Re: Scientnfic Repression in the 21th Century-The Next Galileo Galilei ??????

From: Len Gaasenbeek (gaasbeek_at_rideau.net)
Date: 12/21/04 

Date: Tue, 21 Dec 2004 10:11:44 -0500

To K Loupspeed,

I fully agree with your posting below. Keep up the good work!

Len Gaasenbeek.
.......................................................................
"K_Loupspeed" <loupspeed@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:cb77befc.0412181232.7e4549c@posting.google.com...
> ----------------------------------------
> http://archivefreedom.org/index.html
> ----------------------------------------
> The history of science teaches that the greatest advances in the
> scientific domain have been achieved by bold thinkers who perceived
> new and fruitful approaches that others failed to notice. If one had
> taken the ideas of these scientific geniuses who have been the
> promoters of modern science and submitted them to committees of
> specialists, there is no doubt that the latter would have viewed them
> as extravagant and would have discarded them for the very reason of
> their originality and profundity. As a matter of fact, the battles
> waged, for example by Fresnel and by Pasteur suffice to prove that
> some of these pioneers ran into a lack of understanding from the side
> of eminent scholars which they had to fight with vigor before emerging
> as the winners. More recently, in the domain of theoretical physics,
> of which I can speak with knowledge, the magnificent novel conceptions
> of Lorentz and Planck, and particularly Einstein also clashed with the
> incomprehension of eminent scientists. The new ideas here triumphed;
> but, in proportion as the organization of research becomes more rigid,
> the danger increases that new and fruitful ideas will be unable to
> develop freely.
> Let us state in a few words the conclusion to be drawn from the
> foregoing. While, by the very force of circumstances, research and
> teaching are weighted down by administrative structures and financial
> concerns and by the heavy armature of strict regulations and planning,
> it becomes more indispensable than ever to preserve the freedom of
> scientific research and the freedom of initiative for the original
> investigators, because these freedoms have always been and will always
> remain the most fertile sources for the grand progress of science.
>
> Nobel Laureate Louis de Broglie, April 25, 1978
> ----------------------------------------
> Repression of Physicists
> in the 21st Century
>
> The electronic preprint archive (arXiv.org), founded in 1991 at Los
> Alamos National Laboratories and funded by the National Science
> Foundation, was formed as a way for scientists to rapidly disseminate
> new discoveries and theoretical developments to the worldwide
> scientific community. Its original intent was to be an open forum for
> papers authored by credentialed physicists, i.e., those who
> consistently had papers approved for publication in peer refereed
> journals. Over time the criteria for approval of submitted papers to
> the archive became more complicated and restrictive.
>
> Presently hosted at Cornell University under the direction of
> physicist Paul Ginsparg, it blocks certain physicists from posting
> their papers to this archive. The arXiv administrators maintain a
> list of physicists whom they have blacklisted or ostracized so that
> any paper those individuals attempt to submit is systematically
> rejected regardless of its scientific content. Usually these blocked
> papers have already been accepted for publication in reputable peer
> refereed science journals or in other cases are undergoing review for
> journal publication which indicates that these papers are serious and
> well thought out. The list of suppressed scientists even includes
> Nobel Laureates! One characteristic that these ostracized physicists
> share in common is that they have written or published papers in the
> past which propose new ideas that challenge traditional physics dogma.
> In other cases their published works just happen to run counter to
> the particular theory preferences of the small political clique
> administering the archive.
>
> Our world is experiencing serious problems such as exponential
> population growth, environmental pollution, impending energy
> shortages, nuclear proliferation, and climatic change. We cannot
> afford to suppress the works of those seminal minds whose new ideas
> could revolutionize the way we interact with the world. What if a
> paper described the discovery of a new source of energy that could
> help to alleviate the coming energy crisis? Or, what if a paper
> brought to light a serious environmental hazard which, if unheeded,
> would result in a substantial loss of life. And, what if arXiv.org
> moderators censored one such important paper because of a possible
> personal dislike of its author or because it conflicted with a theory
> they personally favored? Society cannot afford this kind of
> behavior.
>
> In today's fast changing world it is not enough just to publish one's
> ideas in scientific journals, a process that can drag on from months
> to years until approved for publication. Rapid communication of all
> plausible new ideas to the academic community through an easily
> accessible internet archive is essential to the progress of science.
>
> The purpose of this site is to alert the public about the blocking
> activities being conducted by the Cornell sponsored arXiv.org
> administrators and to relate the case histories of those scientists
> who have been censored and/or blacklisted. Archive Freedom advocates
> that this practice be immediately stopped and that all scientists be
> given open uncensored access to this archive to post their technical
> papers. We respectfully urge the administrators at Cornell
> University, as guardian of the world's knowledge of physics, to honor
> the contributions of all serious scientists
> -------------------------------------------

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Your Communication Problems
    ... > "Intelligent Design is Not Science." ... > the Flood" written by out and out creationist scientists (young earth, ... physicists) also don't have this background. ... think if you really wanted to understand evolution, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Pluto assassinated
    ... ("Science" said it, so it must be right, and you're just a backwards ... I don't expect my scientists to be shining knights of truth and logic - I know it's humans that fill those jobs and scientists are just as prone to human flaws as everyone else. ... Though yeah, some Physicists don't get their hands all *that* 'dirty', especially Particle Physicists and Astronomers. ... OTOH, they *do* make big-assed gantries to support the Mirrors, and the Buildings for the Particle Accelerators are crazy weird Accurate and Huge. ...
    (rec.arts.anime.misc)
  • Re: Reading Dawkins ... was "Scrump"
    ... such an explanation now, so an alternative would have to be ... that on the one hand is committed to science and logic to ... What scientists do in their spare time is ... A lot of physicists are working on superstrings, ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: Evolution and Observation Gap
    ... an essential tool of science, ... They did their math, made predictions, then observed to see if the ... I realize that there are some scientists who get perturbed by the notion ... If the Earth was formed hot and then cooled over time, physicists ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Scientnfic Repression in the 21th Century-The Next Galileo Galilei ??????
    ... The history of science teaches that the greatest advances in the ... Repression of Physicists ... was formed as a way for scientists to rapidly disseminate ... consistently had papers approved for publication in peer refereed ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
Loading