Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #553756
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | sci.physics |
| Subject | Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods |
| Date | 2016-02-16 23:05 -0600 |
| Organization | Aioe.org NNTP Server |
| Message-ID | <na0v1p$136t$5@gioia.aioe.org> (permalink) |
| References | (4 earlier) <7XHwy.46985$L75.31524@fx35.iad> <n9viqv$m8k$1@gioia.aioe.org> <fwIwy.52364$St7.31645@fx05.iad> <n9vnvj$10h7$1@gioia.aioe.org> <UpMwy.87492$n72.6272@fx30.iad> |
On 2/16/2016 3:21 PM, benj wrote: > On 02/16/2016 12:58 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 2/16/2016 10:55 AM, benj wrote: >>> On 02/16/2016 11:30 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 2/16/2016 10:16 AM, benj wrote: >>>>> HVAC knows his profession. Galileo was just isolated. And that is >>>>> HVAC's >>>>> job, to take those spouting the "wrong" theories and "isolate" them >>>>> from >>>>> society and science discussion in general by slandering them with the >>>>> appellation "crank", "kook", "insane" and so forth. It's his job. He's >>>>> the modern day inquisition. (I'm sure he'd prefer that he were still >>>>> using torture to get people to recant and burning people at the stake, >>>>> however) >>>> >>>> Ben, you should feel free to pursue whatever topics you want. Even >>>> scientists do that. And there are some scientists who pursue ideas that >>>> very few others think will amount to anything. >>> >>> Wait a minute Odd, YOU were the one arguing for science censorship to >>> keep topics in bounds. >> >> Heck no. I never said that. What I did say is that there is a role for >> moderated publications. Moderation and editorial control is not >> censorship. Also, your being free to pursue whatever you want does NOT >> translate into your being able to command any audience you want. >> >> There is a group of people who do not want to read articles about fringe >> science, which BY DEFINITION, you have an interest in. And just because >> YOU are interested in it, doesn't mean that you get to put results in >> front of their eyeballs. Capiche? > > I don't know what YOU call that but most of us here call that > censorhip! No, Ben, that's not censorship. Not even close to censorship. So when you say "most of us here", are you counting all your personalities? Who else here (and I'm willing to count the names you list to see if they actually constitute "most of us here") would call moderation and editorial control to be the same as censorship? >I thought you were a publisher. Nope. > Oh wait! No wonder you are > defending censorship! > >>> Have a change of heart of something? Or is that >>> just for ME? Kooks can investigate anything they want but REAL >>> scientists must be censored. Got it. >>> >>>> But you don't want just that freedom. You want RESPECT for pursuing >>>> unpopular scientific ideas. That you can't expect. If you pursue an >>>> idea >>>> that almost no one else does, then you are BY DEFINITION on the fringe. >>>> As a result you will always get comments from people on the other side >>>> of the fence that they don't think what you're doing is worthwhile. >>>> This >>>> is BY DEFINITION true, otherwise you'd have more company who think the >>>> topic is worthwhile. For some reason, getting that kind of comment >>>> irritates you. >>> >>> And the place you got the idea that I "want RESPECT" is? If I wanted >>> respect, I'd be self-censoring to topics YOU approve of and certainly >>> not be jerking chains here! >>> >>>> By the way, you being called insane has almost nothing to do with the >>>> topics you want to pursue. It has to do with the other behaviors you >>>> exhibit. Surely you know that. >>> >>> Nonsense. >> >> No, really. You don't know that? > > Sure I do. I used my superpowers to find out just like HVAC does! > >>> You can deny your debating tactics but I know how to debate >>> too, even if I find it boring. >> >> > > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-12 17:10 -0800
Kepler's orbital constaints noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 19:25 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-12 20:35 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 22:55 +0100
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-15 16:32 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 16:35 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-15 16:45 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 08:16 +0100
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-16 00:39 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 02:16 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 07:44 -0600
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:45 -0500
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:53 -0600
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-16 11:04 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 22:56 -0600
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-17 17:22 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:02 -0600
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-18 16:12 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 05:51 +0100
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-18 22:10 -0800
Re: Kepler's orbital constaints Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-19 07:30 +0100
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 09:42 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-13 16:18 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 15:45 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Timo <timo@physics.uq.edu.au> - 2016-02-13 17:45 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-13 19:24 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 19:09 +0100
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-14 17:44 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 19:50 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 07:16 +0100
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 08:30 +0100
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-15 16:21 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 08:20 +0100
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 04:28 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-16 05:19 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:16 -0500
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 10:30 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:55 -0500
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:58 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 16:21 -0500
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 23:05 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 01:27 -0500
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 09:00 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 16:19 -0500
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 15:45 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 19:15 -0500
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 07:28 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:21 -0500
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 08:29 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-16 11:01 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods noTthaTguY <abu.kuanysh05@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 13:30 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-02-18 13:34 +1100
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-17 19:19 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-02-18 15:04 +1100
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-17 20:51 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Sylvia Else <sylvia@not.at.this.address> - 2016-02-18 16:57 +1100
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 07:33 +0100
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:07 -0600
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Peter Riedt <riedt1@yahoo.co.uk> - 2016-02-18 16:16 -0800
Re: Kepler's 3rd with adjusted orbital periods Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 07:27 +0100
csiph-web