Peer Review Tyranny

page: 14
22
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join

posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 04:13 PM
link   
a reply to: biffcartright

Right...I had it deleted. NO. How many times have you been banned this week alone? It's got nothing to do with me, its your own actions that have led you there. But hey, if you need me to be your scapegoat go for it. Otherwise go cry to a moderator. It's not my problem that you can't or are unwilling to adhere to particular rules of this site. I neither own the site nor moderate any forums, I don't have the power to remove your posts. I told you exactly who did it and who to PM about it if you had a problem. You're barking up the wrong tree chief.




posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 04:16 PM
link   
a reply to: HarbingerOfShadows

Maybe what would be better for you is to take a remedial science course and get some of the basics under your belt. If YOU make a claim, its on YOU to support it. Don't cry me a river because you can't grasp that. Perhaps you and biff can start your own forum where you can enjoy your special little circle jerk 24/7 without interruptions from me.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar




Right...I had it deleted. NO. How many times have you been banned this week alone? It's got nothing to do with me, its your own actions that have led you there.


for tenacity.



Peter....The significance of mass constantly accelerating equal to g., is that NONE of the gravitational energy will be available to destroy the supporting structures beneath the mass accelerating, ALL that mass is converted to MOTION!

mass can not constantly accelerate AND remove it's own resistance...one or the other.


I just want to scientifically know how "low temp thermal expansion" makes this possible....
and I can not find any peer reviewed info about this new science.

is there a peer review study that shows this phenomenon at work?

how does his new phenomenon remove structural resistance....

resistance is resistance no matter what it is...and something must remove it.....





Maybe what would be better for you is to take a remedial science course and get some of the basics under your belt.


I just did....




Perhaps you and biff can start your own forum where you can enjoy your special little circle jerk 24/7 without interruptions from me.





I directly discuss this peer review in another forum providing supported facts.....I would enjoy your response there......It would be much appreciated!


edit on 13-8-2014 by biffcartright because: added more...
edit on 13-8-2014 by biffcartright because: added again.....



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 05:30 PM
link   
a reply to: biffcartright

I'm not getting sucked Into your 9/11 related nonsense again. I told you more than once I'm not qualified to comment on it. I'm not a physicist or structural engineer, my background is in anthropology. I posted in this thread to discuss the general merits of the peer review process not talk about specifics related to a previously hijacked thread. Its not a refusal to answer as you keep claiming, it is quite simply beyond my purview.i am well aware of and willing to admit my limitations, the conversation you continuously attmpt to foist upon me is not something i can actually answer with any degree of veracity. Start your own thread or find someone who is actually qualified to discuss it with. I don't know why I'm somehow the target of your affections on this matter.

As for the response to my statement about taking a remedial science course, it was directed at a different poster. Are you answering for them or are you posting from so many accounts that you can't keep track?
edit on 13-8-2014 by peter vlar because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 05:37 PM
link   
a reply to: peter vlar




I'm not getting sucked Into your 9/11 related nonsense again.


I did not post any such thing.....I asked a science question are NOW you telling me that "Low Temp Thermal Expansion" is only a 9-11 thing....this is science...seems you pull the 9-11 claim so's NOT to respond to the science.





Start your own thread or find someone who is actually qualified to discuss it with. I don't know why I'm somehow the target of your affections on this matter.


if you are not qualified, then why do you keep responding...a simple "I don't know" is sufficient...my initial discussion was with Mary.

edit on 13-8-2014 by biffcartright because: I added



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 05:43 PM
link   
a reply to: biffcartright

Bottom line we all know there is no such thing as Low Temp Thermal Expansion.

So, the peer-reviewed papers based on this bogus science are an excellent example of an utter failure in the system.

I want to know how the peer-reviewed papers handle the secret data in the possession of NIST.

Do they address it?

If they don't, I call that the lie of omission.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 05:46 PM
link   
a reply to: biffcartright


You were shown an example of low temp expansion then you claimed that it had nothing to do with buildings as buildings never have expansions joints ever YOU claimed, YOU were then linked to a paper all about expansion joints for buildings one of many.

YOU don't really know anything re the technical aspects of LARGE BUILDING construction.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 05:53 PM
link   
a reply to: biffcartright


I've stated multiple times that the topic is beyond my purview and you keep repeating it to me like a broken mantra lol. Lets just chalk it up to a misunderstanding and move on because let's be honest, after multiple bans and 3 or 4 screen names, I don't know who the hell I'm talking to at this point or if you're posting simultaneously from multiple accounts. I look at the sign up date and try to be considerate because I assume its a new poster and only after a brief back and forth do I realize the rhetoric and demeanor ring a bell.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Mary Rose

Howdy,

I don't think you understand what causes thermal expansion... An increase in energy (no matter how small) will have an effect on a material (no matter how small the effect).

Here's a list of papers dating from the 1940's to the 80's on low temperature thermal expansion.

iopscience.iop.org...
journals.aps.org...
www.sciencedirect.com...
iopscience.iop.org...
scitation.aip.org...
www.sciencedirect.com...
www.tandfonline.com...
www.sciencedirect.com...

Some of these are indeed lower than room temperature experimental studies, but the science has obviously existed (and been peer-reviewed) since at least the 40's based on this list alone...

Do you think all of these scientific (peer reviewed) articles are wrong, a gigantic conspiracy, or what?

Sincere regards,
Hydeman



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 05:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: peter vlar
. . . after multiple bans and 3 or 4 screen names, I don't know who the hell I'm talking to at this point or if you're posting simultaneously from multiple accounts. I look at the sign up date and try to be considerate because I assume its a new poster and only after a brief back and forth do I realize the rhetoric and demeanor ring a bell.

What a load of crap.

It has been pointed out clearly on the thread the situation this member is in.

You are making excuses for not dealing with the true issue of the failure of peer-review in the case of the papers based on bogus science announced to the world by NIST along with their refusal to release supporting data.



posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 05:59 PM
link   

originally posted by: Mary Rose
a reply to: biffcartright

Bottom line we all know there is no such thing as Low Temp Thermal Expansion.

So, the peer-reviewed papers based on this bogus science are an excellent example of an utter failure in the system.

I want to know how the peer-reviewed papers handle the secret data in the possession of NIST.

Do they address it?

If they don't, I call that the lie of omission.


REALLY A CONSTRUCTION EXPERT ARE YOU!!!

Sun Kinks

Caused only by SUNLIGHT lower temp than a fire generates !!!


(post by peter vlar removed for a manners violation)

posted on Aug, 13 2014 @ 07:00 PM
link   
Thread closed for staff review.





new topics
top topics
 
22
<< 11  12  13   >>

log in

join