[Bored chemist]

Has perPedes  posted anything correct yet?

[alancalverd]

But you can have a policy about people who persistently ignore the laws of physics or persistently break the rules.

Like Bruno, Galileo, Newton, Einstein, Maxwell.....not to mention Semmelweiss, Pasteur, Jenner, and everyone else who flagrantly ignored the laws of chemistry and the practice of medicine.
Science is different from mining.
It can take decades to recognise a nugget, and only then do you realise that everything you once considered valuable is actually dross.
Problem is that an awful lot of new dross is presented here as potential nuggets. But it keeps the miners alert and amused.

[paul cotter (OP)]

I get your point Alancalverd, however science has advanced to such an extent that the chance of everything turning to dross is highly unlikely. At the current level of understanding, backed by countless observations, small corrections are the most likely changes. Cosmology may be one area of research where major new theories may arise subsequent to new observations. Yes, in the past there have been "renegades" who upset the status quo but I don't feel Maxwell or Einstein fall into this category-they just collated the evidence already in existence and worked it into cohesive theory.

[alancalverd]

I rather think that dismissing the aether with a couple of equations, or deducing that matter can be transmuted into energy from the assumption that there is a limiting relative speed, were tectonic shifts rather than "corrections" to the laws of physics, and both preceded the supporting observations. 

About 60 years ago, a number of eminent scientists predicted that physics would finish around 1980, which coincidentally would be the start of an ice age.

[Bored chemist]

Having just come back from a fortnight's holiday, I think I can confirm that the answer to " Is "new theories" getting worse?" is a resounding "Yes!.

[paul cotter (OP)]

BC, I hope you enjoyed your holiday and are now reinvigorated and ready to tackle the bs.

[paul cotter (OP)]

There has been a dramatic turn for the worse lately, where does all this nonsense come from? I suspect mental health problems.

[Kryptid]

There has been a dramatic turn for the worse lately, where does all this nonsense come from? I suspect mental health problems.

DarkKnight was another sockpuppet of a former member called Thebox. He has repeatedly come back time and time again posting nonsense before getting banned. He's been kicked off again, though.

[paul cotter (OP)]

Good decision there, Kryptid, countering bullshit gets tiresome when there seems to be an endless stream of it. I feel an obligation to try to enlighten those who are mired in absolute nonsense but it is rarely productive. Such is life.

[Halc]

I feel an obligation to try to enlighten those who are mired in absolute nonsense but it is rarely productive.

Trust me, DarkKnight wasn't in any way seeking enlightenment. Some do, and you can usually tell those that are trying.
On a positive side, DaveLev has found another site to troll, one that deals with them differently.

[paul cotter (OP)]

Bullshit alert! 'new theories' has fallen down the rabbit hole, again.

[Bored chemist]

Having just come back from a fortnight's holiday, I think I can confirm that the answer to " Is "new theories" getting worse?" is a resounding "Yes!.

How many times does this have to happen before I should ask if there's a correlation between me going on holiday and the "New Theories" section filling up with tosh?

[alancalverd]

Funny how we never see you and the serious bullshitters in the same room. I think your "holiday" was actually a brief spell of alter ego.

[Bored chemist]

Funny how we never see you ...

This is the internet.
Nobody sees anyone else.

[Eternal Student]

Hi.

   I'm wondering if the Forum is due for complete re-design or re-development.    Try to sort out what the forum is supposed to do and how it is supposed to be used.   For example,  is it a place for people to try and present or publish an article at all?   
   
   I have increasingly thought that one of the defining features of a forum post should be that it seeks discussion or input from other people.   If anyone found themselves just publishing something and merely hoping it would be read and used or incorporated into someone else's knowledge -  then the entire article is just not something that should be in the forum at all.    For example,  asking a question is obviously fine - you're seeking input (answers)   - but keeping and updating a chronological account of the activities of the Hubble telescope may not be.   You see what I mean about how tricky it is to sort out what is reasonable from what isn't.     Most of us would agree that the activities of the Hubble telescope should be regarded as perfectly good science.   A regularly updated post may be interesting to amateur astronomers and all sorts of people that TNS might consider as their target audience -  but if the article is not inviting or promoting discussion then it's not really something that needs to be on the forum.   There are already websites providing all the latest news about Hubble (e.g.   https://www.nasa.gov/content/news-latest-hubble-news ).

   There are evidently some issues concerning the forum at the moment and its long term future.   Until or unless those are sorted out I don't suppose it's worth creating surveys to see what people want in a forum etc.   A more pressing issue might be sending out requests for additional financial support.      i.d.k.

     Another thing that (I find) has to be thought about is that we do actually want some questions or something to do.   There are days when I log onto the forum and hope to find a discussion or question I can spend a moment on and get involved in.   So it's not as if the forum will work without people asking questions or putting something in new theories.  We can't all be answering or replying, someone has to ask a new question, start a new thread, or update a long running thread with some new material etc.   So maybe there is a case to argue in favour of threads like a chronological account of the Hubble telescopes activities,  a just for fun quiz,  a jokes thread   etc.    Anyway, that's an option, try to look at the glass as being half-full:    When there's a new theory presented that you may think is bad, at least there's a new theory to look at and something you could do today which may be useful.     I'd recommend politely engaging with the author rather than anything else.

Best Wishes.

[paul cotter (OP)]

Hi, ES. There is unfortunately a number of recidivist offenders who expound theories that are absolute nonsense and they cannot be corrected by any means. They just refuse to listen to any criticism whatsoever and some become ratty when the correct ideas are supplied. On the other points you raise I am in full agreement.

[Bored chemist]

For example,  asking a question is obviously fine - you're seeking input (answers)   

Is the honorable member aware that you can turn almost any statement into a question?

I wonder if we should give more thought to simply banning those who refuse to learn.

I'm looking at
Dave Lev,
ACSinUK
Yahya A.Sharif
trevorjohnson32
and other wastes of bandwidth.

[paul cotter (OP)]

I came here to learn and if possible help others to do so. The purveyors of nonsense do not: they make erroneous statements of fact, not opinion and seem immune to logical argument. If it was up to me, they would all be banned as they have zero interest in learning. They only seek to spam the site with their pet "theories".

[Zer0]

Dave is helpful in questioning the authenticity of instrumentations & to recheck the credibility of the info/data obtained.

ACS showcases how easily one can drift apart by relying on corrupted sources of information online & how to identify n tackle scientific misinformation n steer clear off of it.

Yahya has the ability to serve abstract thoughts but eventually conforms to critical thinking and logical reasoning.

Trevor reminds me of ' infinite monkeys with infinite typewriters ' .
Even one hyper monkey on a crazy typing spree could at some point spit out something of profound importance.

Others include radical climate activists sufferin eco-anxiety, fanatic book sellers tryin to make a living & blog masters seeking a meaning to survive.

Even Spammies & Trollz end up teachin a worthy lesson or two.

ps - from Success, learn how to be.
& from Failures, how not to be.

(No Disrespect intended towards Anyone, & No hard feelings Whatsoever)

[Zer0]

I came here to learn and if possible help others to do so. The purveyors of nonsense do not: they make erroneous statements of fact, not opinion and seem immune to logical argument. If it was up to me, they would all be banned as they have zero interest in learning. They only seek to spam the site with their pet "theories".

I Completely Understand your point of view.

But I'm afraid of what you ask for...Perfection.

Of which I've heard is Only available in Heaven.

But to Achieve it,
requires alot of good deeds,
& a hearse ride in deed.

ps - one's Trash, another's Treasure.
life's too Short, live it up with Pleasure!
(fill ur bootz man)