Sven > > > > > > > > > > > It's their forum, and they don't want nutters polluting it with junk. > Nutters invariably think they have something to contribute, but equally > invariably what they're spouting is just nonsense. > > Sylvia. Or another way of saying what you said but more with an open mind is: It's their forum, and they don't want PEOPLE WITH OTHER VIEWS OR OPINIONS OR THOUGHTS TO POST: (nutters polluting it with junk). THEY (Nutters) invariably think they have something to contribute, but equally invariably what they're spouting is NOT WHAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE FORUM WANT TO HEAR (just nonsense). Sylvia, be careful with what you say and how you say it because you are openly showing your closed mind.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 12:54 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <dsjrfkFg3sgU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #585252 |
On 17/06/2016 6:04 PM, trudi.schwander@gmail.com wrote: > Or another way of saying what you said but more with an open mind > is: It's their forum, and they don't want PEOPLE WITH OTHER VIEWS OR > OPINIONS OR THOUGHTS TO POST: (nutters polluting it with junk). THEY > (Nutters) invariably think they have something to contribute, but > equally invariably what they're spouting is NOT WHAT MOST OF THE > PEOPLE IN THE FORUM WANT TO HEAR (just nonsense). Sylvia, be careful > with what you say and how you say it because you are openly showing > your closed mind. > There are other forums, such as this one, where people can post as much as they like, and people do. That doesn't mean that every forum has to accept it. It's just possible that the physics forum rules might exclude a genuine contribution to physics, but such contributions can be made elsewhere and the forum moderators may consider it a price worth paying to keep their forum uncluttered, and thus more accessible for its intended purpose. There is room on the Internet for a variety of spaces. Sylvia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | trudi.schwander@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 22:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dd9b72fd-ba1a-45f3-bc7b-ac354836dc30@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585375 |
On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 4:54:48 AM UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 17/06/2016 6:04 PM, trudi.schwander@gmail.com wrote: > > > Or another way of saying what you said but more with an open mind > > is: It's their forum, and they don't want PEOPLE WITH OTHER VIEWS OR > > OPINIONS OR THOUGHTS TO POST: (nutters polluting it with junk). THEY > > (Nutters) invariably think they have something to contribute, but > > equally invariably what they're spouting is NOT WHAT MOST OF THE > > PEOPLE IN THE FORUM WANT TO HEAR (just nonsense). Sylvia, be careful > > with what you say and how you say it because you are openly showing > > your closed mind. > > > > There are other forums, such as this one, where people can post as much > as they like, and people do. That doesn't mean that every forum has to > accept it. It's just possible that the physics forum rules might exclude > a genuine contribution to physics, but such contributions can be made > elsewhere and the forum moderators may consider it a price worth paying > to keep their forum uncluttered, and thus more accessible for its > intended purpose. There is room on the Internet for a variety of spaces. > > Sylvia Thanks Sylvia, what a difference words make. Reading what you wrote above is not at all annoying for me, but reading your first post was indeed very annoying. Yet both posts had the same message. All those people posting rude messages should take note if they want people to understand and think about their replies. andrew vecsey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 15:06 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <dsk36kFhbb5U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #585388 |
On 18/06/2016 3:01 PM, trudi.schwander@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 4:54:48 AM UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 17/06/2016 6:04 PM, trudi.schwander@gmail.com wrote: >> >>> Or another way of saying what you said but more with an open >>> mind is: It's their forum, and they don't want PEOPLE WITH OTHER >>> VIEWS OR OPINIONS OR THOUGHTS TO POST: (nutters polluting it with >>> junk). THEY (Nutters) invariably think they have something to >>> contribute, but equally invariably what they're spouting is NOT >>> WHAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE FORUM WANT TO HEAR (just >>> nonsense). Sylvia, be careful with what you say and how you say >>> it because you are openly showing your closed mind. >>> >> >> There are other forums, such as this one, where people can post as >> much as they like, and people do. That doesn't mean that every >> forum has to accept it. It's just possible that the physics forum >> rules might exclude a genuine contribution to physics, but such >> contributions can be made elsewhere and the forum moderators may >> consider it a price worth paying to keep their forum uncluttered, >> and thus more accessible for its intended purpose. There is room on >> the Internet for a variety of spaces. >> >> Sylvia > > Thanks Sylvia, what a difference words make. Reading what you wrote > above is not at all annoying for me, but reading your first post was > indeed very annoying. Yet both posts had the same message. All those > people posting rude messages should take note if they want people to > understand and think about their replies. andrew vecsey > Some people have to be annoyed before they'll think. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | trudi.schwander@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 23:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <f5e35b35-8ebd-4774-99df-d9059da37ced@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585389 |
On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 7:06:33 AM UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 18/06/2016 3:01 PM, trudi.schwander@gmail.com wrote: > > On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 4:54:48 AM UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > >> On 17/06/2016 6:04 PM, trudi.schwander@gmail.com wrote: > >> > >>> Or another way of saying what you said but more with an open > >>> mind is: It's their forum, and they don't want PEOPLE WITH OTHER > >>> VIEWS OR OPINIONS OR THOUGHTS TO POST: (nutters polluting it with > >>> junk). THEY (Nutters) invariably think they have something to > >>> contribute, but equally invariably what they're spouting is NOT > >>> WHAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE FORUM WANT TO HEAR (just > >>> nonsense). Sylvia, be careful with what you say and how you say > >>> it because you are openly showing your closed mind. > >>> > >> > >> There are other forums, such as this one, where people can post as > >> much as they like, and people do. That doesn't mean that every > >> forum has to accept it. It's just possible that the physics forum > >> rules might exclude a genuine contribution to physics, but such > >> contributions can be made elsewhere and the forum moderators may > >> consider it a price worth paying to keep their forum uncluttered, > >> and thus more accessible for its intended purpose. There is room on > >> the Internet for a variety of spaces. > >> > >> Sylvia > > > > Thanks Sylvia, what a difference words make. Reading what you wrote > > above is not at all annoying for me, but reading your first post was > > indeed very annoying. Yet both posts had the same message. All those > > people posting rude messages should take note if they want people to > > understand and think about their replies. andrew vecsey > > > > Some people have to be annoyed before they'll think. > > Sylvia. Maybe that is true for some people, but annoyance is an emotion that clouds rational thinking. andrew vecsey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 17:06 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dda55c03-a32e-4bc5-aedf-8043ddc6f9cc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585252 |
On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 1:04:56 AM UTC-7, trudi.s...@gmail.com wrote: > On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 9:32:20 AM UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > > On 17/06/2016 5:09 AM, Sven Andersson wrote: > > > The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. > > > > > > Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! > > > > > > "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." > > > > > > After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! > > > > > > "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! > > > > > > Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > > > > > > Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > > > > > > "Referees > > > > > > Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." > > > > > > The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > > > > > > Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > > > > > > Sven > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > It's their forum, and they don't want nutters polluting it with junk. > > Nutters invariably think they have something to contribute, but equally > > invariably what they're spouting is just nonsense. > > > > Sylvia. > Or another way of saying what you said but more with an open mind is: > It's their forum, and they don't want PEOPLE WITH OTHER VIEWS OR OPINIONS OR THOUGHTS TO POST: (nutters polluting it with junk). THEY (Nutters) invariably think they have something to contribute, but equally invariably what they're spouting is NOT WHAT MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE FORUM WANT TO HEAR (just nonsense). > Sylvia, be careful with what you say and how you say it because you are openly showing your closed mind. The church-ladies only want to here of stuff that confirms their certainty that they are right.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Boris Mohar <borism_void_@sympatico.ca> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 07:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <dhn7mb929o8bpp1g2u4apbq0nqb620id1j@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #585251 |
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 17:32:15 +1000, Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote: >On 17/06/2016 5:09 AM, Sven Andersson wrote: >> The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. >> >> Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! >> >> "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." >> >> After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! >> >> "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! >> >> Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... >> >> Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: >> >> "Referees >> >> Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." >> >> The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! >> >> Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... >> >> Sven >> >> >> >> >> >It's their forum, and they don't want nutters polluting it with junk. >Nutters invariably think they have something to contribute, but equally >invariably what they're spouting is just nonsense. > >Sylvia. Cagle is a nutbar. Go look him up. Log time ago he was laughed out of sci.physics. -- Boris --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | ClutterFreak <ClutterFreak@FakeAddress.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 10:15 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <1995fybjf2z7i$.t85ogeeokjzt$.dlg@40tude.net> |
| In reply to | #585251 |
On Fri, 17 Jun 2016 17:32:15 +1000, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 17/06/2016 5:09 AM, Sven Andersson wrote: >> The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. >> >> Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! >> >> "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." >> >> After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! >> >> "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! >> >> Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... >> >> Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: >> >> "Referees >> >> Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." >> >> The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! >> >> Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... >> >> Sven >> >> >> >> >> > It's their forum, and they don't want nutters polluting it with junk. > Nutters invariably think they have something to contribute, but equally > invariably what they're spouting is just nonsense. > > Sylvia. That's not what happened. You cannot have a "forum" for science. Blabber _about_ science is all you can achieve from a "science" forum. So if some guys placed a moderator for the forum better not be in there to begin with. Waste of time by definition. Here at least we're not pretending to be doing something we aren't doing and cannot possibly do. It's a hangout for people interested in some aspects of science. If somebody is kind enough to spend some of his time here, he's welcome. -- "ruye khosh be folAni neshAn dAdeh." --- This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software. https://www.avast.com/antivirus
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-17 23:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <575a269b-cafe-4f99-b521-04751ef86dad@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585251 |
On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 10:32:20 AM UTC+3, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 17/06/2016 5:09 AM, Sven Andersson wrote: > > The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. > > > > Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! > > > > "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." > > > > After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! > > > > "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! > > > > Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > > > > Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > > > > "Referees > > > > Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." > > > > The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > > > > Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > > > > Sven > > > > > > > > > > > It's their forum, ================================= while you say 'their*** forum how 'their what was their investment in it and how much they paid in order to buy it ?? 2 who the hell is deciding what is junk and what no ?? while Copernicus clamed that the earth is orbiting the sun and not vice verse what was then ''''junk ??!!!! don't you think that human behavior DIDNT changed much since then ???!! 2 you ignore a much worse phenomena ie private crocked interests of stealing ideas by 'killing them now and tater publishing them as theirs or of their friends ???!! it is that you are either naïve or much worse a part of those gangs ATB Y.Porat ==========================================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 22:35 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <dsktgvFmensU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #585391 |
On 18/06/2016 4:05 PM, Y.Porat wrote: > On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 10:32:20 AM UTC+3, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 17/06/2016 5:09 AM, Sven Andersson wrote: >>> The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. >>> >>> Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! >>> >>> "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." >>> >>> After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! >>> >>> "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! >>> >>> Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... >>> >>> Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: >>> >>> "Referees >>> >>> Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." >>> >>> The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! >>> >>> Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... >>> >>> Sven >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> It's their forum, > > ================================= > while you say 'their*** forum > how 'their > what was their investment in it It's hosted somewhere. Someone is paying for it, and for its domain name registration. That makes it theirs. Sylvia
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | trudi.schwander@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 09:58 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <efaba905-fa9b-488c-ac64-d916c03f85bb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585423 |
On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 2:35:47 PM UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 18/06/2016 4:05 PM, Y.Porat wrote: > > On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 10:32:20 AM UTC+3, Sylvia Else wrote: > >> On 17/06/2016 5:09 AM, Sven Andersson wrote: > >>> The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. > >>> > >>> Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! > >>> > >>> "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." > >>> > >>> After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! > >>> > >>> "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! > >>> > >>> Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > >>> > >>> Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > >>> > >>> "Referees > >>> > >>> Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." > >>> > >>> The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > >>> > >>> Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > >>> > >>> Sven > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> It's their forum, > > > > ================================= > > while you say 'their*** forum > > how 'their > > what was their investment in it > > It's hosted somewhere. Someone is paying for it, and for its domain name > registration. That makes it theirs. > > Sylvia Who does this un-moderated forum that we are having discussions on belong to? Who is paying for this forum? How do moderated forums chose their moderators? Who do they pay to and who pays and how much?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-19 14:10 +1000 |
| Message-ID | <dsmk9qF29g2U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #585477 |
On 19/06/2016 2:58 AM, trudi.schwander@gmail.com wrote: > On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 2:35:47 PM UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: >> On 18/06/2016 4:05 PM, Y.Porat wrote: >>> On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 10:32:20 AM UTC+3, Sylvia Else wrote: >>>> On 17/06/2016 5:09 AM, Sven Andersson wrote: >>>>> The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. >>>>> >>>>> Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! >>>>> >>>>> "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." >>>>> >>>>> After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! >>>>> >>>>> "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! >>>>> >>>>> Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... >>>>> >>>>> Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: >>>>> >>>>> "Referees >>>>> >>>>> Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." >>>>> >>>>> The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! >>>>> >>>>> Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... >>>>> >>>>> Sven >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> It's their forum, >>> >>> ================================= >>> while you say 'their*** forum >>> how 'their >>> what was their investment in it >> >> It's hosted somewhere. Someone is paying for it, and for its domain name >> registration. That makes it theirs. >> >> Sylvia > > Who does this un-moderated forum that we are having discussions on belong to? Who is paying for this forum? How do moderated forums chose their moderators? Who do they pay to and who pays and how much? > This is a Usenet group, which is a rather different beast. There are multiple Usenet servers owned by different people which distribute the group messages between them. The servers are typically either provided by ISPs to their customers, or are independently owned and accessed by paying a fee. There are a few independently owner servers that are free to use, but you get what you pay for. Either way, ownership of a server does not confer any power over groups, beyond decisions about whether to support a group at all, and how long posts are retained on that particular server. The group itself is not based on any particular server, and is not owned by anyone. A moderated Usenet group is created at the behest of a person seeking to be the initial moderator. That person, and anyone subsequently appointed by that person, are essentially God as far as that particular group is concerned. Sylvia.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | trudi.schwander@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-18 23:56 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <085e5669-69e5-4a7a-9676-654c25a8295e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #585626 |
On Sunday, June 19, 2016 at 6:10:39 AM UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > On 19/06/2016 2:58 AM, trudi.schwander@gmail.com wrote: > > On Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 2:35:47 PM UTC+2, Sylvia Else wrote: > >> On 18/06/2016 4:05 PM, Y.Porat wrote: > >>> On Friday, June 17, 2016 at 10:32:20 AM UTC+3, Sylvia Else wrote: > >>>> On 17/06/2016 5:09 AM, Sven Andersson wrote: > >>>>> The web-forum Physics Forums censors unwanted postings that are ever so slightly outside the bounds of orthodox science. All it took for me to be banned for life, was three postings arguing for the ideas of Charles S. Cagle! The person that banned me for life is mfb, an "insights author" with 45 "followers". Apparently his insights are excellent when it comes to censorship. Galilei would have everything to fear from this man. > >>>>> > >>>>> Relativity or quantum physics could never have been even discussed, let alone accepted, if that kind of censorship had been in existence in the early 20th century! > >>>>> > >>>>> "Read the forum rules please. Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only. Zero relative velocity for fusion is just nonsense." > >>>>> > >>>>> After this e-mail I was banned for life. Physics Forums don't respond to e-mails. No explanation. No apology. This stinks! > >>>>> > >>>>> "Peer-reviewed science that is discussed seriously in the scientific community only" Small wonder then, that physics is standing still! > >>>>> > >>>>> Modern day Galileis like Halton C. Arp would have known more about mfb and the type of "scientist" he represents. And the courageous scientists who make research into earth expansion would too. And many others who go ever so slightly against the accepted dogma... > >>>>> > >>>>> Last from Arp's book Seeing Red p270: > >>>>> > >>>>> "Referees > >>>>> > >>>>> Refereeing or "peer review" as is rather pompously called, is now unworkable. It has increasingly shown that it lets in the bad papers and excludes that good ones, exactly the opposite of what it is supposed to do." > >>>>> > >>>>> The only thing that peer review guarantees is orthodoxy, nowadays. Complete stasis is the result! > >>>>> > >>>>> Don't forget either to read on p259 "Big Science as the Medieval Church". A medieval church with mfb-like characters as grand-inquisitors... > >>>>> > >>>>> Sven > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>> It's their forum, > >>> > >>> ================================= > >>> while you say 'their*** forum > >>> how 'their > >>> what was their investment in it > >> > >> It's hosted somewhere. Someone is paying for it, and for its domain name > >> registration. That makes it theirs. > >> > >> Sylvia > > > > Who does this un-moderated forum that we are having discussions on belong to? Who is paying for this forum? How do moderated forums chose their moderators? Who do they pay to and who pays and how much? > > > > This is a Usenet group, which is a rather different beast. There > are multiple Usenet servers owned by different people which distribute > the group messages between them. The servers are typically either > provided by ISPs to their customers, or are independently owned and > accessed by paying a fee. There are a few independently owner servers > that are free to use, but you get what you pay for. Either way, > ownership of a server does not confer any power over groups, beyond > decisions about whether to support a group at all, and how long posts > are retained on that particular server. The group itself is not based on > any particular server, and is not owned by anyone. > > A moderated Usenet group is created at the behest of a person seeking to > be the initial moderator. That person, and anyone subsequently appointed > by that person, are essentially God as far as that particular group is > concerned. > > Sylvia. Thank you Sylvia for the very informative description. As far as I understand, un-moderated Usenet newsgroups (like this one right here) provided by Google for free are the ONLY discussion forums available on the internet where ANYONE can easily and FREELY post ANY posts that are guaranteed to be UNCENSORED. I hope Google continues to provide this very valuable service. The ONLY disadvantage I can see is that you have to live with, tolerate and accept members who take the discussions off the track. They do this by posting replies that have no relevance to the discussions going on. They are noisemakers trying to drown out the discussions and do not want to listen and discuss, but ONLY want to be heard. They generate annoying emotions that cloud any rational thinking. Fortunately, unlike in a physical setting of a room where they can not be ignored, in the virtual room of the internet, they can be very easily ignored. I have learned very much and greatly benefited from this group. Thanks again andrew vecsey
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 1 of 2 [1] 2 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web