Mainstream science criterion

[arildno]

Actually we do refer some people there.

Perhaps somebody should venture there with a vocation to heal the place?

 

[Integral]

Perhaps somebody should venture there with a vocation to heal the place?

It would be a fools errand. There is no way to win an online argument when logic and knowledge mean nothing.

 

[DaveC426913]

It would be a fools errand. There is no way to win an online argument when logic and knowledge mean nothing.

Well, you wouldn't win any arguments; you'd enforce the rules and create new ones and eventually drive away the crackpots. But it would be a monumental task to virtually replace a large fraction of the membership.

 

[Redbelly98]

Perhaps somebody should venture there with a vocation to heal the place?

Be careful. I've often found that the person who suggests an idea ends up being the person who must implement it.

 

[arildno]

Be careful. I've often found that the person who suggests an idea ends up being the person who must implement it.

Try to force me..

 

[Astronuc]

Try to force me..

You volunteered.

 

[D H]

Perhaps somebody should venture there with a vocation to heal the place?

Several of us are trying. We still have our fair share of crackpots, but we can now chase them out and as a result the science sections have improved. (Just don't look in the pseudoscience subforum.)

Given the reference in [post=2496168]this post[/post], perhaps siccing them on technologyreview.com might be a better bet.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Several of us are trying. We still have our fair share of crackpots, but we can now chase them out and as a result the science sections have improved.

Really? The mainstream criteria has been in place for at least five years now.

(Just don't look in the pseudoscience subforum.)

A cheap shot from the peanut gallery? The fact is that psuedoscience is not allowed. Did you know that? I suspect not. Do you object to the exploration of potentially unexplained phenomena - the heart and soul of science?

People experience strange things and we do our best qualify, quantify, or explain them. What a crime.

 

[D H]

Whoa! Read the backchain, Ivan. I wasn't referring to this site. Trace the quotes fare enough back and you will get to [post=2499196]this post[/post].

 

[dE_logics]

May be we should have another forums instead of locking the thread. Any thread that the mentors think are lockable will be transferred to this forums which will be untouched by people who don't want to hear such things...making both the set of people happy.


1) Thread ain't locked
2) It ain't in the main forum so you won't see it.


Generally people hate very basic questions...but we do have a separate forum for that, so that solves the issue.

 

[DaveC426913]

May be we should have another forums instead of locking the thread. Any thread that the mentors think are lockable will be transferred to this forums which will be untouched by people who don't want to hear such things...making both the set of people happy.

Confucious say: The fox that chases two rabbits catches none.

No forum can be all things to all people and still succeed.