SCEPCOP Forum

Syd: you don't take my advice about dealing with one topic at a time, you flood the thread with videos and pictures, and anytime someone starts to criticise one of them you try and change the subject by saying well, what about all the rest?

The only one burying anything is you. If you want to accomplish something why don't you take my lead and pick one - and only one - to discuss in more depth. After which you can move onto the next one. Probably better to start a new thread for that one. Leave this thread as the dumping ground for future reference.

The topic should include how practical would it be for NASA or the US Government to eliminate sites? Is it even possible? No one would believe that the person maintaining the site didn't have backups of any pictures hosted on the site. How simple would it be to publish somewhere else? Seems like a fools erand. If countries like China can't keep a lid on stuff like that, how could the US?

So start a thread on the one you want to talk about. I started a thread on my chosen topic. One that you described as important. I look forward to your participation in that thread too.

Sydney, you are coming across really oddly here, mate. If you want to discuss this stuff - I mean really discuss it then it has to be done in a way that posts and information doesn't get lost. You claim to have a scientific nature, but all I see is slapdash posting. You have been given the opportunity to take any one topic and explore it in depth. That is the only way we can come to any useful conclusion.

I'm not seeing much other than lots of posting, paranoid attacking of Arouet for wanting to discus one thing at a time and exactly the kind of avoidance you are accusing him of. I suggest you pick a subject (seeing as you seem to have decided radiation isn't for you now) and we can all try and discuss the merits of it without accusations and silly name calling. If you don't want to do this, that's fine, but I will be blocking you because I came here to have intelligent and open-minded discussions about some topics that interest me. I've yet to see anything from you that suggests you are anything other than the pseudoskeptic you claim to be against.

I'm sorry if this appears harsh, but I am not only willing, but hoping you can prove this a wrong assessment.