I see some unsupported messages among the many supportive. For sure there is a long way ahead. The idea of wikiversity is important to all of us and needs everybody's contribution to grow. Wikiversity would be able to connect all the sciences to provide a much better situation of human kind hopefully.


On Sun, Dec 22, 2013 at 11:58 PM, Brian Salter-Duke <b_duke@bigpond.net.au> wrote:
Look you two guys - cut it out. I now recall your battles on wikiversity
a few years back. You pissed a lot of people off then, including me, and
you are most likely pissing off a lot of people here. In that regard,
there is nothing to chose between you. Please just stop. It is not
productive.

Bduke

On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 01:25:20AM -0500, Jeffrey Peters wrote:
> "Cold fusion is a mystery, as to how it works, but we know what it does,
> the original discovered effect converts deuterium to helium, the evidence
> for this is already overwhelming. I know the experimental evidence, and I
> know the scientists who did that published work, and it has some obvious
> implications, but .. that's not a "belief."
> "
>
> It always goes back to that. He rants and raves, and always comes back to
> his obsession. Abd hates anyone who points out that his obsession is false,
> and it is obvious that Abd has an agenda to make money off of his obsession.
>
> Wonderful guy.
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 23, 2013 at 12:56 AM, Abd ulRahman Lomax <abdlomax@yahoo.com>wrote:
>
> > Essentially, if we assume that he is sane, the man lies.
> >
> > Shortly before he sent this mail, he deleted a comment of mine from his
> > talk page, in which I pointed out that what he told another Wikiversity
> > user about me.
> > https://en.wikiversity.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ottava_Rima&diff=next&oldid=1128082
> >
> > In that comment, I pointed to the actual Wikipedia ban discussion, the
> > close of which does not mention pushing fringe beliefs. Nor was that
> > mentioned in the close of my previous cold fusion topic ban. The cause
> > stated there was my request for a removal of a web site that hosts legal
> > preprints of cold fusion research papers from the global blacklist. That
> > request had began very simply, but when the WP admin who had originally
> > requested the blacklisting raised all the old, rejected arguments (he had
> > been reprimanded by ArbComm for his admin actions around this), I then
> > explained, and that was considered a "wall of text." I was topic banned on
> > Wikipedia as a result. And then, because what I'd written was convincing,
> > the blacklisting was lifted.
> >
> > But all the old charges came out in the ban discussion, as if they had all
> > been confirmed, they were simply stated as fact, and Wikipedians do not
> > research disputes, they simply react. It was claimed that I'd violated an
> > ArbComm sanction by socking. No, I was under no ArbComm sanction, the topic
> > ban was a "community ban," resulting from that meta action. "Violating an
> > ArbComm sanction" was then repeated by many !voting for ban as cause.
> >
> > Wikipedia does dumb stuff like this all the time! I found that when I took
> > the place seriously, I'd quickly become "obsessed." I concluded the place
> > was utterly unreliable, not a place to do any serious work with anything
> > remotely controversial.
> >
> > As to "trying to profit" by selling "information packages" to people,. I
> > have a COI notice on the Wikiversity Cold fusion resource page. I'm not
> > selling information or information packages, I'm selling physical materials
> > that can be used to replicate certain interesting experiments, in
> > particular one that appears, from peer reviewed journal publications, to
> > produce a few neutrons. I've sold one set of materials to a teenager who
> > did run the experiment. Great kid. He's in a documentary on cold fusion as
> > a result. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2265577/ even mentions him. This
> > kid is having serious fun.
> >
> > Not a great movie, unfortunately.
> >
> > I do not sell any information or information packages, just a vial of
> > heavy water electrolyte with palladium and lithium chloride in it, and a
> > plastic cell with gold and platinum wire electrodes, plus some solid state
> > nuclear track detectors.
> >
> > I've invested about $5000 in materials and equipment (to do my own
> > experiments at some point), and I've collected about $400 from that sale
> > and sales of the radiation detectors. I did not do this to profit.
> >
> > I don't recruit people on the wiki to cold fusion, rather I recruit people
> > interested in cold fusion to study and work on the related Wikiversity
> > resource, and that resource is being used to collect materials and study
> > the topic. I invite skeptics, *especially*.
> >
> > I just incorporated Infusion Institute, Inc., in Massachusetts, to
> > facilitate replication, under the strictest of protocols designed to
> > address all skeptical objections, of work that is already generally
> > confirmed and accepted in the peer reviewed literature, for up to twenty
> > years. the goal is increased precision. I have an excellent Board of
> > Directors, and the support of many scientists. This is real science, and
> > we'll be raising some real money, to make happen what should have happened
> > twenty years ago: definitive testing instead of argument from theory.
> >
> > The rejection of cold fusion is what is known to sociologists as a
> > "cascade," a phenomenon that has nothing to do with science and everything
> > to do with social process. Both U.S. Department of Energy reviews
> > recommended further research, and funding under existing programs, which
> > never happened through the DoE. The 2004 review came close to concluding
> > that evidence for the effect was conclusive. They essentially wanted to see
> > more research.
> >
> > I never challenged the designation of cold fusion on Wikipedia as "fringe
> > science," but it did, in fact, pass on to "emerging science" roughly ten
> > years ago.
> >
> > What I did do on Wikipedia was to challenge administrative abuse. And I
> > was sustained, my major sin there. That and my habit of detailed
> > discussion. Wikipedia's design requires consensus, because that is the only
> > objective standard for neutrality, but then the actual community is
> > intolerant of what consensus requires: lots of discussion, often
> > facilitation is required, because most people don't know how to actually
> > resolve disagreements.
> >
> > My stand on cold fusion is not a "belief." Science is not  based on
> > belief, but on experimental evidence and the scientific method.
> >
> > Cold fusion is a mystery, as to how it works, but we know what it does,
> > the original discovered effect converts deuterium to helium, the evidence
> > for this is already overwhelming. I know the experimental evidence, and I
> > know the scientists who did that published work, and it has some obvious
> > implications, but .. that's not a "belief."
> >
> > It's a conclusion from *direct evidence,* widely confirmed, with no
> > contrary evidence. And the conclusion could still be wrong. I'd set the
> > odds, though, at more than a million to one.
> >
> > And none of this has to do with what Ottava did here, attempt to drive
> > away someone interested in contributing to Wikiversity, because of his
> > personal opinions and reactions and beliefs about what is Right. His effect
> > on Wikiversity was highly disruptive and destructive. He attempted to have
> > every bureaucrat removed, and much, much more.
> >
> > This is what he's always done: attack anyone who interferes with his
> > attempt to rule the wikis, with a farrago of lies.
> >
> > Ottava Rex, give it up. You lost it. You've long been encouraged to focus
> > on your field, complete your doctorate. Did you?
> >
> > Abd ul-Rahman Lomax (413) 584-3151 business (413) 695-7114 cell
> > I'm so excited I can't wait for Now.
> >
> >   ------------------------------
> >  *From:* Jeffrey Peters <17peters@cardinalmail.cua.edu>
> >
> > *To:* Mailing list for Wikiversity <wikiversity-l@lists.wikimedia.org>
> > *Sent:* Sunday, December 22, 2013 9:58 PM
> >
> > *Subject:* Re: [Wikiversity-l] Wikiversity-l Digest, Vol 67, Issue 2
> >
> > Abd, you are one to talk. You were banned from en.wikipedia for pushing
> > fringe beliefs on Cold Fusion and it turns out that you are trying to
> > profit by selling your "information packages" to people.
> >
> > Why do you people insist on using Wikiversity to profit? It is not your
> > personal play ground to use to recruit people to your outside groups.
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikiversity-l mailing list
> > Wikiversity-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l
> >
> >

> _______________________________________________
> Wikiversity-l mailing list
> Wikiversity-l@lists.wikimedia.org
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l


--
                Brian Salter-Duke bduke@wikimedia.org.au
    Active on English Wikipedia, Meta-Wiki, Wikiversity, and others.
 [[User:Bduke]] is single user account with en:Wikipedia main account.

_______________________________________________
Wikiversity-l mailing list
Wikiversity-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l