"Not really. I'm with the majority, by definition not an elite. I think it's rather elitist to assume scholars don't know what they're talking about, that such-and-such is right and everyone else is wrong ... I'm afraid you're in the elitist position here. You alone here know the truth, the rest of us have been deluded by an institutional conspiracy to hide the truth."
IE
Safety in numbers.
Popularity of opinion (peer pressure/review)
Im not doing this to get paid.
Truth vs get paid hmmmm
"Yep, which is why everything they say is crossed checked and evaluated by rigorous peer review, before anyone says they're right."
Sounds quite cosy everyone patting eachother on the back....hey Thomas...dont rate your thesis..."well I wont rate yours"...get out and join Eisenman hehehe..
No field testers on here pal, just everyday Joe trying to find out for himself....David and Goliath?
"Because most of what you point to is not factual?"
Im not trying to insult your intelligence though. Im simply in disagreement to the scholar arguement because its a closed shop. People who have nothing to hide generally are not the first to run away easily. Only saying.
"Yes, more than anyone else. A scholars work is not accepted if the evidence does not back it up, whereas the sources you've quoted, I've shown to be misreadings if not factually wrong."
See now I can accept that.
I see no problem being wrong where I stand to learn the truth about something. Shouldn't that be the ultimate goal before obfuscating history etc..
Peer reviews generally come across someting akin to keeping your competition tamed and much like references might usually not be given negatively by an ex employer so to speak it just doesnt sit right with me. I have no problem saying so.
"And claiming because there's nothing there 'clearly' shows a cover-up holds no water at all."
I answered your questions, that is all I expect to do when asked respectfully, Im not going to convince anyone while I am still open minded to learn something, I see this as an opportunity to learn from people who clearly know more about a given subject matter than myself, I wouldn't hold it against anyone though, how else can I test my own beliefs or find out how misled I might be, far more dangerous to protect a lie and covet the truth, I think people are not used to having to answer for their own beliefs and that is why I find the scholarly arguement a false one, because Im not doing this to keep my bank balance topped up or in this for some bs materialistic career and surely any group of like minded individuals seek unity in their work not discord....academia seems to throw life long partnerships together....or are all the major new start ups in disagreement with that Fact? Thinktanks and forums with one man with one idea....not going to work is it.
If you have a school friend who works in publishing become a writer type thing.
IE
Safety in numbers.
Popularity of opinion (peer pressure/review)
Im not doing this to get paid.
Truth vs get paid hmmmm
"Yep, which is why everything they say is crossed checked and evaluated by rigorous peer review, before anyone says they're right."
Sounds quite cosy everyone patting eachother on the back....hey Thomas...dont rate your thesis..."well I wont rate yours"...get out and join Eisenman hehehe..
No field testers on here pal, just everyday Joe trying to find out for himself....David and Goliath?
"Because most of what you point to is not factual?"
Im not trying to insult your intelligence though. Im simply in disagreement to the scholar arguement because its a closed shop. People who have nothing to hide generally are not the first to run away easily. Only saying.
"Yes, more than anyone else. A scholars work is not accepted if the evidence does not back it up, whereas the sources you've quoted, I've shown to be misreadings if not factually wrong."
See now I can accept that.
I see no problem being wrong where I stand to learn the truth about something. Shouldn't that be the ultimate goal before obfuscating history etc..
Peer reviews generally come across someting akin to keeping your competition tamed and much like references might usually not be given negatively by an ex employer so to speak it just doesnt sit right with me. I have no problem saying so.
"And claiming because there's nothing there 'clearly' shows a cover-up holds no water at all."
I answered your questions, that is all I expect to do when asked respectfully, Im not going to convince anyone while I am still open minded to learn something, I see this as an opportunity to learn from people who clearly know more about a given subject matter than myself, I wouldn't hold it against anyone though, how else can I test my own beliefs or find out how misled I might be, far more dangerous to protect a lie and covet the truth, I think people are not used to having to answer for their own beliefs and that is why I find the scholarly arguement a false one, because Im not doing this to keep my bank balance topped up or in this for some bs materialistic career and surely any group of like minded individuals seek unity in their work not discord....academia seems to throw life long partnerships together....or are all the major new start ups in disagreement with that Fact? Thinktanks and forums with one man with one idea....not going to work is it.
If you have a school friend who works in publishing become a writer type thing.
Last edited:
