They are different things,look at wiki cause you confused the terms.Pseudoscience... Feel free to add your theories there.
They are different things,look at wiki cause you confused the terms.
Ahhh but you’re implying by putting them on that forum that they are un-scientific and therefore untrue.
I think moving these sort of threads to “Free Thoughts” is politically more expedient, moderators might not agree with the views of the poster but to label something “Pseudo-science” isn’t polite.
People can feel very strongly about a subject even a crazy one.
Free Thoughts is a general purpose forum, moving a thread there is less likely to offend anyone.
Most conspiracy theories are false for a variety of reasons that are far to complicated to explain in simple terms.
ie.
World trade center
landing on the moon
pearl harbor
etc...
Who cares if we offend people? The admins, I believe, don't want to legitimize these sorts of threads by labeling them anything OTHER than pseudoscience. I can say that when when SciForums STOPS making the distinction between science and pseudoscience, I won't be here anymore.
There are plenty of forums on the internet where you can go and discuss your conspiracy theories and be taken seriously. Thank God this is not one of them.
Asking about solutions to the Einstein Field Equations which possess static properties (you can change t->-t without changing the solution) and its relation to such things as the Schwarzchild Penrose diagram would not be pseudoscience. Proclaiming you have an explaination for thunderstorms due to the centre of the Moon being a white hole, then you're into crazy land.Also I could do a posting in Physics and Math’s about White Holes, which are perfectly mathematically feasible and not have it dumped in to pseudo science even though by definition they have as much reality as the flat earth theory. So where’s the line? It only requires good judgment.
Also I could do a posting in Physics and Math’s about White Holes, which are perfectly mathematically feasible and not have it dumped in to pseudo science even though by definition they have as much reality as the flat earth theory. So where’s the line? It only requires good judgment.
I think it’s the job of the moderator to read the postings carefully and then decide were the appropriate forum for them is.
Asking about solutions to the Einstein Field Equations which possess static properties (you can change t->-t without changing the solution) and its relation to such things as the Schwarzchild Penrose diagram would not be pseudoscience. Proclaiming you have an explaination for thunderstorms due to the centre of the Moon being a white hole, then you're into crazy land.
It depends on the content of the post---are you discussing white holes in their appropriate theoretical context, or are you trying to justify some bullshit pet theory?
I think it’s the job of the moderator to read the postings carefully and then decide were the appropriate forum for them is.
Asking about solutions to the Einstein Field Equations which possess static properties (you can change t->-t without changing the solution) and its relation to such things as the Schwarzchild Penrose diagram would not be pseudoscience. Proclaiming you have an explaination for thunderstorms due to the centre of the Moon being a white hole, then you're into crazy land.