Godlike Productions - Discussion Forum
Users Online Now: 1,660 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 208,601
Pageviews Today: 279,112Threads Today: 102Posts Today: 1,104
02:20 AM


Back to Forum
Back to Forum
Back to Thread
Back to Thread
REPORT COPYRIGHT VIOLATION IN REPLY
Message Subject A Counter-refutation concerning quantum mechanics and Haramein/Rauscher's theory for Bob. We needn't have this conversation again, Bob.
Poster Handle Anonymous Coward
Post Content
Haramein is not worth reading, he is a liar and fraud and this paper has never been looked at by anyone and will never be peer-reviewed as it is BS.
 Quoting: SheldonCooper


...Excellent, constructive contribution.

"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident."
-Arthur Schopenhauer

Seen it before, seeing it now, will see it again.
You seem to be somewhere between stage 1 and 2.
 Quoting: Piscesian Misesian


Funny you should bring up Hairyman

I figured out how he "won" his "best paper in class" as a computer technology symposium.

I have downloaded the review form for that organization and confirmed with the organization itself that anyone can write a review and submit it online.

Would you please list the link for the organization that awarded him "best physics paper"?

I will show you how to confirm that the award s worth absolutely nothing in the real world of science.

Thank you in advance.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 17545742


Thank you for your concern, AC.
I am not referring to the award he received for his initial draft of the Schwarschild Proton at CASYs 2009, an interdisciplinary conference.

You're correct in saying that the award is near inconsequential.

Rather, I am referring to Haramein's and Rauscher's final draft, which is currently in the process of being peer reviewed.

Despite the award's irrelevance, here you are:
[link to scitation.aip.org]
 Quoting: Piscesian Misesian


No you see it is now quite consequential as Hairyman and his goofy goons made a big deal out of the winning of the paper.

You now concede that he and his group voted him the award and this is not consequential?

I am sorry but that is his scientific death knell as science does NOT suffer fraud at all.

How about a list of "peers" that is "currently reviewing" his "final draft" as you have stated?

You supporters of half baked fraudsters are a funny lot.

And I look forward to any threats of defamation for I have done all the homework.
 
Please verify you're human:




Reason for copyright violation:







GLP