Post by Pincho Paxton on Mar 20, 2024 13:06:45 GMT
Peer Review Works Backwards Too
And it rhymes! So peer review where peer all agree on something that is wrong is happening, and people are getting Nobel prizes for that situation. The scientific method is very bad.
Maths as a form of proof combined with everyone agreeing on something that is wrong. the scientific method is very bad.
Observation as a form if proof where peer all agree that they can see mass attracting mass in the Cavendish experiment where you can't actually see mass at all is very bad.
Observation where you say that iron filings are pulled towards a magnet where all peer agree, yet you can't see a pull force at all is very bad.
Peer all agreeing that a red shift stretches a wave so that it becomes redder that leads towards a Big Bang theory is very bad.
The Bending of Spacetime agreed by peer where time has never been observed is very bad.
Ignoring all observations of vacuum cleaners, sponges, and drinking straws that actually do the exact same thing as bar magnets is very bad.
Formulas with m1 m2 where mass is attracted to a larger mass yet mass has not been observed combined with sponges where a larger mass has more holes than a smaller mass, and attracts more water than a smaller mass... ignored... is very bad.
Peer review not only works backwards too, but is working backwards 90% of the time. That's very bad.
Pincho Paxton
And it rhymes! So peer review where peer all agree on something that is wrong is happening, and people are getting Nobel prizes for that situation. The scientific method is very bad.
Maths as a form of proof combined with everyone agreeing on something that is wrong. the scientific method is very bad.
Observation as a form if proof where peer all agree that they can see mass attracting mass in the Cavendish experiment where you can't actually see mass at all is very bad.
Observation where you say that iron filings are pulled towards a magnet where all peer agree, yet you can't see a pull force at all is very bad.
Peer all agreeing that a red shift stretches a wave so that it becomes redder that leads towards a Big Bang theory is very bad.
The Bending of Spacetime agreed by peer where time has never been observed is very bad.
Ignoring all observations of vacuum cleaners, sponges, and drinking straws that actually do the exact same thing as bar magnets is very bad.
Formulas with m1 m2 where mass is attracted to a larger mass yet mass has not been observed combined with sponges where a larger mass has more holes than a smaller mass, and attracts more water than a smaller mass... ignored... is very bad.
Peer review not only works backwards too, but is working backwards 90% of the time. That's very bad.
Pincho Paxton