Site name change

[Michael 345]

it is almost impossible to get your paper presented in any mainstream journal against Big Bang Cosmology.

I would have thought it would be a walk in the park if the presentation had a sliver of credibility

I am guessing here with a bare minimum of understanding of presentation of scientific papers for publication so feel free to correct me

First the publication would examine your credentials and qualifications in the field of your presentation

Understand I am not asking you to tell me what qualifications you have (so don't bother posting them here I am not interested) I am saying any science publication will want to know them

Next would be an overview of your work in the field including previous publications on the subject, your research in the field and why your observations are a better fit then currently held views

As I understand if it passes those checks it is sent out to for review by others in the field (peer review)

The returned reviews are then checked for general agreement. May be the reviewers are asked to double check other reviewers replies

If the paper fails it is returned with the reasons why it failed

If the paper passes it might need to be tidied up for publication, a process in which you will participate, and you and team get all the kudos you deserve

The magazine which publishes breakthrough science gets mucho kudos, so much rides on being at the cutting edge

Cutting edge science will make publication and bring prestigious respect to the magazine

Odd ball ideas and thought bubbles which don't fit established observations of the real world do not

If you have submitted papers and they have been returned I am guessing the reasons for return have been explained

Go through the reasons and re submit the papers along with the reasons for rejection and why the reasons for rejection are incorrect

Good luck

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

, I had two sessions with cosmoquest forum (I do not want to cite, but Paddoboy could not resist), both the threads ran very well with very high number of posts and ran full 30 days, remarkable thing was excellent moderation

Hi Rajesh.
Having had your experience at CQ do you find you have a deeper understanding of matters of interest.
Alex

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

If you have submitted papers and they have been returned I am guessing the reasons for return have been explained

One can learn something from their mistakes and that is not to make any more mistakes.
Alex

 

[Michael 345]

One can learn something from their mistakes and that is not to make any more mistakes.
Alex

Oh if only that were true

I would saddle up my unicorn

Ride through out the kingdom

Nail to every tree those profound words

On a rainbow coloured poster

 

[Xelasnave.1947]

Oh if only that were true

People repeat pattens as a wide generalisation (which means I am only guessing) and often do not learn from mistakes. It is a realisation few get.
I know little because I made few mistakes and learnt little.
Alex

 

[Michael 345]

People repeat pattens as a wide generalisation (which means I am only guessing) and often do not learn from mistakes. It is a realisation few get.
I know little because I made few mistakes and learnt little.
Alex

I make the same mistake all the time

Only it's a different one

 

[DaveC426913]

Did I misunderstand you?
From your OP I thought you are expressing that this forum lacks the good discussion on science, not that I was knowing about your boredom with Trump posts.

Yes, you misunderstood.

Regardless, you used it to attack other forum members by name. That's not a discussion about science; that's bashing.

I asked you what you want to discuss or what should be discussed ? You kept silent.

Here is me, not keeping silent:

It's my thread. What I wanted to do was draw attention to the preponderance of political posts.
It was not my intention to have it derailed by some dude with an axe to grind about another member. Start your own thread.

I posted about unacceptable start of provocations by likes of origins and paddobiys. You started faulting me.
I posted about some members becoming the expert supporters of mainstream without much knowledge. You thought this was my personal scoring.

Yes. Look at the thread title and the first post. It has nothing to do with pad, origin or anything mainstream.

You've hijacked it for your own agenda. Start your own thread.

 

[DaveC426913]

It seems worth reminding―
―that Sciforums is what its members make it. To the one, sure, I know that sounds trivial, but, to the other, that's kind of the thing.

Agree.

Though this is in Site Feedback, it is not a criticism of SciFo; it really is a lament (albeit a snarky one) at the obsession with Trumpian politics . I check SciFo every day, and 95% of new posts are Trump topics. I really am just expressing my boredom with the topic in general.

Billvon provided one of the few thoughtful insights on this:

Yep. Unfortunately this will likely continue; as one of the most anti-science president in generations, he is going to be a topic of discussion on science boards across the US.

And he's right; I just hadn't thought about it in those terms.


(I participate in science content as much as possible. The fact that many high-profile threads have me in the role of skeptic and fallacy Nazi does not mean I make no positive contributions in less notorius threads.)

 

[paddoboy]

you make couple of misses.

1. Try taking on paddoboy, try faulting him. Have a first hand experience and get back pl.

I have been faulted on occasions and have accepted such faults.

2. Evidence is not period. An observational evidence can satisfy two competing theories. You miss that.

Possibly yes: Your own hypothetical alternative suggestions, have failed in that regard though.

3. You seem to be unaware about the problems being faced by those who question mainstream.

From my experience on this forum, the vast majority of those questioning mainstream, stem from the fact that they prefer uncertainty so as to make room for their "god of the gaps"

leave aside making a presentation to scientific community, it is almost impossible to get your paper presented in any mainstream journal against Big Bang Cosmology.

That's simply because you and others do not have the evidence to falsify or invalidate the BB/Inflationary model of universal/spacetime evolution. Excuses, excuses excuses, and conspiracy are always forthcoming from cranks, quacks and nuts of many varieties.

4. Your argument against expletive deleted, is not worth commenting. It is uninformed assessment.

expletive deleted was totally dishonest in the extreme when asking for evidence that reputable, professional scientists ignored the effects of magnetic fields also contributing to orbital degradation particularly with the H/T binary pulsar example, despite numerous papers by myself indicating that all possibilities including magnetic fields were considered.
As a brother in arms of yours, you blindingly support his lies and deception.

I posted about some members becoming the expert supporters of mainstream without much knowledge. You thought this was my personal scoring.

As a reference to me obviously, whatever knowledge I have is through plenty of reading, and the fact that if you [or your two brothers in arms that like you, seem to want denigrate all of 21st century cosmology] had anything of real substance, you would not be here.
The papers you have published with less then reputable sources, were anyway totally and fully discredited and invalidated by Professor Link Bennett, and also at cosmoquest.
Finally if you are so dissatisfied with "sciforum" and the air play you at least are allowed to put here, why don't you stay over at cosmoquest?
Oh, yes that's right! Over there, other then the month's grace you are allowed in the alternative forum to put your nonsense and other unsupported, unevidenced, non mainstream crank suggestions are just not tolerated.
So perhaps in hindsight, you should get down on your knees and pray to your spaghetti monster of choice, and give thanks that at least here, you are allowed to discuss your agenda driven, non mainstream ideas.
But remember, that forums such as this also, are open to any and all quacks, cranks and nuts that for reasons such as "delusions of grandeur" "tall poppy syndrome" or just the fact that mainstream science has pushed any need for your's or anyone elses spaghetti monster, into near oblivion and as a superfluous myth that is just not needed now.

 

[Kittamaru]

Thread closed at OP's request.