Misplaced Pages

Talk:Eric Lerner: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:42, 5 November 2005 editDeglr6328 (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users5,986 edits NPOV← Previous edit Revision as of 00:29, 6 November 2005 edit undoTrious (talk | contribs)162 edits NPOVNext edit →
Line 7: Line 7:


:No actually its a perfectly necessary and relevant little tidbit when talking about a total fucking nutter like Lerner.--] 21:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC) :No actually its a perfectly necessary and relevant little tidbit when talking about a total fucking nutter like Lerner.--] 21:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC)

::Well, I think Lerner doesn't do himself any favors in the way he goes about things but I don't think he's a total nutter. His fusion technology is unproven, I know nothing about plasma so I'm not going to jump to conclusions (and that would be nonNPOV) so let's see what happens with that. Anyway you're probably calling him a nutter because of his BigBang views. People seem to get very heated when the BigBang is questioned. I don't know why, I personally know cosmologists and then are quite open to discuss alternative models, so why Wikipedians and Slashdotters get so worked up is a mystery to me. ] 00:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)

Revision as of 00:29, 6 November 2005

NPOV

The ideas which Lerner espouses are generally regarded as so outlandish by mainstream physicists that he is essentially ignored in that community.

Prove it.

-- Deleted it, it's completely unncessary in a discussion of his credentials (as the article now stands).

No actually its a perfectly necessary and relevant little tidbit when talking about a total fucking nutter like Lerner.--Deglr6328 21:42, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Well, I think Lerner doesn't do himself any favors in the way he goes about things but I don't think he's a total nutter. His fusion technology is unproven, I know nothing about plasma so I'm not going to jump to conclusions (and that would be nonNPOV) so let's see what happens with that. Anyway you're probably calling him a nutter because of his BigBang views. People seem to get very heated when the BigBang is questioned. I don't know why, I personally know cosmologists and then are quite open to discuss alternative models, so why Wikipedians and Slashdotters get so worked up is a mystery to me. Trious 00:29, 6 November 2005 (UTC)