On May 13, 12:37*am, Bryan Olson wrote:
none wrote:
kenseto wrote:
Bryan Olson wrote:
kenseto wrote:
PD wrote:
So, Ken, let's recap your position for a moment.
Lets capture your position: Apparently you are so desperate that you
tried to swindle $22,000 from me!!!!!
You tell not the truth, Ken Seto.
I speakest the truth.

*From here it looks like you are afraid of the truth and are not
looking for honest help. PD offered that and you showed you were
looking for someone to cook the data for you. *That is not
science. *This works in the court system but not in science.

My take is different. I do not think Ken has any plan to fake
experimental data. My diagnosis, as serious though amateur
kookologist, is that Ken is legitimately deluded: he believes
the theories that he made up.

There is an element of intellectual dishonestly, or at least
irresponsibility plus narcissism, in zealously espousing one's
own theory without even bothering to understand what so many
others have worked so long and so hard to establish. That's
par for the course on sci.physics.relativity.

It's another thing for Ken to accuse PD of trying to swindle
him, based on what he *imagines* PD would do. I've heard that
called "false witness".

I was not entirely comfortable withe PD's offer to work on
Ken's experiment. I think I see where PD was going, but of
course Ken would and should reject the offer. What purpose
was served?

Actually, after doing some basic background checking on Mr. Seto, I
wrote to withdraw my offer to him. Mr. Seto did not take kindly to my
performing this check, which at some point produced some concern among
those are connected to him. My background check was more thorough than
this contact that he's aware of.

Mr. Seto is woefully underprepared on all measures for this
experiment. If his so-called PhDs are at all competent, they will
quickly discern this for themselves. It may be that they don't care --
one can imagine all sorts of reasons why.

For the record, if the background check had come out otherwise, then I
would have been happy to provide my services to the utmost of my
professional ability. I have no vested interest in protecting
relativity. This is true for any physicist here. Seto makes a
fundamental error in thinking that scientists do not like surprises,
want to preserve the status quo, and do not want to see new theories
turn out to be promising. That isn't the case at all. Surprises are
the life's blood of physics. However, there is a standard of *quality*
of work, regardless whether it is revolutionary. Half-baked is half-
baked. Even if the recipe sounds really good to the chef, it's not a
good idea to pull it out of the oven and serve it to patrons before it
is completely cooked.

Seto knows his limitations here, but would rather blame the
"establishment" for beating him down and not ensuring him of more
success. He thinks somehow he is entitled to help that others do not
get, and that others should pick up the ball where he can no longer
hang onto it.

PD


--
--Bryan