peer review

["Tesla list" <tesla@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Original poster: Brett Miller <brmtesla2@xxxxxxxxx>

Dave,

> Original poster: David Thomson <dwt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>

> There is no debate on this list.  There are a few
> good arguments
> or observations made and then the topic gets shut
> down.  The old
> timers always get their way only because they have
> flashy
> credentials, not necessarily because the argument
> is sound.
>
>
>> This is complete rubbish.  There's actually a lot
of
>> debate on the list
>> and always has been.

**John Freau said a mouthfull there...I've been
reading the TCML for over 6 years and have been a
member for over 5.  I also went back and read *every
single* post before I joined.

It actually seems as though Terry has been softer on
pseudoscience and antiscience lately when in fact it
used to be ablsolutely barred from the discussions
here (according to the web site).  So with that you
are in luck.  In addition, some of my (and others I
have talked to) have had the dubious enjoyment of
seeing many of our critical and skeptical posts bounce
back to us because the wording was too blunt or
"harsh"...didn't have enough padding.  Nevertheless, I
did not lose my temper...after all, Terry is the
moderator and I joined of my own volition.

I guess you are feeling a bit of anger over some of
these issues on the list, and it makes me wonder if
this is your primary arena for peer review.  I have a
subscription to Scientific American, Skeptical
Inquirer, and Skeptical Briefs, and have not heard
anything about your discovery of the GUT except for
this list.  I knew you had gotten emotional when I saw
your posts which engaging in "refutation by
denigration" toward those who would challenge your
claims.  Even going as far as calling certain people
"old men" and "old timers".  Well, I am 30 years old
and have no credentials.  Partial college education
(got bored and quit) and have been reading and playing
with science since I learned to read at age 3.

I doubt you found the Grand Unified Theory...but if
you are right, time will vindicate you.  You work will
be published in Nature and Science...and will be
taught in classrooms for subsequent generations.
Until then, the people who are thinking critically are
helping you.  It's peer review and is essential to
scientific progress.  It is much of what
differentiates science from religeon.  You won't find
them engaging in debate over whether God exists or
not...it is just accepted.  There you will find dogma
and a firm establishment which is resistant to
challenge and questioning.  Not so in science.  But
your theory won't last long if you shelter it from the
error correcting machinery which is  essential to the
scientific process.

-Brett


__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
http://mail.yahoo.com