Re: Stop the nonsense

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Paul Nicholson by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <paul-at-abelian.demon.co.uk>

Marc, Bart,

I couldn't help but be moved by your comments, especially Marc's
eloquent words,

Bart wrote:
> list members who may someday wish to express a conceptual idea...
> ...powers that be tell them otherwise...creates list member posting
> fears...I think tollerance was lacking...

Marc wrote:
> ...it is great to have someone trying new things, expressing new
> possibilities...we should all take a lesson in humble...
> ...It's in the newness that the interesting resides.

and you almost make me feel like a bit of a heel for trying to get
someones efforts suppressed.  Almost, but not quite. 

Because you have to ask yourself what kind of conceptual ideas
you're willing to entertain on here.  A visit to newsgroup sci.
physics.electromag or .relativity will reveal endless meaningless
discussions on crank theories - longitudinal, scalar, this, that,
and the other waves (never N-rays for some reason?). Einstein usually
takes a bashing, and an aether is nearly always invoked.

Richard Wayne Wall wrote:
> the courage to ignore your critics and advance the science

A theory does not advance by ignoring its critics, but by meeting
criticism head on, understanding it, and addressing it rationally. 

> the pious self anointed and appointed keepers of the EM point of
> view

Your're wrong there. It is *nature* that is the keeper, and our
vocation is to figure out just what it is keeping.  We've no choice
about using EM theory, because nature uses it.  We didn't invent it,
we only discovered it, and we have no choice in the matter. 
Scientists appear to be stuffed shirts simply because they are
constrained by nature.  Pseudoscience is much easier, because
arbitration by nature is not involved, criticism is avoided, and
rational self-consistency and attachment to existing knowledge are
not required.

If we're to continue developing TC technology and science, lets keep
to the scientific method, because it is known to work. That means
restraining our speculations, initially at least, to established EM,
until such time as we come up with something that EM can't explain.

Please can we wind this thread up now, and get back to some real
work?