* It seems that the education system and the science media have done a good job of turning 80 or 90% of students into loyal supporters of "consensus" science. If
I think that's because they have a good narrative story that is told very early to children- even though it's built upon many esoteric, hyper-complex and contradictory "fact-like declarations"
That's an opportunity for us to exploit- their lack of Standard Model coherence and logical dissonance just reinforces that work exists that can be exposed while simultaneously offering logical, testable alternatives.
I agree that this entire electric paradigm needs more and perpetually better outlets of dissemination Lloyd. Higher-quality representations of this work, the history behind it, and most importantly, the similarity between the EU hypothetical declarations to observed results in space and in-lab can make all the difference in it's adoption by larger bodies of interested people. It would be nice to see more and more sites dedicated to this kind of work.
The underlying reason for this thread is to pin down the arguments that are used to dismiss our work- and answer them.
Having to pull a handful of refutable, testable accusations out of what really constitutes a trash-talking tantrum by some of the linked authors is below some people's chosen level of discourse, and I understand that.
But I still believe that we must engage them on the (non-personal) specific points they claim wholly refute our selected scientific worldview. In other words, turn-about is ineffective
play. We must answer their questions
, not their assaults
I do not believe their accusations hold water.
The task remains ours to prove that beyond any reasonable doubt. I am not the scientist that can prove that, but I can
rally efforts to try to publicize existing evidence and make sure it is improved and refined as time goes on. We can all do this, and we should make the effort to do so--to take this work to the next level, and make it a CURRENT active effort in labs and computers and satellite studies. Some of the people in this forum can be very important contributors to advancing these ideas, and I think they would celebrate the opportunity to make these contributions, and I implore them to take a more focused and progressive view of overturning this "Standard Model" dominance by removing every shadow they hide behind- by deconstructing their argument in an ever-improved way.
But never by smack-talking or venom. It shuts off 95% of the discourse and erases any credibility we carry. I know how hard it is, and if you read all my posts you'll certainly find some of my own annoyance displayed at the absurdity of the waste of time caused by these fantasy pursuits of mathematical abstractions-- but I am trying to fight honorably and with increasing focus.
We can all make a big difference by doing so