Appendix 7 of Wikipedia: A Techno-Cult of Ignorance

To AKRONOS Main Page
To the top of Wikipedia: A Techno-Cult of Ignorance

APPENDIX 7

Administrator Guettarda and Salsb have a blast deleting and modifying other people's posts on Aetherometry Talk.

In fact, Guettarda gets a bit punch-drunk:

And so here is one Administrator gloating about being able to go as far as altering the record, the history pages - while, barely 24 hours before, another Administrator said...

To the top of Wikipedia: A Techno-Cult of Ignorance

 ".....let someone add an article about an 
academic, actor, writer, etc., '''who isn't widely known and acknowledged, 
and a pack of editors appear, yapping that the person isn't ‘notable’ '''. 
Leave aside the inconsistency for a moment; many of those who are claimed 
to be non-notable by this Vfd-pack are known to and have affected more people 
than all the nay-sayers put together (one sometimes wonders if that isn't 
the problem)."   Question: How do you square that by deleting "Correa, PhD" 
from the article and call it a "tidied summary"? [[User:TTLightningRod|TTLightningRod]]
-...that's a cabal with a POV, at work 
for you - in a noble mission of protecting the masses.
 ==Does fairness count in Wikipedia?==
 Eugene Mallove founder of the alternative 
science magazine ''Infinite Energy'', while alive, ran it as a peer-review 
publication: himself and at least one other physicist from either the Scientific 
Board or the outside reviewed all submissions. The admins in this case seem 
to consider that it is only peer-reviewed that which happens in mainstream 
publications, journals or magazines be they. That, is bias. [[User:209.29.97.61|209.29.97.61]] 
17:22, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
 :Eugene Mallove is a freind and advocate
of the Correas, plus he was the editor of the magazine. This is not what
is meant by peer review. From our article [[peer review]] ''Typically referees 
are not selected from among the authors' close colleagues, relatives, or friends.''
also ''in scientific publication, the referees do not act as a group, do
not communicate with each other, and typically are not aware of each other's
identities''. IE is a magazine not a scientific journal. [[User:Theresa knott|Theresa
Knott]] [[User talk:Theresa knott| (a tenth stroke)]] 20:33, 17 July 2005
(UTC)
-* So much bad-faith must be seen Lady 
Knott: Eugene Mallove '''became''' a friend and advocate of the Correas '''after''' 
having impartially peer-reviewed many of their technologies and claims. Maybe 
in a relativistic universe, before and after have no meaning.
 == Mention of qualifications ==
 ::I don't understand the connection with
not mentioning the people at all (unless you mean that, although articles
on real scientific theories and discoveries mention the people involved,
articles on pseudo-science and quackery shouldn't).
 ::I can't tell whether you have it right, 
as it's showing up partially as boxes for me. --[[User:Mel Etitis|Mel Etitis]] 
 ([[User talk:Mel Etitis|<font color="green">&Mu;&epsilon;&lambda;
 &Epsilon;&tau;&eta;&tau;&eta;&sigmaf;</font>)]]
 22:28, 17 July 2005 (UTC)
-No, but you're too much, Mel Etitis (you 
remember some editors insisting...).  A guy has some '''biophysical theory''', 
his PhD is in molecular and cellular biology (see earlier Talks) and his Master's
is in biophysics, and somehow, you and other admins judge these credentials
irrelevant to what the guy has to say?
 == Confused ==
 :Me, I don't see any reason for confusion. 
 The fact that Paulo Correa is a trained scientist with a history of mainstream 
scientific research, who has published numerous articles in prestigious mainstream 
journals, would give pause to any impartial and non-ill-willed observer, as
a signal that it is possible that Aetherometry may have scientific merit and
its lack of peer-review does not a priori permit any conclusions regarding 
the lack of such merit.  [[User:FrankZappo|FrankZappo]] 21:41, 17 July 2005 
(UTC)
-* Frank Zappo - the issue is slightly
different.  The Correas and others who cite them obviously have plenty of
peer-reviewed publications - just not in Non-mainstream Science journals
or magazines. Some are proceedings of conferences. Anyway, since only mainstream
publications have a monopoly on peer-review, the issue is moot.
 :: If PC is such, what are his mainstream 
pubs? What was his training? [http://www.aetherometry.com/publications.html]
 lists a vast number of self pubs. There is a small section of nominally
non-self  pubs, but there is a lot of "infinite energy" in that section.
Most of the  rest are patents, not pubs. I don't see a single genuine mainstream
science  paper in the lot. Which ones are you thinking of? Unless you're
thinking of his previous career in Hematology and Oncology, which doesn't
seem relevant.  [[User:William M. Connolley|William M. Connolley]] 22:12:26,
2005-07-17 (UTC).
 ::::::In what way is it contempt to state 
in the article that the Correas work has not been peer reviewed? That is simply
a fact. Yet pro aetherometry folks keep trying to remove it. [[User:Theresa 
knott|Theresa Knott]] [[User talk:Theresa knott| (a tenth stroke)]] 16:50, 
18 July 2005 (UTC)
 :::::::: A fact?  No, it is not.  A fact
is to say that it has not been published in peer-reviewed '''mainstream'''
science publications. For it has been published in peer-reviewed '''non-mainstream 
science''' publications. But since you and your fellow-travellers deleted 
the Category '''non-mainstream science''', now you're back to the very dogmatism 
that sometime back you yourself Knott wanted to avoid when you settled for 
Protoscience and then Non-mainstream science (before it was deleted...). 
Who's fooling who? [[User:216.254.165.65|216.254.165.65]] 04:50, 19 July 2005
(UTC)
-==Frank Zappo are you Correa? Because 
you are acting as if you are==
-Immortal words of a matron indeed, a schoolmarm (shit, strike that!). I could not resist in thinking about all the IPs from Toronto, North-America and all the users, Zappo and Lightning Rod included, that Lady Knott thinks are Correa (the male or female??). It is hilarious. I thought that the notion of Toronto alone being populated by only Correa clones was fantastic. But the whole world and every User that is not on the side of the admin cabal, also? Phenomenal.
 == RFC ==
-This article needs an RFC...although
I'm not sure exactly what to say, but we can agree it needs commenting on
the community somehow...I'm kind of tempted to say, "the issue is self-explanatory"?
 And on the "minor" part, one thing I've found very ironic, and nothing personal,
 just more of an observation than anything else, is that nearly all of the
 aetherometrists that have edited here have a very abrasive (with exceptions)
 style of communicating, remarkably similar to the self-proclaimed "rebuttal"
 to criticisms made. In my limited experience, I've always found that any
distinguished researcher would behave more professionally, especially in
a rebuttal. Most papers I come across make no personal references, are emotionless
(and hence rational), don't resort to ad hominems and very matter of factly
state their point, which makes it all the more poignant.
+This article needs an RFC...although I'm 
not sure exactly what to say, but we can agree it needs commenting on the 
community somehow...I'm kind of tempted to say, "the issue is self-explanatory"? 
And on the "minor" part, one thing I've found very ironic, and nothing personal, 
just more of an observation than anything else, is that nearly all of the 
aetherometrists that have edited here have a very abrasive (with exceptions) 
style of communicating, remarkably similar to the self-proclaimed "rebuttal" 
to criticisms made. In my limited experience, I've always found that any distinguished
researcher would behave more professionally, especially in a rebuttal. Most
papers I come across make no personal references, are emotionless (and hence
rational), don't resort to ad hominems and very matter of factly state their
point, which makes it all the more poignant. I am reminded of a certain fable
by a Greek slave concerning the wind, the sun, and a traveller with a jacket
concerning the issue of force, but then again... -- [[User:Natalinasmpf|Natalinasmpf]]
 02:41, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
-*Then you are 
not only a poseur as a minor, but reflecting 'at such a tender age' what one
'pseudoscientist' once called "the emotional deadness" characteristic  of
majoritarian scientists.  And, almost distractedly, you stumbled upon the 
common element of the cabal: being emotionally dead makes them want to defend 
what it is they think they know and makes them feel secure, and have no intention 
to learn anything different, or let anyone explain - in '''a fucking climate 
of tolerance''' - anything different.  Suppression, suppression, demeaning, 
debasing, is all you and your sidekicks know how to do.
-I am reminded of a certain fable by a 
Greek slave concerning the wind, the sun, and a traveller with a jacket concerning 
the issue of force, but then again... -- [[User:Natalinasmpf|Natalinasmpf]]
 02:41, 18 July 2005 (UTC)
 :Well, your limited experience is just that: 
limited.   Limited, narrow, "somehowish", and very short on actual knowledge. 
 But, to make up for it, very long on dogmatic pronouncements and on insinuations. 
 [[User:FrankZappo|FrankZappo]] 06:59, 18 July 2005 (UTC)

 TTLR is clearly too dumb, or too tired, to 
continue with this great skipping Wurlitzer.  Your great edit war by attrition 
has succeeded for you.  Take pride.  For you ''do'' sit with great security 
in your pristine [[ivory tower]]. [[User:TTLightningRod|TTLightningRod]]
+== Insults and personal attacks ==
+I reverted yet another of the anons who 
went on a long spree of insults.  No reason we should tolerate this sort of
abusive behaviour.  [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] 03:11, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 ::::Buy a clue 129.15.162.223, the comment 
by 64.241.37.140, is a direct response to "213.253.39.xxx" wanting to know 
who is 4.231.163.145.  Who's "Menacing"?
-*Anome 129.15.162.223 resolves to Building 
EL, Room 232, University of Oklahoma in Norman. Guettarda 64.241.37.140 to 
Missouri, St. Louis, Panera llc.
 :::::"Are you sure you want to go down that 
road" sounds like a threat.  Threats are not tolerated.  You're the one who 
choses to display your IP.  [[User:Guettarda|Guettarda]] 16:12, 19 July 2005 
(UTC)

Revision as of 04:36, 21 July 2005 Guettarda Trolling minors... - rm more insults ← Older edit		Revision as of 04:45, 21 July 2005 Guettarda Everybody see the history of this Talk! Newer edit →
Line 1090:		Line 1090:

	:The point of this page is to discuss the article, not to attack the editors. If you can't understand something that simple, then you have no purpose editing this page. The purpose of this project is to write an encyclopaedia - you don't have "free speech" rights, you don't have the "right" to edit the encyclopaedia. This is not a discussion forum. My "job" ''here'' is to protect the rights of constructive editors who are adding something to this project. Get a clue. [[User:Guettarda\|Guettarda]] 04:30, 21 July 2005 (UTC)		:The point of this page is to discuss the article, not to attack the editors. If you can't understand something that simple, then you have no purpose editing this page. The purpose of this project is to write an encyclopaedia - you don't have "free speech" rights, you don't have the "right" to edit the encyclopaedia. This is not a discussion forum. My "job" ''here'' is to protect the rights of constructive editors who are adding something to this project. Get a clue. [[User:Guettarda\|Guettarda]] 04:30, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
		+
		+	::Not to mention, it is entirely possible to any admin to delete any edit from the page history as well. Quite a simple task. [[User:Guettarda\|Guettarda]] 04:45, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 05:17, 21 July 2005 GangofOne A Hand Waiving response, and goodnight - message to TTLR ← Older edit		Revision as of 05:41, 21 July 2005 GangofOne objection to deletion of comments Newer edit →
Line 1097:		Line 1097:

	::Not to mention, it is entirely possible to any admin to delete any edit from the page history as well. Quite a simple task. [[User:Guettarda\|Guettarda]] 04:45, 21 July 2005 (UTC)		::Not to mention, it is entirely possible to any admin to delete any edit from the page history as well. Quite a simple task. [[User:Guettarda\|Guettarda]] 04:45, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
		+
		+	I have to object to the deletion of other's comments that has occurred over the last day or so. The insults have been extremely mild, so much so that if you used them in prison you would be murdered for using such lame insults. The only real insult worthy of the name was by 208.54.95.151. Plus it makes it harder for the reader to read the comments.[[User:GangofOne\|GangofOne]] 05:41, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

 :First, it's deleted.  Then the space is protected
from any possible re-introduction.
 :For now, this Wikipedia article belongs to
the people sharing your impregnable POV.  Good night Nat-wit. [[User:TTLightningRod|TTLightningRod]]
04:19, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
+::Nothing is deleted. Everything is in the history. The page is protected because the anon took to vandalising the article. Are you here to make contributions or are you here to troll? If it's the former answer Natalinasmpf's question. Give a summary of the expertimental results that support atherometry. [[User:Theresa knott|Theresa Knott]] [[User talk:Theresa knott| (a tenth stroke)]] 06:51, 20 July 2005 (UTC)