[WikiEN-l] Re: Crackpot articles

Sat Jul 12 03:24:03 UTC 2003

Timwi wrote:
>What exactly does 'contributed' mean here? 
>If the articles are entirely new, then there's 
>no reason to act at all, other than improving 
>the articles. 

You are completely missing the point; The point was that the terms and 
concepts are pseudoscience junk and may not even warrent inclusion in our 
encyclopedia at all. But a simple Google search of "plasma cosmology" brings 
up this interesting website:

http://www.matter-antimatter.com/plasma_cosmology.htm

Which is a website which states (as fact) that "Plasma Cosmology has replaced 
the Steady State (1950's - 1960's) & Big Bang Theories (1960's - 1990's) of 
the Universe." (which is /complete/ hoghash in the most extreme) and also has 
this to say about a future NASA mission: 

:On July 4, 2005, NASA plans to collide a 350 
:kilogram spacecraft into the antimatter Comet 
:Tempel 1.  The spacecraft's impact with the 
:comet will result in a 7,500 Megatons explosion 
:that will fracture the 125 billion metric ton comet 
:into millions of fragments.  The antimatter fragments 
:will disperse into solar orbit and periodically collide 
:with earth for years to come, produce tremendous 
:explosions (equivalent to millions of Megatons of 
:TNT), and will destroy life as we know it.  
:Armageddon  will have come.

Ee gads! I just paid off my mortgage. Bummer I won't be alive long to enjoy 
it. 

Give me a break. 

I'm a bit sick and tired of having this type of pseudo-science crap on our 
website. Real scientists don't have time to constantly neutralize every one 
of these stupid claims and Wikipedia will look as idiotic as the 
matter-antimatter website if we allow too much of this stuff. 

Sorry, I'm in a bit of a bad mood over the Reciprocal System of Theory nut 
Doug Bundy and his renewed efforts at trying to legitimize his pet "theory" 
by linking to it from valid scientific articles on Wikipedia. 

--mav