Why this section [Speculations] should be banned...

[Phi for All]

I am in the process of disclosing a well supported scientific discovery.

 

Your process is flawed, in that you have failed to provide the support you speak of when asked. We insist you use our process, as defined in our rules, most especially since it is our site, and also because the process has historically produced better results than yours.

[Bengt E Nyman]

I'm glad that you're happy with yourselves. Bye bye.

[Ophiolite]

I'm glad that you're happy with yourselves. Bye bye.

Personally, I shall hold you to that.

[Strange]

I am in the process of disclosing a well supported scientific discovery. Your forum seems to be unwilling or unable to deal with it.

And you want me to be understanding of your difficulties.

I am sorry, but I don't think so.

 

If you want to publish your "discovery" in a respected journal (which you need to do if it is to be taken seriously by the scientific community) then they will be much tougher on you than this forum has been.

Edited November 3, 2015 by Strange

[ajb]

You are proving that you have not taken the time to read www.dipole.se

My statement was rather general and not specifically aimed at your contributions here or elsewhere.

 

You have to understand that finding faults with things that are not so well posed can be difficult.

 

 

I am in the process of disclosing a well supported scientific discovery. Your forum seems to be unwilling or unable to deal with it.

You should seek the standard way of disseminating scientific knowledge, which is via peer-review publication, rather than trying to post parts of the 'theory' on this forum.

Edited November 4, 2015 by ajb

[Bengt E Nyman]

You should seek the standard way of disseminating scientific knowledge, which is via peer-review publication.

Thank You.