Site name change

Discussion in 'Site Feedback' started by DaveC426913, Jan 26, 2017.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    I would have thought it would be a walk in the park if the presentation had a sliver of credibility

    I am guessing here with a bare minimum of understanding of presentation of scientific papers for publication so feel free to correct me

    First the publication would examine your credentials and qualifications in the field of your presentation

    Understand I am not asking you to tell me what qualifications you have (so don't bother posting them here I am not interested) I am saying any science publication will want to know them

    Next would be an overview of your work in the field including previous publications on the subject, your research in the field and why your observations are a better fit then currently held views

    As I understand if it passes those checks it is sent out to for review by others in the field (peer review)

    The returned reviews are then checked for general agreement. May be the reviewers are asked to double check other reviewers replies

    If the paper fails it is returned with the reasons why it failed

    If the paper passes it might need to be tidied up for publication, a process in which you will participate, and you and team get all the kudos you deserve

    The magazine which publishes breakthrough science gets mucho kudos, so much rides on being at the cutting edge

    Cutting edge science will make publication and bring prestigious respect to the magazine

    Odd ball ideas and thought bubbles which don't fit established observations of the real world do not

    If you have submitted papers and they have been returned I am guessing the reasons for return have been explained

    Go through the reasons and re submit the papers along with the reasons for rejection and why the reasons for rejection are incorrect

    Good luck
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    Hi Rajesh.
    Having had your experience at CQ do you find you have a deeper understanding of matters of interest.
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    One can learn something from their mistakes and that is not to make any more mistakes.
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    Oh if only that were true

    I would saddle up my unicorn

    Ride through out the kingdom

    Nail to every tree those profound words

    On a rainbow coloured poster
  8. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    People repeat pattens as a wide generalisation (which means I am only guessing) and often do not learn from mistakes. It is a realisation few get.
    I know little because I made few mistakes and learnt little.
  9. Michael 345 New year. PRESENT is 69 years old Valued Senior Member

    I make the same mistake all the time

    Only it's a different one

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

  10. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Yes, you misunderstood.

    Regardless, you used it to attack other forum members by name. That's not a discussion about science; that's bashing.

    Here is me, not keeping silent:

    Yes. Look at the thread title and the first post. It has nothing to do with pad, origin or anything mainstream.

    You've hijacked it for your own agenda. Start your own thread.
  11. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member


    Though this is in Site Feedback, it is not a criticism of SciFo; it really is a lament (albeit a snarky one) at the obsession with Trumpian politics . I check SciFo every day, and 95% of new posts are Trump topics. I really am just expressing my boredom with the topic in general.

    Billvon provided one of the few thoughtful insights on this:
    And he's right; I just hadn't thought about it in those terms.

    (I participate in science content as much as possible. The fact that many high-profile threads have me in the role of skeptic and fallacy Nazi does not mean I make no positive contributions in less notorius threads.)
  12. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    I have been faulted on occasions and have accepted such faults.
    Possibly yes: Your own hypothetical alternative suggestions, have failed in that regard though.
    From my experience on this forum, the vast majority of those questioning mainstream, stem from the fact that they prefer uncertainty so as to make room for their "god of the gaps"
    That's simply because you and others do not have the evidence to falsify or invalidate the BB/Inflationary model of universal/spacetime evolution. Excuses, excuses excuses, and conspiracy are always forthcoming from cranks, quacks and nuts of many varieties.
    expletive deleted was totally dishonest in the extreme when asking for evidence that reputable, professional scientists ignored the effects of magnetic fields also contributing to orbital degradation particularly with the H/T binary pulsar example, despite numerous papers by myself indicating that all possibilities including magnetic fields were considered.
    As a brother in arms of yours, you blindingly support his lies and deception.
    As a reference to me obviously, whatever knowledge I have is through plenty of reading, and the fact that if you [or your two brothers in arms that like you, seem to want denigrate all of 21st century cosmology] had anything of real substance, you would not be here.
    The papers you have published with less then reputable sources, were anyway totally and fully discredited and invalidated by Professor Link Bennett, and also at cosmoquest.
    Finally if you are so dissatisfied with "sciforum" and the air play you at least are allowed to put here, why don't you stay over at cosmoquest?
    Oh, yes that's right! Over there, other then the month's grace you are allowed in the alternative forum to put your nonsense and other unsupported, unevidenced, non mainstream crank suggestions are just not tolerated.
    So perhaps in hindsight, you should get down on your knees and pray to your spaghetti monster of choice, and give thanks that at least here, you are allowed to discuss your agenda driven, non mainstream ideas.
    But remember, that forums such as this also, are open to any and all quacks, cranks and nuts that for reasons such as "delusions of grandeur" "tall poppy syndrome" or just the fact that mainstream science has pushed any need for your's or anyone elses spaghetti monster, into near oblivion and as a superfluous myth that is just not needed now.
    Truck Captain Stumpy likes this.
  13. Kittamaru Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. Adieu, Sciforums. Valued Senior Member

    Thread closed at OP's request.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page