Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience

1411:

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.

2309:

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.

1700:. 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. 969: 967: 965: 853: 1800:

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.

1999:

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.

2037:

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:

2300:"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. 2151:

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.

1681:. 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. 2291:

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".

1995:

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.

1599:“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. 2287:(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. 2193:

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.

2375:. 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. 1126:

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. --

2418:

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.

1236:

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.

3514:

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.

2350:, 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.) 2175:. 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. 2412:, 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. 1293:, 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. -- 2362:, 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 ( 3563:), 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. 3533:, 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, 3835: 2387:

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.

1603:

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.

2027:, 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 1867:...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..." 2266:

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,

1182:

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.

1793:

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.

830:(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. 1430:

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.

3901:

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

3868:

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

2317:

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

2002:

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

1789:(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. 1583:

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

1429:

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

1251:

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

2669:

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

2108:

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

1994:

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,

1885:

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

1820:

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

1181:

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

3519:

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

2290:

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

2196:

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

2150:

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,

1799:

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

1332:

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

1235:

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

2417:

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,

2366:

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

1998:

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

1803:

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.

1686:

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

1595:

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

1410:

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

1175:

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

2265:

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

2036:

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

2031:

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.

1939:

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

1792:

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,

1602:

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

1433:

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

1230:

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

3571:

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

2192:

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

2170:

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,

1844:

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,

1125:

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

3909:

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

3905:

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

3513:

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

2011:

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

1591:

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

1425:

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

1214:

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

2386:

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

1208:

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

1199:

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

2308:

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

2299:

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

1260:, 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 2003:

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

1220:

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

1302:

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

1193:

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

2256:

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.

7865:

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

1533:. 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 3957:("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." 1649:

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

2278:

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,

1910:

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.

1821:

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.

119:

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

1687:

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.

7921:

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".

2229:

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

7395:

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

3802:

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:

2312: 3402:

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.

3464:

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.

2776:

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.

2200:

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):

3869:

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.

3371: 3480:

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.

2796:

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.

2007:

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).

1426:

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.

2625:

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

5880: 3076:

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.

1445:

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.

1815:

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.

2109:

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).

3155: 4053:

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

2831:

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.

1187:

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

2670:

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.

2578:, 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. 1361:

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.

4035: 4011: 2353:

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

3864:

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.

3549:) 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. 3147: 3792:

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

2146:

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.

1278:

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

1854:

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

2330:. 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 1464:, 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. 3611: 3902:

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.

3759:

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.

3159: 2142:

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.

1479:. 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 3151: 2217:

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),

2463: 3352: 3334: 3206: 3581: 2746:

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.

1514: 937: 2473: 1804:

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

1931:.) 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 940: 1596:

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.

1094:

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. --

3365: 954:

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

2513: 3766: 3621: 2531: 962: 136: 89: 1666:

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.

3922: 2504: 919: 7469: 7079: 7041: 6958: 6886: 6590: 2491: 1753:

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

826:

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

6369: 6122: 1028:

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

961:

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

5393: 3560: 2408:

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

7465: 5326: 2018: 7644: 7472: 1807:

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

7397: 4897: 7759: 7403: 7075: 7037: 6954: 6882: 6586: 4214: 4001: 1488: 1379: 2155: 1366: 1356: 1324: 1311: 1297: 833:

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.

3822: 1761: 132: 125: 7797: 7770: 7741: 7702: 3393:

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.

2449:

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.

2246: 1572: 1130: 1098: 1084: 2112:

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:

7725: 4112: 3674: 3636: 2270:

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

7894: 3023:

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

7302: 6403: 5998: 4210: 3418:

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

1053:

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

441: 7786: 3993: 3969: 3705: 3559:

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

2873:, but which are generally considered pseudoscience by the scientific community may properly contain that information and may be categorized as pseudoscience. 1886:

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.

1773: 1164: 111: 7269: 3572:

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

3273:

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

2787: 2628:" Following this principle, theories which have not been published in reputable sources should not be included in articles on mainstream scientific topics. 2126: 121: 7854: 1450: 1415: 1375:

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.

1140:

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,

7809: 7805: 7118: 6967: 5967: 4419: 3525:

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

2907:

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

5919: 3192: 3189: 2378:

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

995: 5614: 4544: 3146:

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

3203: 1976: 1495: 1057: 7905:. He made a problematic edit and further misrepresented a source, after a warning and discussion about advancing a position unsupported by the sources. 7883:

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

7796:

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

1643:

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

7884: 7750: 3047:, 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 2433: 2294: 1476: 8056: 7497: 6770: 6157: 4978: 4071: 3346: 2116: 1889:

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

1715:

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

1654: 1569: 1492: 1472: 436: 1719: 1704: 1670: 1638:; with no other publications, is a reasonable authority for an unlikely assertion about chiropractic which has no other verifiable source of support 1271: 1264:

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

5147: 2053: 7867: 4027:. The arbitration clerks are directed to amend all existing remedies authorizing discretionary sanctions to instead designate contentious topics. 2847:

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

1906:

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

8101: 8019:

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

7687: 5451: 5354: 4893: 3100: 2690: 1783: 1725: 1716: 1701: 1667: 1144:. As a chronic promoter of pro-pseudoscience bias in articles, Iantresman has consistently disrupted pseudoscience article talk pages dismissing 628: 532: 7676: 7673: 7551: 5085: 5054: 4992: 4961: 1796:

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.

1037: 1034: 8028: 7492: 7083: 7045: 6962: 6890: 6624: 6594: 6379: 6132: 5936: 5023: 4922: 4842: 3695: 3662: 2152: 724: 100: 7976: 6927: 5705: 4634: 2957:

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 (

1607: 1231:

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

7916: 7877: 7362: 6815: 6091: 5397: 2945:

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

1754: 1438: 1113:

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

213: 7928: 7839: 7777: 5116: 4691: 4667: 3375: 3255: 2318:

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

1077:, perhaps you will provide verification of your statement that you are an expert, for example, your description as "a professor of physics" 8014: 7951: 7821: 6153: 2892:, but which some critics allege to be pseudoscience, may contain information to that effect, but generally should not be so characterized. 2569: 2552:, a fundamental policy, requires fair representation of all significant points of view regarding the subject of an article, see comment by 2368: 1561:

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

6878: 6582: 5315: 5128: 5097: 5066: 5035: 5004: 4973: 2453: 2422: 7390: 6447: 6247: 5446: 5304: 5273: 5237: 5200: 5165: 4942: 2394: 7113: 4596: 1991:

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

1612: 5892: 4360: 4303: 3811: 3685: 3640: 3530: 1468: 1153: 261: 6690: 4479: 3976:

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

7295: 7264: 7225: 7186: 6282: 6210: 5931: 5686: 5648: 5609: 5574: 5366: 4903: 4539: 4508: 4396: 4332: 4275: 4205: 4093: 2761:

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

405: 7384: 7147: 7007: 6855: 6810: 6765: 6724: 6559: 6511: 6477: 6432: 6398: 6364: 6323: 5962: 5785: 5751: 5720: 4763: 4732: 2214:

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

1914:

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

7338: 6654: 6383: 6136: 5813: 5473: 5409: 5381: 4874: 4837: 4636: 4494: 3967: 3601: 2121: 1078: 1029: 2708:

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

2593:

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

7573: 7514: 7433: 5670: 5539: 5506: 4800: 4694: 4669: 4435: 4240: 4176: 4145: 1965:. Like ScienceApologist, JBKramer is aware of Knowledge policies but obeys them when it supports the point of view he prefers. 1371:

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

693: 453: 165: 7662:

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

6179: 6148: 6117: 6086: 6055: 6024: 5993: 5849: 5465: 8043: 7938: 7240: 6670: 4498: 3938: 3815: 3301: 207: 2813: 2620: 2334:, for the previously established purpose of disparaging him and his ideas. (In fact, one of ScienceApologist's administrative 1467:

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

1157: 7923: 7670: 7314: 6451: 6413: 6008: 5907: 5674: 5385: 4568: 4220: 3117: 2902: 2771: 2160: 1692:

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

1104: 789: 645: 549: 357: 6913: 5911: 3684:

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

2208:

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

1677:

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

997:

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

8116: 8051: 7731: 7410: 7279: 6874: 6870: 6070: 3287: 2994: 2597:. Guidelines regarding notability have been developed for a number of areas, but not for scientific theories (The proposal 2469:

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

1517:

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

1149: 741: 597: 309: 78: 6417: 6012: 5558: 4593: 4228: 3156:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Tommy_Mandel_has_pushed_his_POV_on_Big_Bang_and_Plasma_cosmology

7128: 7105: 6977: 6578: 6266: 6074: 5977: 5554: 5488: 5428: 5180: 5143: 4586: 4572: 3219: 2864: 1986: 1834: 1738: 1548: 1032: 880:

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

846: 255: 7026: 5981: 5492: 5184: 2273: 6613: 6574: 6373: 6338: 6262: 6126: 5628: 5624: 5424: 5256: 5252: 5124: 5093: 5062: 5031: 5000: 4969: 4720: 4716: 4554: 4423: 4411: 4055: 1135: 501: 399: 17: 7974: 7906: 7801: 7244: 7064: 6981: 6674: 6198: 6043: 4527: 3320: 2519: 2023:

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

7848: 7022: 6946: 6342: 6039: 5770: 5593: 5350: 4889: 4386: 4294: 4098: 4048: 3319:

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

1397: 858:

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

8002: 7999: 7283: 6909: 6709: 5950: 5219: 4751: 4195: 4133: 3651: 3268: 3198: 3195: 2226:

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

867: 8087: 8066: 7833: 7567: 7508: 7427: 7166: 6780: 6639: 6609: 6229: 5800: 5766: 5589: 5525: 5081: 5050: 4988: 4957: 4322: 4268: 4164: 4081: 3274: 2756: 2680: 2478:

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

1969: 1951: 687: 447: 159: 7782:

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

6784: 6301: 6167: 5872: 5868: 5833: 2930:

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

1518: 7991: 7966: 7376: 7354: 7201: 7060: 6999: 6847: 6802: 6757: 6705: 6551: 6469: 6441: 6356: 6315: 6297: 6194: 6105: 5739: 5215: 5019: 4918: 4778: 4747: 4523: 4351: 4129: 3886:(i) the clear and substantial consensus of (a) uninvolved administrators at AE or (b) uninvolved editors at AN or 3538: 3176: 2575: 2549: 1949: 1925: 1876: 1540: 1538: 1461: 1455: 821: 8070: 7769:

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

7102: 6743: 6643: 6537: 5804: 3314: 3257: 2322:

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

237: 8083: 7205: 7162: 6942: 6829: 6620: 6231: 6225: 5701: 5521: 5461: 5293: 4860: 4823: 4815: 4786: 4782: 4618: 4382: 4290: 4160: 4107: 3857:

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

3542: 3459: 3234: 3111: 2793: 2598: 1963: 1959: 1955: 1934: 1932: 1897: 1890: 1075: 1068: 1040: 875: 872: 865: 863: 783: 639: 543: 351: 231: 7830: 6496: 4819: 225: 7608: 7070: 7032: 6923: 6905: 6739: 6533: 5946: 5864: 5829: 4856: 4852: 4191: 3491: 3229: 3038: 2988: 2458: 2381: 2251: 1961: 1957: 1953: 1948:

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

1660: 1225: 735: 591: 303: 285: 6270: 4468: 3754: 3225: 3224:

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

3200: 3186: 1781: 1749:

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

1010: 989: 429: 8011: 7948: 6825: 6101: 5375: 5112: 4869: 4832: 4795: 4684: 4651: 4488: 4450: 4432: 4347: 4318: 4237: 4173: 4142: 3534: 3413: 3148:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Evidence_of_misrepresentation_by_ScienceApologist

2487: 2355: 1981: 1929: 1568:

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

273: 219: 7591: 7538: 7451: 4263: 3254:

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

1937: 1900: 927: 922: 911: 908: 903: 898: 892: 889: 869: 717: 477: 417: 189: 7620: 7579: 7439: 7098: 6163: 5664: 3526: 2012:

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

1209:

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

1200:

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

1067:

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

495: 279: 7526: 3861:

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

3774: 3237: 3141: 1936:, and many of his other comments also, with a sarcastic, superior tone. I reverted him when he did this 1526: 848: 813: 705: 669: 573: 465: 381: 177: 8037: 7663: 7638: 7626: 7327: 7234: 6664: 6437: 5735: 5289: 4255: 3826: 3475: 3018: 2728: 2666: 2363: 1696:

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

1578: 1004: 1001: 992: 765: 621: 423: 333: 201: 3297: 3129: 2303: 1644: 1529:) are tending to use the above-linked comments from the NPOV FAQ as a way to resurrect the deprecated 801: 657: 561: 369: 7614: 7308: 7132: 6616: 6492: 6407: 6002: 5901: 4562: 4464: 3731:

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

3249: 3006: 2723:

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

2101: 914: 753: 609: 525: 321: 267: 7847:

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

7632: 7585: 7532: 7445: 7273: 6919: 6864: 6240: 6064: 5439: 5322: 5300: 5266: 5230: 5193: 5158: 4935: 3935: 3152:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Evidence_that_there_is_no_big_bang_theory

2724: 2399: 2223:

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

711: 513: 471: 411: 183: 1636: 7320: 7122: 7109: 6971: 5971: 5548: 5482: 5371: 5174: 5137: 4580: 4484: 4043: 3930: 3546: 3160:

Wikipedia_talk:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Big_Bang_is_the_real_pseudoscience

3051: 3026: 2689:

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

2662: 249: 1480: 7745: 7683:

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

7520: 7358: 6568: 6332: 6256: 5888: 5660: 5618: 5418: 5246: 4710: 4548: 4405: 3135: 2842: 2826: 2543: 1510: 1484: 807: 699: 663: 567: 459: 393: 375: 171: 8033: 7844: 7826: 7793: 7766: 7737: 7698: 7548: 7380: 7230: 7016: 7003: 6851: 6806: 6761: 6685: 6660: 6555: 6517: 6473: 6360: 6319: 6033: 5654: 5344: 5334: 4883: 4700: 4602: 4475: 4366: 4065: 4059: 3353:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Regarding_Ian_Tresman_in_particular

3335:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Regarding_Ian_Tresman_in_particular

3293: 3207:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience/Evidence#Regarding_Ian_Tresman_in_particular

3012: 2883: 2807: 2614: 2470: 2243: 2239: 2131: 2041: 1363: 1321: 1294: 1244: 1127: 933: 894:, apparently because it does not meet certain editor's unverifiable criteria for these terms. 759: 615: 327: 196: 4014:

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

2652: 2553: 1633: 1118: 8060: 8024: 7561: 7502: 7421: 7291: 7260: 7221: 7182: 7174: 6788: 6774: 6633: 6603: 6278: 6206: 5927: 5897: 5837: 5794: 5760: 5682: 5644: 5605: 5583: 5570: 5362: 5120: 5089: 5075: 5058: 5044: 5027: 4996: 4982: 4965: 4951: 4663: 4630: 4558: 4535: 4504: 4392: 4328: 4201: 4089: 4075: 3123: 2940: 2638: 2594: 2372: 2313:

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

2083: 1317: 1304: 795: 681: 651: 555: 363: 153: 3850:

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

2260: 2050:(an admin) has demonstrated POV-pushing and incivility specifically on the big bang issue, 1289:

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

1042:

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

35: 8: 7985: 7960: 7372: 7348: 7195: 7054: 6995: 6860: 6843: 6798: 6753: 6699: 6547: 6465: 6352: 6311: 6291: 6233: 6188: 6060: 5958: 5747: 5432: 5318: 5296: 5259: 5223: 5209: 5186: 5150: 5013: 4927: 4912: 4772: 4759: 4741: 4728: 4688: 4517: 4123: 3071: 3000: 2920: 2439: 2343: 2205:

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

2059: 1919: 747: 603: 519: 315: 42: 3048: 1109:

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

124:, and will be read, in full. Evidence, no matter who can provide it, is very welcome at 8077: 7912: 7890: 7873: 7756: 7335: 7156: 6936: 6651: 6219: 5810: 5695: 5544: 5515: 5478: 5455: 5405: 5170: 5133: 4809: 4612: 4576: 4376: 4284: 4154: 4102: 3105: 2954: 2644: 2501: 2347: 1522: 1503: 1161: 1021: 777: 633: 537: 345: 244: 27: 2185:

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

1554:

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

8095: 7684: 7678: 7659: 7602: 7252: 7213: 6899: 6733: 6564: 6527: 6328: 6252: 5940: 5884: 5858: 5823: 5414: 5242: 4846: 4706: 4401: 4354: 4297: 4185: 3985: 3446: 3044: 2982: 2741: 1592:

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

1447: 1412: 729: 585: 507: 388: 297: 7402:

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

3582:

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

1267:

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

8047: 8008: 7945: 7817: 7718: 7666: 7461: 7012: 6985: 6819: 6678: 6455: 6095: 6029: 5915: 5597: 5562: 5537: 5504: 5340: 5106: 4879: 4864: 4827: 4790: 4678: 4645: 4471: 4444: 4429: 4341: 4312: 4234: 4170: 4139: 4007: 3442: 3351:

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

2950: 2925: 2510: 2483: 2409: 2331: 2197:

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

1907: 1043: 1031:. And while I don't mind being described as a "well-known pseudoscience POV pusher" 955: 881: 859: 827: 2816:, a guideline, strongly discourages editing which promotes the editor's projects. 2342:

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

1639: 1622: 1169: 1039:, and an abuse of administrator priviliges to react in such a heavy-handed manner 8020: 7669:

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

7556: 7475: 7416: 7287: 7256: 7217: 7178: 7092: 6949:

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

6629: 6599: 6274: 6202: 6175: 6144: 6113: 6082: 6051: 6020: 5989: 5923: 5845: 5790: 5756: 5678: 5640: 5601: 5579: 5566: 5358: 5071: 5040: 4947: 4900: 4659: 4626: 4590: 4531: 4500: 4388: 4324: 4265: 4197: 4085: 4024: 4020: 3397: 3330: 2971: 2065: 2024: 1966: 1746: 1141: 1110: 1095: 1081: 1054: 1025: 676: 489: 148: 3580:

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

2182:

I have sufficient scientific qualifications to understand the relevant material,

1892:, for instance, where Ian espouses the idea that the information he re-added to 1621:

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

936:

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

7981: 7956: 7933:

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

7902: 7862: 7694: 7544: 7367: 7344: 7191: 7138: 7050: 6990: 6838: 6793: 6748: 6715: 6695: 6542: 6502: 6460: 6423: 6389: 6347: 6306: 6287: 6184: 5954: 5776: 5743: 5729: 5711: 5283: 5205: 5009: 4908: 4768: 4755: 4737: 4724: 4513: 4249: 4119: 3749: 3732: 3432: 2889: 2686: 2089: 2077: 2056:

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

1915: 1530: 1422: 1403: 1376: 1145: 1074:.. is likley not 'an expert in physics.' .. He does have 'a doctoral degree.'" 3292:

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

8110: 8073: 7995: 7908: 7886: 7869: 7331: 7248: 7209: 7152: 6932: 6647: 6486: 6215: 5806: 5691: 5636: 5511: 5469: 5401: 4805: 4608: 4458: 4372: 4280: 4259: 4150: 2703: 2538: 2497: 2450: 2391: 2328:

despite the fact that the CTMU explicitly acknowledges and embraces evolution

2323: 2095: 1903: 1750: 1697: 1345: 1308: 1290: 1268: 772: 340: 131:

Arbitrators will be working on evidence and suggesting proposed decisions at

1020:

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

8090: 8001:

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

7925: 7836: 7783: 7774: 7597: 6950: 6895: 6729: 6523: 5854: 5819: 5389: 5311: 4655: 4622: 4415: 4181: 3094: 2977: 2335: 2136: 2071: 2047: 1770: 1758: 1731: 1712: 1678: 1558: 1442: 1122: 580: 292: 3892:

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

3741: 3714: 3635:

Articles relating to pseudoscience, broadly interpreted, are placed under

3181:

11) ScienceApologist has strongly and repeated criticized Iantresman with

142: 8005: 7942: 7813: 7707: 7655: 7457: 7170: 5528: 5495: 5102: 4674: 4641: 4440: 4426: 4337: 4308: 4231: 4167: 4136: 3854:

the explicit prior affirmative consent of the enforcing administrator; or

3438: 3387: 2958: 2588: 2479: 2359: 2188:

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

1945: 1893: 1882: 1407: 1406:, but I'll be happy to give my input. During my review of the history of 1114: 1071: 985: 842: 1827:

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

7851: 7468:

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

7088: 6171: 6140: 6109: 6078: 6047: 6016: 5985: 5876: 5841: 5632: 3420:

Knowledge:Requests_for_arbitration/Pseudoscience#Log_of_blocks_and_bans

3054: 3024: 1651: 1625: 1604: 1506: 1487:

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

484: 3984:

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

3807:

ask the enforcing administrator to reconsider their original decision;

3688:

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

3449:, and any pages, excepting talk pages, related to his real-life work. 2524: 1402:

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

1009:

More accusations against scientists who research alternative theories

988:(a type of redshift mechanism), denial that it is a "proper" redshift 5725: 5279: 4245: 3946: 3643:

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

2870: 2390:

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

2033: 1769:

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

1329: 1286: 1253: 976: 3825:. If the editor is blocked, the appeal may be made by email through 3327: 2339: 1537:

designate a field as pseudoscience, that suffices for categorization

1176:

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

7970: 7701:

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

6916: 6482: 4454: 3594:

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

2946: 2718: 2430: 2419: 2401: 1257: 1240: 951: 991:, or suggestion that it is not generally recognised as a redshift 6833: 4224: 1630: 1437:

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

1344:

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

907:

Removing positive reviews, and replacing them with negative ones

874:). I have requested a verifiable source supporting this position 7456:

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

3323: 2731:, experts were accorded no special role or status on Knowledge. 2028: 1737:

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

1635:) and not available online, written by a private sex counsellor 1036:, I feel it is uncivil to not provide an explanation on request 3372:

Category:Fringe subjects without critical scientific evaluation

3366:

Category:Fringe subjects without critical scientific evaluation

2691:

Knowledge:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_crystal_ball

1824:

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

1148:, and has a history of tendentious and disruptive arguments at 888:

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

7740:

is blocked for 72 hours for violating these restrictions. See

5677:

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

4062:}} may be used on an editor's talkpage; this is not required. 3923:

procedure for the standard appeals and modifications provision

3561:

Knowledge:Administrators' noticeboard/Arbitration enforcement

3454:

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

3374:

and placed articles at contention in this proceeding into it

3082:

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

2837:

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

2766:

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

2736:

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

2319: 2166:

The following is my statement repeated from the original RFA:

7543:

blocked for 24 hours for violating his topic ban by editing

1252:

it. So while Redshift quantization should be excluded from

975:

scientists have questioned the traditional view of redshift

7404:

Knowledge:Arbitration Committee/Discretionary sanctions/Log

3639:. Any uninvolved administrator may levy restrictions as an 1861:

And here is how ScienceApologist interprets that policy --

1557:

despite the NPOV problems with the category namespace that

1334: 1282: 3925:

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

3769:

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

1338: 980:

Typical edits which demonstrate the issue are as follows:

2888:

17) Theories which have a substantial following, such as

1902:. Over a series of actions that day, he was blocked for 1743:

written from a typical mainstream astronomy point of view

1215:

themselves. University records are not generally on-line!

994:, even though it is well accepted in the field of optics 1340: 2068:(an admin) has demonstrated POV-pushing and incivility, 1502:

As an example regarding categorization: Is the current

6984:

of discretionary sanctions and the 1RR restriction on

2464:

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

2104:(an admin) has demonstrated POV-pushing and incivility 1741:. And if any article about a topic of astronomy isn't 1498:(minor edits for clarity 05:31, 6 October 2006 (UTC)) 4002:

Motion: contentious topic designation (December 2022)

2127:

Knowledge:Requests_for_adminship/William M. Connolley

1632:, a publication not listed in the ISI or PubMed (see 1547:

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

1460:

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

4420:

List of pseudosciences and pseudoscientific concepts

2788:

Experts are subject to the no original research rule

2445:(This area is used for notes by non-recused clerks.) 1585: 1000:

Removal of mention of alternative redshift theories,

902:

Discrediting his "theories" by calling them "ideas"

8093:; ignoring consensus and RfCs, circular arguments. 7649:

for "Harrasment of ScienceApologist" 22 June 2007.

1239:As for the related mainstream topics (for example, 5600:which were followed by protection of the article. 4010:, the Arbitration Committee adopted the following 3620:Those discretionary sanctions were later moved by 939:which subsequently results in a heated discussion 4008:2022 adoption of the contentious topics procedure 3953:("Obvious pseudoscience"). Finding of fact #9 of 3201:"inordinate ignorance" of a "nonscientist layman" 2601:is based on principles elucidated in this case). 2367:philosophy , and Langan as a "crank" , something 2358:about Knowledge's CTMU article on the website of 2117:Knowledge:Requests_for_adminship/ScienceApologist 1154:Knowledge:Neutral_point_of_view/FAQ#Pseudoscience 8108: 7939:Talk:Chiropractic/Archive 28#ArbCom restrictions 3955:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience 3951:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience 3767:procedure for the standard enforcement provision 1940:that followed clearly lays out that JBKramer is 1896:could stay until it is verified, in contrast to 1646:for a review of it from a skeptical perspective) 1521:, as WP:NPOV says? I believe some editors (cf. 7755:Reduced to 24 hours, mitigating circumstances. 1745:I'd be happy to correct this. If didn't revert 3087:Modified by motion at 18:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 2857:Modified by motion at 18:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 1873:in violation of the Original Research policy. 1629:b) whether an article in a Society newsletter 6746:after making false accusations of vandalism. 3347:ScienceApologist failure to extend good faith 3196:characterized him as an "avowed Velikovskian" 2869:16) Theories which have a following, such as 2814:Knowledge:Conflict_of_interest#Self-promotion 2535:(vote counts and comments are there as well) 964:. Many other papers have appeared since then 6271:recently edited the lead of plasma cosmology 5398:Nambudripad's Allergy Elimination Techniques 3889:(ii) a passing motion of arbitrators at ARCA 3531:avoid biting genuinely inexperienced editors 2621:Knowledge:Neutral point of view#Undue weight 2074:has demonstrated POV-pushing and incivility, 2062:the person that nominated Joke137 for admin, 1618:KV refers (below) to my comments questioning 1158:Knowledge:Neutral_point_of_view#Undue_weight 926:Removal of Lerner's scientific presentation 5314:discussion that it's not really applicable 3419: 2570:Neutral point of view as applied to science 2295:The Unofficial Anti-Pseudoscience Executive 918:Changing Lerner's verifiable BA in Physics 3486:Passed 5-0 at 02:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3470:Passed 8-0 at 02:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3427:Passed 7-0 at 02:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3408:Passed 7-0 at 02:37, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3382:Passed 6-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3370:17) ScienceApologist has recently created 3360:Passed 7-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3341:Passed 6-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3309:Passed 7-1 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3282:Passed 6-2 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3263:Passed 7-1 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3244:Passed 5-2 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3214:Passed 7-1 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3169:Passed 8-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3064:Passed 8-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 3033:Passed 8-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2966:Passed 8-0 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2935:Passed 7-1 at 02:33, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2912:Passed 7-1 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2897:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2878:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2852:Passed 7-1 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2821:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2802:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2782:Passed 7-1 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2751:Passed 7-1 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2713:Passed 7-1 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2698:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2675:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2633:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2606:Passed 8-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2583:Passed 7-0 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2561:Passed 5-3 at 02:28, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 2019:more evidence of abuse by ScienceApologist 128:. Evidence is more useful than comments. 7665:; disrupted consensus discussions on the 3238:"Completely unauthorative, argumentative" 921:to the suggestion that it's "self-stated" 7829:blocked 72 hours for personal attacks. 3508:Former title: "Discretionary sanctions". 2429:Now checked; and doesn't seem at issue. 2122:Knowledge:Requests_for_adminship/Joke137 4023:shall be treated as a reference to the 3827:Special:EmailUser/Arbitration Committee 2173:therefore none of us is an expert in it 1928:), but that user is no longer involved 1434:should exempt them from any sanctions. 14: 8109: 5914:due to a complaint of edit warring on 3962:Passed 7-0 at 18:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 3906:functionary blocks of whatever nature. 3333:, see also many of the other links at 3328:a site devoted to scientific anomalies 3302:Special:Contributions/ScienceApologist 1711:Finally, I suggest that ArbCom enjoin 1006:, despite them being related subjects. 958:, and consequently contravene policy. 7850:even if not entirely forthcoming. — 135:and voting on proposed decisions at 4034:Passed 10 to 0 with 1 abstention by 3829:(or, if email access is revoked, to 2903:Alternative theoretical formulations 2772:Experts are required to cite sources 2032:Look also at his recent edit to the 1150:Knowledge talk:Neutral point of view 6947:notified of discretionary sanctions 6875:notified of discretionary sanctions 3949:" are struck from principle #15 of 3812:arbitration enforcement noticeboard 3437:7a) Elerner is banned from editing 2220:Reverting edits without discussion, 1527:Talk:Pseudoscience#Credible_sources 1070:, and another editor suggest that " 897:Removal of Lerner's writing awards 23: 7398:standardised enforcement provision 6915:, despite previous related block: 5631:after a report of edit warring on 3821:submit a request for amendment at 2865:Generally considered pseudoscience 1519:let the facts speak for themselves 1247:), I think the policy of removing 24: 18:Knowledge:Requests for arbitration 8128: 7471:, and my reasoning is given here 6454:for breaching 1RR restriction on 4021:discretionary sanctions procedure 2234:In other words, this editor is a 2171:peer-reviewed work in cosmology, 4038:at 21:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC) 4019:21) Each reference to the prior 3879:For a request to succeed, either 3833: 3744:at 21:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC) 3717:at 21:36, 14 December 2022 (UTC) 3675:Standard discretionary sanctions 3288:ScienceApologist has edit warred 3275:Special:Contributions/Iantresman 2211:Constant recourse to ad-populum, 1513:appropriate or necessary when a 1080:, and confirm your doctorate? -- 910:, or including negative reviews 884:and deviation from Wiki policy: 115:on 11:22, 30 November 2014 (UTC) 104:on 22:35, 15 November 2012 (UTC) 4056:subst:Pseudoscience enforcement 3996:, 11:22, 30 November 2014 (UTC) 3846:Modifications by administrators 3708:, 11:22, 30 November 2014 (UTC) 3699:, 22:35, 15 November 2012 (UTC) 3666:, 22:35, 15 November 2012 (UTC) 3220:Deprecation by ScienceApologist 2757:Academically demanding subjects 2681:Knowledge is not a crystal ball 2576:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 2550:Knowledge:Neutral point of view 1624:is a notable source of opinion 1281:-- I absolutely disagree. Does 82:on 14:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 63:on 02:38, 3 December 2006 (UTC) 55:on 11:13, 12 October 2006 (UTC) 7977:01:50, 30 September 2008 (UTC) 7952:02:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC) 7935:Pseudoscience arbitration case 5963:19:29, 26 September 2013 (UTC) 5932:04:34, 11 September 2013 (UTC) 4695:19:34, 14 September 2010 (UTC) 4670:14:33, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 4637:14:33, 13 September 2010 (UTC) 4177:04:10, 22 September 2008 (UTC) 4146:03:47, 22 September 2008 (UTC) 4113:01:21, 22 September 2008 (UTC) 4094:23:25, 21 September 2008 (UTC) 3655:, 14:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3614:, 14:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC) 3460:Iantresman placed on Probation 3193:advised him not to "be a dick" 2794:Knowledge:No original research 2599:Knowledge:Notability (science) 1483:means anything, it means that 1421:I feel the need to respond to 1152:, where he's sought to weaken 1024:who I believe is acting in an 845:is about the plasma physicist, 13: 1: 7822:03:30, 24 February 2008 (UTC) 7787:14:24, 15 February 2008 (UTC) 7778:20:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC) 7726:22:24, 30 December 2007 (UTC) 7688:02:13, 11 December 2007 (UTC) 7681:19:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC) 6856:05:42, 15 February 2014 (UTC) 6811:12:57, 12 February 2014 (UTC) 6766:07:22, 12 February 2014 (UTC) 6725:18:30, 10 February 2014 (UTC) 6512:22:33, 26 December 2013 (UTC) 6478:09:05, 22 December 2013 (UTC) 6433:12:41, 20 December 2013 (UTC) 6399:16:32, 17 December 2013 (UTC) 6283:22:11, 26 November 2013 (UTC) 6248:07:37, 26 November 2013 (UTC) 6211:04:43, 26 November 2013 (UTC) 6180:22:06, 19 November 2013 (UTC) 6149:00:58, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 6118:00:54, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 6087:00:51, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 6056:00:47, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 6025:00:44, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 5994:00:40, 18 November 2013 (UTC) 5893:16:42, 7 September 2013 (UTC) 5649:21:32, 14 December 2012 (UTC) 5596:after a series of reverts at 5410:16:27, 13 February 2012 (UTC) 4875:14:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC) 4838:14:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC) 4801:14:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC) 4361:08:46, 26 December 2008 (UTC) 4333:21:17, 18 November 2008 (UTC) 3798:Appeals by sanctioned editors 3492:Contentious topic designation 3204:"pet ideas" "Basic ignorance" 2727:and the brainstorming essay, 2623:quotes Jimbo Wales, stating " 2434:01:26, 22 November 2006 (UTC) 2423:05:08, 21 November 2006 (UTC) 2395:15:01, 11 November 2006 (UTC) 2161:Statement by Jonathanischoice 2029:http://cosmologystatement.org 1987:Generalities of pseudoscience 1739:pseudoscience watchers' cabal 1105:Statement by ScienceApologist 1065:Question to ScienceApologist: 93:on 12:34, 28 March 2012 (UTC) 8102:23:03, 5 November 2008 (UTC) 7760:00:15, 21 January 2008 (UTC) 7751:15:03, 20 January 2008 (UTC) 6691:13:32, 9 February 2014 (UTC) 6655:04:14, 3 February 2014 (UTC) 6625:19:10, 13 January 2014 (UTC) 6595:16:33, 13 January 2014 (UTC) 6365:01:54, 4 December 2013 (UTC) 6324:00:59, 4 December 2013 (UTC) 5687:15:50, 22 January 2013 (UTC) 5367:21:58, 12 January 2012 (UTC) 5327:01:18, 9 November 2011 (UTC) 5305:10:14, 8 November 2011 (UTC) 5274:17:56, 6 November 2011 (UTC) 5238:17:52, 6 November 2011 (UTC) 5201:03:55, 6 November 2011 (UTC) 4764:03:25, 15 January 2011 (UTC) 4733:03:05, 15 January 2011 (UTC) 4480:01:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC) 4436:19:52, 16 January 2009 (UTC) 4304:23:01, 5 November 2008 (UTC) 4101:to Levine2112's talkpage. - 4025:contentious topics procedure 3784:0) Appeals and modifications 3414:Tommysun placed on probation 2961:), which is also involved. 2274:The dual nature of cosmology 2268:it is absolutely impossible. 2247:20:39, 30 October 2006 (UTC) 2242:13:41, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 2156:01:47, 30 October 2006 (UTC) 1977:18:04, 13 October 2006 (UTC) 1774:11:40, 12 October 2006 (UTC) 1477:making necessary assumptions 1380:20:52, 20 October 2006 (UTC) 1367:18:40, 20 October 2006 (UTC) 1357:21:36, 12 October 2006 (UTC) 1337:". You must seek Time Cube. 913:based on unreliable sources 852:], and peer reviewed author 7: 8117:Knowledge arbitration cases 8029:18:00, 6 October 2008 (UTC) 8015:02:57, 2 October 2008 (UTC) 7493:00:24, 2 January 2007 (UTC) 7466:Electric universe (concept) 7391:Log of individual sanctions 6560:02:07, 5 January 2014 (UTC) 4397:19:39, 1 January 2009 (UTC) 4276:17:38, 9 October 2008 (UTC) 4241:19:30, 6 October 2008 (UTC) 4206:18:39, 6 October 2008 (UTC) 3910:discussed at another venue. 3816:administrators’ noticeboard 3755:Enforcement of restrictions 3604:, 01:56, 28 July 2008 (UTC) 3177:ScienceApologist is uncivil 2520:Temporary injunction (none) 2514:13:10, 6 October 2006 (UTC) 2505:07:12, 5 October 2006 (UTC) 2492:15:57, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 2474:07:34, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 2454:10:09, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1845:"objective") point of view. 1762:12:36, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 1720:16:39, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 1705:16:33, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 1671:06:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1655:10:16, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1608:10:10, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1573:08:38, 8 October 2006 (UTC) 1496:08:25, 5 October 2006 (UTC) 1451:08:16, 5 October 2006 (UTC) 1416:04:47, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1325:20:27, 3 October 2006 (UTC) 1316:So how are you determining 1312:23:45, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1298:20:40, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1272:19:10, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1165:18:46, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1131:20:37, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1099:14:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC) 1085:23:15, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1058:21:50, 2 October 2006 (UTC) 1003:including "See also" links 71:on 18:58, 2 July 2010 (UTC) 10: 8133: 8046:) banned from editing the 7855:19:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC) 7840:17:30, 26 March 2008 (UTC) 7552:01:28, 11 April 2007 (UTC) 7385:10:56, 12 April 2014 (UTC) 7114:11:44, 26 March 2014 (UTC) 7084:11:06, 25 March 2014 (UTC) 7046:11:10, 24 March 2014 (UTC) 7008:03:36, 22 March 2014 (UTC) 6963:00:01, 19 March 2014 (UTC) 6928:21:12, 13 March 2014 (UTC) 6787:following edit warring on 5850:01:27, 6 August 2013 (UTC) 5786:20:11, 14 April 2013 (UTC) 5752:20:23, 14 March 2013 (UTC) 5721:18:48, 13 March 2013 (UTC) 5610:06:48, 2 August 2012 (UTC) 5447:17:45, 12 March 2012 (UTC) 4904:04:32, 28 April 2011 (UTC) 4509:01:56, 29 March 2009 (UTC) 4005: 3507: 3476:ScienceApologist cautioned 3269:Iantresman's editing style 2729:Knowledge:Expert retention 2667:Knowledge:Reliable sources 2642: 2364:Christopher Michael Langan 1136:Statement by FeloniousMonk 1051:Question to FeloniousMonk: 932:Based on those edits from 25: 7929:16:10, 11 July 2008 (UTC) 7917:14:32, 23 June 2008 (UTC) 7901:Martinphi is banned from 7895:16:03, 16 June 2008 (UTC) 7878:10:52, 12 June 2008 (UTC) 7654:Martinphi is banned from 7339:08:43, 9 April 2014 (UTC) 7296:03:05, 8 April 2014 (UTC) 7265:23:19, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 7226:23:17, 4 April 2014 (UTC) 7187:16:46, 3 April 2014 (UTC) 7148:11:56, 3 April 2014 (UTC) 6891:17:49, 3 March 2014 (UTC) 5575:15:27, 31 July 2012 (UTC) 5540:22:18, 21 June 2012 (UTC) 5507:21:01, 17 June 2012 (UTC) 5474:19:27, 15 June 2012 (UTC) 5310:Retracted by myself, per 5166:13:58, 19 June 2011 (UTC) 5129:15:38, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 5098:14:24, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 5067:14:21, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 5036:14:19, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 5005:14:17, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 4974:14:12, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 4943:03:18, 17 June 2011 (UTC) 4861:Future Perfect at Sunrise 4824:Future Perfect at Sunrise 4787:Future Perfect at Sunrise 3834: 3775:Appeals and modifications 3567:Uninvolved administrators 3039:Self promotion by Elerner 2086:(an admin) pseudoskeptic, 1782:Comment by involved user 1613:Reply to Krishna Vindaloo 1398:Statement by Shell_Kinney 6583:this comment made at FTN 6370:Barney the barney barney 6123:Barney the barney barney 5814:13:01, 5 July 2013 (UTC) 5292:) - warned of sanctions 4597:14:56, 24 May 2009 (UTC) 4540:16:25, 14 May 2009 (UTC) 4258:), after a 3RR block at 3315:Iantresman's orientation 3190:"close-minded ignorance" 2725:Knowledge:Expert editors 2685:5) While it may be that 2178:Now don't get me wrong: 1899:, explaining his revert 7672:; vexatious 3RR report 7071:Personal attack removed 7033:Personal attack removed 4223:), for edit-warring at 3921:In accordance with the 3900: 3765:In accordance with the 3686:arbitration enforcement 3677:are authorised for all 3641:arbitration enforcement 3637:discretionary sanctions 2663:Knowledge:Verifiability 2530:All numbering based on 1877:Statement by Mangojuice 1584:for your own position. 1481:WP:NPOVT#Categorisation 1473:giving "equal validity" 1456:Statement by Jim_Butler 877:, but without success. 822:Statement by iantresman 8050:guideline for 30 days. 7802:User notified of block 7596:blocked for 1 week by 7400:applies to this case. 7251:about edit warring at 7212:about edit warring at 6832:after edit warring on 3810:request review at the 2480:Matthew Brown (Morven) 2369:specifically forbidden 2338:even tracked me to my 1813:non-standard cosmology 1511:category:pseudoscience 1485:category:pseudoscience 1092:Question to Guettarda: 69:Case Amended by motion 7845:User:ScienceApologist 7827:User:ScienceApologist 7810:further justification 7806:block notice on AN/AE 7794:User:ScienceApologist 7767:User:ScienceApologist 7744:for the complaint. - 7738:User:ScienceApologist 7699:User:ScienceApologist 7247:after a complaint at 7208:after a complaint at 5561:after an edit war at 3539:neutral point of view 3250:Iantresman is uncivil 3231:The Electric Universe 3226:"well-known woo-woos" 2843:Obvious pseudoscience 2827:Serious encyclopedias 2544:Neutral point of view 2459:Preliminary decisions 2252:Statement by Asmodeus 2132:User:ScienceApologist 1809:alternative cosmology 1661:Statement by JBKramer 1245:Redshift quantization 1226:Statement by Ragesoss 7175:Vitamin C megadosage 7173:and some reverts at 6789:Bioresonance therapy 6617:Georgewilliamherbert 6438:The Devil's Advocate 5838:Alternative medicine 4099:Diff of notification 3980:4. Remedy 14 of the 3931:Amendments by motion 3543:no original research 3324:his personal website 3055:Focus Fusion Society 2884:Questionable science 2808:Conflict of interest 2615:No original research 2595:Knowledge:Notability 2373:Wikimedia Foundation 2102:William M. Connolley 1982:Statement by GoodCop 1881:I first came to the 1305:Theory of everything 1170:Statement by Elerner 1119:WP:NPOV#Undue weight 862:) are pseudoscience 6920:Second Quantization 3945:The words "such as 3704:Amended 11 to 0 by 2639:Appropriate sources 2371:by the head of the 2304:Important Questions 1833:--Executive summary 1811:article to the now 1160:to favor his bias. 7704:for more details. 6912:after addition of 5879:, per instructions 5875:and disruption at 5836:based on edits at 5533: 5500: 5372:Certifiedallergist 4485:NootherIDAvailable 4060:subst:uw-sanctions 3992:Passed 11 to 0 by 3982:Pseudoscience case 3649:Passed 14 to 0 by 3612:alternate sanction 3535:dispute resolution 3501:Superseded version 2955:Intrinsic redshift 2532:/Proposed decision 2348:Wesley R. Elsberry 1579:Statement by Gleng 1549:scientific sources 1535:Skeptical Inquirer 1523:User:FeloniousMonk 950:2. The article on 855:(all verifiable). 137:/Proposed decision 8053:, 4 November 2008 7773:for the report. 7747:Revolving Bugbear 7253:Talk:Chiropractic 7214:Talk:Chiropractic 7146: 7074: 7036: 6723: 6510: 6431: 6397: 5784: 5719: 5531: 5498: 5127: 5096: 5065: 5034: 5003: 4972: 4873: 4836: 4799: 4111: 4049:Notification logs 3916: 3915: 3814:("AE") or at the 3733:contentious topic 3728: 3727: 3693:Passed 8 to 0 by 3610:Superseded by an 3527:assume good faith 3447:Aneutronic fusion 3045:Aneutronic fusion 850:, science writer 8124: 8100: 8098: 8034:ScienceApologist 7748: 7724: 7721: 7715: 7660:Will-o'-the-wisp 7648: 7595: 7574:deleted contribs 7542: 7515:deleted contribs 7490: 7484: 7480: 7462:Plasma cosmology 7455: 7434:deleted contribs 7325: 7324: 7305: 7231:Jayaguru-Shishya 7145: 7143: 7136: 7068: 7030: 6986:Rupert Sheldrake 6722: 6720: 6713: 6688: 6683: 6661:Til Eulenspiegel 6509: 6507: 6500: 6456:Rupert Sheldrake 6430: 6428: 6421: 6396: 6394: 6387: 6243: 5916:Rupert Sheldrake 5783: 5781: 5774: 5718: 5716: 5709: 5661:Pottinger's cats 5598:Blacklight Power 5563:Blacklight Power 5535: 5502: 5442: 5269: 5233: 5196: 5161: 5153: 5123: 5092: 5061: 5030: 4999: 4968: 4938: 4930: 4867: 4830: 4793: 4359: 4357: 4302: 4300: 4273: 4105: 3941: 3840: 3838: 3837: 3836: 3780: 3779: 3698: 3665: 3654: 3600:Passed 7-2-0 by 3588:Other provisions 3520:and guidelines. 3497: 3496: 3443:Plasma cosmology 3294:Plasma cosmology 3145: 3118:deleted contribs 3050:as the director 3022: 2995:deleted contribs 2951:Plasma cosmology 2941:Locus of dispute 2921:Findings of Fact 2742:Content disputes 2655: 2471:Charles Matthews 2410:user:HeadleyDown 2042:ScienceApologist 1974: 1364:ScienceApologist 1354: 1351: 1348: 1322:ScienceApologist 1295:ScienceApologist 1128:ScienceApologist 1044:pseudoscepticism 934:ScienceApologist 882:pseudoscepticism 860:plasma cosmology 828:pseudoscepticism 817: 790:deleted contribs 769: 742:deleted contribs 721: 694:deleted contribs 673: 646:deleted contribs 625: 598:deleted contribs 577: 550:deleted contribs 529: 502:deleted contribs 481: 454:deleted contribs 433: 406:deleted contribs 385: 358:deleted contribs 337: 310:deleted contribs 289: 262:deleted contribs 241: 214:deleted contribs 197:ScienceApologist 193: 166:deleted contribs 143:Involved parties 110:Case Amended by 99:Case Amended by 88:Case Amended by 77:Case Amended by 45: 38: 8132: 8131: 8127: 8126: 8125: 8123: 8122: 8121: 8107: 8106: 8096: 8094: 7994:) cautioned by 7969:) cautioned by 7814:John Vandenberg 7746: 7734: 7719: 7708: 7705: 7600: 7559: 7500: 7486: 7482: 7476: 7419: 7413: 7393: 7306: 7303:178.221.220.214 7301: 7300: 7169:after a 3RR at 7139: 7137: 6716: 6714: 6686: 6679: 6520: 6503: 6501: 6424: 6422: 6404:TheRedPenOfDoom 6390: 6388: 6241: 5999:TheRedPenOfDoom 5898:198.189.184.243 5777: 5775: 5712: 5710: 5657: 5635:was decided at 5529: 5496: 5440: 5337: 5267: 5231: 5194: 5159: 5151: 5121:KillerChihuahua 5090:KillerChihuahua 5059:KillerChihuahua 5028:KillerChihuahua 4997:KillerChihuahua 4966:KillerChihuahua 4936: 4928: 4703: 4605: 4591:User:TimVickers 4559:KillerChihuahua 4369: 4355: 4353: 4298: 4296: 4269: 4211:Malcolm Schosha 4068: 4051: 4046: 4044:Enforcement log 4030: 4029: 4015: 4006:As part of the 4004: 3974: 3972:(November 2014) 3943: 3937: 3933: 3917: 3873:Important notes 3832: 3830: 3785: 3777: 3757: 3752: 3729: 3694: 3661: 3650: 3509: 3502: 3494: 3478: 3462: 3435: 3416: 3400: 3398:Tommysun banned 3390: 3368: 3349: 3331:User:Iantresman 3317: 3290: 3271: 3252: 3222: 3179: 3103: 3097: 3074: 3041: 2980: 2974: 2943: 2928: 2923: 2905: 2886: 2867: 2845: 2829: 2810: 2790: 2774: 2759: 2744: 2721: 2706: 2687:paradigm shifts 2683: 2659: 2658: 2651: 2647: 2641: 2617: 2591: 2572: 2546: 2541: 2527: 2522: 2466: 2461: 2442: 2405: 2384: 2315: 2306: 2297: 2276: 2263: 2254: 2163: 2084:KillerChihuahua 2025:static universe 2021: 1989: 1984: 1970: 1879: 1787: 1747:User:Iantresman 1735: 1663: 1615: 1581: 1458: 1400: 1352: 1349: 1346: 1228: 1172: 1142:User:Iantresman 1138: 1111:User:Iantresman 1107: 956:pseudosceptical 841:1. The article 824: 775: 727: 679: 631: 583: 535: 487: 439: 391: 343: 295: 247: 199: 151: 145: 116: 105: 94: 83: 72: 64: 56: 49: 48: 41: 34: 30: 22: 21: 20: 12: 11: 5: 8130: 8120: 8119: 8105: 8104: 8089:cautioned for 8054: 8031: 8017: 7979: 7954: 7931: 7919: 7903:remote viewing 7899: 7898: 7897: 7863:User:Martinphi 7859: 7858: 7857: 7835:secondarily. 7824: 7791: 7790: 7789: 7764: 7763: 7762: 7733: 7732:2008 sanctions 7730: 7729: 7728: 7695:User:Martinphi 7651: 7650: 7554: 7545:Systems theory 7495: 7412: 7411:2007 sanctions 7409: 7392: 7389: 7388: 7387: 7342: 7298: 7270:Synsepalum2013 7267: 7228: 7189: 7150: 7116: 7086: 7048: 7010: 6965: 6930: 6893: 6879:arguing on FTN 6861:PhiChiPsiOmega 6858: 6813: 6768: 6727: 6693: 6658: 6627: 6597: 6562: 6519: 6516: 6515: 6514: 6480: 6435: 6401: 6367: 6326: 6285: 6250: 6213: 6182: 6151: 6120: 6089: 6061:Barleybannocks 6058: 6027: 5996: 5965: 5934: 5895: 5852: 5817: 5788: 5754: 5723: 5689: 5656: 5653: 5652: 5651: 5612: 5577: 5542: 5509: 5476: 5449: 5412: 5369: 5336: 5333: 5332: 5331: 5330: 5329: 5319:Magog the Ogre 5297:Magog the Ogre 5276: 5240: 5203: 5168: 5131: 5100: 5069: 5038: 5007: 4976: 4945: 4906: 4877: 4840: 4803: 4766: 4735: 4702: 4699: 4698: 4697: 4689:NuclearWarfare 4687:) notified by 4672: 4658:, notified by 4639: 4625:, notified by 4604: 4601: 4600: 4599: 4589:) notified by 4574: 4557:) notified by 4542: 4511: 4482: 4453:) notified by 4438: 4399: 4368: 4365: 4364: 4363: 4335: 4306: 4278: 4243: 4208: 4179: 4148: 4117: 4116: 4115: 4067: 4064: 4050: 4047: 4045: 4042: 4041: 4040: 4017: 4016: 4003: 4000: 3999: 3998: 3989: 3973: 3966: 3965: 3964: 3942: 3934: 3932: 3929: 3928: 3927: 3914: 3913: 3912: 3911: 3907: 3903: 3899: 3896: 3895: 3894: 3893: 3890: 3887: 3881: 3880: 3859: 3858: 3855: 3848: 3847: 3843: 3842: 3819: 3808: 3800: 3799: 3787: 3786: 3783: 3778: 3776: 3773: 3772: 3771: 3756: 3753: 3751: 3748: 3747: 3746: 3726: 3725: 3724: 3723: 3722: 3721: 3720: 3719: 3713:Superseded by 3671: 3670: 3669: 3668: 3660:Superseded by 3631: 3630: 3629: 3628: 3627: 3626: 3590: 3589: 3578: 3577: 3569: 3568: 3557: 3556: 3504: 3503: 3500: 3495: 3493: 3490: 3489: 3488: 3477: 3474: 3473: 3472: 3461: 3458: 3457: 3456: 3434: 3433:Elerner banned 3431: 3430: 3429: 3415: 3412: 3411: 3410: 3399: 3396: 3389: 3386: 3385: 3384: 3367: 3364: 3363: 3362: 3348: 3345: 3344: 3343: 3316: 3313: 3312: 3311: 3289: 3286: 3285: 3284: 3270: 3267: 3266: 3265: 3251: 3248: 3247: 3246: 3221: 3218: 3217: 3216: 3178: 3175: 3174: 3173: 3172: 3171: 3096: 3093: 3092: 3091: 3090: 3089: 3073: 3070: 3069: 3068: 3067: 3066: 3040: 3037: 3036: 3035: 2973: 2970: 2969: 2968: 2942: 2939: 2938: 2937: 2927: 2924: 2922: 2919: 2917: 2915: 2914: 2904: 2901: 2900: 2899: 2890:psychoanalysis 2885: 2882: 2881: 2880: 2866: 2863: 2862: 2861: 2860: 2859: 2844: 2841: 2840: 2839: 2828: 2825: 2824: 2823: 2809: 2806: 2805: 2804: 2789: 2786: 2785: 2784: 2773: 2770: 2769: 2768: 2758: 2755: 2754: 2753: 2743: 2740: 2739: 2738: 2720: 2717: 2716: 2715: 2705: 2702: 2701: 2700: 2682: 2679: 2678: 2677: 2657: 2656: 2648: 2643: 2640: 2637: 2636: 2635: 2616: 2613: 2611: 2609: 2608: 2590: 2587: 2586: 2585: 2571: 2568: 2566: 2564: 2563: 2545: 2542: 2540: 2537: 2526: 2525:Final decision 2523: 2521: 2518: 2517: 2516: 2507: 2494: 2476: 2465: 2462: 2460: 2457: 2447: 2446: 2441: 2438: 2437: 2436: 2404: 2398: 2383: 2380: 2314: 2311: 2305: 2302: 2296: 2293: 2275: 2272: 2262: 2259: 2253: 2250: 2232: 2231: 2227: 2224: 2221: 2218: 2215: 2212: 2209: 2206: 2190: 2189: 2186: 2183: 2162: 2159: 2140: 2139: 2134: 2129: 2124: 2119: 2106: 2105: 2099: 2098:pseudoskeptic, 2093: 2087: 2081: 2075: 2069: 2063: 2060:Dragons flight 2057: 2051: 2045: 2020: 2017: 2015: 1988: 1985: 1983: 1980: 1878: 1875: 1871: 1870: 1869: 1868: 1859: 1858: 1857: 1856: 1849: 1848: 1847: 1846: 1839: 1838: 1837: 1836: 1819: 1786: 1780: 1779: 1778: 1777: 1776: 1734: 1724: 1723: 1722: 1708: 1707: 1689: 1688: 1683: 1682: 1674: 1673: 1662: 1659: 1658: 1657: 1647: 1641: 1627: 1619: 1614: 1611: 1580: 1577: 1576: 1575: 1566: 1565: 1564: 1563: 1562: 1555: 1552: 1525:'s comment at 1457: 1454: 1420: 1399: 1396: 1395: 1394: 1393: 1392: 1391: 1390: 1389: 1388: 1387: 1386: 1385: 1384: 1383: 1382: 1353:sch 1347:Jim 1227: 1224: 1223: 1222: 1217: 1216: 1211: 1210: 1204: 1202: 1201: 1196: 1195: 1190: 1189: 1184: 1183: 1178: 1177: 1171: 1168: 1137: 1134: 1106: 1103: 1102: 1101: 1088: 1087: 1061: 1060: 1013: 1012: 1007: 998: 984:Regarding the 971:, and several 930: 929: 924: 916: 905: 900: 895: 891:or "physicist" 823: 820: 819: 818: 770: 722: 674: 626: 578: 530: 482: 434: 386: 338: 290: 242: 194: 144: 141: 108: 97: 86: 75: 67: 59: 51: 47: 46: 39: 31: 26: 15: 9: 6: 4: 3: 2: 8129: 8118: 8115: 8114: 8112: 8103: 8099: 8092: 8088: 8085: 8082: 8079: 8075: 8071: 8068: 8065: 8062: 8058: 8055: 8052: 8049: 8045: 8042: 8039: 8035: 8032: 8030: 8026: 8022: 8018: 8016: 8013: 8010: 8007: 8003: 8000: 7997: 7993: 7990: 7987: 7983: 7980: 7978: 7975: 7972: 7968: 7965: 7962: 7958: 7955: 7953: 7950: 7947: 7944: 7940: 7936: 7932: 7930: 7927: 7924: 7920: 7918: 7914: 7910: 7907: 7904: 7900: 7896: 7892: 7888: 7885: 7882: 7881: 7880: 7879: 7875: 7871: 7868: 7864: 7860: 7856: 7853: 7849: 7846: 7843: 7842: 7841: 7838: 7834: 7831: 7828: 7825: 7823: 7819: 7815: 7811: 7807: 7803: 7799: 7795: 7792: 7788: 7785: 7781: 7780: 7779: 7776: 7772: 7768: 7765: 7761: 7758: 7754: 7753: 7752: 7749: 7743: 7739: 7736: 7735: 7727: 7722: 7716: 7714: 7712: 7703: 7700: 7696: 7692: 7691: 7690: 7689: 7686: 7682: 7680: 7677: 7674: 7671: 7668: 7664: 7661: 7657: 7646: 7643: 7640: 7637: 7634: 7631: 7628: 7625: 7622: 7619: 7616: 7613: 7610: 7607: 7604: 7599: 7593: 7590: 7587: 7584: 7581: 7578: 7575: 7572: 7569: 7566: 7563: 7558: 7555: 7553: 7550: 7546: 7540: 7537: 7534: 7531: 7528: 7525: 7522: 7519: 7516: 7513: 7510: 7507: 7504: 7499: 7496: 7494: 7491: 7489: 7485: 7479: 7473: 7470: 7467: 7463: 7459: 7453: 7450: 7447: 7444: 7441: 7438: 7435: 7432: 7429: 7426: 7423: 7418: 7415: 7414: 7408: 7407: 7405: 7399: 7386: 7382: 7378: 7374: 7370: 7369: 7364: 7360: 7356: 7353: 7350: 7346: 7343: 7340: 7337: 7333: 7329: 7322: 7319: 7316: 7313: 7310: 7304: 7299: 7297: 7293: 7289: 7285: 7281: 7278: 7275: 7271: 7268: 7266: 7262: 7258: 7254: 7250: 7246: 7242: 7239: 7236: 7232: 7229: 7227: 7223: 7219: 7215: 7211: 7207: 7203: 7200: 7197: 7193: 7190: 7188: 7184: 7180: 7176: 7172: 7168: 7164: 7161: 7158: 7154: 7151: 7149: 7144: 7142: 7134: 7130: 7127: 7124: 7120: 7119:76.107.171.90 7117: 7115: 7111: 7107: 7106:76.107.171.90 7104: 7100: 7097: 7094: 7090: 7087: 7085: 7081: 7077: 7072: 7066: 7062: 7059: 7056: 7052: 7049: 7047: 7043: 7039: 7034: 7028: 7024: 7021: 7018: 7014: 7011: 7009: 7005: 7001: 6997: 6993: 6992: 6987: 6983: 6979: 6976: 6973: 6969: 6968:Matthew light 6966: 6964: 6960: 6956: 6952: 6948: 6944: 6941: 6938: 6934: 6931: 6929: 6925: 6921: 6917: 6914: 6911: 6907: 6904: 6901: 6897: 6894: 6892: 6888: 6884: 6880: 6876: 6872: 6869: 6866: 6862: 6859: 6857: 6853: 6849: 6845: 6841: 6840: 6835: 6831: 6827: 6824: 6821: 6817: 6814: 6812: 6808: 6804: 6800: 6796: 6795: 6790: 6786: 6782: 6779: 6776: 6772: 6769: 6767: 6763: 6759: 6755: 6751: 6750: 6745: 6741: 6738: 6735: 6731: 6728: 6726: 6721: 6719: 6711: 6707: 6704: 6701: 6697: 6694: 6692: 6689: 6684: 6682: 6676: 6672: 6669: 6666: 6662: 6659: 6656: 6653: 6649: 6645: 6641: 6638: 6635: 6631: 6628: 6626: 6622: 6618: 6615: 6611: 6608: 6605: 6601: 6598: 6596: 6592: 6588: 6584: 6580: 6576: 6573: 6570: 6566: 6563: 6561: 6557: 6553: 6549: 6545: 6544: 6539: 6535: 6532: 6529: 6525: 6522: 6521: 6513: 6508: 6506: 6498: 6494: 6491: 6488: 6484: 6481: 6479: 6475: 6471: 6467: 6463: 6462: 6457: 6453: 6449: 6446: 6443: 6439: 6436: 6434: 6429: 6427: 6419: 6415: 6412: 6409: 6405: 6402: 6400: 6395: 6393: 6385: 6381: 6378: 6375: 6371: 6368: 6366: 6362: 6358: 6354: 6350: 6349: 6344: 6340: 6337: 6334: 6330: 6327: 6325: 6321: 6317: 6313: 6309: 6308: 6303: 6299: 6296: 6293: 6289: 6286: 6284: 6280: 6276: 6272: 6268: 6264: 6261: 6258: 6254: 6251: 6249: 6246: 6244: 6237: 6236: 6232: 6230: 6227: 6224: 6221: 6217: 6214: 6212: 6208: 6204: 6200: 6196: 6193: 6190: 6186: 6183: 6181: 6177: 6173: 6169: 6165: 6162: 6159: 6155: 6152: 6150: 6146: 6142: 6138: 6134: 6131: 6128: 6124: 6121: 6119: 6115: 6111: 6107: 6103: 6100: 6097: 6093: 6090: 6088: 6084: 6080: 6076: 6072: 6069: 6066: 6062: 6059: 6057: 6053: 6049: 6045: 6041: 6038: 6035: 6031: 6028: 6026: 6022: 6018: 6014: 6010: 6007: 6004: 6000: 5997: 5995: 5991: 5987: 5983: 5979: 5976: 5973: 5969: 5968:Alfonzo Green 5966: 5964: 5960: 5956: 5952: 5948: 5945: 5942: 5938: 5935: 5933: 5929: 5925: 5921: 5917: 5913: 5909: 5906: 5903: 5899: 5896: 5894: 5890: 5886: 5882: 5878: 5874: 5870: 5866: 5863: 5860: 5856: 5853: 5851: 5847: 5843: 5839: 5835: 5831: 5828: 5825: 5821: 5818: 5815: 5812: 5808: 5805: 5802: 5799: 5796: 5792: 5789: 5787: 5782: 5780: 5772: 5768: 5765: 5762: 5758: 5755: 5753: 5749: 5745: 5741: 5737: 5734: 5731: 5727: 5724: 5722: 5717: 5715: 5707: 5703: 5700: 5697: 5693: 5690: 5688: 5684: 5680: 5676: 5672: 5669: 5666: 5662: 5659: 5658: 5650: 5646: 5642: 5638: 5634: 5630: 5626: 5623: 5620: 5616: 5613: 5611: 5607: 5603: 5599: 5595: 5591: 5588: 5585: 5581: 5578: 5576: 5572: 5568: 5564: 5560: 5556: 5553: 5550: 5546: 5545:Eric mit 1992 5543: 5541: 5538: 5536: 5526: 5523: 5520: 5517: 5513: 5510: 5508: 5505: 5503: 5493: 5490: 5487: 5484: 5480: 5479:Other Choices 5477: 5475: 5472: 5471: 5466: 5463: 5460: 5457: 5453: 5450: 5448: 5445: 5443: 5436: 5435: 5430: 5426: 5423: 5420: 5416: 5413: 5411: 5407: 5403: 5399: 5395: 5391: 5387: 5383: 5380: 5377: 5373: 5370: 5368: 5364: 5360: 5356: 5352: 5349: 5346: 5342: 5339: 5338: 5328: 5324: 5320: 5316: 5313: 5309: 5308: 5307: 5306: 5302: 5298: 5294: 5291: 5288: 5285: 5281: 5277: 5275: 5272: 5270: 5263: 5262: 5258: 5254: 5251: 5248: 5244: 5241: 5239: 5236: 5234: 5227: 5226: 5221: 5217: 5214: 5211: 5207: 5204: 5202: 5199: 5197: 5190: 5189: 5185: 5182: 5179: 5176: 5172: 5171:Ken McRitchie 5169: 5167: 5164: 5162: 5155: 5154: 5148: 5145: 5142: 5139: 5135: 5134:HandThatFeeds 5132: 5130: 5126: 5122: 5118: 5114: 5111: 5108: 5104: 5101: 5099: 5095: 5091: 5087: 5083: 5080: 5077: 5073: 5070: 5068: 5064: 5060: 5056: 5052: 5049: 5046: 5042: 5039: 5037: 5033: 5029: 5025: 5021: 5018: 5015: 5011: 5008: 5006: 5002: 4998: 4994: 4990: 4987: 4984: 4980: 4977: 4975: 4971: 4967: 4963: 4959: 4956: 4953: 4949: 4946: 4944: 4941: 4939: 4932: 4931: 4924: 4920: 4917: 4914: 4910: 4907: 4905: 4902: 4899: 4895: 4891: 4888: 4885: 4881: 4878: 4876: 4871: 4866: 4862: 4858: 4854: 4851: 4848: 4844: 4841: 4839: 4834: 4829: 4825: 4821: 4817: 4814: 4811: 4807: 4804: 4802: 4797: 4792: 4788: 4784: 4780: 4777: 4774: 4770: 4767: 4765: 4761: 4757: 4753: 4749: 4746: 4743: 4739: 4736: 4734: 4730: 4726: 4722: 4718: 4715: 4712: 4708: 4705: 4704: 4696: 4692: 4690: 4686: 4683: 4680: 4676: 4673: 4671: 4668: 4665: 4661: 4657: 4653: 4650: 4647: 4643: 4640: 4638: 4635: 4632: 4628: 4624: 4620: 4617: 4614: 4610: 4607: 4606: 4598: 4595: 4592: 4588: 4585: 4582: 4578: 4577:TheDoctorIsIn 4575: 4573: 4570: 4567: 4564: 4560: 4556: 4553: 4550: 4546: 4543: 4541: 4537: 4533: 4529: 4525: 4522: 4519: 4515: 4512: 4510: 4506: 4502: 4499: 4496: 4493: 4490: 4486: 4483: 4481: 4477: 4473: 4469: 4466: 4463: 4460: 4456: 4452: 4449: 4446: 4442: 4439: 4437: 4434: 4431: 4428: 4424: 4421: 4417: 4414:) notified - 4413: 4410: 4407: 4403: 4400: 4398: 4394: 4390: 4387: 4384: 4381: 4378: 4374: 4371: 4370: 4362: 4358: 4352: 4349: 4346: 4343: 4339: 4336: 4334: 4330: 4326: 4323: 4320: 4317: 4314: 4310: 4307: 4305: 4301: 4295: 4292: 4289: 4286: 4282: 4279: 4277: 4274: 4272: 4267: 4264: 4261: 4260:pseudoscience 4257: 4254: 4251: 4247: 4244: 4242: 4239: 4236: 4233: 4229: 4226: 4222: 4219: 4216: 4212: 4209: 4207: 4203: 4199: 4196: 4193: 4190: 4187: 4183: 4180: 4178: 4175: 4172: 4169: 4165: 4162: 4159: 4156: 4152: 4149: 4147: 4144: 4141: 4138: 4134: 4131: 4128: 4125: 4121: 4118: 4114: 4109: 4104: 4100: 4097: 4096: 4095: 4091: 4087: 4083: 4080: 4077: 4073: 4070: 4069: 4063: 4061: 4057: 4039: 4037: 4032: 4031: 4028: 4026: 4022: 4013: 4009: 3997: 3995: 3990: 3987: 3983: 3979: 3978: 3977: 3971: 3963: 3960: 3959: 3958: 3956: 3952: 3948: 3940: 3926: 3924: 3919: 3918: 3908: 3904: 3898: 3897: 3891: 3888: 3885: 3884: 3883: 3882: 3878: 3877: 3876: 3874: 3870: 3866: 3862: 3856: 3853: 3852: 3851: 3845: 3844: 3839:wikimedia.org 3828: 3824: 3820: 3817: 3813: 3809: 3806: 3805: 3804: 3797: 3796: 3795: 3794: 3789: 3788: 3782: 3781: 3770: 3768: 3763: 3762: 3761: 3745: 3743: 3738: 3737: 3736: 3734: 3718: 3716: 3711: 3710: 3709: 3707: 3702: 3701: 3700: 3697: 3691: 3690: 3689: 3687: 3683: 3680: 3676: 3667: 3664: 3658: 3657: 3656: 3653: 3647: 3646: 3645: 3644: 3642: 3638: 3625: 3624:to this case. 3623: 3618: 3617: 3616: 3615: 3613: 3607: 3606: 3605: 3603: 3598: 3597: 3596: 3595: 3591: 3587: 3586: 3585: 3583: 3575: 3574: 3573: 3566: 3565: 3564: 3562: 3554: 3553: 3551: 3550: 3548: 3547:verifiability 3544: 3540: 3536: 3532: 3528: 3522: 3521: 3516: 3515: 3506: 3505: 3499: 3498: 3487: 3484: 3483: 3482: 3471: 3468: 3467: 3466: 3455: 3452: 3451: 3450: 3448: 3444: 3440: 3428: 3425: 3424: 3423: 3421: 3409: 3406: 3405: 3404: 3395: 3394: 3383: 3380: 3379: 3378: 3376: 3373: 3361: 3358: 3357: 3356: 3354: 3342: 3339: 3338: 3337: 3336: 3332: 3329: 3325: 3321: 3310: 3307: 3306: 3305: 3303: 3299: 3295: 3283: 3280: 3279: 3278: 3276: 3264: 3261: 3260: 3259: 3258: 3256: 3245: 3242: 3241: 3240: 3239: 3236: 3235:"discredited" 3233: 3232: 3227: 3215: 3212: 3211: 3210: 3208: 3205: 3202: 3199: 3197: 3194: 3191: 3188: 3187:"incompetent" 3184: 3170: 3167: 3166: 3165: 3164: 3163: 3161: 3157: 3153: 3149: 3143: 3140: 3137: 3134: 3131: 3128: 3125: 3122: 3119: 3116: 3113: 3110: 3107: 3102: 3088: 3085: 3084: 3083: 3080: 3079: 3078: 3072:Pseudoscience 3065: 3062: 3061: 3060: 3059: 3058: 3056: 3052: 3049: 3046: 3034: 3031: 3030: 3029: 3027: 3025: 3020: 3017: 3014: 3011: 3008: 3005: 3002: 2999: 2996: 2993: 2990: 2987: 2984: 2979: 2967: 2964: 2963: 2962: 2960: 2956: 2952: 2948: 2936: 2933: 2932: 2931: 2918: 2913: 2910: 2909: 2908: 2898: 2895: 2894: 2893: 2891: 2879: 2876: 2875: 2874: 2872: 2858: 2855: 2854: 2853: 2850: 2849: 2848: 2838: 2835: 2834: 2833: 2822: 2819: 2818: 2817: 2815: 2803: 2800: 2799: 2798: 2795: 2783: 2780: 2779: 2778: 2767: 2764: 2763: 2762: 2752: 2749: 2748: 2747: 2737: 2734: 2733: 2732: 2730: 2726: 2714: 2711: 2710: 2709: 2699: 2696: 2695: 2694: 2692: 2688: 2676: 2673: 2672: 2671: 2668: 2664: 2654: 2650: 2649: 2646: 2634: 2631: 2630: 2629: 2627: 2622: 2612: 2607: 2604: 2603: 2602: 2600: 2596: 2584: 2581: 2580: 2579: 2577: 2567: 2562: 2559: 2558: 2557: 2555: 2551: 2536: 2534: 2533: 2515: 2512: 2508: 2506: 2503: 2499: 2495: 2493: 2489: 2485: 2481: 2477: 2475: 2472: 2468: 2467: 2456: 2455: 2452: 2444: 2443: 2435: 2432: 2428: 2427: 2426: 2425: 2424: 2421: 2414: 2413: 2411: 2403: 2400:Statement by 2397: 2396: 2393: 2388: 2379: 2376: 2374: 2370: 2365: 2361: 2357: 2351: 2349: 2345: 2341: 2337: 2333: 2329: 2325: 2321: 2310: 2301: 2292: 2288: 2286: 2282: 2271: 2269: 2261:Pseudoscience 2258: 2249: 2248: 2245: 2241: 2237: 2228: 2225: 2222: 2219: 2216: 2213: 2210: 2207: 2204: 2203: 2202: 2198: 2194: 2187: 2184: 2181: 2180: 2179: 2176: 2174: 2168: 2167: 2158: 2157: 2154: 2148: 2144: 2138: 2135: 2133: 2130: 2128: 2125: 2123: 2120: 2118: 2115: 2114: 2113: 2110: 2103: 2100: 2097: 2094: 2091: 2088: 2085: 2082: 2079: 2076: 2073: 2070: 2067: 2064: 2061: 2058: 2055: 2052: 2049: 2046: 2043: 2040: 2039: 2038: 2035: 2030: 2026: 2016: 2013: 2009: 2006: 2000: 1996: 1992: 1979: 1978: 1975: 1973: 1968: 1964: 1962: 1960: 1958: 1956: 1954: 1952: 1950: 1947: 1943: 1938: 1935: 1933: 1930: 1927: 1924: 1921: 1917: 1912: 1909: 1905: 1901: 1898: 1895: 1891: 1887: 1884: 1874: 1866: 1865: 1864: 1863: 1862: 1853: 1852: 1851: 1850: 1843: 1842: 1841: 1840: 1835: 1832: 1831: 1830: 1829: 1828: 1825: 1822: 1817: 1814: 1810: 1805: 1801: 1797: 1794: 1790: 1785: 1775: 1772: 1768: 1767: 1766: 1765: 1764: 1763: 1760: 1756: 1752: 1748: 1744: 1740: 1733: 1729: 1726:Statement of 1721: 1718: 1714: 1710: 1709: 1706: 1703: 1699: 1695: 1691: 1690: 1685: 1684: 1680: 1676: 1675: 1672: 1669: 1665: 1664: 1656: 1653: 1648: 1645: 1642: 1640: 1637: 1634: 1631: 1628: 1626: 1623: 1620: 1617: 1616: 1610: 1609: 1606: 1600: 1597: 1593: 1590: 1586: 1574: 1571: 1567: 1560: 1556: 1553: 1550: 1546: 1545: 1544: 1543: 1541: 1539: 1536: 1532: 1528: 1524: 1520: 1516: 1515:Pubmed search 1512: 1508: 1505:inclusion of 1504: 1501: 1500: 1499: 1497: 1494: 1490: 1486: 1482: 1478: 1474: 1470: 1469:pseudoscience 1465: 1463: 1453: 1452: 1449: 1444: 1440: 1435: 1431: 1427: 1424: 1418: 1417: 1414: 1409: 1405: 1381: 1378: 1374: 1370: 1369: 1368: 1365: 1360: 1359: 1358: 1355: 1343: 1342: 1341: 1339: 1336: 1331: 1328: 1327: 1326: 1323: 1319: 1315: 1314: 1313: 1310: 1306: 1301: 1300: 1299: 1296: 1292: 1291:User:Ragesoss 1288: 1284: 1280: 1276: 1275: 1274: 1273: 1270: 1265: 1263: 1259: 1255: 1250: 1246: 1242: 1237: 1234: 1219: 1218: 1213: 1212: 1207: 1206: 1205: 1198: 1197: 1192: 1191: 1186: 1185: 1180: 1179: 1174: 1173: 1167: 1166: 1163: 1162:FeloniousMonk 1159: 1155: 1151: 1147: 1143: 1133: 1132: 1129: 1124: 1120: 1116: 1112: 1100: 1097: 1093: 1090: 1089: 1086: 1083: 1079: 1076: 1073: 1069: 1066: 1063: 1062: 1059: 1056: 1052: 1049: 1048: 1047: 1045: 1041: 1038: 1035: 1033: 1030: 1027: 1023: 1022:FeloniousMonk 1018: 1017: 1016:FeloniousMonk 1011: 1008: 1005: 1002: 999: 996: 993: 990: 987: 983: 982: 981: 978: 977: 974: 970: 968: 966: 963: 959: 957: 953: 948: 947: 943: 941: 938: 935: 928: 925: 923: 920: 917: 915: 912: 909: 906: 904: 901: 899: 896: 893: 890: 887: 886: 885: 883: 878: 876: 873: 870: 868: 866: 864: 861: 856: 854: 851: 849: 847: 844: 839: 838: 834: 831: 829: 815: 812: 809: 806: 803: 800: 797: 794: 791: 788: 785: 782: 779: 774: 771: 767: 764: 761: 758: 755: 752: 749: 746: 743: 740: 737: 734: 731: 726: 723: 719: 716: 713: 710: 707: 704: 701: 698: 695: 692: 689: 686: 683: 678: 675: 671: 668: 665: 662: 659: 656: 653: 650: 647: 644: 641: 638: 635: 630: 627: 623: 620: 617: 614: 611: 608: 605: 602: 599: 596: 593: 590: 587: 582: 579: 575: 572: 569: 566: 563: 560: 557: 554: 551: 548: 545: 542: 539: 534: 531: 527: 524: 521: 518: 515: 512: 509: 506: 503: 500: 497: 494: 491: 486: 483: 479: 476: 473: 470: 467: 464: 461: 458: 455: 452: 449: 446: 443: 438: 435: 431: 428: 425: 422: 419: 416: 413: 410: 407: 404: 401: 398: 395: 390: 387: 383: 380: 377: 374: 371: 368: 365: 362: 359: 356: 353: 350: 347: 342: 339: 335: 332: 329: 326: 323: 320: 317: 314: 311: 308: 305: 302: 299: 294: 291: 287: 284: 281: 278: 275: 272: 269: 266: 263: 260: 257: 254: 251: 246: 245:FeloniousMonk 243: 239: 236: 233: 230: 227: 224: 221: 218: 215: 212: 209: 206: 203: 198: 195: 191: 188: 185: 182: 179: 176: 173: 170: 167: 164: 161: 158: 155: 150: 147: 146: 140: 138: 134: 129: 127: 123: 117: 114: 113: 106: 103: 102: 95: 92: 91: 84: 81: 80: 73: 70: 65: 62: 57: 54: 44: 40: 37: 33: 32: 29: 19: 8080: 8063: 8040: 7988: 7963: 7934: 7861: 7798:AN/AE report 7710: 7709: 7653: 7652: 7641: 7635: 7629: 7623: 7617: 7611: 7605: 7588: 7582: 7576: 7570: 7564: 7535: 7529: 7523: 7517: 7511: 7505: 7487: 7481: 7477: 7448: 7442: 7436: 7430: 7424: 7401: 7394: 7366: 7351: 7317: 7311: 7276: 7237: 7198: 7159: 7140: 7125: 7095: 7057: 7019: 6989: 6974: 6951:Talk:Ken Ham 6939: 6902: 6867: 6837: 6822: 6792: 6777: 6747: 6736: 6717: 6702: 6680: 6667: 6636: 6606: 6571: 6565:CEngelbrecht 6541: 6530: 6504: 6489: 6459: 6444: 6425: 6410: 6391: 6376: 6346: 6335: 6329:Roxy the dog 6305: 6294: 6259: 6253:Wavyinfinity 6238: 6234: 6222: 6191: 6160: 6129: 6098: 6067: 6036: 6005: 5974: 5943: 5920:ArbCom-Alert 5918:, using the 5904: 5873:edit warring 5861: 5826: 5797: 5778: 5763: 5732: 5713: 5698: 5667: 5621: 5615:GhostOfLippe 5586: 5551: 5524:) notified: 5518: 5491:) notified: 5485: 5468: 5464:) notified: 5458: 5437: 5433: 5421: 5415:BruceSwanson 5394:use of socks 5378: 5353:) notiified 5347: 5286: 5278: 5264: 5260: 5249: 5243:Robertcurrey 5228: 5224: 5212: 5191: 5187: 5177: 5156: 5149: 5140: 5109: 5078: 5047: 5016: 4985: 4954: 4933: 4926: 4915: 4886: 4849: 4812: 4775: 4744: 4713: 4707:Afterwriting 4681: 4656:Chiropractic 4648: 4623:Chiropractic 4615: 4583: 4565: 4551: 4545:24.68.247.69 4526:) notified. 4520: 4497:) notified. 4491: 4461: 4447: 4416:Chiropractic 4408: 4402:Orangemarlin 4385:) notified. 4379: 4350:) notified. 4344: 4321:) notified. 4315: 4287: 4270: 4252: 4217: 4188: 4157: 4126: 4084:) notified. 4078: 4052: 4033: 4018: 3991: 3981: 3975: 3968:Modified by 3961: 3954: 3950: 3944: 3936:Modified by 3920: 3872: 3871: 3867: 3863: 3860: 3849: 3801: 3791: 3790: 3764: 3758: 3739: 3730: 3712: 3703: 3692: 3681: 3678: 3672: 3659: 3648: 3634: 3632: 3619: 3609: 3608: 3599: 3593: 3592: 3579: 3570: 3558: 3552: 3524: 3523: 3518: 3517: 3512: 3510: 3485: 3479: 3469: 3463: 3453: 3436: 3426: 3417: 3407: 3401: 3392: 3391: 3381: 3369: 3359: 3350: 3340: 3318: 3308: 3291: 3281: 3272: 3262: 3253: 3243: 3230: 3223: 3213: 3182: 3180: 3168: 3138: 3132: 3126: 3120: 3114: 3108: 3098: 3086: 3081: 3075: 3063: 3042: 3032: 3015: 3009: 3003: 2997: 2991: 2985: 2975: 2965: 2944: 2934: 2929: 2916: 2911: 2906: 2896: 2887: 2877: 2868: 2856: 2851: 2846: 2836: 2830: 2820: 2811: 2801: 2791: 2781: 2775: 2765: 2760: 2750: 2745: 2735: 2722: 2712: 2707: 2704:Wiki process 2697: 2684: 2674: 2660: 2632: 2624: 2618: 2610: 2605: 2592: 2582: 2573: 2565: 2560: 2547: 2529: 2528: 2448: 2416: 2415: 2407: 2406: 2389: 2385: 2377: 2352: 2327: 2316: 2307: 2298: 2289: 2284: 2281:metaphysical 2280: 2277: 2267: 2264: 2255: 2235: 2233: 2199: 2195: 2191: 2177: 2172: 2169: 2165: 2164: 2149: 2145: 2141: 2137:User:Joke137 2111: 2107: 2044:(of course), 2022: 2014: 2010: 2004: 2001: 1997: 1993: 1990: 1971: 1941: 1922: 1913: 1888: 1880: 1872: 1860: 1826: 1823: 1818: 1812: 1808: 1806: 1802: 1798: 1795: 1791: 1788: 1742: 1736: 1732:User:Pjacobi 1727: 1713:User:Ed Poor 1693: 1601: 1598: 1594: 1588: 1582: 1534: 1466: 1459: 1436: 1432: 1428: 1419: 1401: 1372: 1277: 1266: 1261: 1248: 1238: 1232: 1229: 1203: 1139: 1108: 1091: 1064: 1050: 1019: 1015: 1014: 979: 972: 960: 949: 945: 944: 931: 879: 857: 840: 836: 835: 832: 825: 810: 804: 798: 792: 786: 780: 762: 756: 750: 744: 738: 732: 714: 708: 702: 696: 690: 684: 666: 660: 654: 648: 642: 636: 618: 612: 606: 600: 594: 588: 570: 564: 558: 552: 546: 540: 522: 516: 510: 504: 498: 492: 474: 468: 462: 456: 450: 444: 426: 420: 414: 408: 402: 396: 389:Shell_Kinney 378: 372: 366: 360: 354: 348: 330: 324: 318: 312: 306: 300: 282: 276: 270: 264: 258: 252: 234: 228: 222: 216: 210: 204: 186: 180: 174: 168: 162: 156: 130: 118: 109: 107: 98: 96: 87: 85: 76: 74: 68: 66: 60: 58: 52: 50: 8021:Tim Vickers 7832:primarily, 7656:Ghost light 7621:protections 7549:Thatcher131 7458:Wolf effect 7282:) notified 7243:) notified 7204:) notified 7171:Lipoic acid 7165:) notified 7013:Lampstand49 6681:Laser brain 6673:) notified 6642:) notified 6536:) notified 6341:) notified 6300:) notified 6265:) notified 6228:) notified 6197:) notified 6030:David in DC 5910:) notified 5803:) notified. 5673:) notified 5627:) notified 5592:) notified 5557:) notified 5341:Encyclotadd 4880:Paul Bedson 4532:Tim Vickers 4472:Enric Naval 4293:) notified 4198:Tim Vickers 4194:) notified 4163:) notified. 4132:) notified. 3986:consistency 3818:("AN"); and 3750:Enforcement 3740:Amended by 3439:Eric Lerner 3298:Eric Lerner 2972:Eric Lerner 2959:Eric Lerner 2653:WP:ARBPS/4A 2511:Fred Bauder 2440:Clerk notes 2360:the Brights 2344:TalkOrigins 2080:(an admin), 1946:Eric Lerner 1894:Eric Lerner 1883:Eric Lerner 1755:Myron Evans 1491:. Thanks, 1441:article as 1439:Myron Evans 1423:Guettarda's 1408:Eric Lerner 1307:as well).-- 1194:technology. 986:Wolf effect 843:Eric Lerner 61:Case Closed 53:Case Opened 8057:Levine2112 7633:page moves 7586:block user 7580:page moves 7557:Iantresman 7533:block user 7527:filter log 7498:Tom Mandel 7446:block user 7440:page moves 7417:Iantresman 7361:following 7288:EdJohnston 7257:EdJohnston 7218:EdJohnston 7179:EdJohnston 7141:Sandstein 6771:Enigma9035 6718:Sandstein 6630:Kmarinas86 6600:Tom Butler 6505:Sandstein 6426:Sandstein 6392:Sandstein 6275:EdJohnston 6203:EdJohnston 5924:EdJohnston 5922:template. 5877:Homeopathy 5791:Silent Key 5779:Sandstein 5757:Widescreen 5714:Sandstein 5679:EdJohnston 5641:EdJohnston 5633:Homeopathy 5602:EdJohnston 5580:Kmarinas86 5567:EdJohnston 5359:EdJohnston 5072:Xxanthippe 5041:Tom Butler 4979:Hans Adler 4948:Becritical 4901:Courcelles 4660:dave souza 4627:dave souza 4501:PhilKnight 4389:PhilKnight 4325:PhilKnight 4086:PhilKnight 4072:Levine2112 3793:Committee. 3183:ad hominem 3136:block user 3130:filter log 3013:block user 3007:filter log 2926:Notability 2589:Notability 2539:Principles 2382:Conclusion 2356:"heads-up" 2066:Duncharris 1570:Jim Butler 1507:homeopathy 1493:Jim Butler 1318:notability 1243:vis-a-vis 1096:Iantresman 1082:Iantresman 1055:Iantresman 871:(or worse 808:block user 802:filter log 760:block user 754:filter log 712:block user 706:filter log 677:Mangojuice 664:block user 658:filter log 616:block user 610:filter log 568:block user 562:filter log 520:block user 514:filter log 472:block user 466:filter log 437:Jim_Butler 424:block user 418:filter log 376:block user 370:filter log 328:block user 322:filter log 280:block user 274:filter log 232:block user 226:filter log 184:block user 178:filter log 149:iantresman 8048:WP:FRINGE 7982:QuackGuru 7957:QuackGuru 7771:this diff 7742:this diff 7667:talk page 7627:deletions 7592:block log 7539:block log 7452:block log 7368:Callanecc 7345:Kelby2002 7326:notified 7192:QuackGuru 7051:John Foxe 6991:Callanecc 6839:Callanecc 6794:Callanecc 6749:Callanecc 6696:Montanabw 6543:Callanecc 6461:Callanecc 6348:Callanecc 6307:Callanecc 6288:Bobrayner 6269:since he 6185:Orrerysky 5955:IRWolfie- 5885:Brangifer 5744:IRWolfie- 5206:Zachariel 5010:Jojalozzo 4909:Milikguay 4898:AE Thread 4769:Immortale 4756:T. Canens 4738:ZuluPapa5 4725:T. Canens 4514:Milomedes 4120:QuackGuru 3947:Time Cube 3831:arbcom-en 3185:attacks: 3142:block log 3019:block log 2871:astrology 2340:talk page 2332:WP:HARASS 2236:wikitroll 2090:WAS 4.250 2078:Guettarda 2054:Ems57fcva 2034:cosmology 1916:Deglr6328 1908:WP:LIVING 1730:involved 1462:elsewhere 1377:WAS 4.250 1330:Time Cube 1287:Time cube 1254:Cosmology 946:Example 2 837:Example 1 814:block log 766:block log 718:block log 670:block log 622:block log 574:block log 526:block log 478:block log 430:block log 382:block log 334:block log 286:block log 238:block log 190:block log 133:/Workshop 126:/Evidence 122:Talk page 36:WP:ARB/PS 28:Shortcuts 8111:Category 8084:contribs 8074:DigitalC 8067:contribs 8044:contribs 7996:Lifebaka 7992:contribs 7967:contribs 7909:Vassyana 7887:Vassyana 7870:Vassyana 7757:Thatcher 7609:contribs 7568:contribs 7509:contribs 7428:contribs 7377:contribs 7359:notified 7355:contribs 7332:Bishonen 7315:contribs 7280:contribs 7241:contribs 7202:contribs 7163:contribs 7153:Khimaris 7129:contribs 7103:notified 7099:contribs 7065:notified 7061:contribs 7027:notified 7023:contribs 7000:contribs 6982:notified 6978:contribs 6943:contribs 6933:StAnselm 6910:notified 6906:contribs 6871:contribs 6848:contribs 6826:contribs 6803:contribs 6781:contribs 6758:contribs 6744:notified 6740:contribs 6706:contribs 6671:contribs 6648:Bishonen 6640:contribs 6614:notified 6610:contribs 6579:notified 6575:contribs 6552:contribs 6534:contribs 6493:contribs 6470:contribs 6448:contribs 6414:contribs 6380:contribs 6357:contribs 6339:contribs 6316:contribs 6298:contribs 6263:contribs 6226:contribs 6216:Wpete510 6195:contribs 6168:notified 6164:contribs 6137:notified 6133:contribs 6106:notified 6102:contribs 6075:notified 6071:contribs 6044:notified 6040:contribs 6013:notified 6009:contribs 5982:notified 5978:contribs 5951:notified 5947:contribs 5908:contribs 5869:notified 5865:contribs 5834:notified 5830:contribs 5807:Bishonen 5801:contribs 5767:contribs 5740:notified 5736:contribs 5702:contribs 5692:Hgilbert 5671:contribs 5625:contribs 5590:contribs 5555:contribs 5522:contribs 5512:Sprecher 5489:contribs 5470:MastCell 5462:contribs 5452:SirShawn 5429:notified 5425:contribs 5402:WGFinley 5386:notified 5382:contribs 5351:contribs 5290:contribs 5257:notified 5253:contribs 5220:notified 5216:contribs 5181:contribs 5144:contribs 5117:notified 5113:contribs 5086:notified 5082:contribs 5055:notified 5051:contribs 5024:notified 5020:contribs 4993:notified 4989:contribs 4962:notified 4958:contribs 4923:notified 4919:contribs 4894:notified 4890:contribs 4857:notified 4853:contribs 4820:notified 4816:contribs 4806:Arydberg 4783:notified 4779:contribs 4752:notified 4748:contribs 4721:notified 4717:contribs 4685:contribs 4652:contribs 4619:contribs 4609:Sir Anon 4587:contribs 4569:contribs 4555:contribs 4524:contribs 4495:contribs 4465:contribs 4451:contribs 4412:contribs 4383:contribs 4373:Dicklyon 4348:contribs 4319:contribs 4291:contribs 4281:DigitalC 4256:contribs 4221:contribs 4192:contribs 4161:contribs 4151:Ludwigs2 4130:contribs 4103:Eldereft 4082:contribs 4058:}} or {{ 3679:articles 3388:Remedies 3112:contribs 3101:Tommysun 3095:Tommysun 2989:contribs 2947:Big bang 2645:Shortcut 2498:Dmcdevit 2496:Accept. 2451:FloNight 2392:Asmodeus 2285:physical 2096:Jim62sch 1944:editing 1926:contribs 1855:correct. 1784:Tommysun 1717:JBKramer 1702:JBKramer 1668:JBKramer 1309:ragesoss 1269:ragesoss 1258:Big Bang 1241:Redshift 952:Redshift 784:contribs 773:Asmodeus 736:contribs 688:contribs 640:contribs 629:Tommysun 592:contribs 544:contribs 533:JBKramer 496:contribs 448:contribs 400:contribs 352:contribs 341:Ragesoss 304:contribs 256:contribs 208:contribs 160:contribs 43:WP:ARBPS 7937:. See 7926:GRBerry 7837:GRBerry 7784:GRBerry 7775:GRBerry 7598:Raul654 6896:Johnvr4 6834:Shiatsu 6730:DJFryzy 6524:Askahrc 5937:Feline1 5855:Cjwilky 5820:Wkerney 4843:Jmpunit 4225:Psychic 4182:Surturz 3576:Logging 3555:Appeals 3053:of the 2978:Elerner 2719:Experts 2509:Accept 2336:helpers 2153:GoodCop 2072:Pjacobi 2048:Joke137 1771:Pjacobi 1759:Pjacobi 1587:. I do 1531:WP:SPOV 1443:Pjacobi 1404:WP:PAIN 1188:debate. 1146:WP:NPOV 1026:uncivil 973:hundred 725:GoodCop 581:Pjacobi 293:Elerner 7639:rights 7615:blocks 7464:, and 7249:WP:AN3 7210:WP:AN3 7133:warned 6877:after 6830:warned 6816:Ankank 6785:warned 6710:warned 6687:(talk) 6581:after 6497:warned 6452:warned 6418:warned 6384:warned 6092:Blippy 5871:about 5771:warned 5706:warned 5637:WP:AN3 5125:Advice 5103:Ocaasi 5094:Advice 5063:Advice 5032:Advice 5001:Advice 4970:Advice 4896:after 4675:Thezob 4642:Ocaasi 4441:Heelop 4338:Hughgr 4309:Seeyou 4036:motion 4012:motion 3994:motion 3970:motion 3939:motion 3823:"ARCA" 3742:motion 3715:motion 3706:motion 3696:motion 3663:motion 3652:motion 3622:motion 3602:motion 3158:, and 2324:WP:NPA 1904:WP:3RR 1751:WP:BLP 1698:WP:ANI 1475:, and 1072:Lerner 112:motion 101:motion 90:motion 79:motion 8097:Shell 8091:WP:TE 7866:AN/I. 7852:Coren 7808:with 7713:levse 7693:Both 7685:Shell 7679:Shell 7321:WHOIS 7089:Ersby 6172:Bbb23 6154:Vzaak 6141:Bbb23 6110:Bbb23 6079:Bbb23 6048:Bbb23 6017:Bbb23 5986:Bbb23 5881:here. 5842:Bbb23 5390:WP:TE 5312:WP:AN 4870:cont. 4833:cont. 4796:cont. 4356:Shell 4299:Shell 4271:juice 4266:Mango 4108:cont. 3682:pages 3300:(see 2554:Jimbo 2320:venue 2230:that. 1972:juice 1967:Mango 1728:semi- 1679:WP:OR 1652:Gleng 1650:eyes. 1605:Gleng 1559:WP:CG 1448:Shell 1413:Shell 1285:have 1233:about 1123:WP:RS 485:Gleng 16:< 8078:talk 8072:and 8061:talk 8038:talk 8025:talk 7986:talk 7961:talk 7941:. -- 7913:talk 7891:talk 7874:talk 7818:talk 7720:Talk 7697:and 7603:talk 7562:talk 7521:logs 7503:talk 7478:Buck 7422:talk 7381:logs 7373:talk 7349:talk 7336:talk 7328:here 7309:talk 7292:talk 7284:here 7274:talk 7261:talk 7245:here 7235:talk 7222:talk 7206:here 7196:talk 7183:talk 7167:here 7157:talk 7123:talk 7110:talk 7093:talk 7080:talk 7055:talk 7042:talk 7017:talk 7004:logs 6996:talk 6972:talk 6959:talk 6937:talk 6924:talk 6900:talk 6887:talk 6865:talk 6852:logs 6844:talk 6820:talk 6807:logs 6799:talk 6775:talk 6762:logs 6754:talk 6734:talk 6700:talk 6675:here 6665:talk 6652:talk 6644:here 6634:talk 6621:talk 6604:talk 6591:talk 6569:talk 6556:logs 6548:talk 6538:here 6528:talk 6518:2014 6487:talk 6474:logs 6466:talk 6442:talk 6408:talk 6374:talk 6361:logs 6353:talk 6343:here 6333:talk 6320:logs 6312:talk 6302:here 6292:talk 6279:talk 6267:here 6257:talk 6242:Talk 6220:talk 6207:talk 6199:here 6189:talk 6176:talk 6158:talk 6145:talk 6127:talk 6114:talk 6096:talk 6083:talk 6065:talk 6052:talk 6034:talk 6021:talk 6003:talk 5990:talk 5972:talk 5959:talk 5941:talk 5928:talk 5912:here 5902:talk 5889:talk 5859:talk 5846:talk 5824:talk 5811:talk 5795:talk 5761:talk 5748:talk 5730:talk 5726:DVMt 5696:talk 5683:talk 5675:here 5665:talk 5655:2013 5645:talk 5629:here 5619:talk 5606:talk 5594:here 5584:talk 5571:talk 5559:here 5549:talk 5516:talk 5483:talk 5456:talk 5441:Talk 5419:talk 5406:talk 5400:. -- 5388:for 5376:talk 5363:talk 5355:here 5345:talk 5335:2012 5323:talk 5301:talk 5284:talk 5280:PiCo 5268:Talk 5247:talk 5232:Talk 5210:talk 5195:Talk 5175:talk 5160:Talk 5138:talk 5107:talk 5076:talk 5045:talk 5014:talk 4983:talk 4952:talk 4937:Talk 4913:talk 4884:talk 4863:. - 4847:talk 4826:. - 4810:talk 4789:. - 4773:talk 4760:talk 4742:talk 4729:talk 4711:talk 4701:2011 4679:talk 4664:talk 4654:) – 4646:talk 4631:talk 4621:) – 4613:talk 4603:2010 4594:diff 4581:talk 4563:talk 4549:talk 4536:talk 4528:diff 4518:talk 4505:talk 4489:talk 4476:talk 4459:talk 4445:talk 4418:and 4406:talk 4393:talk 4377:talk 4367:2009 4342:talk 4329:talk 4313:talk 4285:talk 4250:talk 4246:NJGW 4215:talk 4202:talk 4186:talk 4155:talk 4124:talk 4090:talk 4076:talk 4066:2008 3673:14) 3633:13) 3545:and 3529:and 3511:12) 3296:and 3124:logs 3106:talk 3099:10) 3001:logs 2983:talk 2812:13) 2792:12) 2665:and 2661:4a) 2626:not. 2619:3a) 2574:1a) 2346:and 2283:and 1942:here 1920:talk 1757:. -- 1489:here 1373:felt 1335:Time 1320:? -- 1283:Time 1256:and 1156:and 1121:and 1115:WP:V 796:logs 778:talk 748:logs 730:talk 700:logs 682:talk 652:logs 634:talk 604:logs 586:talk 556:logs 538:talk 508:logs 490:talk 460:logs 442:talk 412:logs 394:talk 364:logs 346:talk 316:logs 298:talk 268:logs 250:talk 220:logs 202:talk 172:logs 154:talk 7971:FT2 7645:RfA 7488:ofg 7483:ets 7474:. 7363:SPI 7076:jps 7038:jps 7029:. 6955:jps 6883:jps 6587:jps 6483:JzG 6170:.-- 6139:.-- 6108:.-- 6077:.-- 6046:.-- 6015:.-- 5984:.-- 5883:-- 5840:.-- 5534:don 5501:don 5396:at 5392:and 4865:2/0 4859:by 4828:2/0 4822:by 4791:2/0 4785:by 4693:at 4455:JzG 3043:8) 2976:7) 2548:1) 2431:FT2 2420:FT2 2402:FT2 2244:Jon 2240:Jon 1589:not 1542:-- 1509:in 1279:it. 1249:any 1221:be. 8113:: 8027:) 8012:ka 8009:on 8006:El 8004:-- 7949:ka 7946:on 7943:El 7915:) 7893:) 7876:) 7820:) 7812:. 7804:; 7800:; 7723:• 7717:• 7706:— 7675:, 7658:, 7547:. 7460:, 7383:) 7379:• 7375:• 7365:. 7357:) 7334:| 7330:. 7294:) 7286:. 7263:) 7255:. 7224:) 7216:. 7185:) 7177:. 7135:. 7131:) 7112:) 7101:) 7082:) 7067:. 7063:) 7044:) 7025:) 7006:) 7002:• 6998:• 6988:. 6980:) 6961:) 6953:. 6945:) 6926:) 6918:. 6908:) 6889:) 6881:. 6873:) 6854:) 6850:• 6846:• 6836:. 6828:) 6809:) 6805:• 6801:• 6791:. 6783:) 6764:) 6760:• 6756:• 6742:) 6712:. 6708:) 6677:. 6650:| 6646:. 6623:) 6612:) 6593:) 6585:. 6577:) 6558:) 6554:• 6540:. 6499:. 6495:) 6476:) 6472:• 6468:• 6458:. 6450:) 6420:. 6416:) 6386:. 6382:) 6363:) 6359:• 6345:. 6322:) 6318:• 6304:. 6281:) 6273:. 6235:NW 6209:) 6201:. 6178:) 6166:) 6147:) 6135:) 6116:) 6104:) 6085:) 6073:) 6054:) 6042:) 6023:) 6011:) 5992:) 5980:) 5961:) 5953:, 5949:) 5930:) 5891:) 5867:) 5848:) 5832:) 5809:| 5773:. 5769:) 5750:) 5742:. 5738:) 5708:. 5704:) 5685:) 5647:) 5608:) 5573:) 5527:. 5494:. 5467:. 5434:NW 5431:. 5427:) 5408:) 5384:) 5365:) 5357:. 5325:) 5317:. 5303:) 5295:. 5261:NW 5255:) 5225:NW 5222:. 5218:) 5188:NW 5183:) 5152:NW 5146:) 5119:. 5115:) 5088:. 5084:) 5057:. 5053:) 5026:. 5022:) 4995:. 4991:) 4964:. 4960:) 4929:NW 4925:. 4921:) 4892:) 4855:) 4818:) 4781:) 4762:) 4754:. 4750:) 4731:) 4723:. 4719:) 4662:, 4629:, 4571:) 4538:) 4530:. 4507:) 4478:) 4470:-- 4467:) 4433:ka 4430:on 4427:El 4425:-- 4395:) 4331:) 4262:. 4238:ka 4235:on 4232:El 4230:-- 4204:) 4174:ka 4171:on 4168:El 4166:-- 4143:ka 4140:on 4137:El 4135:-- 4092:) 4054:{{ 3875:: 3841:). 3735:. 3584:. 3541:, 3537:, 3445:, 3441:, 3422:. 3377:. 3355:. 3326:, 3322:, 3304:) 3277:. 3228:, 3209:. 3162:. 3154:, 3150:, 3057:. 3028:. 2953:, 2949:, 2693:. 2556:. 2490:) 2326:, 2238:. 1694:IS 1471:, 1362:-- 1350:62 1262:as 1117:, 1046:. 942:. 139:. 8086:) 8081:· 8076:( 8069:) 8064:· 8059:( 8041:· 8036:( 8023:( 7998:. 7989:· 7984:( 7973:. 7964:· 7959:( 7911:( 7889:( 7872:( 7816:( 7711:R 7647:) 7642:· 7636:· 7630:· 7624:· 7618:· 7612:· 7606:· 7601:( 7594:) 7589:· 7583:· 7577:· 7571:· 7565:· 7560:( 7541:) 7536:· 7530:· 7524:· 7518:· 7512:· 7506:· 7501:( 7454:) 7449:· 7443:· 7437:· 7431:· 7425:· 7420:( 7406:. 7371:( 7352:· 7347:( 7341:. 7323:) 7318:· 7312:· 7307:( 7290:( 7277:· 7272:( 7259:( 7238:· 7233:( 7220:( 7199:· 7194:( 7181:( 7160:· 7155:( 7126:· 7121:( 7108:( 7096:· 7091:( 7078:( 7073:) 7069:( 7058:· 7053:( 7040:( 7035:) 7031:( 7020:· 7015:( 6994:( 6975:· 6970:( 6957:( 6940:· 6935:( 6922:( 6903:· 6898:( 6885:( 6868:· 6863:( 6842:( 6823:· 6818:( 6797:( 6778:· 6773:( 6752:( 6737:· 6732:( 6703:· 6698:( 6668:· 6663:( 6657:. 6637:· 6632:( 6619:( 6607:· 6602:( 6589:( 6572:· 6567:( 6550:• 6546:( 6531:· 6526:( 6490:· 6485:( 6464:( 6445:· 6440:( 6411:· 6406:( 6377:· 6372:( 6355:• 6351:( 6336:· 6331:( 6314:• 6310:( 6295:· 6290:( 6277:( 6260:· 6255:( 6245:) 6239:( 6223:· 6218:( 6205:( 6192:· 6187:( 6174:( 6161:· 6156:( 6143:( 6130:· 6125:( 6112:( 6099:· 6094:( 6081:( 6068:· 6063:( 6050:( 6037:· 6032:( 6019:( 6006:· 6001:( 5988:( 5975:· 5970:( 5957:( 5944:· 5939:( 5926:( 5905:· 5900:( 5887:( 5862:· 5857:( 5844:( 5827:· 5822:( 5816:. 5798:· 5793:( 5764:· 5759:( 5746:( 5733:· 5728:( 5699:· 5694:( 5681:( 5668:· 5663:( 5643:( 5639:. 5622:· 5617:( 5604:( 5587:· 5582:( 5569:( 5565:. 5552:· 5547:( 5532:Æ 5530:S 5519:· 5514:( 5499:Æ 5497:S 5486:· 5481:( 5459:· 5454:( 5444:) 5438:( 5422:· 5417:( 5404:( 5379:· 5374:( 5361:( 5348:· 5343:( 5321:( 5299:( 5287:· 5282:( 5271:) 5265:( 5250:· 5245:( 5235:) 5229:( 5213:· 5208:( 5198:) 5192:( 5178:· 5173:( 5163:) 5157:( 5141:· 5136:( 5110:· 5105:( 5079:· 5074:( 5048:· 5043:( 5017:· 5012:( 4986:· 4981:( 4955:· 4950:( 4940:) 4934:( 4916:· 4911:( 4887:· 4882:( 4872:) 4868:( 4850:· 4845:( 4835:) 4831:( 4813:· 4808:( 4798:) 4794:( 4776:· 4771:( 4758:( 4745:· 4740:( 4727:( 4714:· 4709:( 4682:· 4677:( 4666:. 4649:· 4644:( 4633:. 4616:· 4611:( 4584:· 4579:( 4566:· 4561:( 4552:· 4547:( 4534:( 4521:· 4516:( 4503:( 4492:· 4487:( 4474:( 4462:· 4457:( 4448:· 4443:( 4422:. 4409:· 4404:( 4391:( 4380:· 4375:( 4345:· 4340:( 4327:( 4316:· 4311:( 4288:· 4283:( 4253:· 4248:( 4227:. 4218:· 4213:( 4200:( 4189:· 4184:( 4158:· 4153:( 4127:· 4122:( 4110:) 4106:( 4088:( 4079:· 4074:( 3988:; 3144:) 3139:· 3133:· 3127:· 3121:· 3115:· 3109:· 3104:( 3021:) 3016:· 3010:· 3004:· 2998:· 2992:· 2986:· 2981:( 2502:t 2500:· 2488:C 2486:: 2484:T 2482:( 2092:, 2005:I 1923:· 1918:( 1551:; 1333:" 816:) 811:· 805:· 799:· 793:· 787:· 781:· 776:( 768:) 763:· 757:· 751:· 745:· 739:· 733:· 728:( 720:) 715:· 709:· 703:· 697:· 691:· 685:· 680:( 672:) 667:· 661:· 655:· 649:· 643:· 637:· 632:( 624:) 619:· 613:· 607:· 601:· 595:· 589:· 584:( 576:) 571:· 565:· 559:· 553:· 547:· 541:· 536:( 528:) 523:· 517:· 511:· 505:· 499:· 493:· 488:( 480:) 475:· 469:· 463:· 457:· 451:· 445:· 440:( 432:) 427:· 421:· 415:· 409:· 403:· 397:· 392:( 384:) 379:· 373:· 367:· 361:· 355:· 349:· 344:( 336:) 331:· 325:· 319:· 313:· 307:· 301:· 296:( 288:) 283:· 277:· 271:· 265:· 259:· 253:· 248:( 240:) 235:· 229:· 223:· 217:· 211:· 205:· 200:( 192:) 187:· 181:· 175:· 169:· 163:· 157:· 152:(

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

Knowledge

:Requests for arbitration/Pseudoscience - Knowledge

Index