« on: 02/08/2019 07:18:20 »
All of the content of that Wikipedia page is exactly what you are not about. You can argue your case but it may well be a zero sum game. We inform you, you spout nonsense, we inform you, you spout nonsense. Well one day you may well find something useful to do with your life. Like actually learning about science. It may even alleviate your boredom. Who knows.
I am conceded that much of my stuff as generally expressed, have holes and are incorrect in its evolving stage.
But, it is not as if the contemporary scientific method is not intrinsically flawed.
In the meanwhile of corresponding in this thread, some scientists had privately sent their reviews on UVS to me. Despite they had commented on the strength as well as the weaknesses of the UVS treatise, I can say many had reviewed it seriously. And despite they addressed some shortcomings, they did not considered that I had spouted nonsense. And I am certainly not bored with such reviews coming in. It is unfortunate I have to bear with much boring nonsense in this thread for them to find UVS.
Well one day you may well find the stuff you believed as impeccable sciences, are among those like geocentrism when the paradigm shift materializes.