Off topic posts from "mysterious property of light."

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

  1. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    In the interests of fair play, especially since wlminex is not able to respond to that claim because he is currently on the 'ban' list, I am compelled to ask you: Do you have anything to back up your claim that his "CV is fake"? If so, I for one would be most interested to read/sight your references/evidence for making that claim. Thanks.

    Back tomorrow. G'night!
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Absolutely! The proof is in his very on words.

    Read his CV and then read his more than a dozen posts of nonsense. NO ONE with the actual background he claims would make such serious, blatant scientific blunders. He's nothing but a fake from the word go. <shrug>
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement

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

    Are you saying that posts wlminex made related to geology are nonsense? Or just that posts unrelated to his area of expertise are nonsense? The idea that someone would create an extensive, fake CV proclaiming to have a PHD in geology to garner respect on a Physics forum seems extremely unlikely to me. I think you're letting your personal feelings cloud your assessment here, and getting a PHD is an accomplishment which should be respected.

    (of course, whether a PHD in geology adds any weight to wlminex's views on Physics is another subject entirely)
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    If that is all the 'evidence' you go on, then some of the daft things said by some prominent scientiific professionals would appall you. Lol.

    Anyhow, whenever anyone posits NEW IDEAS, it tends to make people come across as 'a bit odd' etc. I just concentrate on discussing the idea and leave any 'impressions' about personality behind it out of my considerations as 'irrelevant' to the merits or otherwise of the idea.

    Naturally, anyone questioning the current paradigm/perspective must necessarily BE and sound 'different' etc, and may appear as you opine. But that is the risk taken by any pioneer/explorer whatever the 'territory'.

    However, if his CV (which he posted in that thread specially for others, like yourself for instance, to read because they are more interested in the persons than in the ideas) turns out to be genuine, then where are you?

    Anyone can sound odd etc when canvassing a new idea out of his normal field of expertise; but sometimes it takes an 'outsider' perspective to see the wood AND the trees which has eluded the 'experts' in the field. It wouldn't be the first time in the history of science that this has happened!

    Tolerance, full discourse and less of the personal tactics and prejudices. Just saying. Cheers!
  8. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    I most certainly DO respect a PhD - in any field.

    However, unlike you, I've read everything he's posted up until now (and I've now stopped) and it led me to the * definite* conclusion that his claims, including the degree are completely false. And I have no personal feelings in this one way or another; my only interest is in facts, not made-up fantasies.

    He reminds me a great deal of Walter Wagoner and all of his false claims of experience and expertise. Ugh!!

    Besides reading all of his posts that I ever care to do I've also said all I care to about his bogus claims and leave it up to the rest of you to reach your own conclusions. I've little doubt that in time, all you will agree with my findings.
  9. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Drat! I replied to your post but it's stuck in the "mod approval" pool. That sure is annoying.
  10. brucep Valued Senior Member

    I definitely agree with you and I didn't have to read all his posts to come to that conclusion. He made it clear he doesn't understand the scientific method. You can't be a PHD, in any science, and be completely clueless about how science works. Lying about credentials when it's obvious you have none is what cranks do.
  11. brucep Valued Senior Member

    I just received the mod approval note. It is annoying. You'll see I fully agree with you.
  12. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    Well it's all a moot point really since he's been permabanned and I don't suppose proving things out one way or the other would change anyone's minds about anything, but as a matter of curiosity I wonder what it would take to verify.
  13. RJBeery Natural Philosopher Valued Senior Member

    TESTING, TESTING!! My post was flagged as well. Someone suggested that the trick is to post a short garbage entry and if it is not flagged for review THEN you edit it without problems. I think I'm going to start doing that
  14. brucep Valued Senior Member

    His ban is permanent. If you want to know send him an email because his ban status is 'never'.
  15. origin Heading towards oblivion Valued Senior Member

    I'm sorry, but when I read the ban comment of 'far too much OOB' I just about shot beer through my nose...
  16. brucep Valued Senior Member

    Maybe we should have a party and you can demonstrate how to keep that from happening. Asking for 'proof' from the mods is further nonsense from the Obfuscation Troll.
  17. brucep Valued Senior Member

    You should put a cork in it. The forum doesn't have time for a cascade of crank ideas.
  18. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    @ Walter,
    You now need proven credentials and must be invited to participate in threads now. Sorry.

    @ BruceP,
    I can think of at least one Nobel Prize winning PhD who would be banned from Sciforums. I don't even have to name him as everyone knows who I am talking about.

    I have a problem when self-righteous know-it-alls dictate what is true. As long as there remains controversy on Interpretations of Quantum Mechanics worldwide then there should be room for controversy in posts on Sciforums relating to the same content. The Fred Wolf/Bell views of quantum physics are complete woo and not worthy of simple discussion here. That is current sciforum bias, but it is bias and should not be welcome in this day of free speech.

    If I asked a group to brainstorm I would not critisize ANY ideas from them as the rule of thumb is "There is no bad ideas in brainstorming", and I feel the same freedom should apply to other areas of thought for much the same reason, and good ideas can come out of bad ones.

    @ everyone,

    I could care less about whether it is believed here or not, but I am convinced beyond doubt that I have witnessed and participated in psychic/telepathic experiments that defy probabilities to the extent I could never believe otherwise. If you choose the skepticism stance here then that is not my problem, and I genuinely feel bad that your views and life experiences denied you this truth.

    No amount of probabilities can ever equal proof in this matter. We could exhibit 10,000,000,000:1 odds that PSI is true, and skeptics and the scientific method must cling to that 1 chance in a billion that their version of reality is correct. There is no amount of probabilities that can EVER equal proof, and that to me; is the main downfall of The Scientific Method. Telepathy can only become accepted when a tool comes into existence that can measure it. Until then it is pseudoscience.

    The point I am getting to is..

    History teaches us that much science originates as woo/pseudoscience and works its way up to the physics forum. It will repeat itself again and someday psychic events will be on the physics forum (IN MY HUMBLE OPINION). It would be nice to see this within the lifetime of many here to see the embarrassed posts of the former skeptics, but I'll not hold my breath.

    If you believe as many do that PSI exists, then there really is not a lot of current physics that can explain it clearly. It will require new ideas, new interpretations, new discoveries.

    New science is often old woo, and if people did not discuss woo then new science WOULD (not possibly would) grind to a snails pace.

    I am sure the ideas offered by Wlminex brought many hits to Sciforums, and I will miss his thoughts.

    I further think it was incredibly rude of Read-Only to respond "Who invited you" and then make light of his credentials without proof.

    I myself am a retired Soil Engineer with a family background in the Print Trade. Even though I was an Engineer I never had to use a calculator or partake in any math at my job. I drove around to various farms and homes and took samples which were sent to a lab. I never analyzed anything, and I never had to completely write a report as all writing was submitted to our Editors. I was a glorified driver, and I could go weeks without seeing a co-worker. I know it's not rocket science.

    I did not set out for that job. I wanted to be more, but choices narrow after you attend school, and I found I liked that job. My interests and best subjects were always science and that sent me on the courses I needed to become an Engineer. I read about science and am as well read as most. I am also a programmer and have various computer skills and run various websites as businesses. I am not the best with PHP, but I more than get by, and have at least intermediate skills.

    How many of you only partake in discussions based on your professional training?

    I submit that even though my credentials look impressive on paper I would be hard pressed to actually do the chemistry (and some physics) I learned in university. I finished that crap 20 years ago. The only time I use a calculator is when doing my taxes. I submit that a PhD could equally post nonsense (according to the Sciforum gods like Read-Only and some mods).

    Nonsense is only nonsense if it goes against your beliefs. I will repeat two things.
    a) I repeat "As long as controversy about Interpretations exist in the world, then controversy should have room in the physics forum".
    b) I repeat "I can name a Nobel Prize winner who has a PhD in Phyics, that would get banned from Sciforums". Initials are B.J. (but you knew that).

    I run a paranormal website, and have worked with several other paranormal groups.

    The point here is that I and others need to see some new ideas show up in the physics forum to satisfy my/their pseudoscience beliefs. I again feel bad that those beliefs are not commonplace, but for those who do follow my threads it is not for lack of trying.

    Consciousness involved in collapse seems to be the biggest debate there that gets anyone with the Wolf views banned. There is no room for discussion, as there is mob rules or mod rules when anything remotely controversial is spoken.

    If a "Many Worlds Interpretation" is discussed there it would be mostly ignored by mods and members as the MWI is still heralded as a breakthrough in Quantum Mechanic Thought. Do people realize that it proposes that we are split into millions of different Earths and counterparts to ourselves that live out every possible scenario in our lives on other worlds? Many would say that sounds woo'ish (I do), yet it is still a heralded Interpretation.

    I think that many cannot see how ridiculous the choices become at that level, and try to understand only the most rational sounding viewpoints.

    I think Wlminex was a better member than many of you, and at least would post original thoughts.

    Wlminex was accurate in his post here when he said a vacuum had little to do with answering the question, and it was actually Read-Only who was confusing the issue.

    Read only was the person who responded rudely in this thread and that action seems supported by moderators.

    I think that banning members who argue the Fred Wolf Interpretation is simply censorship from a mob mentality of moderators (who have discussed him in the moderators forum), who are pushing their Interpretation onto everyone.


    Being mean to someone is not an admirable quality where I live.

    As far as the mods go. I find it is those denied authority in their work that often wield what little power they are given vehemently. I once new a box stacker who became a fierce Union Rep (albeit an idiotic one). He had the education of a skid packer but was given shop rep authority and grew teeth. He was easily recognized as an idiot and removed from the position. Are you like this guy?

    In the grand scheme of things this is only a forum, and I will spit this out because it is what some others are thinking.

    Maybe I will get a ban from this for violating the Anti-Free-Speech policies adopted here, but would not miss any sleep over it.

    If you are involved in this then you know your behavior sucks, and it is you that needs to live with yourself.

    I can look at myself in the mirror just fine, with perhaps a tweak of envy at the lucky dog in there. I am happy.
  19. brucep Valued Senior Member

    You talking to me? I'm not a PHD. I'm not getting run off for being a scientific illiterate while claiming I'm a PHD. Pretty clear he was fibbing. You probably believe him. Stuff your 'wet cardboard soapbox' rant. He was banned for a reason. The same reason he was banned a few weeks ago. He decided to come back and continue with the same bs. He got the ban with 'never' behind it. It is his fault regardless what you think.
  20. kwhilborn Banned Banned

    Glad to see more psychics popping up.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    A geologist is supposed to be an expert in physics?
    Last edited: Nov 15, 2012
  21. Read-Only Valued Senior Member

    Not necessarily, but he IS supposed to be a scientist!

    And as such, he most certainly is supposed to understand the scientific method which he clearly did NOT. And that clearly exposed him as a fraud and a LIAR so why are you supporting such a worthless, lying, deceitful individual?????????????????????????????
  22. RealityCheck Banned Banned

    But the forum has time for loudmouthed/foulmouthed wannabe 'drive-by' personally prejudiced preconclusionary types who have an unfortunate tendency of calling people 'obfuscation troll' and other names while also presuming to dictate to the forum as to what/who is or isn't 'crank' before he even bothers to actually read what is being presented/discussed in context?

    Ok. Got it. Thanks for that news. With those 'credentials' you should apply for a mod job here. Just the kind of tin-pot ego-tripper they need more of. Not.

    Watch your blood pressure, mate. Life's too short for all your bile and ego-tantrums. Chill out.

    And I didn't ask you, I asked whoever banned wlminex, to explain in open forum why, and to set out fully the 'justification/s' for banning wlminex so that we can consider both sides in full and fair context. Unless you are the relevant mod's official representative speaking on his behalf, kindly keep your personal tantrums and nastiness out of it.

  23. brucep Valued Senior Member

    You started this Troll how about you ending it. FYI I'm pretty sure he wasn't banned for stating 'make believe' credentials so moderation doesn't have to prove they're 'make believe'. I'm pretty sure he was banned for the same reason he was banned for several weeks ago. You're doing the same thing you were banned for several times. Trolling. I'm not your mate and I'm not having a personal tantrum. I'm not a nasty person either. Quit trolling me. Quit trolling the moderator.

Share This Page