The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

Discussions on astrology, homeopathy and superstition etc.

Moderators: Calilasseia, DarthHelmet86, Onyx8

Is Universe expansion in Euclidean space or not expansion in hyperbolic space?

Universe is expansion in Euclidean space
4
67%
Universe is not expansion in hyperbolic space
2
33%
 
Total votes : 6

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#141  Postby Brain man » Oct 28, 2011 5:41 pm

Jumbo wrote:
Fourth Property of Electrons? Electric Dipole Moment Would Explain Creation of Universe

Interesting though this is it can't create the imbalance in charge required by Ashmore.

Universal Vortical Singularity enlightenment on the dipole anisotropy pattern of CMBR

This site though is just plain silly. The appearance of a 'vortex' in the CMBR is only there because of the chosen projection to fit it onto a 2 dimensional screen. It also at times misrepresents the big bang as an explosion. it chucks out GR and requires a completely new theory of gravity oh and it requires an all pervading aether comprised of some sort of plasma. Plasma cosmologies are hampered by the slight issue that none of them work and they don't match observation.


I dont know where you got that idea. Its being view as a multipole expansion in 4 dimensions. Take it up with NASA who are doing the work and ask to edit wikipedia.

http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap030209.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_mic ... anisotropy
Inherently Dishonest Clueless Researcher
User avatar
Brain man
Banned Troll
 
Name: Aznali Exidore
Posts: 1351
Age: 51
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#142  Postby Brain man » Oct 28, 2011 5:45 pm

Paul wrote:Oh and BUMP!

Paul wrote:
Brain man wrote:The number of mods who were on power trips at RDF now eating humble pie in forums and meetups where they are shunned or considered badly is a testament to the fact that in science people remember these activities.


Really? Come on dish the dirt. Who? Where? When? :popcorn:


Are you going to back up that assertion with some evidence?


Just speak to the veterans who have been around since the start of RDF and ask what happened to the worst offenders after its downfall. Im not breaching FUA by naming those involved.
Inherently Dishonest Clueless Researcher
User avatar
Brain man
Banned Troll
 
Name: Aznali Exidore
Posts: 1351
Age: 51
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#143  Postby The_Metatron » Oct 28, 2011 5:49 pm

You got nothing, then? Just baseless accusation?
I AM Skepdickus!

Check out Hack's blog, too. He writes good.
User avatar
The_Metatron
Moderator
 
Name: Jesse
Posts: 20517
Age: 56
Male

Country: United States
United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#144  Postby Brain man » Oct 28, 2011 5:55 pm

The_Metatron wrote:You got nothing, then? Just baseless accusation?


its FUA breach to put such information here. Go the more social orientated athiest forums and ask them there.
Inherently Dishonest Clueless Researcher
User avatar
Brain man
Banned Troll
 
Name: Aznali Exidore
Posts: 1351
Age: 51
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#145  Postby Regina » Oct 28, 2011 6:03 pm

Brain man wrote:
Well it should not concern anybody but the owner of this site. The SEO info i get also says the value of this site is accruing at £16,000 a year (at very least). It takes work for that to happen. I will need to get a deeper report on whether the backlinking was crafted to increase market value. If so then maybe on that basis the owner is looking at this site as a financial investment and can be reasoned with privately.

I'm sure the owner of this site will be very interested in this piece of information. Why not ask him? He's online.
No, they ain't makin' Jews like Jesus anymore,
They don't turn the other cheek the way they done before.

Kinky Friedman
Regina
 
Posts: 15599
Male

Djibouti (dj)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#146  Postby Paul » Oct 28, 2011 6:06 pm

Brain man wrote:
Paul wrote:Oh and BUMP!

Paul wrote:

Really? Come on dish the dirt. Who? Where? When? :popcorn:


Are you going to back up that assertion with some evidence?


Just speak to the veterans who have been around since the start of RDF and ask what happened to the worst offenders after its downfall. Im not breaching FUA by naming those involved.


Bullshit! In was around then too (I have a different username now), so I don't need to speak to any 'veterans'.
There has been some ill-feeling about certain issues, but nothing about the way crackpot theories are treated.

I don't think that you'd breach the FUA of this site by reporting what was said somewhere else about a specific mod.
I can only recall one mod at RDF who used his own name, so how can these individuals be identified?
Name an ex-RDF mod who has been shunned or considered badly in professional circles.

Give some examples of offences by ex-RDF mods which anyone outside of RDF (or TAF or Rationalia) gives a toss about.
"Peter, I can see your house from here!"
User avatar
Paul
 
Posts: 4550
Age: 61
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#147  Postby Brain man » Oct 28, 2011 6:17 pm

Regina wrote:
Brain man wrote:
Well it should not concern anybody but the owner of this site. The SEO info i get also says the value of this site is accruing at £16,000 a year (at very least). It takes work for that to happen. I will need to get a deeper report on whether the backlinking was crafted to increase market value. If so then maybe on that basis the owner is looking at this site as a financial investment and can be reasoned with privately.

I'm sure the owner of this site will be very interested in this piece of information. Why not ask him? He's online.


Obviously because you cannot ask somebody directly if they are trying to create a marketable investment in a situation like this and expect an answer. Especially when the moderators are not paid as far as a i know.

Evidence is required to determine that the situation has been crafted to create a market value. It can also arise by chance. Only SEO and media experts (many who i know) have the tools and insight to determine that. A tabloid paper for example creates market value by feeding on controversy and libel. It includes libel into its risk and even has libel funds put aside. However it is up front. People who watch fox news or read papers like the daily mail know what the sources are all about and the information is in context for that platform.

This has still to be clarified for here. I was a member for several months here thinking it was a pure respectable and objective well considered science forum before it clicked what was not right. The issue was confusing because i had been communicating only with those members who behave more like IRL professional colleagues. The other side,the RDF trouble, i was completely unaware till later it was predominant.
Inherently Dishonest Clueless Researcher
User avatar
Brain man
Banned Troll
 
Name: Aznali Exidore
Posts: 1351
Age: 51
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#148  Postby Paul » Oct 28, 2011 6:21 pm

Brain man wrote:thats not how it works in professional circles. people are hurried and have to make quick decisions. They google somebody see this, and may switch off right away, as this forum "looks" respectable. Google does not even aggregate the links from here. If i search on some theorists it comes up with pages of peer reviewed works interspersed with a link to each of one page of one of these threads, with Pseudoscience as the most prominent word.


If they're hurried and they're making snap decisions based on this site "looking respectable" like you suggest then they're not good researchers. I've seen plenty of "respectable looking" websites and forums that a little further digging shows them to be full of bullshit (such as homoeopathy sites).

If I google "James Maxlow", top link is his own website and this place doesn't appear in the first few pages.
If I google "James Maxlow pseudoscience" then we appear top of the list with the EE thread.

I think you're right, this doesn't belong in Pseudoscience.

It belongs in Conspiracy Theories.
"Peter, I can see your house from here!"
User avatar
Paul
 
Posts: 4550
Age: 61
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#149  Postby campermon » Oct 28, 2011 6:22 pm

:popcorn: (Uncle Orphs Veteran StyleTM)
Scarlett and Ironclad wrote:Campermon,...a middle aged, middle class, Guardian reading, dad of four, knackered hippy, woolly jumper wearing wino and science teacher.
User avatar
campermon
RS Donator
 
Posts: 17032
Age: 49
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#150  Postby Regina » Oct 28, 2011 6:22 pm

Brain man wrote:

Obviously because you cannot ask somebody directly if they are trying to create a marketable investment in a situation like this and expect an answer

Right. So instead of asking a straight-forward question, you prefer to throw around unfounded accusations and dark hints as to the owner's intentions.
No, they ain't makin' Jews like Jesus anymore,
They don't turn the other cheek the way they done before.

Kinky Friedman
Regina
 
Posts: 15599
Male

Djibouti (dj)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#151  Postby Brain man » Oct 28, 2011 6:23 pm

Paul wrote:
Brain man wrote:
Paul wrote:Oh and BUMP!



Are you going to back up that assertion with some evidence?


Just speak to the veterans who have been around since the start of RDF and ask what happened to the worst offenders after its downfall. Im not breaching FUA by naming those involved.


Bullshit! In was around then too (I have a different username now), so I don't need to speak to any 'veterans'.
There has been some ill-feeling about certain issues, but nothing about the way crackpot theories are treated.

I don't think that you'd breach the FUA of this site by reporting what was said somewhere else about a specific mod.
I can only recall one mod at RDF who used his own name, so how can these individuals be identified?
Name an ex-RDF mod who has been shunned or considered badly in professional circles.

Give some examples of offences by ex-RDF mods which anyone outside of RDF (or TAF or Rationalia) gives a toss about.


Well that explains your confusion. I was referring to the moderators who had gone a little power crazy at RDF in general. Not specifically to "crackpot" theories at all. If anything the science situation was better at RDF than here. Far more considerate. More like IRL science. Well not surprising because there were more scientists popping in at RDF just due to his name.

Anyway you have made my point for me without me having to breach the FUA by naming forums with a high meetup rate where those past activities became an ongoing issue for.
Inherently Dishonest Clueless Researcher
User avatar
Brain man
Banned Troll
 
Name: Aznali Exidore
Posts: 1351
Age: 51
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#152  Postby Paul » Oct 28, 2011 6:24 pm

Regina wrote:
Brain man wrote:

Obviously because you cannot ask somebody directly if they are trying to create a marketable investment in a situation like this and expect an answer

Right. So instead of asking a straight-forward question, you prefer to throw around unfounded accusations and dark hints as to the owner's intentions.


and he's worried about breaching the FUA by naming some ex-RDF usernames :dunno:
"Peter, I can see your house from here!"
User avatar
Paul
 
Posts: 4550
Age: 61
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#153  Postby Brain man » Oct 28, 2011 6:27 pm

Regina wrote:
Brain man wrote:

Obviously because you cannot ask somebody directly if they are trying to create a marketable investment in a situation like this and expect an answer

Right. So instead of asking a straight-forward question, you prefer to throw around unfounded accusations and dark hints as to the owner's intentions.


there is nothing dark about creating high value web sites. Keeping information secret is one primary key to how respectable business works.
Inherently Dishonest Clueless Researcher
User avatar
Brain man
Banned Troll
 
Name: Aznali Exidore
Posts: 1351
Age: 51
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#154  Postby Brain man » Oct 28, 2011 6:28 pm

Paul wrote:
Regina wrote:
Brain man wrote:

Obviously because you cannot ask somebody directly if they are trying to create a marketable investment in a situation like this and expect an answer

Right. So instead of asking a straight-forward question, you prefer to throw around unfounded accusations and dark hints as to the owner's intentions.


and he's worried about breaching the FUA by naming some ex-RDF usernames :dunno:


Sure as their names were often their actual IRL names
Inherently Dishonest Clueless Researcher
User avatar
Brain man
Banned Troll
 
Name: Aznali Exidore
Posts: 1351
Age: 51
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#155  Postby Paul » Oct 28, 2011 6:30 pm

Brain man wrote:Well that explains your confusion. I was referring to the moderators who had gone a little power crazy at RDF in general. Not specifically to "crackpot" theories at all. If anything the science situation was better at RDF than here. Far more considerate. More like IRL science. Well not surprising because there were more scientists popping in at RDF just due to his name.

Anyway you have made my point for me without me having to breach the FUA by naming forums with a high meetup rate where those past activities became an ongoing issue for.


I'm not the one that's confused. You appear to have no clue as to what was behind the meltdown at RDF and who was involved.
What point were you making by talking about "power mad" mods at RDF then??
"Peter, I can see your house from here!"
User avatar
Paul
 
Posts: 4550
Age: 61
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#156  Postby Regina » Oct 28, 2011 6:31 pm

Eh, no. They weren't. Coincidentally, I was around, too during the Great Forum Wars.
Last edited by Regina on Oct 28, 2011 6:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
No, they ain't makin' Jews like Jesus anymore,
They don't turn the other cheek the way they done before.

Kinky Friedman
Regina
 
Posts: 15599
Male

Djibouti (dj)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#157  Postby Paul » Oct 28, 2011 6:33 pm

Brain man wrote:
Paul wrote:
Regina wrote:
Right. So instead of asking a straight-forward question, you prefer to throw around unfounded accusations and dark hints as to the owner's intentions.


and he's worried about breaching the FUA by naming some ex-RDF usernames :dunno:


Sure as their names were often their actual IRL names


More bullshit. I can only think of one mod that used his RL name as his username.
"Peter, I can see your house from here!"
User avatar
Paul
 
Posts: 4550
Age: 61
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#158  Postby campermon » Oct 28, 2011 6:36 pm

Richard Dawkins...........

:lol:
Scarlett and Ironclad wrote:Campermon,...a middle aged, middle class, Guardian reading, dad of four, knackered hippy, woolly jumper wearing wino and science teacher.
User avatar
campermon
RS Donator
 
Posts: 17032
Age: 49
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#159  Postby Brain man » Oct 28, 2011 6:36 pm

Paul wrote:
Brain man wrote:thats not how it works in professional circles. people are hurried and have to make quick decisions. They google somebody see this, and may switch off right away, as this forum "looks" respectable. Google does not even aggregate the links from here. If i search on some theorists it comes up with pages of peer reviewed works interspersed with a link to each of one page of one of these threads, with Pseudoscience as the most prominent word.


If they're hurried and they're making snap decisions based on this site "looking respectable" like you suggest then they're not good researchers. I've seen plenty of "respectable looking" websites and forums that a little further digging shows them to be full of bullshit (such as homoeopathy sites).

If I google "James Maxlow", top link is his own website and this place doesn't appear in the first few pages.
If I google "James Maxlow pseudoscience" then we appear top of the list with the EE thread.

I think you're right, this doesn't belong in Pseudoscience.

It belongs in Conspiracy Theories.


James has already employed an SEO and marketing expert to deal with this. Thats why the results are clean, and has pictures, subdomains, lots of personal profiles etc coming up in google to push the general junk down. Not all theorists have resources for that.

I cant tell you what puts a thread from here to the top of google. I wouldnt pass that information around here. Suffice to say there is not a thread on Ratskep about james maxlow.
Inherently Dishonest Clueless Researcher
User avatar
Brain man
Banned Troll
 
Name: Aznali Exidore
Posts: 1351
Age: 51
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: The 2011 of the Nobel Prize for physics is a mistake

#160  Postby Brain man » Oct 28, 2011 6:38 pm

Paul wrote:
Brain man wrote:
Paul wrote:

and he's worried about breaching the FUA by naming some ex-RDF usernames :dunno:


Sure as their names were often their actual IRL names


More bullshit. I can only think of one mod that used his RL name as his username.


not the whole name, but many used part of it. The point is I would stll not bring up the identities of these people here.
Inherently Dishonest Clueless Researcher
User avatar
Brain man
Banned Troll
 
Name: Aznali Exidore
Posts: 1351
Age: 51
Male

Country: UK
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Pseudoscience

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest