Off topic posts from "mysterious property of light."

Discussion in 'SF Open Government' started by RealityCheck, Nov 14, 2012.

  1. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    Messages:
    800
    I asked a question indicated by wlminex's ban, to satisfy the requirements of fair play and transparency. That is not a 'troll' of the mod involved. The fact that you see it that way says more about your personal attitudes and prejudices and biased 'reading' of things/people.


    And your self-serving biased reading has led you into a further faux pas: a proper reading of the posts/chronology will show it was YOU who started in trolling/insulting ME after I merely asked the question of the mod.

    If you can't even get that right, then what hope is there for anything else you bring your preconclusionary attitude to?

    Get a life. Watch your bile. Chill out. Stop your personal vendettas and biased reading of people and posts.

    Take care, mate. Really.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,136
    Whoa this whole thread has taken a curious turn. I believe the CV is genuine, regardless of wlminex's posts. If brucep or Read-Only (or anyone else) would agree to terms I'd be willing to wager on it.
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,088
    The Scientific Method is taught in middle school (grade 7) in Canada, and fail to see why it even needs teaching. It is purely common sense.

    I stated that as long as controversy exists in the world about interpretations and theorys in physics (not governed by scientific method), then there should be room for an equal amount of controversy in the physics forum. It is controversial topics that likely bring more members and website views.

    I also stated that Brian Josephson would who holds a PhD IN Physics (not Geology) would also be kicked from the physics forum frequently. Mainly for not holding popular "opinion".

    I am sure my views are labelled "Nuttier than a port-a-potty at a peanut festival" by many here, as I subscribe to unpopular theological/metaphysical views for a science forum.

    Unique thinking (even if wrong) should be encouraged. I have the patience to answer thousands of "stupid" questions if the asker is sincere.

    Not as much patience for self imposed "science police".
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. prometheus viva voce! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,045
    That's rubbish. Josephson not only has a PhD in physics, he also has a nobel prize in physics. Does that mean he can say whatever the hell he likes about physics? Certainly not! He was awarded the nobel prize for his work on super currents, but now he is researching quantum mechanics and conciousness, a subject where there is less genuine research going on than the Iranian government's department for the study and advancement of atheism. If you do poor research, write poor papers that don't get published by a decent journal then you can expect to be ostracised by the physics community. On this forum the equivalent is when you make poor postings that aren't supported by the evidence then you are likely to get similarly ostracised.

    If Josephson can here and posted about quantum conciousness I wouldn't ban him for not holding the same opinions as me. There are many many people on this forum that I haven't banned who hold differing opinions, and believe it or not, I am not here to impose myself on anyone. I would however, ban Josephson if he repeatedly posted crackpot rubbish or links to his theories (if you can call them that) on the physics and maths board. That is exactly what wliminex did and would not stop doing after repeated informal warnings, formal warnings and temporary bans and that is why he is permanently banned from sciforums.
     
  8. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    That would serve NO purpose whatsoever. <shrug> As far as I'm concerned, he's gone, I'm satisfied - end of story.

    Time to move forward, not back.
     
  9. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,088
    @ Prometheus,

    Quantum Mechanics and Consciousness is the touchy subject then isn't it. We all know your view is the only correct one or face banishment.
    If the world agreed with your views then fine, but that would not be true. Maybe you could write the definitive Interpretation and then we could bow down in awe of you . Your opinion is OPINION.

    (you can fix your own spelling, since you corrected Wlminex post so nicely the other day).

    You say it is rubbish but then agree with me?
    If you took the time to read Josephson (I'm guessing against), then you would know he builds upon known science and anything "crackpot" would need to be an OPINION of yours and others.

    Thank-you for proving my point that a Nobel Prize Winning Physicist with a PhD in Physics could receive the exact same treatment as Wlminex.
     
  10. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    There are a number of people here who have the ability and background (education AND experience) to spot crackpottery. Sadly, you are FAR from being qualified to be in that group. Instead, you are MORE than willing to accept practically ANY garbage you come across. You've proven that here time and again.

    And one more thing - I'm starting to get a feeling that your welcome and time here has just about expired....
     
  11. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    Messages:
    800




    Hi Read-Only. I just read your responses to kwhilborn. Be careful, mate, as your replies there were hardly better than his when it comes to the criteria you apply.

    First you seemingly put your own personal 'satisfaction' forward as a criteria for banning or not banning someone; then you consult your 'feeling' when divining what the admin/mods will or will not do in response to kwhilborn himself.

    These subjective satisfaction/feelings are hardly objective basis for taking your opinions at face value above anyone else's, are they? You leave yourself open to others accusing you of bias and personal prejudice by putting your satisfaction and feeling before actual facts which can only be discovered when all the circumstances have been presented and discussed in open forum. Banning people before this has taken place will do nothing for the reputation of this site or posters like yourself who prefer to go with personal 'satisfaction' and 'feelings' rather than allow full disclosure/discussion in open forum.

    Take care you don't let your personal wants to dictate the wants of science, humanity and fair play....else you will be on a slippery slope regarding all these!

    I trust you really aren't as you (seemingly) came across there. Cheers!
     
  12. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    You would think he would notice since he spends so much time looking in the mirror in self righteous confirmation.
     
  13. AlexG Like nailing Jello to a tree Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,304
    Given RC's full out spam attack over at Physfourms after he was banned, and his current behavior here, I can't see any reason to take him off my ignore list.

    I figure that pretty soon he will push too far and share the same fate as wilmenidiot.
     
  14. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    You're such a despicable person. Initiating the 2 month self righteous serial rant against rpenner whining that your rights had been violated because you were banned from posting there. You small minded ignorant Troll. I won't be happy until you're sent packing from this site. I do have a bias against self righteous small minded ignorant trolls.
     
  15. prometheus viva voce! Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,045
    Yeah, misspelling the same word twice is the same as writing a sentence that was so full of errors it was almost unreadable...

    You clearly have not understood the point I was making. One of the bases of scientific discourse is peer review, that is everyone is treated in the same way. Wliminex produced rubbish here so he is gone. If Josephson or the channelled spirit of Einstein produced rubbish here they would both be gone. Science does not, or should not have anything to do with personalities.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2012
  16. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    You're living proof that the scientific method should be taught from Kindergarden through High School.
     
  17. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,098
    If it's that important to you then go ahead and prove it. I can admit when I'm wrong. I never have a problem with that. Just ask my wife. I even told you I made a mistake when I first started posting here. Haven't seen you do that. Maybe you have. Don't read many of your posts.
     
  18. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    Messages:
    2,088
    @ Read-Only
    This must be the self-imposed "science police" who parade up and down sciforums trolling or banning members who post anything related to consciousness involved in collapse. Just because it is not a popular viewpoint there is a lot of people arguing for it. i.e. Bell/Wolf

    Don't kid yourself Read-Only. I was well aware when my welcome here expired, and it was probably about 11 years ago when I first posted in the Paranormal thread.

    I do have interest in accepted science as well and do put forth good answers and ideas.
    @ Read-Only
    This was a MAIL FROM YOU.

    So ....

    Maybe original thinking is not always lost on this crowd.

    I QUESTION YOUR ABILITY TO RECOGNIZE real science sometimes as evidenced in the LENR thread, and even if it is not proven while both of us are still members I will be happy knowing you feel like an idiot somewhere for your previous posts on the topic.

    Most science begins as woo. Isn't that the first thing in the scientific principle? Find some woo?

    So you find some woo, and you prove it is science. History repeats itself.

    I stand behind everything I have said on this website and have enough experience in science, the paranormal, human nature, and common sense to recognize more than most.

    http://www.sciforums.com/showthread...ide-from-Calcium-Hydroxide)&highlight=seaweed

    It is only common sense that I am "wearing out my welcome" by siding with someone who was banned. Obviously at least one moderator will see this as a reason to defend their actions. I would be proud to be banned from here for defending what I think is right.

    I was banned one time in a over a decade here for spamming (linking- link 3 times in a row for visibility) and then did sock puppets to complain so had it extended, but have only been banned 1 time.

    If the self imposed "science police" have too much power here then who would want to be a member. I won't lose any sleep.
     
    Last edited: Nov 16, 2012
  19. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,136
    See, it's easy to type things, making any proclamations you want at the keyboard. You were stating it almost as a fact that wlminex's CV was fake. The rejected challenge has already served the purpose of testing your resolve.
     
  20. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    Despite your claims to the contrary, science is NOT advanced by dreaming up "woo." Rather it is like building a brick wall - each brick is carefully placed on other PROVEN and formally accepted brick.
     
  21. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    OK, because I was stating it as FACT, go right ahead and prove me wrong. If you can, I'm certainly man enough to formally admit my error right here for everyone to see.
     
  22. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,136
    I googled William Mansker PHD and came up with this:
    http://www.attawaygems.com/NMFG/program_speaker_mansker.html
    If this isn't convincing enough, I'll email him for a photo copy of his degree.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Anyway, scientific discourse should be capable of standing on its own merits (or collapse due to the lack thereof), regardless of letters behind a name. That being said, it was simply rubbing me the wrong way how you guys seemed to be casting aspersions on ALL of Mansker's credentials simply due to your view of his Physics ideas.
     
  23. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    10,296
    That's all well and good - BUT why, then, did he come here under a totally different name? There's no way to couple the nut who was here to Dr. Mansker. <shrug>
     

Share This Page