Here’s the problem: you are talking about some guys who claimed exposing seeds and eggs to electric fields creates strange prehistoric mutants. You claim scientists aren’t looking at it because they are too caught up in current dogma, to beholden to industrial interests like Monsanto. But anyone who has actually seen scientific literature knows stuff that important does get some investigation regardless of corporate backing, if there is something substantative to it, and I’m sure can easily imagine some other reason people might not be looking at it - say, that it turns out to be crazy nonsense with nothing to back it up, to the point where counter-evidence is hardly worth publishing.
You seem incapable of imagining the second possibility; you’re happy to report this not as a hypothesis but a fact. Nor is that unusual here; for instance, previously you took your argument from a website claiming there was no time dilation, something that is measured every day. You’re saying you’re concerned science isn’t considering new ideas, but from your examples, you’re only arguing science shouldn’t have standards.
Forget that. Again, peer review does have problems; but if your cure is that scientists should stop building on what’s well-established for checking every claim that shows up on the internet, figuring out that relativity does still work and perpetual motion machines still don’t, and trying to figure out how to test time cube guy’s ideas, that’s a much better way to impede discovery. wysinwyg has brought this up, and you’ve avoided addressing it.
The other problem, of course, is you’re talking about some guys who claimed exposing seeds and eggs to electric fields creates strange prehistoric mutants and so made the thread all about Jeff Schmidt and how that somehow means you should only trust fringe science, yet again, instead of the topic. But I guess that’s also our fault for indulging you.
