Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience

1418:

ownership of an article until he is satisfied with its state and will accuse others of doing so should they revert his changes. He tends to push mainstream POV to extremes, strictly adhering the Undue Weight clause - unfortunately sometimes this goes so far as removal of well-sourced positive comments he doesn't agree with or "knows" is wrong or the inclusion of negative material without any source or with poor sources. He sometimes uses original research to modify articles into his vision of NPOV and may not be able to provide sources showing that his view is mainstream or provide them to support his content changes. He tends to revert to his preferred version rather than discuss and resolve editing conflicts and can often be incivil during attempted discussions. He tends to discard the notion that the threshold for inclusion in Knowledge is verifiability, not truth. Essentially, its a good cause gone awry - it is completely acceptable to keep minor topics on Knowledge from legitimizing or inflating themselves simply by virtue of appearing here - it is less acceptable to discard Knowledge's principles in order to do so.

2316:

constraints of Knowledge. Why, then, do we have people who make such accusations regarding material they clearly fail to understand? Why would they make such accusations against a theory of metaphysical cosmology like the CTMU, which does not employ the methodology of empirical science and thus cannot be classified as "pseudoscience" under any circumstances? And why, upon being corrected regarding the metaphysical nature of the theory and conclusively shown that it meets Knowledge's standards for inclusion, would they employ all kinds of specious argumentation and outright deceit in order to finish their hatchet job on it? Why, for that matter, would they be followed around and aided in their depredations by Knowledge administrators like Pjacobi, who attempt to tie the hands of their opponents? These are all very good questions, and they are all of considerable importance to the future of Knowledge.

1707:. If everyone who ever edited the article to date were banned from ever touching it or plasma cosmology articles, I would be ecstatic, because I am certain they would improve. I would be shocked if the other-side of this conflict believed the same. As such, they are editing against what they know wider consensus is - yes, they are the noble crusaders of truth against the scores of the rest of us, blinded by the scientific institutions that keep people with truly innovative and unique ideas caged up, requiring them to spend years studying the works of lesser minds just to get the three worthless letters we require to really pay attention to them. They should start protoscienceapedia, and then they can have all of the articles written however they want. Since it will get everything from evolution to the big bang exactly right, and will quickly become the prominent science encyclopedia on the net. 976: 974: 972: 860: 1807:

the integrity of not only the article, but the integrity of Knowledge in general. For example, Hubble did not believe that the redshift he discovered meant expansion, this is described in greater detail in a paper commorating Hubbles Centennial of his birth, as reported by Sandage. He has deleted this from all the articles having to do with cosmology. He reason is that it is "nonsense". That is an example of original research, or in this case, POV Pushing. When he was introduced to Tifft's quantized redshift, which if true falsifies the redshift Doppler interpretation, at first he denied it, Since then he has had to admit to it, but has deleted all the papers which confrmed Tifft's findings, and inserted one paper which disputes them, leaving us with the impression that the case is closed and Tifftshift is not relevant anymore.

2006:

current majority of academic authorities. Such authoritarian thinking is illogical though, as the scientific authorities once exhibited pseudoskepticism toward many minority scientific beliefs that we now know to be true. Without open-mindedness, there can not be scientific progress. The authoritarian thinking of pseudoskeptics in turn results from testosterone, the hormone of intimidating aggression, and that is why there are far more male pseudoskeptics than female pseudoskeptics, and why pseudoskeptics often exhibit aggressive behavior, such as discreditting the opposition, as has been demonstrated in this very dispute (such as by ScienceApologist), among countless other places. It is therefore evident that pseudoskepticism is a personality disorder, which is similar to antisocial and narcissistic personality disorders.

2044:

articles (via his watchlist, I assume), so as to POV-dominate them. I noticed that on the static universe article, ScienceApologist entered a large number of links to other physical-cosmology-related articles at the top; I suspect that those are all of the articles that ScienceApologist and/or his wikiclique allies POV-dominate. Also, look at ScienceApologist's user page; he was given a barnstar by many people. Many of those people are ScienceApologist's POV allies. I have been studying that wikiclique, and I have identified many members thereof, some of which are admins. ScienceApologist himself also ran for admin, but did not get sufficient votes. Whether or not every one of those members is POV-biased on the big bang issue and other pseudoskepticism-related issues I do not know. The wikiclique members are:

2307:"pseudoscience" to, a militant band of self-styled skeptics including ScienceApologist and Pjacobi. Since most of these skeptics do not know what pseudoscience is or how to identify it, their usage of the term is effectively synonymous with "superficially resembling science, but unorthodox". Such people touch and feel their way to what they consider a positive identification of "pseudoscience" by looking at what a given instance seems to address, what terminology it employs, the claims that are made for it by its proponents, what others are saying about it, and the identity, circumstances, credentials, and associations of its author. Unfortunately, none of these criteria is particularly relevant to the actual distinctions between pseudoscience and other kinds of reasoning. 2158:

who alter wikipedia to make it not an encyclopedia, but a proselytism platform. Thus, wikipedia is being misrepresented by those POV-pushers and by the power-holding people (such as Jimbo Wales, and thus far the arbitrators) that do not take action to stop them, and furthermore, wikipedia is a donation-soliciting organization. That is of concern to me, and many others as well. I suppose that you can call me an unrealistic optimist for trying to convince you to change. I like wikipedia; it has a great deal of important information, and I have looked up information in wikipedia many times.

1688:. Ian and Eric have repeatedly and continually violated this policy. That they are actually correct about physics - that they have discovered the true origin of the universe - is not relevant. I don't care. If this means that Knowledge will not be the first publisher of the true origin of the universe, then we'll miss out. Luckily, you can fork the project, and announce that Plasma Physics is the only true thing somewhere else, and be a hero. Knowledge is for people who are interested in describing the current state of things, not a place for you to argue for your alternative theories. 2298:

to the original meaning of the term and thus deals primarily with the ontological and epistemological aspects of the cosmos, including the logical entailments of the observation process itself (e.g., the Anthropic Principles); (2) whereas physical cosmology is an empirical science which relies on the scientific method, metaphysical cosmology relies exclusively on deduction, and is not properly described as empirical science (although in some cases, it can be described as mathematics). Thus, whatever might be said of it, it cannot be legitimately described as "pseudoscience".

2002:

divination, and homeopathy. There is pseudoscience that is caused by an affinity for excitement. There is pseudoscience that is caused not by psychological factors, but by a lack of information, such as the flat earth belief and phrenology, and such pseudosciences typically cease once they are disproven. Some pseudosciences are the result of multiple causes. The different pseudosciences should be distinguished from eachother by the aforementioned causes. A person that makes an accusation of pseudoscience should describe it as having one or more of the aforementioned causes.

1606:“Pseudoscience” is a word rarely used by scientists in the peer reviewed literature; it has no consistent and clear general meaning, although it may be used with a particular meaning in mind when used in a particular context. I think it should be avoided in general on WP because of its vagueness and derogatory implication, if something has been criticized as obscure, illogical, unfounded, false, or mystical, say that, and say why the source of the opinion is notable if it is not apparent, and make sure that the citation is accessible online so that the context can be seen. 2294:(in order of historical priority). In the classical realm, they are often held separate - a philosopher might say that this is symptomatic of the pathology of Cartesian dualism - but the distinction becomes insupportable at the extremes of scale and velocity ruled by quantum mechanics and relativity, in each of which observers are to some extent mathematically conflated with observation events. As this seems to imply, ontology and epistemology still bear strongly on the fundamental nature of the cosmos. 2200:

bodies of observational evidence by invoking untestable, unobservable or imaginary constructs (eg. God, dark energy), and scientists on the other hand who believe that the current consensus is flawed or flat out wrong, and are working on alternative theories that try different starting assumptions (and by their very nature are incomplete and less well-developed). One is science, one is not. The history of science is littered with the remains of previously unassailable, consensus scientific explanations.

2382:. The fact that Byrgenwulf so easily lured ScienceApologist, Pjacobi and others into joining his rabid deletional attack on the CTMU , shows that the entire affair was fueled by an unseemly combination of philosophical bias and personal antipathy. This, and not mere fidelity to science, seems to be a large part of what drives the skewed editorial behavior of ScienceApologist and a good number of his "anti-pseudoscience" cohorts, and it is utterly antithetical to the encyclopedic integrity of Knowledge. 1133:

marginalization (in terms of amount of text) of certain points as per the policies and guidelines described. Likewise, on the pages that are devoted to these nonmainstream ideas, it is important to verifiably, reliably, and accurately indicate that the subjects are non-mainstream, derided, and ignored. This puts a bee in Ian's bonnet because ideally he would like to see mainstream pages describe more non-mainstream arguments or he would like to see non-mainstream pages free of mainstream criticism. --

2425:

and I have to host them the next while. I will try to look up more on this, but it's uncertain when. So I figured at least it was best to report possibly plausible concerns passed to me, so that they are "on the record". I have avoided naming names here "just to be on the safe side", since I don't wish to point fingers towards any individual until I have myself checked and confirmed (if plausible) the allegation. I trust this is in order. If more information is needed please let me know.

1243:

such ideas directly. Statements to the effect of "this idea violates such-and-such" or "this is widely considered pseudoscience" (along with specific verifiable critiques by outside sources) should provide all the warning readers need (although providing verifiable information about ideological or political motivations, etc., is often helpful as well). NPOV policy requires that we try to describe opposing viewpoints in ways that supporters of those viewpoints would consider accurate.

3521:

Knowledge, any expected standards of behavior, or any normal editorial process. The sanctions imposed may include blocks of up to one year in length; bans from editing any page or set of pages within the area of conflict; bans on any editing related to the topic or its closely related topics; restrictions on reverts or other specified behaviors; or any other measures which the imposing administrator believes are reasonably necessary to ensure the smooth functioning of the project.

2357:, both prominently associated with the anti-ID cause.) Not unrelatedly, we have also seen JBKramer deliberately misrepresent my own editorial history, falsely accusing me of editing the former CTMU article and its author's biography in violation of WP:NPOV and WP:AUTO. (As a glance at the history pages of those articles quickly reveals , my edits to them have been extremely few in number, minor in extent, corrective in nature, and thus utterly consistent with Knowledge policy.) 2182:. However Fred Hoyle, Hannes Alfven, Anthony Perrat, Eric Lerner and others are/were experts, though they hold or held non-consensus views. This does not make them pseudoscientists. This should not be in dispute, yet ScienceApologist consistently reduces debate about controversial scientific views (especially views he can't argue against conclusively) into pissing contests about who is the more qualified or who has more published work. 2419:, whose fingerprints (I am told) seem to be visible in this case under more than one collaborating user accounts, and who has in the past (under old accounts) paid special attention to POV warfare "for fun" on controversial topics such as borderline science/pseudoscience issues, and was not averse to faking information and/or rubbishing valid editors/contributions while posing as a valid contributor with a valid viewpoint. 1300:, that articles about major subjects should be linked to all minor subjects is an unreasonable expectation. The one-stream approach is much more reasonable where articles are linked to as the actual content of the article warrants. This means that general subjects will not necessarily link to every minor article that claims influence on the general subject but, obviously, minor articles will link to the general subject. -- 2369:, which is controlled and largely populated by militants of an atheist-materialist philosophical persuasion. After declaring that his interest was "piqued" by reading that "Langan is linked to ID", Byrgenwulf proceeded to make numerous disparaging but incorrect or vapid remarks about (one particular informal exposition of) the theory, boastfully holding his own technical ability superior to Langan's ( 3570:), or the Committee. Administrators are cautioned not to reverse such sanctions without familiarizing themselves with the full facts of the matter and engaging in extensive discussion and consensus-building at the administrators' noticeboard or another suitable on-wiki venue. The Committee will consider appropriate remedies including suspension or revocation of adminship in the event of violations. 3540:, and the desire to allow responsible contributors maximum freedom to edit, with the need to reduce edit-warring and misuse of Knowledge as a battleground, so as to create an acceptable collaborative editing environment even on our most contentious articles. Editors wishing to edit in these areas are advised to edit carefully, to adopt Knowledge's communal approaches (including appropriate conduct, 3842: 2394:

blame-the-victims shenanigans, and if nothing is done about them, they will simply grow worse. In fact, failing to address them would in all likelihood be interpreted by the violators themselves as encouragement to redouble their destructive efforts. I hope and trust that the Arbitration Committee understands this and will act in the best interests of the Knowledge Project.

1610:

questions to be unnecessary, there might be no dispute. If it is not for the lay reader but for someone who already knows rather more physics than I do, then iantresman’s comments might indeed be seen as irritating, as it isn’t the job of expert editors here to give tutorials. If you can’t agree on who the article is for, then you will never agree on how to write it.

2034:, in which he deleted all of the astrophysical information, twice (which was written by one user, then restored by a different user), and in the text of the article, he libellously accused the static universe proponents as doing the exact same thing as the big bang proponents (the main opponents of the static universe model)- falsification (see 1874:...exactly why I demand exclusion or marginalization (in terms of amount of text) of certain points as per the policies and guidelines described. Likewise, on the pages that are devoted to these nonmainstream ideas, it is important to verifiably, reliably, and accurately indicate that the subjects are non-mainstream, derided, and ignored..." 2273:

procedure. On the theoretical side, however, pseudoscience is marked by the drawing of improper conclusions from data, and it is not always easy to show conclusively that this has been done in any particular case. In Knowledge, where content and validity are not considered to be valid editorial criteria and are not supposed to be debated,

1189:

viewpoint. The most obvious example is the theory of continental drift. Almost everything that geologists thought 60 years ago about geological processes was wrong, because the drift theory was a minority viewpoint for 30 years. The drift theory was for a long while very non-mainstream. But it was not pseudo- science. And, it was right.

1800:

which states that ALL significant views bere presented without any attempt to say which is more correct. If you listen only to him he will sound like the innocent victim, when in fact, in my opinion, he knows full well what he is doing and why. He uses his positon of administrator to manipulate threaten and discourage other editors.

837:(a false skepticism). This results in (a) some scientific articles giving exclusive coverage of the mainstream scientific point of view (POV), as if it were the only view, while policy notes that the scientific POV should give way to the broader neutral POV, (b) Articles on some minority scientific views being over-critical. 1437:

falls into one of three categories - cleanup, my biology and computer science interests and OTRS actions - he'll be hard pressed to find anyone who agrees with his assumptions. It is knee-jerk reactions like these that make the pseudo/mainstream science debate a conflict instead of the collaboration it should be.

3908:

While asking the enforcing administrator and seeking reviews at AN or AE are not mandatory prior to seeking a decision from the committee, once the committee has reviewed a request, further substantive review at any forum is barred. The sole exception is editors under an active sanction who may still

3875:

Administrators are free to modify sanctions placed by former administrators – that is, editors who do not have the administrator permission enabled (due to a temporary or permanent relinquishment or desysop) – without regard to the requirements of this section. If an administrator modifies a sanction

2324:

The evolution of the cosmos is that process which carries and embeds the evolution of life, and given the existence of a theologically-loaded controversy spanning not only the perennial battle between evolution and Biblical Creationism, but between different perspectives on evolution itself (as noted

2009:

I have noticed that on wikipedia, pseudoskeptics, some of which are politically motivated, have chronically abused the pseudoscience category, putting it on such articles as eugenics, cold fusion, and static universe. I personally am a rather skeptical person; I am a non-spiritual atheist materialist

1796:(note) There seems to be some confusion about pseudoscience, Pseudoscince is that which professes to be science but does not use the scientific method. The scientific method is "testing." If any cosmology could be called pseudoscience, Inflation, and the fact that it can't be tested, is one of them. 1590:

I was asked to offer an opinion because I have expressed the view that, if you believe that one interpretation of the facts is true, then it is in your best interests to show the case ‘’for the opposite position’’ as strongly, clearly, and honestly as possible from available V RS, as well as the case

1436:

After the block and its subsequent reversal, Guettarda engaged me in discussion which included similar unfounded allegations and other attacks on my integrity. When asked to support his allegations of bias and characterizations of my editing, he failed to provide any such evidence. Since my editing

1258:

mention of non-mainstream ideas is a distortion of the intent of Undue Weight as well. If a non-mainstream or pseudoscience idea is notable enough to have an article, it should be common sense that, at the least, it can be linked as a "see also" from the narrowest-scope mainstream article related to

2676:

require that information included in an article have been published in a reliable source which is identified and potentially available to the reader. What constitutes a reliable source varies with the topic of the article, but in the case of a scientific theory, there is a clear expectation that the

2115:

Those are the main ones that I know of. From the looks of this RfAr page, it looks like there may be others. However, some of those people may also be responsible for holding back the creationist POV-pushers. It is an unfortunate truth that often, the only people holding back certain POV-pushers are

2001:

There are different causes of belief in various pseudosciences, by which those pseudosciences can be classified. There are some quasi-scientific fanatical religious beliefs that could be classified as pseudoscience rather than religion. There is spiritual pseudoscience, such as astrology, palmistry,

1892:

article via a request for page protection/unprotection. I have been trying to reason with the various sides, but it has been extremely difficult. In a lot of edit conflicts, when I try to intervene, I find that the underlying issues are either an unfamiliarity with Knowledge policies, or a lack of

1827:

Again, he is a big bang supporter who is continually revising non-big bang articles such that they imply support for the big bang. This violates NPOV. And he gets away with it. This is much bigger than a dispute between editors, it is indicative of a cancer within Knowledge which if not treated will

1188:

I hope that I don’t have to convince the arbitrators that this is an attitude that is completely inimical to the scientific enterprise. While many minority viewpoints in science eventually die away, it is equally obvious that almost everything that science has eventually verified was once a minority

3526:

Prior to any sanctions being imposed, the editor in question shall be given a warning with a link to this decision by an uninvolved administrator; and, where appropriate, should be counseled on specific steps that he or she can take to improve his or her editing in accordance with relevant policies

2297:

The operative distinctions between physical and metaphysical cosmology are these: (1) whereas physical cosmology is about comparing and classifying observed large-scale structures and discussing the physical processes by which they may have originated or evolved, metaphysical cosmology remains true

2203:

There is/was a similar debate in evolution between Gould's punctuated equilibria and the more traditional gradualists. Nobody except the most rabid and opinionated of adherents would seriously maintain that the other party weren't true scientists, and only Creationists saw the existence of any such

2157:

You might be wondering why I have conducted such extensive investigation, despite having little involvement in the disputes. It is largely because wikipedia presents itself as an encyclopedia, and yet it is infested with relentless POV-pushers such as ScienceApologist and his POV wikiclique allies,

1806:

ScienceApologist is a self admitted big bang proponent, who is working mainly on non-big bang articles. He claims he does this because he is a Wikipedian. However, what he reallly does is water down all evidence that does not support the big bang. It is the methods that he uses that is a threat to

1339:

is absolutely legitimate science; and, its fame renders it mainstream knowledge, even if it is excluded from the dogmatic Academic 1-corner mainstream. Time Cube is the truth of the universe, and should be sought by all humans—as well as linked from all applicable Knowledge articles, including even

1242:

these ideas, the appropriate application of Undue Weight should not invoke the implicit rejection of these ideas by the mainstream scientific community as proof of "tiny minority" status (and thus removal of information); weighting should be based on the verifiable views of those who have discussed

2424:

My apologies to Arbcom and other editors for reporting a concern without also presenting formal evidence (something I have avoided to date), and for not carefully checking it and satisfying myself of it. It's 5 am here, friends are arriving on intercontinental flights at 7 and 11 am respectively,

2373:

is the author of the CTMU). Immediately afterward - on that very same day, July 10 - he initiated a focused attack against that article on Knowledge. In editing the CTMU and Langan articles, Byrgenwulf tarred the CTMU as "pseudoscience" despite the fact that it had always been clearly presented as

2005:

Pseudoskepticism is the willfully blind deprecation of viable, and often truthful, scientific beliefs. Pseudoskepticism derives from a generally authoritarian ideology, and the scientific beliefs that pseudoskeptics blindly dismiss are consequentially usually the ones that are not supported by the

1810:

This is how pseudoscience works. He refers to the work of others as "pseudoscientific" when in fact it is he who is basing his conclusions on untestable science, and that is a definition of pseudoscience. He will edit an article so that everything in the article supports his view by implication.

1693:

Lerner has published a great deal of material - decades ago - questioning the big bang. Modern science ignored, and continues to ignore him. Since there is no verifiable secondary sources that in any way substantiate Lerner's viewpoints, but there are a great many verifiable secondary sources that

1602:

On bios of living people, I think WP must present their views in a way that the subjects would reasonably be expected to consider to be fair, while doing so exclusively from V RS. Criticisms should be reported, again founded solely in V RS (from named notable sources, not anonymous declarations of

1417:

and its associated talk page edits, I found that ScienceApologist, in his good-faith attempt to keep minority science or pseudo science articles from becoming promotion pieces, tended to strictly enforce certain Knowledge policies while marginalizing others to further his goal. SA tends to assert

1182:

SA uses the term “marginalized” to blur together very different categories. In SA’s mind, as is clear from his edits and comments both on my “Eric Lerner” page and on many others, “controversial” in science is the same as “discredited pseudoscience.” In his view, anyone with a viewpoint that is in

2272:

Pseudoscience is notoriously hard to define and identify. Most definitions appeal to the scientific method, which guides the interplay of theoretical cognition and experimental observation. On the observational side, pseudoscience is marked by usually clear-cut deviations from proper experimental

2043:

article. I changed the wording from a POV-biased state to an objective state, and then only 3 minutes later, ScienceApologist changed it back to a POV-biased version that was slightly different from the original. It is therefore evident that ScienceApologist is constantly policing a wide range of

2038:

for a description of the falsification of the big bang). That demonstrates a tendency in ScienceApologist to state the opposite of the truth, which is a common behavior among people that desire to disrupt truth, including pseudoskeptics. His behavior reminds me much of the banned user Paul Vogel.

1946:

and left a message on his talk page about it: he was hammering home the unsourced, almost certainly unverifiable statement that Lerner's work has been ignored by the community, a statement that we had sought sources for before, and not found, as I believe JBKramer was well-aware of. The dialogue

1799:

I have experienced the editing of ScienceApologist first hand, This problem is not fundamentally about personalities or content dispute, it is about the systemic behavoir of editors acting as if they owned the articles they work on, and have a right to write it as they please in violtion of NPOV,

1609:

The second example invokes the unspoken question is “Who is this article for?” If it is for the lay reader, then the text invites the sort of questions that iantresman is asking, and if they were seen not as challenges to what is written but as a request to make the article clear enough for the

1440:

That said, I'm convinced a block was not the best way to resolve the edit war and have no concerns about its quick reversal. I was and am still disturbed by FeloniousMonk, Guettarda and others in their circle excusing ScienceApologist's actions and their claims that an editor's body of good work

1237:

I'm not sure how "involved" I can be considered, but I have observed and occasionally argued against some of the (in my opinion overzealous) anti-pseudoscience efforts of ScienceApologist, FeloniousMonk, and others. I am particularly concerned about the abuse of the "Undue Weight" clause of NPOV

3578:

For the purpose of imposing sanctions under this provision, an administrator will be considered "uninvolved" if he or she is not engaged in a current, direct, personal conflict on the topic with the user receiving sanctions. Enforcing the provisions of this decision will not be considered to be

2199:

However, the problem here is one of dogmatism - a myopic, pseudo-religious insistence that the current scientific consensus is the only lens through which to view a subject. There is a difference between on the one hand crackpot theories trying to explain (or worse, dismiss and marginalise) huge

2177:

In his statement above, ScienceApologist contends that he is an expert in this field. He most certainly is not. Having a BA and a job as a community college level physics instructor does not constitute being an expert in anything. Neither Ian Tresman, nor ScienceApologist , nor I have published,

1851:

Knowledge has an important policy: roughly stated, you should write articles without bias, representing all views fairly. Knowledge uses the words "bias" and "neutral" in a special sense! This doesn't mean that it's possible to write an article from just one point of view, the neutral (unbiased,

1132:

policies/guidelines for determining the tone, tenor, and content of articles. Knowing, for example, that the vast majority of subject-specific literature ignores much of what Ian Tresman would like to see included on certain articles about mainstream subjects is exactly why I demand exclusion or

3916:

All actions designated as arbitration enforcement actions, including those alleged to be out of process or against existing policy, must first be appealed following arbitration enforcement procedures to establish if such enforcement is inappropriate before the action may be reversed or formally

3912:

These provisions apply only to contentious topics placed by administrators and to blocks placed by administrators to enforce arbitration case decisions. They do not apply to sanctions directly authorised by the committee, and enacted either by arbitrators or by arbitration clerks, or to special

3520:

Any uninvolved administrator may, on his or her own discretion, impose sanctions on any editor working in the area of conflict (defined as articles which relate to pseudoscience, broadly interpreted) if, despite being warned, that editor repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to the purpose of

2018:

Pseudoskeptics, particularly ScienceApologist, have argued that much of the information about minority beliefs should be removed from all articles due to the undue weight policy. That is a gross perversion of the rule, and ScienceApologist knows it, because the rule applies to the proportional

1598:

think that every dissenting opinion should be treated in this way, only if there are significant disputes (for instance expressed in secondary sources in major peer reviewed journals). Iantresman has presented a case that there is a significant dispute on redshift, if this is true it should be

1432:

most recent allegations. First, let me point out that his summary is a gross misrepresentation of the incident - the article was in ScienceApologist's preferred version when he was blocked; I later restored this version of the article when Elerner used the block as an opportunity to abort the

1221:

SA and his colleague BKramer have pursued this campaign against me and everyone else they see as minority thinkers. This has led to ludicrous stunts such as questioning my (BA!) degree from Columbia as “unsourced”. I would like to see anyone’s degree which is publicly sourced to anyone except

2393:

It is time to stop these concerted violations of Knowledge policy by people who are plainly motivated by a combination of ignorance, bias, and bigotry. They cannot be justified by the need for "quality control of science articles", or by diversionary accusations of "wikishilling", or by other

1215:

That is why it is entirely appropriate to put back in the paragraph about where I have published and spoken and the coverage of my work in leading popular since magazines like New Scientist and Sky and Telescope. As Art Carlson says, such information allows the reader to judge how my view are

1206:

SA’s edits of my page have systematically aimed to create the false impression that no one in the community takes my work seriously, that I should be grouped with someone like ,say, Velikovsky. For that reason he has eliminated references to my peer-reviewed publications, to leading academic

2315:

In some cases, pseudoscience is obvious to nearly everyone who is aware of its proper definition. In such cases, it is only natural - if still not entirely justified - for people to name it as such. But in all but the very most obvious cases, there is no room for such accusations within the

2306:

Recently, an initially accurate and well-written article on a notable theory of metaphysical cosmology, the CTMU, was deleted from Knowledge on the absurd pretext that it was "pseudoscience". This occurred after it was brought to the specific attention of, and initially misrepresented as

1267:, it serves readers well to provide a link from Redshift even if Redshift quantization is generally considered pseudoscience (which Iantresman contests and I am not qualified to judge). And often, a more appropriate approach is to include a sentence or two to contextualize the topic 2010:

that does not believe in an afterlife, psychic ability, current extraterrestrial visitation (unless I see better proof, because it is technically possible), the big bang, continuous creation / quasi-steady state, the electric universe model, etcetera, or even free will ...and even

1227:

I think both SA and BKramer should be blocked from my page and from the many other pages that they have defaced with their rampages by confusing minority viewpoints with pseudoscience. And by the way, there is no sourced evidence that SA is any sort of “expert” as he claims to

1309:

As I've argued before, I don't think Time Cube qualifies as notable non-mainstream science or pseudoscience; it is pseudoscience, but its notability derives from its popularity as an internet meme, and thus it is rightly excluded from Time (and probably should be removed from

1200:

Pseudoscience is something very different—it is untestable and unverifiable claims that make no reference to the existing body of science. My work is testable and is in the context of plasma physics, a laboratory-verified body of science that is the basis of much of today’s

2263:

I've apparently been added at the last minute (by JBKramer) as an involved party in this RfA. Hence, although one or two members of the Arbitration Committee have at least partially made their decisions, I'll append a few remarks in the hope that they can still be of help.

7872:

is prohibited from injecting himself into discussions and reports about ScienceApologist that are not directly related to him. Martinphi is further prohibited from injecting himself into policy and content discussions that involve ScienceApologist. Restriction posted on

1540:. It's as if so-labelled pseudoscientific topics have magically become exceptions to the NPOV and VER requirements that we use V RS's to say who says what and why. Editors such as FM are arguing that if authors who write for non-peer-reviewed popular journals such as 3964:("Pseudoscience") is amended to read "Knowledge contains articles on pseudoscientific ideas which, while notable, have little or no following in the scientific community, often being so little regarded that there is no serious criticism of them by scientific critics." 1656:

This illustrates a generally expressed concern about dual standards: that skeptics seek to exclude information presented by those with whom they disagree by rightly demanding high standards of sources, but sometimes fail lamentably in removing the beams from their own

2285:

There is a certain deficiency in the background information on cosmology which has been provided here. These days, cosmological discourse occurs mainly in the context of empirical science. However, it is possible to distinguish two kinds of cosmological reasoning,

1917:

as a stick to force reverts over neutrality of tone is inappropriate, and doesn't give one license to violate the 3RR. Still, Iantresman has had a lot of stress over all these issues, I'm sure, and he is sometimes the lone defender against the pseudoscience camp.

1828:

end up with a POV encyclopledia, and no one will know what happened. This kind of manipulative behavoir demeans Knowledge and threatens the integrity of Knowledge. It is all the more sinister because he has successfully made it look like he has done nothing wrong.

126:

Please do not edit this page directly unless you wish to become a participant in this request. (All participants are subject to Arbitration Committee decisions, and the ArbCom will consider each participant's role in the dispute.) Comments are very welcome on the

1694:

state that the big bang theory is the best current explanation for the origin of the universe, it is appropriate to write that Lerner's theories are not accepted by mainstream science. This is true, verifiable, and NPOV. It is also what Lerner and Tresman oppose.

7928:

ScienceApologist blocked for 12 hours by Elonka. For a combination of factors, including incivility in talk page discussions, bad faith in summary removing something from his talk page, and using undo to revert a 3 month old edit by Martinphi as "irrelevant".

2236:

A protracted futile and silly argument last year about an illustration of plasma filaments in space, sourced from peer-reviewed material. It was at about this point when I realised what a serious pain in the arse wikitrolls are, and pretty much gave up after

7402:

Any block, restriction, ban, or sanction performed under the authorisation of a remedy for this case must be logged in this section. Please specify the administrator, date and time, nature of sanction, and basis or context. Unless otherwise specified, the

3809:

Appeals may be made only by the editor under sanction and only for a currently active sanction. Requests for modification of page restrictions may be made by any editor. The process has three possible stages (see "Important notes" below). The editor may:

2319: 3409:

5a) Tommysun is banned from editing articles which relate to science and pseudoscience. The term "pseudoscience" shall be interpreted broadly; it is intended to include but not be limited to all article in Category:Pseudoscience and its subcategories.

3471:

8b) Iantresman is placed on probation for a year. He may be banned from any article or subject area which he disrupts by aggressive biased editing. All bans are to be logged at Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience#Log_of_blocks_and_bans.

2783:

11) Experts are presumed to have an adequate command of appropriate sources for information they add or positions they take. Bare assertions of expertise without supporting sources are unacceptable, especially if there is conflict with other users.

2207:

Some of SA's tactics are quite simply outrageous, make frequent recourse to various logical fallacies, and border on desperate. For example (sorry, I don't have time to find sources for these, and some of this is long standing back to early 2004):

3876:

placed by a former administrator, the administrator who made the modification becomes the "enforcing administrator". If a former administrator regains the tools, the provisions of this section again apply to their unmodified enforcement actions.

3378: 3487:

11) ScienceApologist is cautioned to respect all policies and guidelines, in spirit as well as letter, when editing articles concerning some alternative to conventional science. This applies in particular to matters of good faith and civility.

2803:

applies to users who are experts in a field and who may be engaged in original research. The latest insights resulting from current research are often not acceptable for inclusion as established information as they have not yet been published.

2014:

recognize the strong scientific support for eugenics, the static universe model, and cold fusion (in the case of eugenics, the proof of it's efficacy is so overwhelming that it is surprising that anyone would even dare call it pseudoscience).

1433:

discussion process and revert to his alternate version. The block was an attempt to halt a long standing edit war and over concerns that Knowledge policies, including those surrounding the biographies of living persons, were being violated.

2632:

If a viewpoint is held by an extremely small (or vastly limited) minority, it does not belong in Knowledge (except perhaps in some ancillary article) regardless of whether it is true or not; and regardless of whether you can prove it or

5887: 3083:

9) Knowledge contains articles on pseudoscientific ideas which, while notable, have little or no following in the scientific community, often being so little regarded that there is no serious criticism of them by scientific critics.

1452:

pointed out. Its an excellent example of the ability to maintain a biographical article's focus and follow Knowledge policy while clearly and unequivocally stating that the subject's theories are not accepted by mainstream science.

1822:

article. Notice how this new name makes the alternative cosmologies dependant of the standard theory alternative. That is, instead of the two being two alternatives, there is only one, the big bang, and the rest ore merely not one.

2116:

other POV-pushers, much like how the sunnis and the shi'ites hold eachother in check. I should note, by the way, that even the clique member Dragons flight criticized ScienceApologist for being uncivil (on ScienceApologist's RfA).

3162: 4060:

List here editors who have been placed on notice of the remedies in place in this case or in related cases. The diff of the notification must be included along with the name of the user notified. For convenience, the templates

2838:

14) Serious and respected encyclopedias and reference works are generally expected to provide overviews of scientific topics that are in line with respected scientific thought. Knowledge aspires to be such a respected work.

1194:

No one would doubt that my work in cosmology is controversial. But it would be entirely inaccurate to claim, as SA does, that it is either ignored in the astronomical community or treated as outside the realm of scientific

2677:

sources for the theory itself are reputable textbooks or peer-reviewed journals. Scientific theories promulgated outside these media are not properly verifiable as scientific theories and should not be represented as such.

2585:, a fundamental policy, requires fair representation of significant alternatives to scientific orthodoxy. Significant alternatives, in this case, refers to legitimate scientific disagreement, as opposed to pseudoscience. 1368:

Because the top and the bottom don't count, silly. I bet you're one of those "mainstream" people that think that -1 * -1 = 1. If that's true, then you are just stupid and evil, and we don't have to listen to you anyway.

4042: 4018: 2360:

Lest there be any doubt regarding the "anti-ID conspiracy" against certain notable people and ideas here at Knowledge, consider the following facts. On July 10, 2006, a now-departed user named "Byrgenwulf" received a

3871:

Nothing in this section prevents an administrator from replacing an existing sanction issued by another administrator with a new sanction if fresh misconduct has taken place after the existing sanction was applied.

3556:) in their editing, and to amend behaviors that are deemed to be of concern by administrators. An editor unable or unwilling to do so may wish to restrict their editing to other topics, in order to avoid sanctions. 3154: 3799:

This procedure applies to appeals related to, and modifications of, actions taken by administrators to enforce the Committee's remedies. It does not apply to appeals related to the remedies directly enacted by the

2153:

With such vast proof of abuse by ScienceApologist presented by multiple users, why have the arbitrators not yet blocked him from editting all science-related articles? They should not delay any longer in doing so.

1285:

If a non-mainstream or pseudoscience idea is notable enough to have an article, it should be common sense that, at the least, it can be linked as a "see also" from the narrowest-scope mainstream article related to

1861:

That's a common misunderstanding of the Knowledge policy. :::The Knowledge policy is that we should fairly represent all sides of a dispute, and not make an article state, imply, or insinuate that any one side is

2337:. More recently, we have seen ScienceApologist attempt to conspicuously insert this affiliation in the Knowledge biography of said author , to whom he has accused me of being identical in additional violation of 1471:, the term "pseudoscience" isn't found much in peer-reviewed scientific literature. Accordingly, to the extent that we use the term, we should be clear about whose POV we're representing, and with which V RS's. 3618: 3909:

request an easing or removal of the sanction on the grounds that said sanction is no longer needed, but such requests may only be made once every six months, or whatever longer period the committee may specify.

3766:

0) Should any user subject to a restriction in this case violate that restriction, that user may be blocked, initially for up to one month, and then with blocks increasing in duration to a maximum of one year.

3166: 2149:

There is also the fact that the very username 'ScienceApologist' is misrepresentative, as he is precisely the type of person that embarrasses scientific materialism with blind authoritarian pseudoskepticism.

1486:. However, NPOV and VER go further than those passages, and if we rely too heavily on those passages at the expense of other aspects of NPOV and VER, we're missing the forest for the trees. For example, if 3158: 2224:

Trying to claim that Creationist ideas qualify in the same category as other non-standard cosmologies (obviously trying to tar non-consensus scientific work with the same brush as Christian fundamentalism),

2470: 3359: 3341: 3213: 3588: 2753:

9) Restrictions are placed on users only in cases where their behavior seriously disrupts the wiki process or fulfillment of Knowledge's mission to produce an accurate and useful reference work.

1521: 944: 2480: 1811:

This is not NPOV writing, it is adding a POV to the reported material.If you read the articles, it is clear that nothing but the big bang is meaningful. And that, by definition is not NPOV

1938:.) I think the summary of SA's behavior above says everything I would say, but I do want to mention that JBKramer's behavior is less subtle and much more concerning. He has been incivil 947: 1603:

consensus). The overall intent should be neither to endorse nor to denigrate, but simply to report. If either side fails in this then the article will be less credible as a consequence.

1101:

I ask you the same question as I asked to FeloniousMonk above. It should be quite easy to demonstrate your point with several examples, which would help myself and the Administrators. --

3372: 961:

is written from a typical mainstream astronomy point of view. But like some other mainstream articles, it nearly totally excludes some minority scientific views, to a point I consider

2520: 3773: 3628: 2538: 969: 143: 96: 1673:

I consider myself an involved party and have added myself to the list. I will make a statement here shortly. I urge ArbComm to accept this case to review the conduct of all parties.

3929: 2511: 926: 7476: 7086: 7048: 6965: 6893: 6597: 2498: 1760:

and wouldn't tolerate turning a biography into a character assassination, even and especially for notable proponents of pseudoscientific theories -- compare the recent cleanup at

833:

A small number of editors appear to be excluding or misrepresenting some minority scientific views, with a variety of techniques that I think are best described in the article on

6376: 6129: 1035:

manner at best. For example, while trying to clarify NPOV, he unilaterally and without warning, removed my discussion to my talk page, preventing other editors from commenting

968:

For example, alternative redshift theories are extensively described in peer reviewed literatures. For example, in 1981, H. J. Reboul summarised over 500 papers on the subject

5400: 3567: 2415:

I have received word of a plausible concern, that suggests it may be worth looking at the track record of banned POV warrior / vandal / chronic abusive sock-user / ban evader

7472: 5333: 2025: 7651: 7479: 1814:

He is very clever, and will resort to trivial meaningless long arugments about semantics to detract attention to what he really is doing. For example his renaming of the

7404: 4904: 7766: 7410: 7082: 7044: 6961: 6889: 6593: 4221: 4008: 1495: 1386: 2162: 1373: 1363: 1331: 1318: 1304: 840:

I offer two articles as examples, in summary. If the case is accepted, there are many more examples available, and I hope to get a number of areas of policy clarified.

3829: 1768: 139: 132: 7804: 7777: 7748: 7709: 3400:

Note: All remedies that refer to a period of time, for example to a ban of X months or a revert parole of Y months, are to run concurrently unless otherwise stated.

2456:

Recuse. As a neutral administrator I posted comments on AN/I about Shell Kinney's block of ScienceApologist and made suggestions regarding Eric Lerner's biography.

2253: 1579: 1137: 1105: 1091: 2119:

For evidence of the POV wikiclique alliances, look at RfA votes, barnstar signatures (on user pages), article discussions, and edit histories. For example, go to:

7732: 4119: 3681: 3643: 2277:

Hence, our reliance on notability criteria like mainstream publicity and "expert consensus" in deciding what should, and should not, go into Knowledge articles.

7901: 3030:

is Eric Lerner, an advocate of the plasma cosmology theory. He is engaged in promotion of a "plasma focus device," utilizing a hydrogen-boron nuclear reaction

7309: 6410: 6005: 4217: 3425:

6) Tommysun is placed on probation. He may be banned from any article or subject area which he disrupts by aggressive biased editing. All bans to be logged at

1060:

Could you provide (a) A couple of examples (eg. diffs) illustrating your statement, together with (b) A couple of reliable sources suggesting pseudoscience. --

448: 7793: 4000: 3976: 3712: 3566:

Sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision may be appealed to the imposing administrator, the appropriate administrators' noticeboard (currently

2880:, but which are generally considered pseudoscience by the scientific community may properly contain that information and may be categorized as pseudoscience. 1893:

trust that putting the policies first will result in an article that is acceptable to everyone. Here, I think the conflict goes somewhat deeper than that.

1780: 1171: 118: 7276: 3579:

participation in a dispute. Any doubt regarding whether an administrator qualifies under this definition is to be treated as any other appeal of sanctions.

3280:

13) Iantresman's editing to pseudoscience and science-related articles are characterized by low level edit warring and frequent edits against consensus. See

2794: 2635:" Following this principle, theories which have not been published in reputable sources should not be included in articles on mainstream scientific topics. 2133: 128: 7861: 1457: 1422: 1382:

and not logically disected; but can be emotionally appreciated to great personal satisfaction and financial reward with a little help from my $ 19.95 book.

1147:

I have little to contribute to this RFAR other than to urge the arbitration committee to have a long look at the contributions and actions of it's bringer,

7816: 7812: 7125: 6974: 5974: 4426: 3532:

In determining whether to impose sanctions on a given user and which sanctions to impose, administrators should use their judgment and balance the need to

2914:

18) Alternative theoretical formulations which have a following within the scientific community are not pseudoscience, but part of the scientific process.

5926: 3199: 3196: 2385:

Surely the Arbitration Committee does not countenance the organized hijacking of Knowledge by "ID critics" or any other philosophically-motivated group.

1002: 5621: 4551: 3153:

shows a pattern of aggressive biased editing combined with eccentric interpretation with respect to information concerning theoretical astrophysics, see

3210: 1983: 1502: 1064: 7912:. He made a problematic edit and further misrepresented a source, after a warning and discussion about advancing a position unsupported by the sources. 7890:

After extensive discussion (and sadly further drama), the above is revoked and replaced with a distinct remedy for both Martinphi and ScienceApologist.

7803:

is blocked for 96 hours (again, as the previous block was shortened) for violating his restriction, specifically incivility and and assuming bad faith.

1650:

c) whether a popular book entitled “Encyclopedia of Pseudoscience, from Alien abductions to Zone Therapy” is an appropriate source of fact in WP. (see

7891: 7757: 3054:, which Elerner has edited extensively is, in part, an treatment of the "plasma focus device" which he is engaged in supporting and raising money for 2440: 2301: 1483: 8063: 7504: 6777: 6164: 4985: 4078: 3353: 2123: 1896:

Iantresman has generally been respectful of Knowledge policies but tries to skirt them just enough that his non-neutral approach shows through. See

1722:

from dragging creation/evolution, global warming and the unification church disputes into this case. Those are political slapfests. This is science.

1661: 1576: 1499: 1479: 443: 1726: 1711: 1677: 1645:; with no other publications, is a reasonable authority for an unlikely assertion about chiropractic which has no other verifiable source of support 1278: 1271:

an small minority view or a concept generally recognized as pseudoscience. In this sense, it may be that more (words) is actually less (emphasis).

5154: 2060: 7874: 4034:. The arbitration clerks are directed to amend all existing remedies authorizing discretionary sanctions to instead designate contentious topics. 2854:

15) Theories which, while purporting to be scientific, are obviously bogus, may be so labeled and categorized as such without more justification.

1913:

violation; I reviewed and denied the unblock. We had a lengthy discussion about it, and I was surprised that he never was able to see that using

8108: 8026:

QuackGuru and Surturz warned of discretionary sanctions and given specific guidelines on how to edit in the future or face immediate topic bans.

7694: 5458: 5361: 4900: 3107: 2697: 1790: 1732: 1723: 1708: 1674: 1151:. As a chronic promoter of pro-pseudoscience bias in articles, Iantresman has consistently disrupted pseudoscience article talk pages dismissing 635: 539: 7683: 7680: 7558: 5092: 5061: 4999: 4968: 1803:

In this case, the prime editor, as they call it here, is not an expert of the field he is editing, rather he is an expert from the opposition.

1044: 1041: 8035: 7499: 7090: 7052: 6969: 6897: 6631: 6601: 6386: 6139: 5943: 5030: 4929: 4849: 3702: 3669: 2159: 731: 107: 7983: 6934: 5712: 4641: 2964:

and others. One involved party is also a leading developer and proponent of one of the topics in question, and has a biography on Knowledge (

1614: 1238:

policy to overly limit, and in many cases remove altogether, material about non-mainstream or pseudoscientific ideas. Especially in articles

7923: 7884: 7369: 6822: 6098: 5404: 2952:

2) The locus of this dispute in this case is the editing to a group of articles loosely connected to cosmology and related topics, including

1761: 1445: 1120:

and the contributions of editors who are familiar and may be considered "mainstream experts" in the material, like myself. I am a fan of the

220: 7935: 7846: 7784: 5123: 4698: 4674: 3382: 3262: 2325:

above by Jonathanischoice), cosmological discussions can become similarly polarized. Thus, we have seen ScienceApologist and others use the

1084:, perhaps you will provide verification of your statement that you are an expert, for example, your description as "a professor of physics" 8021: 7958: 7828: 6160: 2899:, but which some critics allege to be pseudoscience, may contain information to that effect, but generally should not be so characterized. 2576: 2559:, a fundamental policy, requires fair representation of all significant points of view regarding the subject of an article, see comment by 2375: 1568:

mentions (i.e., it appears without annotations, so it can be used to advance one view over another rather than presenting competing views).

6885: 6589: 5322: 5135: 5104: 5073: 5042: 5011: 4980: 2460: 2429: 7397: 6454: 6254: 5453: 5311: 5280: 5244: 5207: 5172: 4949: 2401: 7120: 4603: 1998:

I have some expertise in the area of the psychology of both the belief in pseudoscience and pseudoskepticism, which may be of use here.

1619: 5899: 4367: 4310: 3818: 3692: 3647: 3537: 1475: 1160: 268: 6697: 4486: 3983:

Following a request to amend several prior decisions to terminate discretionary sanctions provisions that may no longer be necessary,

7302: 7271: 7232: 7193: 6289: 6217: 5938: 5693: 5655: 5616: 5581: 5373: 4910: 4546: 4515: 4403: 4339: 4282: 4212: 4100: 2768:

10) In the case of subjects which require considerable academic or experiential expertise, some deference to experts is appropriate.

412: 7391: 7154: 7014: 6862: 6817: 6772: 6731: 6566: 6518: 6484: 6439: 6405: 6371: 6330: 5969: 5792: 5758: 5727: 4770: 4739: 2221:

Complete and categorical dismissal of entire discussions as irrelevant (especially when errors in his logic are pointed out to him),

1921:

By far, I am more worried about the contributions of the other camp, particularly ScienceApologist and JBKramer. (Previously, also

7345: 6661: 6390: 6143: 5820: 5480: 5416: 5388: 4881: 4844: 4643: 4501: 3974: 3608: 2128: 1085: 1036: 2715:

6) As practiced on Knowledge, the wiki process contemplates that any editor may edit any article provided they do not disrupt it.

2600:

2) There must be sufficient verifiable information from reliable sources regarding a subject for there to be an article about it,

7580: 7521: 7440: 5677: 5546: 5513: 4807: 4701: 4676: 4442: 4247: 4183: 4152: 1972:. Like ScienceApologist, JBKramer is aware of Knowledge policies but obeys them when it supports the point of view he prefers. 1378:

No no no ... its a poetic allegory representing the oneness and beyond-understanding-ness of the multi-universe that can only be

700: 460: 172: 7669:

and their associated talk pages. Basis: Reverted merge calling it a "disruptive and nonconsensus redirect by ScienceApologist."

6186: 6155: 6124: 6093: 6062: 6031: 6000: 5856: 5472: 8050: 7945: 7247: 6677: 4505: 3945: 3822: 3308: 214: 2820: 2627: 2341:, for the previously established purpose of disparaging him and his ideas. (In fact, one of ScienceApologist's administrative 1474:

Editors concerned with highlighting what they believe are pseudoscientific topics rightly point to the NPOV FAQ's comments on

1164: 7930: 7677: 7321: 6458: 6420: 6015: 5914: 5681: 5392: 4575: 4227: 3124: 2909: 2778: 2167: 1699:

Finally, articles should be written by people without substantial skin in the game. Tresman is a supporter of Lerner. Lerner

1111: 796: 652: 556: 364: 6920: 5918: 3691:

relating to pseudoscience and fringe science, broadly interpreted. Any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an

2215:

Blatant and obvious misunderstanding of the papers when he finally did get round to reading (or claiming to have read) them,

1684:

We have a policy that was initially designed to prevent physics cranks from presenting their unique theories in Knowledge -

1004:

where the original paper on the subject has over 100 citations, and verifiable citations call it a "new redshift mechanism".

8123: 8058: 7738: 7417: 7286: 6881: 6877: 6077: 3294: 3001: 2604:. Guidelines regarding notability have been developed for a number of areas, but not for scientific theories (The proposal 2476:

Accept. We can't rule on content here; but can examine whether allegations of large-scale POV pushing have any foundation.

1524:

turns up a scant three citations of the terms "homeopathy" and "pseudoscience" together? Why doesn't it suffice simply to

1156: 748: 604: 316: 85: 6424: 6019: 5565: 4600: 4235: 3163:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Tommy_Mandel_has_pushed_his_POV_on_Big_Bang_and_Plasma_cosmology

7135: 7112: 6984: 6585: 6273: 6081: 5984: 5561: 5495: 5435: 5187: 5150: 4593: 4579: 3226: 2871: 1993: 1841: 1745: 1555: 1039: 887:

I believe that the following editing examples are based on the unsubstantiated perception of pseudoscience, resulting in

853: 262: 7033: 5988: 5499: 5191: 2280: 6620: 6581: 6380: 6345: 6269: 6133: 5635: 5631: 5431: 5263: 5259: 5131: 5100: 5069: 5038: 5007: 4976: 4727: 4723: 4561: 4430: 4418: 4062: 1142: 508: 406: 17: 7981: 7913: 7808: 7251: 7071: 6988: 6681: 6205: 6050: 4534: 3327: 2526: 2030:

I too have witnessed the grossly disruptive POV-pushing of ScienceApologist's edits. Look at his edits to the article

7855: 7029: 6953: 6349: 6046: 5777: 5600: 5357: 4896: 4393: 4301: 4105: 4055: 3326:

15) Iantresman, in his editing philosophy, favors challenges to standard knowledge, which he sometimes terms "dogma"

1404: 865:

While some of his work is indeed controversial, a number of editors are of the opinion that Lerner or his work (e.g.

8009: 8006: 7290: 6916: 6716: 5957: 5226: 4758: 4202: 4140: 3658: 3275: 3205: 3202: 2233:

Ad-hominem attacks on Eric Lerner's person, reputation, qualifications, status as a legitimate scientist, and so on,

874: 8094: 8073: 7840: 7574: 7515: 7434: 7173: 6787: 6646: 6616: 6236: 5807: 5773: 5596: 5532: 5088: 5057: 4995: 4964: 4329: 4275: 4171: 4088: 3281: 2763: 2687: 2485:

Accept. There appears to be sufficient allegation of user misconduct to investigate (on all sides of this matter)

1976: 1958: 694: 454: 166: 7789:

Block shortened at request of mediator handling the mediation on the pages of which the reported violation began.

6791: 6308: 6174: 5879: 5875: 5840: 2937:

1a) The notability of a scientific theory may arise in ways that are not determined by its contemporary validity.

1525: 7998: 7973: 7383: 7361: 7208: 7067: 7006: 6854: 6809: 6764: 6712: 6558: 6476: 6448: 6363: 6322: 6304: 6201: 6112: 5746: 5222: 5026: 4925: 4785: 4754: 4530: 4358: 4136: 3893:(i) the clear and substantial consensus of (a) uninvolved administrators at AE or (b) uninvolved editors at AN or 3545: 3183: 2582: 2556: 1956: 1932: 1883: 1547: 1545: 1468: 1462: 828: 23: 8077: 7776:

is blocked for 96 hours for violating his restriction, specifically incivility and and assuming bad faith. See

7109: 6750: 6650: 6544: 5811: 3321: 3264: 2329:

in which a certain CTMU paper was published to justify their attack on its author and his ideas in violation of

244: 8090: 7212: 7169: 6949: 6836: 6627: 6238: 6232: 5708: 5528: 5468: 5300: 4867: 4830: 4822: 4793: 4789: 4625: 4389: 4297: 4167: 4114: 3864:

prior affirmative agreement for the modification at (a) AE or (b) AN or (c) ARCA (see "Important notes" below).

3549: 3466: 3241: 3118: 2800: 2605: 1970: 1966: 1962: 1941: 1939: 1904: 1897: 1082: 1075: 1047: 882: 879: 872: 870: 790: 646: 550: 358: 238: 7837: 6503: 4826: 232: 7615: 7077: 7039: 6930: 6912: 6746: 6540: 5953: 5871: 5836: 4863: 4859: 4198: 3498: 3236: 3045: 2995: 2465: 2388: 2258: 1968: 1964: 1960: 1955:

to oppose the work of people like Lerner and their articles, and disturbs me greatly. Here is the sequence:

1667: 1232: 742: 598: 310: 292: 6277: 4475: 3761: 3232: 3231:

11a) Using strong negative language, ScienceApologist has deprecated a number of persons and their theories

3207: 3193: 1788: 1756:

often enough to be listed by him, I humbly apologize. It wasn't on purpose. Note that I'm all for following

1017: 996: 436: 8018: 7955: 6832: 6108: 5382: 5119: 4876: 4839: 4802: 4691: 4658: 4495: 4457: 4439: 4354: 4325: 4244: 4180: 4149: 3541: 3420: 3155:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Evidence_of_misrepresentation_by_ScienceApologist

2494: 2362: 1988: 1936: 1575:

Since these disputes affect large numbers of articles, guidance from the ArbCom would be helpful. thanks,

280: 226: 7598: 7545: 7458: 4270: 3261:

12) Iantresman has also been uncivil regarding ScienceApologist, accusing him of bad faith or vandalism.

1944: 1907: 934: 929: 918: 915: 910: 905: 899: 896: 876: 724: 484: 424: 196: 7627: 7586: 7446: 7105: 6170: 5671: 3533: 2019:

coverage of different subjects within an article, not the coverage of the subject of the article itself.

1216:

regarded and to make distinctions between “controversial” and “kooky”, distinctions that SA denies exist.

1207:

institutions where I have been invited to present my work and to my stay at ESO as a Visiting Astronomer.

1074:

Since you note that "the scientific community defers to its expert members for evaluation of controversy"

502: 286: 7533: 3868:

Administrators modifying sanctions out of process may at the discretion of the committee be desysopped.

3781: 3244: 3148: 1943:, and many of his other comments also, with a sarcastic, superior tone. I reverted him when he did this 1533: 855: 820: 712: 676: 580: 472: 388: 184: 8044: 7670: 7645: 7633: 7334: 7241: 6671: 6444: 5742: 5296: 4262: 3833: 3482: 3025: 2735: 2673: 2370: 1703:

Lerner. I am someone with a slight science background who stumbled upon the article due to whinging on

1585: 1011: 1008: 999: 772: 628: 430: 340: 208: 3304: 3136: 2310: 1651: 1536:) are tending to use the above-linked comments from the NPOV FAQ as a way to resurrect the deprecated 808: 664: 568: 376: 7621: 7315: 7139: 6623: 6499: 6414: 6009: 5908: 4569: 4471: 3738:

14) All pages relating to pseudoscience and fringe science, broadly interpreted, are designated as a

3256: 3013: 2730:

7) Historically, although a perennial subject of discussion, see, for example, the rejected proposal

2108: 921: 760: 616: 532: 328: 274: 7854:

blocked reduced to "time served" given the significant positive improvement by offering an apology

7639: 7592: 7539: 7452: 7280: 6926: 6871: 6247: 6071: 5446: 5329: 5307: 5273: 5237: 5200: 5165: 4942: 3942: 3159:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Evidence_that_there_is_no_big_bang_theory

2731: 2406: 2230:

Constantly editing and reverting until basically everyone else gives up in frustration and disgust,

718: 520: 478: 418: 190: 1643: 7327: 7129: 7116: 6978: 5978: 5555: 5489: 5378: 5181: 5144: 4587: 4491: 4050: 3937: 3553: 3167:

Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Big_Bang_is_the_real_pseudoscience

3058: 3033: 2696:

occur from time to time, it is not the place of Knowledge to venture projections regarding them,

2669: 256: 1487: 7752: 7690:

After considerable discussion, it appears Martinphi is unlikely to continue disruptive actions.

7527: 7365: 6575: 6339: 6263: 5895: 5667: 5625: 5425: 5253: 4717: 4555: 4412: 3142: 2849: 2833: 2550: 1517: 1491: 814: 706: 670: 574: 466: 400: 382: 178: 8040: 7851: 7833: 7800: 7773: 7744: 7705: 7555: 7387: 7237: 7023: 7010: 6858: 6813: 6768: 6692: 6667: 6562: 6524: 6480: 6367: 6326: 6040: 5661: 5351: 5341: 4890: 4707: 4609: 4482: 4373: 4072: 4066: 3360:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Regarding_Ian_Tresman_in_particular

3342:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Regarding_Ian_Tresman_in_particular

3300: 3214:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Regarding_Ian_Tresman_in_particular

3019: 2890: 2814: 2621: 2477: 2250: 2246: 2138: 2048: 1370: 1328: 1301: 1251: 1134: 940: 901:, apparently because it does not meet certain editor's unverifiable criteria for these terms. 766: 622: 334: 203: 4021:

to re-designate existing discretionary sanctions remedies as contentious topic designations.

2659: 2560: 1640: 1125: 8067: 8031: 7568: 7509: 7428: 7298: 7267: 7228: 7189: 7181: 6795: 6781: 6640: 6610: 6285: 6213: 5934: 5904: 5844: 5801: 5767: 5689: 5651: 5612: 5590: 5577: 5369: 5127: 5096: 5082: 5065: 5051: 5034: 5003: 4989: 4972: 4958: 4670: 4637: 4565: 4542: 4511: 4399: 4335: 4208: 4096: 4082: 3130: 2947: 2645: 2601: 2379: 2320:

ScienceApologist is an "ID critic" with a philosophically skewed understanding of cosmology

2090: 1324: 1311: 802: 688: 658: 562: 370: 160: 3857:

No administrator may modify or remove a sanction placed by another administrator without:

2267: 2057:(an admin) has demonstrated POV-pushing and incivility specifically on the big bang issue, 1296:

listed in the see also section? The two-stream approach to editting proposes advocated by

1049:

when a "simple content dispute" this is not. Again, I think the reaction is an example of

42: 8: 7992: 7967: 7379: 7355: 7202: 7061: 7002: 6867: 6850: 6805: 6760: 6706: 6554: 6472: 6359: 6318: 6298: 6240: 6195: 6067: 5965: 5754: 5439: 5325: 5303: 5266: 5230: 5216: 5193: 5157: 5020: 4934: 4919: 4779: 4766: 4748: 4735: 4695: 4524: 4130: 3078: 3007: 2927: 2446: 2350: 2212:

Blunt refusal to even read some of the important papers in question (WMAP discrepancies),

2066: 1926: 754: 610: 526: 322: 49: 3055: 1116:

There is conflict between editors who champion pseudoscience, fringe science, etc. like

131:, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at 8084: 7919: 7897: 7880: 7763: 7342: 7163: 6943: 6658: 6226: 5817: 5702: 5551: 5522: 5485: 5462: 5412: 5177: 5140: 4816: 4619: 4583: 4383: 4291: 4161: 4109: 3112: 2961: 2651: 2508: 2354: 1529: 1510: 1168: 1028: 784: 640: 544: 352: 251: 34: 2192:

one does not need to be an expert in a subject in order to write effectively about it,

1561:

irrespective of whether we can prove the scientific community takes such a stance; and

8102: 7691: 7685: 7666: 7609: 7259: 7220: 6906: 6740: 6571: 6534: 6335: 6259: 5947: 5891: 5865: 5830: 5421: 5249: 4853: 4713: 4408: 4361: 4304: 4192: 3992: 3453: 3051: 2989: 2748: 1599:

reported. Reporting a dissenting opinion does not imply endorsement of that opinion.

1454: 1419: 736: 592: 514: 395: 304: 7409:

All sanctions issued pursuant to a discretionary sanctions remedy must be logged at

3589:

Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Martinphi-ScienceApologist#Log of blocks and bans

1274:

Bracketing notable non-mainstream ideas into walled gardens makes Knowledge worse.--

8054: 8015: 7952: 7824: 7725: 7673: 7468: 7019: 6992: 6826: 6685: 6462: 6102: 6036: 5922: 5604: 5569: 5544: 5511: 5347: 5113: 4886: 4871: 4834: 4797: 4685: 4652: 4478: 4451: 4436: 4348: 4319: 4241: 4177: 4146: 4014: 3449: 3358:

16) ScienceApologist has habitually failed to extend good faith to Iantresman, see

2957: 2932: 2517: 2490: 2416: 2338: 2204:

debate at all as evidence that evolution itself was therefore fundamentally wrong.

1914: 1050: 1038:. And while I don't mind being described as a "well-known pseudoscience POV pusher" 962: 888: 866: 834: 2823:, a guideline, strongly discourages editing which promotes the editor's projects. 2349:

to repeat this spurious accusation; note the references on JoshuaZ's talk page to

1646: 1629: 1176: 1046:, and an abuse of administrator priviliges to react in such a heavy-handed manner 8027: 7676:

on supposed procedural grounds; warned ScienceApologist for the edit he reverted

7563: 7482: 7423: 7294: 7263: 7224: 7185: 7099: 6956:

after arguing that that it is not a fact that the Earth is not 6000 years old at

6636: 6606: 6281: 6209: 6182: 6151: 6120: 6089: 6058: 6027: 5996: 5930: 5852: 5797: 5763: 5685: 5647: 5608: 5586: 5573: 5365: 5078: 5047: 4954: 4907: 4666: 4633: 4597: 4538: 4507: 4395: 4331: 4272: 4204: 4092: 4031: 4027: 3404: 3337: 2978: 2072: 2031: 1973: 1753: 1148: 1117: 1102: 1088: 1061: 1032: 683: 496: 155: 3587:

All sanctions imposed under the provisions of this decision are to be logged at

2189:

I have sufficient scientific qualifications to understand the relevant material,

1899:, for instance, where Ian espouses the idea that the information he re-added to 1628:

a) whether a Penn state sophomore writing for an in-house undergraduate journal

943:

and some of his others edits in other articles, I made a Personal Attack report

7988: 7963: 7940:

Announcement made at the talkpage, that the article is within the scope of the

7909: 7869: 7701: 7551: 7374: 7351: 7198: 7145: 7057: 6997: 6845: 6800: 6755: 6722: 6702: 6549: 6509: 6467: 6430: 6396: 6354: 6313: 6294: 6191: 5961: 5783: 5750: 5736: 5718: 5290: 5212: 5016: 4915: 4775: 4762: 4744: 4731: 4520: 4256: 4126: 3756: 3739: 3439: 2896: 2693: 2096: 2084: 2063:

has demonstrated POV-pushing and incivility specifically on the big bang issue,

1922: 1537: 1429: 1410: 1383: 1152: 1081:.. is likley not 'an expert in physics.' .. He does have 'a doctoral degree.'" 3299:

14) ScienceApologist has occasionally engaged in edit warring, for example at

8117: 8080: 8002: 7915: 7893: 7876: 7338: 7255: 7216: 7159: 6939: 6654: 6493: 6222: 5813: 5698: 5643: 5518: 5476: 5408: 4812: 4615: 4465: 4379: 4287: 4266: 4157: 2710: 2545: 2504: 2457: 2398: 2335:

despite the fact that the CTMU explicitly acknowledges and embraces evolution

2330: 2102: 1910: 1757: 1704: 1352: 1315: 1297: 1275: 779: 347: 138:

Arbitrators will be working on evidence and suggesting proposed decisions at

1027:

In addition to editor ScienceApologist, I've also singled out Administrator

8097: 8008:

QuackGuru then deleted the thread, saying the allegations were unsupported.

7932: 7843: 7790: 7781: 7604: 6957: 6902: 6736: 6530: 5861: 5826: 5396: 5318: 4662: 4629: 4422: 4188: 3101: 2984: 2342: 2143: 2078: 2054: 1777: 1765: 1738: 1719: 1685: 1565: 1449: 1129: 587: 299: 3899:

is required. If consensus at AE or AN is unclear, the status quo prevails.

3748: 3721: 3642:

Articles relating to pseudoscience, broadly interpreted, are placed under

3188:

11) ScienceApologist has strongly and repeated criticized Iantresman with

149: 8012: 7949: 7820: 7714: 7662: 7464: 7177: 5535: 5502: 5109: 4681: 4648: 4447: 4433: 4344: 4315: 4238: 4174: 4143: 3861:

the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or

3445: 3394: 2965: 2595: 2486: 2366: 2195:

I do not necessarily disagree with most of ScienceApologist's sentiments.

1952: 1900: 1889: 1414: 1413:, but I'll be happy to give my input. During my review of the history of 1121: 1078: 992: 849: 1834:

There seems to be some confusion about NPOV. Let me refresh our memory

7858: 7475:

and their talk pages. This was done in consultation with other admins

7095: 6178: 6147: 6116: 6085: 6054: 6023: 5992: 5883: 5848: 5639: 3427:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience#Log_of_blocks_and_bans

3061: 3031: 1658: 1632: 1611: 1513: 1494:

should be used sparingly. I've commented on this issue in some detail

491: 3991:

is amended by replacing the word "articles" with the word "pages" for

3814:

ask the enforcing administrator to reconsider their original decision;

3695:

action on users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning.

3456:, and any pages, excepting talk pages, related to his real-life work. 2531: 1409:

I haven't been much of an involved party in this save the incident on

1016:

More accusations against scientists who research alternative theories

995:(a type of redshift mechanism), denial that it is a "proper" redshift 5732: 5286: 4252: 3953: 3650:

action on users editing in this topic area, after an initial warning.

2877: 2397:

I'll be adding links, headings, and text as time permits. Thank you,

2040: 1776:

Added myself to case, as was my intention in the original comment. --

1336: 1293: 1260: 983: 3832:. If the editor is blocked, the appeal may be made by email through 3334: 2346: 1544:

designate a field as pseudoscience, that suffices for categorization

1183:

the minority in a field is not only wrong, but not even a scientist.

7977: 7708:

are blocked for 72 hours due to arbcom restriction violations. See

6923: 6489: 4461: 3601:

This provision does not affect any existing provisions of the case.

2953: 2725: 2437: 2426: 2408: 1264: 1247: 958: 998:, or suggestion that it is not generally recognised as a redshift 6840: 4231: 1637: 1444:

I would also like to congratulate the editors who cleaned up the

1351:

If it's a cube, how come there aren't six days? Why only four?

914:

Removing positive reviews, and replacing them with negative ones

881:). I have requested a verifiable source supporting this position 7463:

blocked for 24 hours for disruption and banned for 3 weeks from

3330: 2738:, experts were accorded no special role or status on Knowledge. 2035: 1744:

If this case gets opened, I beg to be included. I'm a member of

1642:) and not available online, written by a private sex counsellor 1043:, I feel it is uncivil to not provide an explanation on request 3379:

Category:Fringe subjects without critical scientific evaluation

3373:

Category:Fringe subjects without critical scientific evaluation

2698:

Knowledge:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_crystal_ball

1831:

He has a vested interest when he visits Not Big Bang articles.

1155:, and has a history of tendentious and disruptive arguments at 895:

Removal of Lerner's verifiable label as a "plasma cosmologist"

7747:

is blocked for 72 hours for violating these restrictions. See

5684:

due to a complaint of edit warring on fringe science articles.

4069:}} may be used on an editor's talkpage; this is not required. 3930:

procedure for the standard appeals and modifications provision

3568:

Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement

3461:

Passed 5-0 with 2 abstentions at 02:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

3381:

and placed articles at contention in this proceeding into it

3089:

Passed 6-0 with 2 abstentions at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

2844:

Passed 5-1 with 2 abstentions at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

2773:

Passed 5-0 with 3 abstentions at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

2743:

Passed 4-1 with 3 abstentions at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC)

2326: 2173:

The following is my statement repeated from the original RFA:

7550:

blocked for 24 hours for violating his topic ban by editing

1259:

it. So while Redshift quantization should be excluded from

982:

scientists have questioned the traditional view of redshift

7411:

Knowledge:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/Log

3646:. Any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an 1868:

And here is how ScienceApologist interprets that policy --

1564:

despite the NPOV problems with the category namespace that

1341: 1289: 3932:

adopted 3 May 2014, this provision did not require a vote.

3776:

adopted 3 May 2014, this provision did not require a vote.

1345: 987:

Typical edits which demonstrate the issue are as follows:

2895:

17) Theories which have a substantial following, such as

1909:. Over a series of actions that day, he was blocked for 1750:

written from a typical mainstream astronomy point of view

1222:

themselves. University records are not generally on-line!

1001:, even though it is well accepted in the field of optics 1347: 2075:(an admin) has demonstrated POV-pushing and incivility, 1509:

As an example regarding categorization: Is the current

6991:

of discretionary sanctions and the 1RR restriction on

2471:

Arbitrators' opinions on hearing this matter (4/0/0/0)

2111:(an admin) has demonstrated POV-pushing and incivility 1748:. And if any article about a topic of astronomy isn't 1505:(minor edits for clarity 05:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)) 4009:

Motion: contentious topic designation (December 2022)

2134:

Knowledge:Requests_for_adminship/William M. Connolley

1639:, a publication not listed in the ISI or PubMed (see 1554:

despite the fact that such sources don't meet RS for

1467:

I agree with Gleng's comments. As he says below and

4427:

List of pseudosciences and pseudoscientific concepts

2795:

Experts are subject to the no original research rule

2452:(This area is used for notes by non-recused clerks.) 1592: 1007:

Removal of mention of alternative redshift theories,

909:

Discrediting his "theories" by calling them "ideas"

8100:; ignoring consensus and RfCs, circular arguments. 7656:

for "Harrasment of ScienceApologist" 22 June 2007.

1246:As for the related mainstream topics (for example, 5607:which were followed by protection of the article. 4017:, the Arbitration Committee adopted the following 3627:Those discretionary sanctions were later moved by 946:which subsequently results in a heated discussion 4015:2022 adoption of the contentious topics procedure 3960:("Obvious pseudoscience"). Finding of fact #9 of 3208:"inordinate ignorance" of a "nonscientist layman" 2608:is based on principles elucidated in this case). 2374:philosophy , and Langan as a "crank" , something 2365:about Knowledge's CTMU article on the website of 2124:Knowledge:Requests_for_adminship/ScienceApologist 1161:Knowledge:Neutral_point_of_view/FAQ#Pseudoscience 8115: 7946:Talk:Chiropractic/Archive 28#ArbCom restrictions 3962:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience 3958:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience 3774:procedure for the standard enforcement provision 1947:that followed clearly lays out that JBKramer is 1903:could stay until it is verified, in contrast to 1653:for a review of it from a skeptical perspective) 1528:, as WP:NPOV says? I believe some editors (cf. 7762:Reduced to 24 hours, mitigating circumstances. 1752:I'd be happy to correct this. If didn't revert 3094:Modified by motion at 18:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 2864:Modified by motion at 18:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 1880:in violation of the Original Research policy. 1636:b) whether an article in a Society newsletter 6753:after making false accusations of vandalism. 3354:ScienceApologist failure to extend good faith 3203:characterized him as an "avowed Velikovskian" 2876:16) Theories which have a following, such as 2821:Knowledge:Conflict_of_interest#Self-promotion 2542:(vote counts and comments are there as well) 971:. Many other papers have appeared since then 6278:recently edited the lead of plasma cosmology 5405:Nambudripad's Allergy Elimination Techniques 3896:(ii) a passing motion of arbitrators at ARCA 3538:avoid biting genuinely inexperienced editors 2628:Knowledge:Neutral point of view#Undue weight 2081:has demonstrated POV-pushing and incivility, 2069:the person that nominated Joke137 for admin, 1625:KV refers (below) to my comments questioning 1165:Knowledge:Neutral_point_of_view#Undue_weight 933:Removal of Lerner's scientific presentation 5321:discussion that it's not really applicable 3426: 2577:Neutral point of view as applied to science 2302:The Unofficial Anti-Pseudoscience Executive 925:Changing Lerner's verifiable BA in Physics 3493:Passed 5-0 at 02:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3477:Passed 8-0 at 02:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3434:Passed 7-0 at 02:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3415:Passed 7-0 at 02:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3389:Passed 6-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3377:17) ScienceApologist has recently created 3367:Passed 7-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3348:Passed 6-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3316:Passed 7-1 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3289:Passed 6-2 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3270:Passed 7-1 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3251:Passed 5-2 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3221:Passed 7-1 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3176:Passed 8-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3071:Passed 8-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3040:Passed 8-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2973:Passed 8-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2942:Passed 7-1 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2919:Passed 7-1 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2904:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2885:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2859:Passed 7-1 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2828:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2809:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2789:Passed 7-1 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2758:Passed 7-1 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2720:Passed 7-1 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2705:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2682:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2640:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2613:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2590:Passed 7-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2568:Passed 5-3 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2026:more evidence of abuse by ScienceApologist 135:. Evidence is more useful than comments. 7672:; disrupted consensus discussions on the 3245:"Completely unauthorative, argumentative" 928:to the suggestion that it's "self-stated" 7836:blocked 72 hours for personal attacks. 3515:Former title: "Discretionary sanctions". 2436:Now checked; and doesn't seem at issue. 2129:Knowledge:Requests_for_adminship/Joke137 4030:shall be treated as a reference to the 3834:Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee 2180:therefore none of us is an expert in it 1935:), but that user is no longer involved 1441:should exempt them from any sanctions. 14: 8116: 5921:due to a complaint of edit warring on 3969:Passed 7-0 at 18:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 3913:functionary blocks of whatever nature. 3340:, see also many of the other links at 3335:a site devoted to scientific anomalies 3309:Special:Contributions/ScienceApologist 1718:Finally, I suggest that ArbCom enjoin 1013:, despite them being related subjects. 965:, and consequently contravene policy. 7857:even if not entirely forthcoming. — 142:and voting on proposed decisions at 4041:Passed 10 to 0 with 1 abstention by 3836:(or, if email access is revoked, to 2910:Alternative theoretical formulations 2779:Experts are required to cite sources 2039:Look also at his recent edit to the 1157:Knowledge talk:Neutral point of view 6954:notified of discretionary sanctions 6882:notified of discretionary sanctions 3956:" are struck from principle #15 of 3819:arbitration enforcement noticeboard 3444:7a) Elerner is banned from editing 2227:Reverting edits without discussion, 1534:Talk:Pseudoscience#Credible_sources 1077:, and another editor suggest that " 904:Removal of Lerner's writing awards 30: 7405:standardised enforcement provision 6922:, despite previous related block: 5638:after a report of edit warring on 3828:submit a request for amendment at 2872:Generally considered pseudoscience 1526:let the facts speak for themselves 1254:), I think the policy of removing 31: 18:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration 8135: 7478:, and my reasoning is given here 6461:for breaching 1RR restriction on 4028:discretionary sanctions procedure 2241:In other words, this editor is a 2178:peer-reviewed work in cosmology, 4045:at 21:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC) 4026:21) Each reference to the prior 3886:For a request to succeed, either 3840: 3751:at 21:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC) 3724:at 21:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC) 3682:Standard discretionary sanctions 3295:ScienceApologist has edit warred 3282:Special:Contributions/Iantresman 2218:Constant recourse to ad-populum, 1520:appropriate or necessary when a 1087:, and confirm your doctorate? -- 917:, or including negative reviews 891:and deviation from Wiki policy: 122:on 11:22, 30 November 2014 (UTC) 111:on 22:35, 15 November 2012 (UTC) 4063:subst:Pseudoscience enforcement 4003:, 11:22, 30 November 2014 (UTC) 3853:Modifications by administrators 3715:, 11:22, 30 November 2014 (UTC) 3706:, 22:35, 15 November 2012 (UTC) 3673:, 22:35, 15 November 2012 (UTC) 3227:Deprecation by ScienceApologist 2764:Academically demanding subjects 2688:Knowledge is not a crystal ball 2583:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 2557:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 1631:is a notable source of opinion 1288:-- I absolutely disagree. Does 89:on 14:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 70:on 02:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 62:on 11:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC) 7984:01:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC) 7959:02:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC) 7942:Pseudoscience arbitration case 5970:19:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC) 5939:04:34, 11 September 2013 (UTC) 4702:19:34, 14 September 2010 (UTC) 4677:14:33, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 4644:14:33, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 4184:04:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC) 4153:03:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC) 4120:01:21, 22 September 2008 (UTC) 4101:23:25, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 3662:, 14:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3621:, 14:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3467:Iantresman placed on Probation 3200:advised him not to "be a dick" 2801:Knowledge:No original research 2606:Knowledge:Notability (science) 1490:means anything, it means that 1428:I feel the need to respond to 1159:, where he's sought to weaken 1031:who I believe is acting in an 852:is about the plasma physicist, 13: 1: 7829:03:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC) 7794:14:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC) 7785:20:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC) 7733:22:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC) 7695:02:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 7688:19:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 6863:05:42, 15 February 2014 (UTC) 6818:12:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC) 6773:07:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC) 6732:18:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC) 6519:22:33, 26 December 2013 (UTC) 6485:09:05, 22 December 2013 (UTC) 6440:12:41, 20 December 2013 (UTC) 6406:16:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC) 6290:22:11, 26 November 2013 (UTC) 6255:07:37, 26 November 2013 (UTC) 6218:04:43, 26 November 2013 (UTC) 6187:22:06, 19 November 2013 (UTC) 6156:00:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 6125:00:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 6094:00:51, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 6063:00:47, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 6032:00:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 6001:00:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 5900:16:42, 7 September 2013 (UTC) 5656:21:32, 14 December 2012 (UTC) 5603:after a series of reverts at 5417:16:27, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 4882:14:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC) 4845:14:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC) 4808:14:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC) 4368:08:46, 26 December 2008 (UTC) 4340:21:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC) 3805:Appeals by sanctioned editors 3499:Contentious topic designation 3211:"pet ideas" "Basic ignorance" 2734:and the brainstorming essay, 2630:quotes Jimbo Wales, stating " 2441:01:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC) 2430:05:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC) 2402:15:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC) 2168:Statement by Jonathanischoice 2036:http://cosmologystatement.org 1994:Generalities of pseudoscience 1746:pseudoscience watchers' cabal 1112:Statement by ScienceApologist 1072:Question to ScienceApologist: 100:on 12:34, 28 March 2012 (UTC) 8109:23:03, 5 November 2008 (UTC) 7767:00:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC) 7758:15:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC) 6698:13:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC) 6662:04:14, 3 February 2014 (UTC) 6632:19:10, 13 January 2014 (UTC) 6602:16:33, 13 January 2014 (UTC) 6372:01:54, 4 December 2013 (UTC) 6331:00:59, 4 December 2013 (UTC) 5694:15:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC) 5374:21:58, 12 January 2012 (UTC) 5334:01:18, 9 November 2011 (UTC) 5312:10:14, 8 November 2011 (UTC) 5281:17:56, 6 November 2011 (UTC) 5245:17:52, 6 November 2011 (UTC) 5208:03:55, 6 November 2011 (UTC) 4771:03:25, 15 January 2011 (UTC) 4740:03:05, 15 January 2011 (UTC) 4487:01:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC) 4443:19:52, 16 January 2009 (UTC) 4311:23:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC) 4108:to Levine2112's talkpage. - 4032:contentious topics procedure 3791:0) Appeals and modifications 3421:Tommysun placed on probation 2968:), which is also involved. 2281:The dual nature of cosmology 2275:it is absolutely impossible. 2254:20:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC) 2249:13:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 2163:01:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC) 1984:18:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC) 1781:11:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC) 1484:making necessary assumptions 1387:20:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC) 1374:18:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC) 1364:21:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC) 1344:". You must seek Time Cube. 920:based on unreliable sources 859:], and peer reviewed author 7: 8124:Knowledge arbitration cases 8036:18:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC) 8022:02:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC) 7500:00:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC) 7473:Electric universe (concept) 7398:Log of individual sanctions 6567:02:07, 5 January 2014 (UTC) 4404:19:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC) 4283:17:38, 9 October 2008 (UTC) 4248:19:30, 6 October 2008 (UTC) 4213:18:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC) 3917:discussed at another venue. 3823:administrators’ noticeboard 3762:Enforcement of restrictions 3611:, 01:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC) 3184:ScienceApologist is uncivil 2527:Temporary injunction (none) 2521:13:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC) 2512:07:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC) 2499:15:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 2481:07:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 2461:10:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1852:"objective") point of view. 1769:12:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 1727:16:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 1712:16:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 1678:06:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1662:10:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1615:10:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1580:08:38, 8 October 2006 (UTC) 1503:08:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC) 1458:08:16, 5 October 2006 (UTC) 1423:04:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1332:20:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1323:So how are you determining 1319:23:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1305:20:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1279:19:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1172:18:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1138:20:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1106:14:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 1092:23:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1065:21:50, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1010:including "See also" links 78:on 18:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 10: 8140: 8053:) banned from editing the 7862:19:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC) 7847:17:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC) 7559:01:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 7392:10:56, 12 April 2014 (UTC) 7121:11:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC) 7091:11:06, 25 March 2014 (UTC) 7053:11:10, 24 March 2014 (UTC) 7015:03:36, 22 March 2014 (UTC) 6970:00:01, 19 March 2014 (UTC) 6935:21:12, 13 March 2014 (UTC) 6794:following edit warring on 5857:01:27, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 5793:20:11, 14 April 2013 (UTC) 5759:20:23, 14 March 2013 (UTC) 5728:18:48, 13 March 2013 (UTC) 5617:06:48, 2 August 2012 (UTC) 5454:17:45, 12 March 2012 (UTC) 4911:04:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC) 4516:01:56, 29 March 2009 (UTC) 4012: 3514: 3483:ScienceApologist cautioned 3276:Iantresman's editing style 2736:Knowledge:Expert retention 2674:Knowledge:Reliable sources 2649: 2371:Christopher Michael Langan 1143:Statement by FeloniousMonk 1058:Question to FeloniousMonk: 939:Based on those edits from 32: 7936:16:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC) 7924:14:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC) 7908:Martinphi is banned from 7902:16:03, 16 June 2008 (UTC) 7885:10:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC) 7661:Martinphi is banned from 7346:08:43, 9 April 2014 (UTC) 7303:03:05, 8 April 2014 (UTC) 7272:23:19, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 7233:23:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 7194:16:46, 3 April 2014 (UTC) 7155:11:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC) 6898:17:49, 3 March 2014 (UTC) 5582:15:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC) 5547:22:18, 21 June 2012 (UTC) 5514:21:01, 17 June 2012 (UTC) 5481:19:27, 15 June 2012 (UTC) 5317:Retracted by myself, per 5173:13:58, 19 June 2011 (UTC) 5136:15:38, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 5105:14:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 5074:14:21, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 5043:14:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 5012:14:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 4981:14:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 4950:03:18, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 4868:Future Perfect at Sunrise 4831:Future Perfect at Sunrise 4794:Future Perfect at Sunrise 3841: 3782:Appeals and modifications 3574:Uninvolved administrators 3046:Self promotion by Elerner 2093:(an admin) pseudoskeptic, 1789:Comment by involved user 1620:Reply to Krishna Vindaloo 1405:Statement by Shell_Kinney 6590:this comment made at FTN 6377:Barney the barney barney 6130:Barney the barney barney 5821:13:01, 5 July 2013 (UTC) 5299:) - warned of sanctions 4604:14:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC) 4547:16:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC) 4265:), after a 3RR block at 3322:Iantresman's orientation 3197:"close-minded ignorance" 2732:Knowledge:Expert editors 2692:5) While it may be that 2185:Now don't get me wrong: 1906:, explaining his revert 7679:; vexatious 3RR report 7078:Personal attack removed 7040:Personal attack removed 4230:), for edit-warring at 3928:In accordance with the 3907: 3772:In accordance with the 3693:arbitration enforcement 3684:are authorised for all 3648:arbitration enforcement 3644:discretionary sanctions 2670:Knowledge:Verifiability 2537:All numbering based on 1884:Statement by Mangojuice 1591:for your own position. 1488:WP:NPOVT#Categorisation 1480:giving "equal validity" 1463:Statement by Jim_Butler 884:, but without success. 829:Statement by iantresman 8057:guideline for 30 days. 7809:User notified of block 7603:blocked for 1 week by 7407:applies to this case. 7258:about edit warring at 7219:about edit warring at 6839:after edit warring on 3817:request review at the 2487:Matthew Brown (Morven) 2376:specifically forbidden 2345:even tracked me to my 1820:non-standard cosmology 1518:category:pseudoscience 1492:category:pseudoscience 1099:Question to Guettarda: 76:Case Amended by motion 7852:User:ScienceApologist 7834:User:ScienceApologist 7817:further justification 7813:block notice on AN/AE 7801:User:ScienceApologist 7774:User:ScienceApologist 7751:for the complaint. - 7745:User:ScienceApologist 7706:User:ScienceApologist 7254:after a complaint at 7215:after a complaint at 5568:after an edit war at 3546:neutral point of view 3257:Iantresman is uncivil 3238:The Electric Universe 3233:"well-known woo-woos" 2850:Obvious pseudoscience 2834:Serious encyclopedias 2551:Neutral point of view 2466:Preliminary decisions 2259:Statement by Asmodeus 2139:User:ScienceApologist 1816:alternative cosmology 1668:Statement by JBKramer 1252:Redshift quantization 1233:Statement by Ragesoss 7182:Vitamin C megadosage 7180:and some reverts at 6796:Bioresonance therapy 6624:Georgewilliamherbert 6445:The Devil's Advocate 5845:Alternative medicine 4106:Diff of notification 3987:4. Remedy 14 of the 3938:Amendments by motion 3550:no original research 3331:his personal website 3062:Focus Fusion Society 2891:Questionable science 2815:Conflict of interest 2622:No original research 2602:Knowledge:Notability 2380:Wikimedia Foundation 2109:William M. Connolley 1989:Statement by GoodCop 1888:I first came to the 1312:Theory of everything 1177:Statement by Elerner 1126:WP:NPOV#Undue weight 869:) are pseudoscience 6927:Second Quantization 3952:The words "such as 3711:Amended 11 to 0 by 2646:Appropriate sources 2378:by the head of the 2311:Important Questions 1840:--Executive summary 1818:article to the now 1167:to favor his bias. 7711:for more details. 6919:after addition of 5886:, per instructions 5882:and disruption at 5843:based on edits at 5540: 5507: 5379:Certifiedallergist 4492:NootherIDAvailable 4067:subst:uw-sanctions 3999:Passed 11 to 0 by 3989:Pseudoscience case 3656:Passed 14 to 0 by 3619:alternate sanction 3542:dispute resolution 3508:Superseded version 2962:Intrinsic redshift 2539:/Proposed decision 2355:Wesley R. Elsberry 1586:Statement by Gleng 1556:scientific sources 1542:Skeptical Inquirer 1530:User:FeloniousMonk 957:2. The article on 862:(all verifiable). 144:/Proposed decision 8060:, 4 November 2008 7780:for the report. 7754:Revolving Bugbear 7260:Talk:Chiropractic 7221:Talk:Chiropractic 7153: 7081: 7043: 6730: 6517: 6438: 6404: 5791: 5726: 5538: 5505: 5134: 5103: 5072: 5041: 5010: 4979: 4880: 4843: 4806: 4118: 4056:Notification logs 3923: 3922: 3821:("AE") or at the 3740:contentious topic 3735: 3734: 3700:Passed 8 to 0 by 3617:Superseded by an 3534:assume good faith 3454:Aneutronic fusion 3052:Aneutronic fusion 857:, science writer 22:(Redirected from 8131: 8107: 8105: 8041:ScienceApologist 7755: 7731: 7728: 7722: 7667:Will-o'-the-wisp 7655: 7602: 7581:deleted contribs 7549: 7522:deleted contribs 7497: 7491: 7487: 7469:Plasma cosmology 7462: 7441:deleted contribs 7332: 7331: 7312: 7238:Jayaguru-Shishya 7152: 7150: 7143: 7075: 7037: 6993:Rupert Sheldrake 6729: 6727: 6720: 6695: 6690: 6668:Til Eulenspiegel 6516: 6514: 6507: 6463:Rupert Sheldrake 6437: 6435: 6428: 6403: 6401: 6394: 6250: 5923:Rupert Sheldrake 5790: 5788: 5781: 5725: 5723: 5716: 5668:Pottinger's cats 5605:Blacklight Power 5570:Blacklight Power 5542: 5509: 5449: 5276: 5240: 5203: 5168: 5160: 5130: 5099: 5068: 5037: 5006: 4975: 4945: 4937: 4874: 4837: 4800: 4366: 4364: 4309: 4307: 4280: 4112: 3948: 3847: 3845: 3844: 3843: 3787: 3786: 3705: 3672: 3661: 3607:Passed 7-2-0 by 3595:Other provisions 3527:and guidelines. 3504: 3503: 3450:Plasma cosmology 3301:Plasma cosmology 3152: 3125:deleted contribs 3057:as the director 3029: 3002:deleted contribs 2958:Plasma cosmology 2948:Locus of dispute 2928:Findings of Fact 2749:Content disputes 2662: 2478:Charles Matthews 2417:user:HeadleyDown 2049:ScienceApologist 1981: 1371:ScienceApologist 1361: 1358: 1355: 1329:ScienceApologist 1302:ScienceApologist 1135:ScienceApologist 1051:pseudoscepticism 941:ScienceApologist 889:pseudoscepticism 867:plasma cosmology 835:pseudoscepticism 824: 797:deleted contribs 776: 749:deleted contribs 728: 701:deleted contribs 680: 653:deleted contribs 632: 605:deleted contribs 584: 557:deleted contribs 536: 509:deleted contribs 488: 461:deleted contribs 440: 413:deleted contribs 392: 365:deleted contribs 344: 317:deleted contribs 296: 269:deleted contribs 248: 221:deleted contribs 204:ScienceApologist 200: 173:deleted contribs 150:Involved parties 117:Case Amended by 106:Case Amended by 95:Case Amended by 84:Case Amended by 52: 45: 27: 8139: 8138: 8134: 8133: 8132: 8130: 8129: 8128: 8114: 8113: 8103: 8101: 8001:) cautioned by 7976:) cautioned by 7821:John Vandenberg 7753: 7741: 7726: 7715: 7712: 7607: 7566: 7507: 7493: 7489: 7483: 7426: 7420: 7400: 7313: 7310:178.221.220.214 7308: 7307: 7176:after a 3RR at 7146: 7144: 6723: 6721: 6693: 6686: 6527: 6510: 6508: 6431: 6429: 6411:TheRedPenOfDoom 6397: 6395: 6248: 6006:TheRedPenOfDoom 5905:198.189.184.243 5784: 5782: 5719: 5717: 5664: 5642:was decided at 5536: 5503: 5447: 5344: 5274: 5238: 5201: 5166: 5158: 5128:KillerChihuahua 5097:KillerChihuahua 5066:KillerChihuahua 5035:KillerChihuahua 5004:KillerChihuahua 4973:KillerChihuahua 4943: 4935: 4710: 4612: 4598:User:TimVickers 4566:KillerChihuahua 4376: 4362: 4360: 4305: 4303: 4276: 4218:Malcolm Schosha 4075: 4058: 4053: 4051:Enforcement log 4037: 4036: 4022: 4013:As part of the 4011: 3981: 3979:(November 2014) 3950: 3944: 3940: 3924: 3880:Important notes 3839: 3837: 3792: 3784: 3764: 3759: 3736: 3701: 3668: 3657: 3516: 3509: 3501: 3485: 3469: 3442: 3423: 3407: 3405:Tommysun banned 3397: 3375: 3356: 3338:User:Iantresman 3324: 3297: 3278: 3259: 3229: 3186: 3110: 3104: 3081: 3048: 2987: 2981: 2950: 2935: 2930: 2912: 2893: 2874: 2852: 2836: 2817: 2797: 2781: 2766: 2751: 2728: 2713: 2694:paradigm shifts 2690: 2666: 2665: 2658: 2654: 2648: 2624: 2598: 2579: 2553: 2548: 2534: 2529: 2473: 2468: 2449: 2412: 2391: 2322: 2313: 2304: 2283: 2270: 2261: 2170: 2091:KillerChihuahua 2032:static universe 2028: 1996: 1991: 1977: 1886: 1794: 1754:User:Iantresman 1742: 1670: 1622: 1588: 1465: 1407: 1359: 1356: 1353: 1235: 1179: 1149:User:Iantresman 1145: 1118:User:Iantresman 1114: 963:pseudosceptical 848:1. The article 831: 782: 734: 686: 638: 590: 542: 494: 446: 398: 350: 302: 254: 206: 158: 152: 123: 112: 101: 90: 79: 71: 63: 56: 55: 48: 41: 37: 29: 28: 24:Knowledge:ARBPS 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 8137: 8127: 8126: 8112: 8111: 8096:cautioned for 8061: 8038: 8024: 7986: 7961: 7938: 7926: 7910:remote viewing 7906: 7905: 7904: 7870:User:Martinphi 7866: 7865: 7864: 7842:secondarily. 7831: 7798: 7797: 7796: 7771: 7770: 7769: 7740: 7739:2008 sanctions 7737: 7736: 7735: 7702:User:Martinphi 7658: 7657: 7561: 7552:Systems theory 7502: 7419: 7418:2007 sanctions 7416: 7399: 7396: 7395: 7394: 7349: 7305: 7277:Synsepalum2013 7274: 7235: 7196: 7157: 7123: 7093: 7055: 7017: 6972: 6937: 6900: 6886:arguing on FTN 6868:PhiChiPsiOmega 6865: 6820: 6775: 6734: 6700: 6665: 6634: 6604: 6569: 6526: 6523: 6522: 6521: 6487: 6442: 6408: 6374: 6333: 6292: 6257: 6220: 6189: 6158: 6127: 6096: 6068:Barleybannocks 6065: 6034: 6003: 5972: 5941: 5902: 5859: 5824: 5795: 5761: 5730: 5696: 5663: 5660: 5659: 5658: 5619: 5584: 5549: 5516: 5483: 5456: 5419: 5376: 5343: 5340: 5339: 5338: 5337: 5336: 5326:Magog the Ogre 5304:Magog the Ogre 5283: 5247: 5210: 5175: 5138: 5107: 5076: 5045: 5014: 4983: 4952: 4913: 4884: 4847: 4810: 4773: 4742: 4709: 4706: 4705: 4704: 4696:NuclearWarfare 4694:) notified by 4679: 4665:, notified by 4646: 4632:, notified by 4611: 4608: 4607: 4606: 4596:) notified by 4581: 4564:) notified by 4549: 4518: 4489: 4460:) notified by 4445: 4406: 4375: 4372: 4371: 4370: 4342: 4313: 4285: 4250: 4215: 4186: 4155: 4124: 4123: 4122: 4074: 4071: 4057: 4054: 4052: 4049: 4048: 4047: 4024: 4023: 4010: 4007: 4006: 4005: 3996: 3980: 3973: 3972: 3971: 3949: 3941: 3939: 3936: 3935: 3934: 3921: 3920: 3919: 3918: 3914: 3910: 3906: 3903: 3902: 3901: 3900: 3897: 3894: 3888: 3887: 3866: 3865: 3862: 3855: 3854: 3850: 3849: 3826: 3815: 3807: 3806: 3794: 3793: 3790: 3785: 3783: 3780: 3779: 3778: 3763: 3760: 3758: 3755: 3754: 3753: 3733: 3732: 3731: 3730: 3729: 3728: 3727: 3726: 3720:Superseded by 3678: 3677: 3676: 3675: 3667:Superseded by 3638: 3637: 3636: 3635: 3634: 3633: 3597: 3596: 3585: 3584: 3576: 3575: 3564: 3563: 3511: 3510: 3507: 3502: 3500: 3497: 3496: 3495: 3484: 3481: 3480: 3479: 3468: 3465: 3464: 3463: 3441: 3440:Elerner banned 3438: 3437: 3436: 3422: 3419: 3418: 3417: 3406: 3403: 3396: 3393: 3392: 3391: 3374: 3371: 3370: 3369: 3355: 3352: 3351: 3350: 3323: 3320: 3319: 3318: 3296: 3293: 3292: 3291: 3277: 3274: 3273: 3272: 3258: 3255: 3254: 3253: 3228: 3225: 3224: 3223: 3185: 3182: 3181: 3180: 3179: 3178: 3103: 3100: 3099: 3098: 3097: 3096: 3080: 3077: 3076: 3075: 3074: 3073: 3047: 3044: 3043: 3042: 2980: 2977: 2976: 2975: 2949: 2946: 2945: 2944: 2934: 2931: 2929: 2926: 2924: 2922: 2921: 2911: 2908: 2907: 2906: 2897:psychoanalysis 2892: 2889: 2888: 2887: 2873: 2870: 2869: 2868: 2867: 2866: 2851: 2848: 2847: 2846: 2835: 2832: 2831: 2830: 2816: 2813: 2812: 2811: 2796: 2793: 2792: 2791: 2780: 2777: 2776: 2775: 2765: 2762: 2761: 2760: 2750: 2747: 2746: 2745: 2727: 2724: 2723: 2722: 2712: 2709: 2708: 2707: 2689: 2686: 2685: 2684: 2664: 2663: 2655: 2650: 2647: 2644: 2643: 2642: 2623: 2620: 2618: 2616: 2615: 2597: 2594: 2593: 2592: 2578: 2575: 2573: 2571: 2570: 2552: 2549: 2547: 2544: 2533: 2532:Final decision 2530: 2528: 2525: 2524: 2523: 2514: 2501: 2483: 2472: 2469: 2467: 2464: 2454: 2453: 2448: 2445: 2444: 2443: 2411: 2405: 2390: 2387: 2321: 2318: 2312: 2309: 2303: 2300: 2282: 2279: 2269: 2266: 2260: 2257: 2239: 2238: 2234: 2231: 2228: 2225: 2222: 2219: 2216: 2213: 2197: 2196: 2193: 2190: 2169: 2166: 2147: 2146: 2141: 2136: 2131: 2126: 2113: 2112: 2106: 2105:pseudoskeptic, 2100: 2094: 2088: 2082: 2076: 2070: 2067:Dragons flight 2064: 2058: 2052: 2027: 2024: 2022: 1995: 1992: 1990: 1987: 1885: 1882: 1878: 1877: 1876: 1875: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1856: 1855: 1854: 1853: 1846: 1845: 1844: 1843: 1826: 1793: 1787: 1786: 1785: 1784: 1783: 1741: 1731: 1730: 1729: 1715: 1714: 1696: 1695: 1690: 1689: 1681: 1680: 1669: 1666: 1665: 1664: 1654: 1648: 1634: 1626: 1621: 1618: 1587: 1584: 1583: 1582: 1573: 1572: 1571: 1570: 1569: 1562: 1559: 1532:'s comment at 1464: 1461: 1427: 1406: 1403: 1402: 1401: 1400: 1399: 1398: 1397: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1360:sch 1354:Jim 1234: 1231: 1230: 1229: 1224: 1223: 1218: 1217: 1211: 1209: 1208: 1203: 1202: 1197: 1196: 1191: 1190: 1185: 1184: 1178: 1175: 1144: 1141: 1113: 1110: 1109: 1108: 1095: 1094: 1068: 1067: 1020: 1019: 1014: 1005: 991:Regarding the 978:, and several 937: 936: 931: 923: 912: 907: 902: 898:or "physicist" 830: 827: 826: 825: 777: 729: 681: 633: 585: 537: 489: 441: 393: 345: 297: 249: 201: 151: 148: 115: 104: 93: 82: 74: 66: 58: 54: 53: 46: 38: 33: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 8136: 8125: 8122: 8121: 8119: 8110: 8106: 8099: 8095: 8092: 8089: 8086: 8082: 8078: 8075: 8072: 8069: 8065: 8062: 8059: 8056: 8052: 8049: 8046: 8042: 8039: 8037: 8033: 8029: 8025: 8023: 8020: 8017: 8014: 8010: 8007: 8004: 8000: 7997: 7994: 7990: 7987: 7985: 7982: 7979: 7975: 7972: 7969: 7965: 7962: 7960: 7957: 7954: 7951: 7947: 7943: 7939: 7937: 7934: 7931: 7927: 7925: 7921: 7917: 7914: 7911: 7907: 7903: 7899: 7895: 7892: 7889: 7888: 7887: 7886: 7882: 7878: 7875: 7871: 7867: 7863: 7860: 7856: 7853: 7850: 7849: 7848: 7845: 7841: 7838: 7835: 7832: 7830: 7826: 7822: 7818: 7814: 7810: 7806: 7802: 7799: 7795: 7792: 7788: 7787: 7786: 7783: 7779: 7775: 7772: 7768: 7765: 7761: 7760: 7759: 7756: 7750: 7746: 7743: 7742: 7734: 7729: 7723: 7721: 7719: 7710: 7707: 7703: 7699: 7698: 7697: 7696: 7693: 7689: 7687: 7684: 7681: 7678: 7675: 7671: 7668: 7664: 7653: 7650: 7647: 7644: 7641: 7638: 7635: 7632: 7629: 7626: 7623: 7620: 7617: 7614: 7611: 7606: 7600: 7597: 7594: 7591: 7588: 7585: 7582: 7579: 7576: 7573: 7570: 7565: 7562: 7560: 7557: 7553: 7547: 7544: 7541: 7538: 7535: 7532: 7529: 7526: 7523: 7520: 7517: 7514: 7511: 7506: 7503: 7501: 7498: 7496: 7492: 7486: 7480: 7477: 7474: 7470: 7466: 7460: 7457: 7454: 7451: 7448: 7445: 7442: 7439: 7436: 7433: 7430: 7425: 7422: 7421: 7415: 7414: 7412: 7406: 7393: 7389: 7385: 7381: 7377: 7376: 7371: 7367: 7363: 7360: 7357: 7353: 7350: 7347: 7344: 7340: 7336: 7329: 7326: 7323: 7320: 7317: 7311: 7306: 7304: 7300: 7296: 7292: 7288: 7285: 7282: 7278: 7275: 7273: 7269: 7265: 7261: 7257: 7253: 7249: 7246: 7243: 7239: 7236: 7234: 7230: 7226: 7222: 7218: 7214: 7210: 7207: 7204: 7200: 7197: 7195: 7191: 7187: 7183: 7179: 7175: 7171: 7168: 7165: 7161: 7158: 7156: 7151: 7149: 7141: 7137: 7134: 7131: 7127: 7126:76.107.171.90 7124: 7122: 7118: 7114: 7113:76.107.171.90 7111: 7107: 7104: 7101: 7097: 7094: 7092: 7088: 7084: 7079: 7073: 7069: 7066: 7063: 7059: 7056: 7054: 7050: 7046: 7041: 7035: 7031: 7028: 7025: 7021: 7018: 7016: 7012: 7008: 7004: 7000: 6999: 6994: 6990: 6986: 6983: 6980: 6976: 6975:Matthew light 6973: 6971: 6967: 6963: 6959: 6955: 6951: 6948: 6945: 6941: 6938: 6936: 6932: 6928: 6924: 6921: 6918: 6914: 6911: 6908: 6904: 6901: 6899: 6895: 6891: 6887: 6883: 6879: 6876: 6873: 6869: 6866: 6864: 6860: 6856: 6852: 6848: 6847: 6842: 6838: 6834: 6831: 6828: 6824: 6821: 6819: 6815: 6811: 6807: 6803: 6802: 6797: 6793: 6789: 6786: 6783: 6779: 6776: 6774: 6770: 6766: 6762: 6758: 6757: 6752: 6748: 6745: 6742: 6738: 6735: 6733: 6728: 6726: 6718: 6714: 6711: 6708: 6704: 6701: 6699: 6696: 6691: 6689: 6683: 6679: 6676: 6673: 6669: 6666: 6663: 6660: 6656: 6652: 6648: 6645: 6642: 6638: 6635: 6633: 6629: 6625: 6622: 6618: 6615: 6612: 6608: 6605: 6603: 6599: 6595: 6591: 6587: 6583: 6580: 6577: 6573: 6570: 6568: 6564: 6560: 6556: 6552: 6551: 6546: 6542: 6539: 6536: 6532: 6529: 6528: 6520: 6515: 6513: 6505: 6501: 6498: 6495: 6491: 6488: 6486: 6482: 6478: 6474: 6470: 6469: 6464: 6460: 6456: 6453: 6450: 6446: 6443: 6441: 6436: 6434: 6426: 6422: 6419: 6416: 6412: 6409: 6407: 6402: 6400: 6392: 6388: 6385: 6382: 6378: 6375: 6373: 6369: 6365: 6361: 6357: 6356: 6351: 6347: 6344: 6341: 6337: 6334: 6332: 6328: 6324: 6320: 6316: 6315: 6310: 6306: 6303: 6300: 6296: 6293: 6291: 6287: 6283: 6279: 6275: 6271: 6268: 6265: 6261: 6258: 6256: 6253: 6251: 6244: 6243: 6239: 6237: 6234: 6231: 6228: 6224: 6221: 6219: 6215: 6211: 6207: 6203: 6200: 6197: 6193: 6190: 6188: 6184: 6180: 6176: 6172: 6169: 6166: 6162: 6159: 6157: 6153: 6149: 6145: 6141: 6138: 6135: 6131: 6128: 6126: 6122: 6118: 6114: 6110: 6107: 6104: 6100: 6097: 6095: 6091: 6087: 6083: 6079: 6076: 6073: 6069: 6066: 6064: 6060: 6056: 6052: 6048: 6045: 6042: 6038: 6035: 6033: 6029: 6025: 6021: 6017: 6014: 6011: 6007: 6004: 6002: 5998: 5994: 5990: 5986: 5983: 5980: 5976: 5975:Alfonzo Green 5973: 5971: 5967: 5963: 5959: 5955: 5952: 5949: 5945: 5942: 5940: 5936: 5932: 5928: 5924: 5920: 5916: 5913: 5910: 5906: 5903: 5901: 5897: 5893: 5889: 5885: 5881: 5877: 5873: 5870: 5867: 5863: 5860: 5858: 5854: 5850: 5846: 5842: 5838: 5835: 5832: 5828: 5825: 5822: 5819: 5815: 5812: 5809: 5806: 5803: 5799: 5796: 5794: 5789: 5787: 5779: 5775: 5772: 5769: 5765: 5762: 5760: 5756: 5752: 5748: 5744: 5741: 5738: 5734: 5731: 5729: 5724: 5722: 5714: 5710: 5707: 5704: 5700: 5697: 5695: 5691: 5687: 5683: 5679: 5676: 5673: 5669: 5666: 5665: 5657: 5653: 5649: 5645: 5641: 5637: 5633: 5630: 5627: 5623: 5620: 5618: 5614: 5610: 5606: 5602: 5598: 5595: 5592: 5588: 5585: 5583: 5579: 5575: 5571: 5567: 5563: 5560: 5557: 5553: 5552:Eric mit 1992 5550: 5548: 5545: 5543: 5533: 5530: 5527: 5524: 5520: 5517: 5515: 5512: 5510: 5500: 5497: 5494: 5491: 5487: 5486:Other Choices 5484: 5482: 5479: 5478: 5473: 5470: 5467: 5464: 5460: 5457: 5455: 5452: 5450: 5443: 5442: 5437: 5433: 5430: 5427: 5423: 5420: 5418: 5414: 5410: 5406: 5402: 5398: 5394: 5390: 5387: 5384: 5380: 5377: 5375: 5371: 5367: 5363: 5359: 5356: 5353: 5349: 5346: 5345: 5335: 5331: 5327: 5323: 5320: 5316: 5315: 5314: 5313: 5309: 5305: 5301: 5298: 5295: 5292: 5288: 5284: 5282: 5279: 5277: 5270: 5269: 5265: 5261: 5258: 5255: 5251: 5248: 5246: 5243: 5241: 5234: 5233: 5228: 5224: 5221: 5218: 5214: 5211: 5209: 5206: 5204: 5197: 5196: 5192: 5189: 5186: 5183: 5179: 5178:Ken McRitchie 5176: 5174: 5171: 5169: 5162: 5161: 5155: 5152: 5149: 5146: 5142: 5141:HandThatFeeds 5139: 5137: 5133: 5129: 5125: 5121: 5118: 5115: 5111: 5108: 5106: 5102: 5098: 5094: 5090: 5087: 5084: 5080: 5077: 5075: 5071: 5067: 5063: 5059: 5056: 5053: 5049: 5046: 5044: 5040: 5036: 5032: 5028: 5025: 5022: 5018: 5015: 5013: 5009: 5005: 5001: 4997: 4994: 4991: 4987: 4984: 4982: 4978: 4974: 4970: 4966: 4963: 4960: 4956: 4953: 4951: 4948: 4946: 4939: 4938: 4931: 4927: 4924: 4921: 4917: 4914: 4912: 4909: 4906: 4902: 4898: 4895: 4892: 4888: 4885: 4883: 4878: 4873: 4869: 4865: 4861: 4858: 4855: 4851: 4848: 4846: 4841: 4836: 4832: 4828: 4824: 4821: 4818: 4814: 4811: 4809: 4804: 4799: 4795: 4791: 4787: 4784: 4781: 4777: 4774: 4772: 4768: 4764: 4760: 4756: 4753: 4750: 4746: 4743: 4741: 4737: 4733: 4729: 4725: 4722: 4719: 4715: 4712: 4711: 4703: 4699: 4697: 4693: 4690: 4687: 4683: 4680: 4678: 4675: 4672: 4668: 4664: 4660: 4657: 4654: 4650: 4647: 4645: 4642: 4639: 4635: 4631: 4627: 4624: 4621: 4617: 4614: 4613: 4605: 4602: 4599: 4595: 4592: 4589: 4585: 4584:TheDoctorIsIn 4582: 4580: 4577: 4574: 4571: 4567: 4563: 4560: 4557: 4553: 4550: 4548: 4544: 4540: 4536: 4532: 4529: 4526: 4522: 4519: 4517: 4513: 4509: 4506: 4503: 4500: 4497: 4493: 4490: 4488: 4484: 4480: 4476: 4473: 4470: 4467: 4463: 4459: 4456: 4453: 4449: 4446: 4444: 4441: 4438: 4435: 4431: 4428: 4424: 4421:) notified - 4420: 4417: 4414: 4410: 4407: 4405: 4401: 4397: 4394: 4391: 4388: 4385: 4381: 4378: 4377: 4369: 4365: 4359: 4356: 4353: 4350: 4346: 4343: 4341: 4337: 4333: 4330: 4327: 4324: 4321: 4317: 4314: 4312: 4308: 4302: 4299: 4296: 4293: 4289: 4286: 4284: 4281: 4279: 4274: 4271: 4268: 4267:pseudoscience 4264: 4261: 4258: 4254: 4251: 4249: 4246: 4243: 4240: 4236: 4233: 4229: 4226: 4223: 4219: 4216: 4214: 4210: 4206: 4203: 4200: 4197: 4194: 4190: 4187: 4185: 4182: 4179: 4176: 4172: 4169: 4166: 4163: 4159: 4156: 4154: 4151: 4148: 4145: 4141: 4138: 4135: 4132: 4128: 4125: 4121: 4116: 4111: 4107: 4104: 4103: 4102: 4098: 4094: 4090: 4087: 4084: 4080: 4077: 4076: 4070: 4068: 4064: 4046: 4044: 4039: 4038: 4035: 4033: 4029: 4020: 4016: 4004: 4002: 3997: 3994: 3990: 3986: 3985: 3984: 3978: 3970: 3967: 3966: 3965: 3963: 3959: 3955: 3947: 3933: 3931: 3926: 3925: 3915: 3911: 3905: 3904: 3898: 3895: 3892: 3891: 3890: 3889: 3885: 3884: 3883: 3881: 3877: 3873: 3869: 3863: 3860: 3859: 3858: 3852: 3851: 3846:wikimedia.org 3835: 3831: 3827: 3824: 3820: 3816: 3813: 3812: 3811: 3804: 3803: 3802: 3801: 3796: 3795: 3789: 3788: 3777: 3775: 3770: 3769: 3768: 3752: 3750: 3745: 3744: 3743: 3741: 3725: 3723: 3718: 3717: 3716: 3714: 3709: 3708: 3707: 3704: 3698: 3697: 3696: 3694: 3690: 3687: 3683: 3674: 3671: 3665: 3664: 3663: 3660: 3654: 3653: 3652: 3651: 3649: 3645: 3632: 3631:to this case. 3630: 3625: 3624: 3623: 3622: 3620: 3614: 3613: 3612: 3610: 3605: 3604: 3603: 3602: 3598: 3594: 3593: 3592: 3590: 3582: 3581: 3580: 3573: 3572: 3571: 3569: 3561: 3560: 3558: 3557: 3555: 3554:verifiability 3551: 3547: 3543: 3539: 3535: 3529: 3528: 3523: 3522: 3513: 3512: 3506: 3505: 3494: 3491: 3490: 3489: 3478: 3475: 3474: 3473: 3462: 3459: 3458: 3457: 3455: 3451: 3447: 3435: 3432: 3431: 3430: 3428: 3416: 3413: 3412: 3411: 3402: 3401: 3390: 3387: 3386: 3385: 3383: 3380: 3368: 3365: 3364: 3363: 3361: 3349: 3346: 3345: 3344: 3343: 3339: 3336: 3332: 3328: 3317: 3314: 3313: 3312: 3310: 3306: 3302: 3290: 3287: 3286: 3285: 3283: 3271: 3268: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3263: 3252: 3249: 3248: 3247: 3246: 3243: 3242:"discredited" 3240: 3239: 3234: 3222: 3219: 3218: 3217: 3215: 3212: 3209: 3206: 3204: 3201: 3198: 3195: 3194:"incompetent" 3191: 3177: 3174: 3173: 3172: 3171: 3170: 3168: 3164: 3160: 3156: 3150: 3147: 3144: 3141: 3138: 3135: 3132: 3129: 3126: 3123: 3120: 3117: 3114: 3109: 3095: 3092: 3091: 3090: 3087: 3086: 3085: 3079:Pseudoscience 3072: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3065: 3063: 3059: 3056: 3053: 3041: 3038: 3037: 3036: 3034: 3032: 3027: 3024: 3021: 3018: 3015: 3012: 3009: 3006: 3003: 3000: 2997: 2994: 2991: 2986: 2974: 2971: 2970: 2969: 2967: 2963: 2959: 2955: 2943: 2940: 2939: 2938: 2925: 2920: 2917: 2916: 2915: 2905: 2902: 2901: 2900: 2898: 2886: 2883: 2882: 2881: 2879: 2865: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2857: 2856: 2855: 2845: 2842: 2841: 2840: 2829: 2826: 2825: 2824: 2822: 2810: 2807: 2806: 2805: 2802: 2790: 2787: 2786: 2785: 2774: 2771: 2770: 2769: 2759: 2756: 2755: 2754: 2744: 2741: 2740: 2739: 2737: 2733: 2721: 2718: 2717: 2716: 2706: 2703: 2702: 2701: 2699: 2695: 2683: 2680: 2679: 2678: 2675: 2671: 2661: 2657: 2656: 2653: 2641: 2638: 2637: 2636: 2634: 2629: 2619: 2614: 2611: 2610: 2609: 2607: 2603: 2591: 2588: 2587: 2586: 2584: 2574: 2569: 2566: 2565: 2564: 2562: 2558: 2543: 2541: 2540: 2522: 2519: 2515: 2513: 2510: 2506: 2502: 2500: 2496: 2492: 2488: 2484: 2482: 2479: 2475: 2474: 2463: 2462: 2459: 2451: 2450: 2442: 2439: 2435: 2434: 2433: 2432: 2431: 2428: 2421: 2420: 2418: 2410: 2407:Statement by 2404: 2403: 2400: 2395: 2386: 2383: 2381: 2377: 2372: 2368: 2364: 2358: 2356: 2352: 2348: 2344: 2340: 2336: 2332: 2328: 2317: 2308: 2299: 2295: 2293: 2289: 2278: 2276: 2268:Pseudoscience 2265: 2256: 2255: 2252: 2248: 2244: 2235: 2232: 2229: 2226: 2223: 2220: 2217: 2214: 2211: 2210: 2209: 2205: 2201: 2194: 2191: 2188: 2187: 2186: 2183: 2181: 2175: 2174: 2165: 2164: 2161: 2155: 2151: 2145: 2142: 2140: 2137: 2135: 2132: 2130: 2127: 2125: 2122: 2121: 2120: 2117: 2110: 2107: 2104: 2101: 2098: 2095: 2092: 2089: 2086: 2083: 2080: 2077: 2074: 2071: 2068: 2065: 2062: 2059: 2056: 2053: 2050: 2047: 2046: 2045: 2042: 2037: 2033: 2023: 2020: 2016: 2013: 2007: 2003: 1999: 1986: 1985: 1982: 1980: 1975: 1971: 1969: 1967: 1965: 1963: 1961: 1959: 1957: 1954: 1950: 1945: 1942: 1940: 1937: 1934: 1931: 1928: 1924: 1919: 1916: 1912: 1908: 1905: 1902: 1898: 1894: 1891: 1881: 1873: 1872: 1871: 1870: 1869: 1860: 1859: 1858: 1857: 1850: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1842: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1835: 1832: 1829: 1824: 1821: 1817: 1812: 1808: 1804: 1801: 1797: 1792: 1782: 1779: 1775: 1774: 1773: 1772: 1771: 1770: 1767: 1763: 1759: 1755: 1751: 1747: 1740: 1736: 1733:Statement of 1728: 1725: 1721: 1717: 1716: 1713: 1710: 1706: 1702: 1698: 1697: 1692: 1691: 1687: 1683: 1682: 1679: 1676: 1672: 1671: 1663: 1660: 1655: 1652: 1649: 1647: 1644: 1641: 1638: 1635: 1633: 1630: 1627: 1624: 1623: 1617: 1616: 1613: 1607: 1604: 1600: 1597: 1593: 1581: 1578: 1574: 1567: 1563: 1560: 1557: 1553: 1552: 1551: 1550: 1548: 1546: 1543: 1539: 1535: 1531: 1527: 1523: 1522:Pubmed search 1519: 1515: 1512:inclusion of 1511: 1508: 1507: 1506: 1504: 1501: 1497: 1493: 1489: 1485: 1481: 1477: 1476:pseudoscience 1472: 1470: 1460: 1459: 1456: 1451: 1447: 1442: 1438: 1434: 1431: 1425: 1424: 1421: 1416: 1412: 1388: 1385: 1381: 1377: 1376: 1375: 1372: 1367: 1366: 1365: 1362: 1350: 1349: 1348: 1346: 1343: 1338: 1335: 1334: 1333: 1330: 1326: 1322: 1321: 1320: 1317: 1313: 1308: 1307: 1306: 1303: 1299: 1298:User:Ragesoss 1295: 1291: 1287: 1283: 1282: 1281: 1280: 1277: 1272: 1270: 1266: 1262: 1257: 1253: 1249: 1244: 1241: 1226: 1225: 1220: 1219: 1214: 1213: 1212: 1205: 1204: 1199: 1198: 1193: 1192: 1187: 1186: 1181: 1180: 1174: 1173: 1170: 1169:FeloniousMonk 1166: 1162: 1158: 1154: 1150: 1140: 1139: 1136: 1131: 1127: 1123: 1119: 1107: 1104: 1100: 1097: 1096: 1093: 1090: 1086: 1083: 1080: 1076: 1073: 1070: 1069: 1066: 1063: 1059: 1056: 1055: 1054: 1052: 1048: 1045: 1042: 1040: 1037: 1034: 1030: 1029:FeloniousMonk 1025: 1024: 1023:FeloniousMonk 1018: 1015: 1012: 1009: 1006: 1003: 1000: 997: 994: 990: 989: 988: 985: 984: 981: 977: 975: 973: 970: 966: 964: 960: 955: 954: 950: 948: 945: 942: 935: 932: 930: 927: 924: 922: 919: 916: 913: 911: 908: 906: 903: 900: 897: 894: 893: 892: 890: 885: 883: 880: 877: 875: 873: 871: 868: 863: 861: 858: 856: 854: 851: 846: 845: 841: 838: 836: 822: 819: 816: 813: 810: 807: 804: 801: 798: 795: 792: 789: 786: 781: 778: 774: 771: 768: 765: 762: 759: 756: 753: 750: 747: 744: 741: 738: 733: 730: 726: 723: 720: 717: 714: 711: 708: 705: 702: 699: 696: 693: 690: 685: 682: 678: 675: 672: 669: 666: 663: 660: 657: 654: 651: 648: 645: 642: 637: 634: 630: 627: 624: 621: 618: 615: 612: 609: 606: 603: 600: 597: 594: 589: 586: 582: 579: 576: 573: 570: 567: 564: 561: 558: 555: 552: 549: 546: 541: 538: 534: 531: 528: 525: 522: 519: 516: 513: 510: 507: 504: 501: 498: 493: 490: 486: 483: 480: 477: 474: 471: 468: 465: 462: 459: 456: 453: 450: 445: 442: 438: 435: 432: 429: 426: 423: 420: 417: 414: 411: 408: 405: 402: 397: 394: 390: 387: 384: 381: 378: 375: 372: 369: 366: 363: 360: 357: 354: 349: 346: 342: 339: 336: 333: 330: 327: 324: 321: 318: 315: 312: 309: 306: 301: 298: 294: 291: 288: 285: 282: 279: 276: 273: 270: 267: 264: 261: 258: 253: 252:FeloniousMonk 250: 246: 243: 240: 237: 234: 231: 228: 225: 222: 219: 216: 213: 210: 205: 202: 198: 195: 192: 189: 186: 183: 180: 177: 174: 171: 168: 165: 162: 157: 154: 153: 147: 145: 141: 136: 134: 130: 124: 121: 120: 113: 110: 109: 102: 99: 98: 91: 88: 87: 80: 77: 72: 69: 64: 61: 51: 47: 44: 40: 39: 36: 25: 19: 8087: 8070: 8047: 7995: 7970: 7941: 7868: 7805:AN/AE report 7717: 7716: 7660: 7659: 7648: 7642: 7636: 7630: 7624: 7618: 7612: 7595: 7589: 7583: 7577: 7571: 7542: 7536: 7530: 7524: 7518: 7512: 7494: 7488: 7484: 7455: 7449: 7443: 7437: 7431: 7408: 7401: 7373: 7358: 7324: 7318: 7283: 7244: 7205: 7166: 7147: 7132: 7102: 7064: 7026: 6996: 6981: 6958:Talk:Ken Ham 6946: 6909: 6874: 6844: 6829: 6799: 6784: 6754: 6743: 6724: 6709: 6687: 6674: 6643: 6613: 6578: 6572:CEngelbrecht 6548: 6537: 6511: 6496: 6466: 6451: 6432: 6417: 6398: 6383: 6353: 6342: 6336:Roxy the dog 6312: 6301: 6266: 6260:Wavyinfinity 6245: 6241: 6229: 6198: 6167: 6136: 6105: 6074: 6043: 6012: 5981: 5950: 5927:ArbCom-Alert 5925:, using the 5911: 5880:edit warring 5868: 5833: 5804: 5785: 5770: 5739: 5720: 5705: 5674: 5628: 5622:GhostOfLippe 5593: 5558: 5531:) notified: 5525: 5498:) notified: 5492: 5475: 5471:) notified: 5465: 5444: 5440: 5428: 5422:BruceSwanson 5401:use of socks 5385: 5360:) notiified 5354: 5293: 5285: 5271: 5267: 5256: 5250:Robertcurrey 5235: 5231: 5219: 5198: 5194: 5184: 5163: 5156: 5147: 5116: 5085: 5054: 5023: 4992: 4961: 4940: 4933: 4922: 4893: 4856: 4819: 4782: 4751: 4720: 4714:Afterwriting 4688: 4663:Chiropractic 4655: 4630:Chiropractic 4622: 4590: 4572: 4558: 4552:24.68.247.69 4533:) notified. 4527: 4504:) notified. 4498: 4468: 4454: 4423:Chiropractic 4415: 4409:Orangemarlin 4392:) notified. 4386: 4357:) notified. 4351: 4328:) notified. 4322: 4294: 4277: 4259: 4224: 4195: 4164: 4133: 4091:) notified. 4085: 4059: 4040: 4025: 3998: 3988: 3982: 3975:Modified by 3968: 3961: 3957: 3951: 3943:Modified by 3927: 3879: 3878: 3874: 3870: 3867: 3856: 3808: 3798: 3797: 3771: 3765: 3746: 3737: 3719: 3710: 3699: 3688: 3685: 3679: 3666: 3655: 3641: 3639: 3626: 3616: 3615: 3606: 3600: 3599: 3586: 3577: 3565: 3559: 3531: 3530: 3525: 3524: 3519: 3517: 3492: 3486: 3476: 3470: 3460: 3443: 3433: 3424: 3414: 3408: 3399: 3398: 3388: 3376: 3366: 3357: 3347: 3325: 3315: 3298: 3288: 3279: 3269: 3260: 3250: 3237: 3230: 3220: 3189: 3187: 3175: 3145: 3139: 3133: 3127: 3121: 3115: 3105: 3093: 3088: 3082: 3070: 3049: 3039: 3022: 3016: 3010: 3004: 2998: 2992: 2982: 2972: 2951: 2941: 2936: 2923: 2918: 2913: 2903: 2894: 2884: 2875: 2863: 2858: 2853: 2843: 2837: 2827: 2818: 2808: 2798: 2788: 2782: 2772: 2767: 2757: 2752: 2742: 2729: 2719: 2714: 2711:Wiki process 2704: 2691: 2681: 2667: 2639: 2631: 2625: 2617: 2612: 2599: 2589: 2580: 2572: 2567: 2554: 2536: 2535: 2455: 2423: 2422: 2414: 2413: 2396: 2392: 2384: 2359: 2334: 2323: 2314: 2305: 2296: 2291: 2288:metaphysical 2287: 2284: 2274: 2271: 2262: 2242: 2240: 2206: 2202: 2198: 2184: 2179: 2176: 2172: 2171: 2156: 2152: 2148: 2144:User:Joke137 2118: 2114: 2051:(of course), 2029: 2021: 2017: 2011: 2008: 2004: 2000: 1997: 1978: 1948: 1929: 1920: 1895: 1887: 1879: 1867: 1833: 1830: 1825: 1819: 1815: 1813: 1809: 1805: 1802: 1798: 1795: 1749: 1743: 1739:User:Pjacobi 1734: 1720:User:Ed Poor 1700: 1608: 1605: 1601: 1595: 1589: 1541: 1473: 1466: 1443: 1439: 1435: 1426: 1408: 1379: 1284: 1273: 1268: 1255: 1245: 1239: 1236: 1210: 1146: 1115: 1098: 1071: 1057: 1026: 1022: 1021: 986: 979: 967: 956: 952: 951: 938: 886: 864: 847: 843: 842: 839: 832: 817: 811: 805: 799: 793: 787: 769: 763: 757: 751: 745: 739: 721: 715: 709: 703: 697: 691: 673: 667: 661: 655: 649: 643: 625: 619: 613: 607: 601: 595: 577: 571: 565: 559: 553: 547: 529: 523: 517: 511: 505: 499: 481: 475: 469: 463: 457: 451: 433: 427: 421: 415: 409: 403: 396:Shell_Kinney 385: 379: 373: 367: 361: 355: 337: 331: 325: 319: 313: 307: 289: 283: 277: 271: 265: 259: 241: 235: 229: 223: 217: 211: 193: 187: 181: 175: 169: 163: 137: 125: 116: 114: 105: 103: 94: 92: 83: 81: 75: 73: 67: 65: 59: 57: 8028:Tim Vickers 7839:primarily, 7663:Ghost light 7628:protections 7556:Thatcher131 7465:Wolf effect 7289:) notified 7250:) notified 7211:) notified 7178:Lipoic acid 7172:) notified 7020:Lampstand49 6688:Laser brain 6680:) notified 6649:) notified 6543:) notified 6348:) notified 6307:) notified 6272:) notified 6235:) notified 6204:) notified 6037:David in DC 5917:) notified 5810:) notified. 5680:) notified 5634:) notified 5599:) notified 5564:) notified 5348:Encyclotadd 4887:Paul Bedson 4539:Tim Vickers 4479:Enric Naval 4300:) notified 4205:Tim Vickers 4201:) notified 4170:) notified. 4139:) notified. 3993:consistency 3825:("AN"); and 3757:Enforcement 3747:Amended by 3446:Eric Lerner 3305:Eric Lerner 2979:Eric Lerner 2966:Eric Lerner 2660:WP:ARBPS/4A 2518:Fred Bauder 2447:Clerk notes 2367:the Brights 2351:TalkOrigins 2087:(an admin), 1953:Eric Lerner 1901:Eric Lerner 1890:Eric Lerner 1762:Myron Evans 1498:. Thanks, 1448:article as 1446:Myron Evans 1430:Guettarda's 1415:Eric Lerner 1314:as well).-- 1201:technology. 993:Wolf effect 850:Eric Lerner 68:Case Closed 60:Case Opened 8064:Levine2112 7640:page moves 7593:block user 7587:page moves 7564:Iantresman 7540:block user 7534:filter log 7505:Tom Mandel 7453:block user 7447:page moves 7424:Iantresman 7368:following 7295:EdJohnston 7264:EdJohnston 7225:EdJohnston 7186:EdJohnston 7148:Sandstein 6778:Enigma9035 6725:Sandstein 6637:Kmarinas86 6607:Tom Butler 6512:Sandstein 6433:Sandstein 6399:Sandstein 6282:EdJohnston 6210:EdJohnston 5931:EdJohnston 5929:template. 5884:Homeopathy 5798:Silent Key 5786:Sandstein 5764:Widescreen 5721:Sandstein 5686:EdJohnston 5648:EdJohnston 5640:Homeopathy 5609:EdJohnston 5587:Kmarinas86 5574:EdJohnston 5366:EdJohnston 5079:Xxanthippe 5048:Tom Butler 4986:Hans Adler 4955:Becritical 4908:Courcelles 4667:dave souza 4634:dave souza 4508:PhilKnight 4396:PhilKnight 4332:PhilKnight 4093:PhilKnight 4079:Levine2112 3800:Committee. 3190:ad hominem 3143:block user 3137:filter log 3020:block user 3014:filter log 2933:Notability 2596:Notability 2546:Principles 2389:Conclusion 2363:"heads-up" 2073:Duncharris 1577:Jim Butler 1514:homeopathy 1500:Jim Butler 1325:notability 1250:vis-a-vis 1103:Iantresman 1089:Iantresman 1062:Iantresman 878:(or worse 815:block user 809:filter log 767:block user 761:filter log 719:block user 713:filter log 684:Mangojuice 671:block user 665:filter log 623:block user 617:filter log 575:block user 569:filter log 527:block user 521:filter log 479:block user 473:filter log 444:Jim_Butler 431:block user 425:filter log 383:block user 377:filter log 335:block user 329:filter log 287:block user 281:filter log 239:block user 233:filter log 191:block user 185:filter log 156:iantresman 8055:WP:FRINGE 7989:QuackGuru 7964:QuackGuru 7778:this diff 7749:this diff 7674:talk page 7634:deletions 7599:block log 7546:block log 7459:block log 7375:Callanecc 7352:Kelby2002 7333:notified 7199:QuackGuru 7058:John Foxe 6998:Callanecc 6846:Callanecc 6801:Callanecc 6756:Callanecc 6703:Montanabw 6550:Callanecc 6468:Callanecc 6355:Callanecc 6314:Callanecc 6295:Bobrayner 6276:since he 6192:Orrerysky 5962:IRWolfie- 5892:Brangifer 5751:IRWolfie- 5213:Zachariel 5017:Jojalozzo 4916:Milikguay 4905:AE Thread 4776:Immortale 4763:T. Canens 4745:ZuluPapa5 4732:T. Canens 4521:Milomedes 4127:QuackGuru 3954:Time Cube 3838:arbcom-en 3192:attacks: 3149:block log 3026:block log 2878:astrology 2347:talk page 2339:WP:HARASS 2243:wikitroll 2097:WAS 4.250 2085:Guettarda 2061:Ems57fcva 2041:cosmology 1923:Deglr6328 1915:WP:LIVING 1737:involved 1469:elsewhere 1384:WAS 4.250 1337:Time Cube 1294:Time cube 1261:Cosmology 953:Example 2 844:Example 1 821:block log 773:block log 725:block log 677:block log 629:block log 581:block log 533:block log 485:block log 437:block log 389:block log 341:block log 293:block log 245:block log 197:block log 140:/Workshop 133:/Evidence 129:Talk page 43:WP:ARB/PS 35:Shortcuts 8118:Category 8091:contribs 8081:DigitalC 8074:contribs 8051:contribs 8003:Lifebaka 7999:contribs 7974:contribs 7916:Vassyana 7894:Vassyana 7877:Vassyana 7764:Thatcher 7616:contribs 7575:contribs 7516:contribs 7435:contribs 7384:contribs 7366:notified 7362:contribs 7339:Bishonen 7322:contribs 7287:contribs 7248:contribs 7209:contribs 7170:contribs 7160:Khimaris 7136:contribs 7110:notified 7106:contribs 7072:notified 7068:contribs 7034:notified 7030:contribs 7007:contribs 6989:notified 6985:contribs 6950:contribs 6940:StAnselm 6917:notified 6913:contribs 6878:contribs 6855:contribs 6833:contribs 6810:contribs 6788:contribs 6765:contribs 6751:notified 6747:contribs 6713:contribs 6678:contribs 6655:Bishonen 6647:contribs 6621:notified 6617:contribs 6586:notified 6582:contribs 6559:contribs 6541:contribs 6500:contribs 6477:contribs 6455:contribs 6421:contribs 6387:contribs 6364:contribs 6346:contribs 6323:contribs 6305:contribs 6270:contribs 6233:contribs 6223:Wpete510 6202:contribs 6175:notified 6171:contribs 6144:notified 6140:contribs 6113:notified 6109:contribs 6082:notified 6078:contribs 6051:notified 6047:contribs 6020:notified 6016:contribs 5989:notified 5985:contribs 5958:notified 5954:contribs 5915:contribs 5876:notified 5872:contribs 5841:notified 5837:contribs 5814:Bishonen 5808:contribs 5774:contribs 5747:notified 5743:contribs 5709:contribs 5699:Hgilbert 5678:contribs 5632:contribs 5597:contribs 5562:contribs 5529:contribs 5519:Sprecher 5496:contribs 5477:MastCell 5469:contribs 5459:SirShawn 5436:notified 5432:contribs 5409:WGFinley 5393:notified 5389:contribs 5358:contribs 5297:contribs 5264:notified 5260:contribs 5227:notified 5223:contribs 5188:contribs 5151:contribs 5124:notified 5120:contribs 5093:notified 5089:contribs 5062:notified 5058:contribs 5031:notified 5027:contribs 5000:notified 4996:contribs 4969:notified 4965:contribs 4930:notified 4926:contribs 4901:notified 4897:contribs 4864:notified 4860:contribs 4827:notified 4823:contribs 4813:Arydberg 4790:notified 4786:contribs 4759:notified 4755:contribs 4728:notified 4724:contribs 4692:contribs 4659:contribs 4626:contribs 4616:Sir Anon 4594:contribs 4576:contribs 4562:contribs 4531:contribs 4502:contribs 4472:contribs 4458:contribs 4419:contribs 4390:contribs 4380:Dicklyon 4355:contribs 4326:contribs 4298:contribs 4288:DigitalC 4263:contribs 4228:contribs 4199:contribs 4168:contribs 4158:Ludwigs2 4137:contribs 4110:Eldereft 4089:contribs 4065:}} or {{ 3686:articles 3395:Remedies 3119:contribs 3108:Tommysun 3102:Tommysun 2996:contribs 2954:Big bang 2652:Shortcut 2505:Dmcdevit 2503:Accept. 2458:FloNight 2399:Asmodeus 2292:physical 2103:Jim62sch 1951:editing 1933:contribs 1862:correct. 1791:Tommysun 1724:JBKramer 1709:JBKramer 1675:JBKramer 1316:ragesoss 1276:ragesoss 1265:Big Bang 1248:Redshift 959:Redshift 791:contribs 780:Asmodeus 743:contribs 695:contribs 647:contribs 636:Tommysun 599:contribs 551:contribs 540:JBKramer 503:contribs 455:contribs 407:contribs 359:contribs 348:Ragesoss 311:contribs 263:contribs 215:contribs 167:contribs 50:WP:ARBPS 7944:. See 7933:GRBerry 7844:GRBerry 7791:GRBerry 7782:GRBerry 7605:Raul654 6903:Johnvr4 6841:Shiatsu 6737:DJFryzy 6531:Askahrc 5944:Feline1 5862:Cjwilky 5827:Wkerney 4850:Jmpunit 4232:Psychic 4189:Surturz 3583:Logging 3562:Appeals 3060:of the 2985:Elerner 2726:Experts 2516:Accept 2343:helpers 2160:GoodCop 2079:Pjacobi 2055:Joke137 1778:Pjacobi 1766:Pjacobi 1594:. I do 1538:WP:SPOV 1450:Pjacobi 1411:WP:PAIN 1195:debate. 1153:WP:NPOV 1033:uncivil 980:hundred 732:GoodCop 588:Pjacobi 300:Elerner 7646:rights 7622:blocks 7471:, and 7256:WP:AN3 7217:WP:AN3 7140:warned 6884:after 6837:warned 6823:Ankank 6792:warned 6717:warned 6694:(talk) 6588:after 6504:warned 6459:warned 6425:warned 6391:warned 6099:Blippy 5878:about 5778:warned 5713:warned 5644:WP:AN3 5132:Advice 5110:Ocaasi 5101:Advice 5070:Advice 5039:Advice 5008:Advice 4977:Advice 4903:after 4682:Thezob 4649:Ocaasi 4448:Heelop 4345:Hughgr 4316:Seeyou 4043:motion 4019:motion 4001:motion 3977:motion 3946:motion 3830:"ARCA" 3749:motion 3722:motion 3713:motion 3703:motion 3670:motion 3659:motion 3629:motion 3609:motion 3165:, and 2331:WP:NPA 1911:WP:3RR 1758:WP:BLP 1705:WP:ANI 1482:, and 1079:Lerner 119:motion 108:motion 97:motion 86:motion 8104:Shell 8098:WP:TE 7873:AN/I. 7859:Coren 7815:with 7720:levse 7700:Both 7692:Shell 7686:Shell 7328:WHOIS 7096:Ersby 6179:Bbb23 6161:Vzaak 6148:Bbb23 6117:Bbb23 6086:Bbb23 6055:Bbb23 6024:Bbb23 5993:Bbb23 5888:here. 5849:Bbb23 5397:WP:TE 5319:WP:AN 4877:cont. 4840:cont. 4803:cont. 4363:Shell 4306:Shell 4278:juice 4273:Mango 4115:cont. 3689:pages 3307:(see 2561:Jimbo 2327:venue 2237:that. 1979:juice 1974:Mango 1735:semi- 1686:WP:OR 1659:Gleng 1657:eyes. 1612:Gleng 1566:WP:CG 1455:Shell 1420:Shell 1292:have 1240:about 1130:WP:RS 492:Gleng 16:< 8085:talk 8079:and 8068:talk 8045:talk 8032:talk 7993:talk 7968:talk 7948:. -- 7920:talk 7898:talk 7881:talk 7825:talk 7727:Talk 7704:and 7610:talk 7569:talk 7528:logs 7510:talk 7485:Buck 7429:talk 7388:logs 7380:talk 7356:talk 7343:talk 7335:here 7316:talk 7299:talk 7291:here 7281:talk 7268:talk 7252:here 7242:talk 7229:talk 7213:here 7203:talk 7190:talk 7174:here 7164:talk 7130:talk 7117:talk 7100:talk 7087:talk 7062:talk 7049:talk 7024:talk 7011:logs 7003:talk 6979:talk 6966:talk 6944:talk 6931:talk 6907:talk 6894:talk 6872:talk 6859:logs 6851:talk 6827:talk 6814:logs 6806:talk 6782:talk 6769:logs 6761:talk 6741:talk 6707:talk 6682:here 6672:talk 6659:talk 6651:here 6641:talk 6628:talk 6611:talk 6598:talk 6576:talk 6563:logs 6555:talk 6545:here 6535:talk 6525:2014 6494:talk 6481:logs 6473:talk 6449:talk 6415:talk 6381:talk 6368:logs 6360:talk 6350:here 6340:talk 6327:logs 6319:talk 6309:here 6299:talk 6286:talk 6274:here 6264:talk 6249:Talk 6227:talk 6214:talk 6206:here 6196:talk 6183:talk 6165:talk 6152:talk 6134:talk 6121:talk 6103:talk 6090:talk 6072:talk 6059:talk 6041:talk 6028:talk 6010:talk 5997:talk 5979:talk 5966:talk 5948:talk 5935:talk 5919:here 5909:talk 5896:talk 5866:talk 5853:talk 5831:talk 5818:talk 5802:talk 5768:talk 5755:talk 5737:talk 5733:DVMt 5703:talk 5690:talk 5682:here 5672:talk 5662:2013 5652:talk 5636:here 5626:talk 5613:talk 5601:here 5591:talk 5578:talk 5566:here 5556:talk 5523:talk 5490:talk 5463:talk 5448:Talk 5426:talk 5413:talk 5407:. -- 5395:for 5383:talk 5370:talk 5362:here 5352:talk 5342:2012 5330:talk 5308:talk 5291:talk 5287:PiCo 5275:Talk 5254:talk 5239:Talk 5217:talk 5202:Talk 5182:talk 5167:Talk 5145:talk 5114:talk 5083:talk 5052:talk 5021:talk 4990:talk 4959:talk 4944:Talk 4920:talk 4891:talk 4870:. - 4854:talk 4833:. - 4817:talk 4796:. - 4780:talk 4767:talk 4749:talk 4736:talk 4718:talk 4708:2011 4686:talk 4671:talk 4661:) – 4653:talk 4638:talk 4628:) – 4620:talk 4610:2010 4601:diff 4588:talk 4570:talk 4556:talk 4543:talk 4535:diff 4525:talk 4512:talk 4496:talk 4483:talk 4466:talk 4452:talk 4425:and 4413:talk 4400:talk 4384:talk 4374:2009 4349:talk 4336:talk 4320:talk 4292:talk 4257:talk 4253:NJGW 4222:talk 4209:talk 4193:talk 4162:talk 4131:talk 4097:talk 4083:talk 4073:2008 3680:14) 3640:13) 3552:and 3536:and 3518:12) 3303:and 3131:logs 3113:talk 3106:10) 3008:logs 2990:talk 2819:13) 2799:12) 2672:and 2668:4a) 2633:not. 2626:3a) 2581:1a) 2353:and 2290:and 1949:here 1927:talk 1764:. -- 1496:here 1380:felt 1342:Time 1327:? -- 1290:Time 1263:and 1163:and 1128:and 1122:WP:V 803:logs 785:talk 755:logs 737:talk 707:logs 689:talk 659:logs 641:talk 611:logs 593:talk 563:logs 545:talk 515:logs 497:talk 467:logs 449:talk 419:logs 401:talk 371:logs 353:talk 323:logs 305:talk 275:logs 257:talk 227:logs 209:talk 179:logs 161:talk 7978:FT2 7652:RfA 7495:ofg 7490:ets 7481:. 7370:SPI 7083:jps 7045:jps 7036:. 6962:jps 6890:jps 6594:jps 6490:JzG 6177:.-- 6146:.-- 6115:.-- 6084:.-- 6053:.-- 6022:.-- 5991:.-- 5890:-- 5847:.-- 5541:don 5508:don 5403:at 5399:and 4872:2/0 4866:by 4835:2/0 4829:by 4798:2/0 4792:by 4700:at 4462:JzG 3050:8) 2983:7) 2555:1) 2438:FT2 2427:FT2 2409:FT2 2251:Jon 2247:Jon 1596:not 1549:-- 1516:in 1286:it. 1256:any 1228:be. 8120:: 8034:) 8019:ka 8016:on 8013:El 8011:-- 7956:ka 7953:on 7950:El 7922:) 7900:) 7883:) 7827:) 7819:. 7811:; 7807:; 7730:• 7724:• 7713:— 7682:, 7665:, 7554:. 7467:, 7390:) 7386:• 7382:• 7372:. 7364:) 7341:| 7337:. 7301:) 7293:. 7270:) 7262:. 7231:) 7223:. 7192:) 7184:. 7142:. 7138:) 7119:) 7108:) 7089:) 7074:. 7070:) 7051:) 7032:) 7013:) 7009:• 7005:• 6995:. 6987:) 6968:) 6960:. 6952:) 6933:) 6925:. 6915:) 6896:) 6888:. 6880:) 6861:) 6857:• 6853:• 6843:. 6835:) 6816:) 6812:• 6808:• 6798:. 6790:) 6771:) 6767:• 6763:• 6749:) 6719:. 6715:) 6684:. 6657:| 6653:. 6630:) 6619:) 6600:) 6592:. 6584:) 6565:) 6561:• 6547:. 6506:. 6502:) 6483:) 6479:• 6475:• 6465:. 6457:) 6427:. 6423:) 6393:. 6389:) 6370:) 6366:• 6352:. 6329:) 6325:• 6311:. 6288:) 6280:. 6242:NW 6216:) 6208:. 6185:) 6173:) 6154:) 6142:) 6123:) 6111:) 6092:) 6080:) 6061:) 6049:) 6030:) 6018:) 5999:) 5987:) 5968:) 5960:, 5956:) 5937:) 5898:) 5874:) 5855:) 5839:) 5816:| 5780:. 5776:) 5757:) 5749:. 5745:) 5715:. 5711:) 5692:) 5654:) 5615:) 5580:) 5534:. 5501:. 5474:. 5441:NW 5438:. 5434:) 5415:) 5391:) 5372:) 5364:. 5332:) 5324:. 5310:) 5302:. 5268:NW 5262:) 5232:NW 5229:. 5225:) 5195:NW 5190:) 5159:NW 5153:) 5126:. 5122:) 5095:. 5091:) 5064:. 5060:) 5033:. 5029:) 5002:. 4998:) 4971:. 4967:) 4936:NW 4932:. 4928:) 4899:) 4862:) 4825:) 4788:) 4769:) 4761:. 4757:) 4738:) 4730:. 4726:) 4669:, 4636:, 4578:) 4545:) 4537:. 4514:) 4485:) 4477:-- 4474:) 4440:ka 4437:on 4434:El 4432:-- 4402:) 4338:) 4269:. 4245:ka 4242:on 4239:El 4237:-- 4211:) 4181:ka 4178:on 4175:El 4173:-- 4150:ka 4147:on 4144:El 4142:-- 4099:) 4061:{{ 3882:: 3848:). 3742:. 3591:. 3548:, 3544:, 3452:, 3448:, 3429:. 3384:. 3362:. 3333:, 3329:, 3311:) 3284:. 3235:, 3216:. 3169:. 3161:, 3157:, 3064:. 3035:. 2960:, 2956:, 2700:. 2563:. 2497:) 2333:, 2245:. 1701:IS 1478:, 1369:-- 1357:62 1269:as 1124:, 1053:. 949:. 146:. 8093:) 8088:· 8083:( 8076:) 8071:· 8066:( 8048:· 8043:( 8030:( 8005:. 7996:· 7991:( 7980:. 7971:· 7966:( 7918:( 7896:( 7879:( 7823:( 7718:R 7654:) 7649:· 7643:· 7637:· 7631:· 7625:· 7619:· 7613:· 7608:( 7601:) 7596:· 7590:· 7584:· 7578:· 7572:· 7567:( 7548:) 7543:· 7537:· 7531:· 7525:· 7519:· 7513:· 7508:( 7461:) 7456:· 7450:· 7444:· 7438:· 7432:· 7427:( 7413:. 7378:( 7359:· 7354:( 7348:. 7330:) 7325:· 7319:· 7314:( 7297:( 7284:· 7279:( 7266:( 7245:· 7240:( 7227:( 7206:· 7201:( 7188:( 7167:· 7162:( 7133:· 7128:( 7115:( 7103:· 7098:( 7085:( 7080:) 7076:( 7065:· 7060:( 7047:( 7042:) 7038:( 7027:· 7022:( 7001:( 6982:· 6977:( 6964:( 6947:· 6942:( 6929:( 6910:· 6905:( 6892:( 6875:· 6870:( 6849:( 6830:· 6825:( 6804:( 6785:· 6780:( 6759:( 6744:· 6739:( 6710:· 6705:( 6675:· 6670:( 6664:. 6644:· 6639:( 6626:( 6614:· 6609:( 6596:( 6579:· 6574:( 6557:• 6553:( 6538:· 6533:( 6497:· 6492:( 6471:( 6452:· 6447:( 6418:· 6413:( 6384:· 6379:( 6362:• 6358:( 6343:· 6338:( 6321:• 6317:( 6302:· 6297:( 6284:( 6267:· 6262:( 6252:) 6246:( 6230:· 6225:( 6212:( 6199:· 6194:( 6181:( 6168:· 6163:( 6150:( 6137:· 6132:( 6119:( 6106:· 6101:( 6088:( 6075:· 6070:( 6057:( 6044:· 6039:( 6026:( 6013:· 6008:( 5995:( 5982:· 5977:( 5964:( 5951:· 5946:( 5933:( 5912:· 5907:( 5894:( 5869:· 5864:( 5851:( 5834:· 5829:( 5823:. 5805:· 5800:( 5771:· 5766:( 5753:( 5740:· 5735:( 5706:· 5701:( 5688:( 5675:· 5670:( 5650:( 5646:. 5629:· 5624:( 5611:( 5594:· 5589:( 5576:( 5572:. 5559:· 5554:( 5539:Æ 5537:S 5526:· 5521:( 5506:Æ 5504:S 5493:· 5488:( 5466:· 5461:( 5451:) 5445:( 5429:· 5424:( 5411:( 5386:· 5381:( 5368:( 5355:· 5350:( 5328:( 5306:( 5294:· 5289:( 5278:) 5272:( 5257:· 5252:( 5242:) 5236:( 5220:· 5215:( 5205:) 5199:( 5185:· 5180:( 5170:) 5164:( 5148:· 5143:( 5117:· 5112:( 5086:· 5081:( 5055:· 5050:( 5024:· 5019:( 4993:· 4988:( 4962:· 4957:( 4947:) 4941:( 4923:· 4918:( 4894:· 4889:( 4879:) 4875:( 4857:· 4852:( 4842:) 4838:( 4820:· 4815:( 4805:) 4801:( 4783:· 4778:( 4765:( 4752:· 4747:( 4734:( 4721:· 4716:( 4689:· 4684:( 4673:. 4656:· 4651:( 4640:. 4623:· 4618:( 4591:· 4586:( 4573:· 4568:( 4559:· 4554:( 4541:( 4528:· 4523:( 4510:( 4499:· 4494:( 4481:( 4469:· 4464:( 4455:· 4450:( 4429:. 4416:· 4411:( 4398:( 4387:· 4382:( 4352:· 4347:( 4334:( 4323:· 4318:( 4295:· 4290:( 4260:· 4255:( 4234:. 4225:· 4220:( 4207:( 4196:· 4191:( 4165:· 4160:( 4134:· 4129:( 4117:) 4113:( 4095:( 4086:· 4081:( 3995:; 3151:) 3146:· 3140:· 3134:· 3128:· 3122:· 3116:· 3111:( 3028:) 3023:· 3017:· 3011:· 3005:· 2999:· 2993:· 2988:( 2509:t 2507:· 2495:C 2493:: 2491:T 2489:( 2099:, 2012:I 1930:· 1925:( 1558:; 1340:" 823:) 818:· 812:· 806:· 800:· 794:· 788:· 783:( 775:) 770:· 764:· 758:· 752:· 746:· 740:· 735:( 727:) 722:· 716:· 710:· 704:· 698:· 692:· 687:( 679:) 674:· 668:· 662:· 656:· 650:· 644:· 639:( 631:) 626:· 620:· 614:· 608:· 602:· 596:· 591:( 583:) 578:· 572:· 566:· 560:· 554:· 548:· 543:( 535:) 530:· 524:· 518:· 512:· 506:· 500:· 495:( 487:) 482:· 476:· 470:· 464:· 458:· 452:· 447:( 439:) 434:· 428:· 422:· 416:· 410:· 404:· 399:( 391:) 386:· 380:· 374:· 368:· 362:· 356:· 351:( 343:) 338:· 332:· 326:· 320:· 314:· 308:· 303:( 295:) 290:· 284:· 278:· 272:· 266:· 260:· 255:( 247:) 242:· 236:· 230:· 224:· 218:· 212:· 207:( 199:) 194:· 188:· 182:· 176:· 170:· 164:· 159:( 26:)

Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.

Knowledge

:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience - Knowledge

Index