Rules of Conduct
My goal with this site is create a space where people can openly discuss unconventional theories. I believe if a theory is correct then it should be able to stand up to scrutiny. The intent of this site is get people talking about theories and discussing them openly. I do not want to limit content because of my personal beliefs.
I want to find a way to keep the discussion about Science. I don't want it to become a place where there are personal attacks, profanity, flame wars, etc. Belittling others or grandizing ones self do little to advance a discussion.
I especially dislike attacks on people because of their education. I myself attempted college three times. It just isn't my way of learning. I work much better on my own when I have a real problem to solve. Instead of a college degree I have boxes of books. Now that we have the Internet I spend many hours studying a multitude of subjects.
Have you ever heard of Samuel P. Langley? He and a team of highly educated experts were attempting to become the inventors of flight. They were backed by military and had facilities and funding. They failed. Instead two self-funded bicycle mechanics flew the Wright Flyer for first time in 1903. Langley resigned shortly thereafter.
There are many examples where an outsider is the one to create the breakthrough. They question things in a new way because they don't already have all the answers.
I don't want to be in a position of deciding right and wrong. It seems like a terrible waste of my time. But right now this website has a staff of 1, and that's me. However I'm a programmer so I plan to code the solution. I plan to add the ability for other users to rank content using several different criteria. Since I'm the website creator and a programmer my plan is to automate a solution to this issue. To create a way for other users to rank different aspects of content. But for now it's just me reading what people post. Please make my job easy and let's keep personal attacks out of the discussion. It doesn't help anybody.
If attacks are the best you can do than you really don't have much of an argument and the theory you are protecting must not have much to stand on.
- No ad hominem attacks - Attacking the person instead of arguing about the theory.
- No straw man attacks - Saying someone said something they didn't say, and then proving that what was (not) said is wrong. Therefore the person is wrong, even though they didn't say it.
- Guilt by association - Arguing someone is incorrect because they associate with or speak about someone else.
- No profanity. It doesn't add anything and is unnecessary.
I realize that trying to regulate these types of behavior is very subjective - I don't even know if it's legal, I'll have to check that out. Let's just all treat each other with respect. Keep the discussion on the subject matter. Life is more enjoyable without these petty differences and prejudices. Let's stick to the subject and find a way to work together and make things happen. Let's act like Scientists, not Politicians.
The higher goal is a common and supersedes any ego. We try to follow observations as our guide, the principles of Science! If we as humanity ever want to achieve the great things that have been 'promised' for generations now we need to have the strength to acknowledge that we need to do away with many of the currently accepted mainstream ideas on how our universe is constructed (laws of Physics). Only by doing away the whole erroneous thing we can use the many observations and scientific papers that are out there but not acknowledged or given the attention they need because the current Theoretical!! models do not allow it. This is not the way to make progress. The way to make progress is to be able to discern and dare to step out of the narrow mindset that is put on us due to the current models. Not only are the impossible to grasp and they are in contradiction to each other but they are even proven false on many occasions.
A new paradigm is not a singular mind that dictates and delivers some solution and answer to everything. A new true paradigm that belongs to all can only be created by "all" or at least those that are interested. In the end the "truth" is only the current accepted paradigm. This model does not give definitive answers, but allows everyone to make that next step and do pioneering scientific research by exploring possibilities that were simply never considered even.
Each and everyone needs to make a simple decision: Am I able to change my understanding by accepting that reality may be different then was taught? Am I able to be brave enough to make that step and give up the old paradigm in order to be able to work in reality on the scientific and technical solutions of tomorrow?!