In the following online article, I make a public allegation of science fraud at NASA with regard to the discovery of the Big Bang Blackbody Spectrum. I call it the first "space fraud" in history.

That discoverer has just been named as one of the 100 most important people of the world by TIME Magazine. Obviously, I would not put out this article if I were not on very solid grounds. I am. The response from NASA (which agency is informed on this site) so far has been one of silence. This can be interpreted in two ways: (1) This matter is not worthy of their attention, (2) They will not acknowledge there is any issue.

If you look throught the article, you will find that it is a pretty serious matter.

AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT OF SCIENCE FRAUD AT NASA
THE GENESIS COVENANT
Is the Big Bang Blackbody Bogus?
<link removed - explain this yourself, here - Serenitude>

I would not put out this article if I were not on very solid grounds. I am.

So why publish on a free website and annouce it on a obscure astronomy board rather than get it peer-reviewed and published in a major science Journal?

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

aguest...your page is almost impossible to read. (at least for my webtv unit.)

It's hard to read without the webTV unit.

__________________
Howling from the Shadows

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. --- JayUtah

You can't reason an irrational person out of an irrational belief. --- Noclevername

Apollo: The History and the Hoax
Enter the World of Athran

OK...so it's not just me.

edited to add...My point, aguest, is that I don't imagine a lot of folks here will take the trouble to read your page because it is so much trouble to read.

Perhaps you could tell us what your ideas are here.

It shows okay in IE 7, but not Firefox.

A simple hint for starting off a paper: state your premise clearly, succinctly, and early. Making your audience slog though paragraph after paragraph of poorly constructed, incoherent ramblings will win you no points at all.

I had to stop reading.

For my own health and safety.

It is amazing that any science research is done with all those secret meetings to attend.

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

??????????????????

Which is nearly impossible to read.

I wouldn't know. I can't read apples from oranges on your page. Your articles literally overlap each other. I have no mind to "decode" them.

You can call it a pumpkin if you like, but in the world of CTers vs. NASA, this is probably #1,405 or so.

Ok.

Obviously.

Please clean up your site so others can see for themselves. Also, note that linking to a website for validation, etc... is fine, but we will require you to state, clearly and concisley, your ideas here.

I don't blame them.

Actually, there is at least a third option. That this is so silly, it got passed around to everyone through the email system, everyone had a good laugh, then went back to work.

The major publication that you anonymously published on the free hosting site is illegible. We require you sum up your argument clearly and concisely here, and defend yourself from all challenges. This is not merely a postinghouse for ATM or Conspiracy ideas.

AN INVESTIGATIVE REPORT OF SCIENCE FRAUD AT NASA
THE GENESIS COVENANT
Is the Big Bang Blackbody Bogus?
<Removed link from Serenitude's stupid post - Serenitude>

Moved to the CT Section.

__________________
"I have this theory that the Apollo missions were faked when NASA found out that general relativity was wrong because the Earth was expanding due to the Sun's iron core being influenced by magnetic waves from the electric universe after being perturbed by Planet X and thereby causing global warming. Where should I start a thread about this?" ~ ToSeek

"Those are the people that wonder how a thermos knows whether to keep something hot or keep something cold." ~ NeoWatcher

Just a general question, scientist come from a number of different religions, countries, regions that have fought for centuries with each other, but when it comes to scientific theories they generally agree with each other, so how can that be?
( just a question I wish some cters, hbers, and atmers would ask themselves)

__________________
If it's just us, it seems like an awful waste of space.
Contact Carl Sagan

Advice noted, with thanks.

__________________
"I'd take the awe of understanding over the awe of ignorance any day." - Douglas Adams

What an excellent web page!

It should be held up as an excellent example for all other web page authors to learn from.

Specifically, how not to write a web page. It is a primer nonpareil about how to muddle up fonts, colors, formatting, graphics, et al, into a nearly incomprehensible mess.

The ironic thing here is the content is already a muddle, so the end result is a muddle².

Concerning the content, this is only #1405? Must be an early one, just redone for the web.

Then, any "scientific" hypothesis that incorporates such material as

is going to be suspect from the get-go. Too many hours with RPGs?

Plus, the overabundance of the word "exact" and its variants indicates a background devoid of knowledge of statistics and its application to scientific endeavors.

Even as someone who really enjoys science fiction and some fantasy works, I nevertheless couldn't make it to the end. Guess it's because I'm running low on ibuprofen.

BTW, Rue, it also displays its "formatting" better in IE6, but with many error messages, indicating the author didn't clean up the HTML, etc., prior to posting it. There is freeware out there that allows one to preview one's code per all the major browsers' renderings in order to assure such messes as the OP's page don't occur.

Final note: as usual, after having visited a site with IE, I had to remove a lot of adware, spyware, etc.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

From the site ...and yes, eyes bleeding.
OK, after skimming, it seems that aguest has a problem with the physical method of gathering the measurements. He/she has researched the instrument called a "Winston Cone" which was used on COBE, and finds that it cannot gather data effectively enough (precisely enough?) for the results to be considered valid (CMBR confirmed). Perhaps I have misrepresented aguest, I didn't read all that closely (the reading gets easier once you are past the godawful colored print), but didn't COBE just confirm earth based findings? and then didn't WMAP get even better results, further confirming the CMBR?
Hmmm.

Kee Kee Keeeee!
Hear that? It's the sound of seagulls posting

__________________
This is not an idea to be tossed aside lightly - it should be thrown with great force

You definitely need to rewrite this. First in a proper writing form that gives a summary of all the major points, then expands on them later.

You jumped around in your presentation, and found not one summary of all the various points you were making, that it was akin to assembling a 1000 piece puzzle in the dark while wearing ray-bans.

Additionally you presented no evidence of an actual cover up of any kind. Presenting some hand written drawing of a nefarious device called a sky horn is definitely not evidence of a cover up. Evidence of a cover up would include NASA letters, emails, and documents and specifications of equipment used in the detection of the back-body. Also statements from people that were on those teams at NASA would be good.

And tying all your badly presented hypotheses is with all those relics, which are totally unrelated to anything involved with your back-body idea's makes an already difficult read, near impossible.

Your idea was presented in a typical Woo Woo look at this I can do Bold and colorful fonts on web pages fashion so I invent a conspiracy for a web page.

With no real evidence, no schematics of equipment, no supporting facts from NASA historical information, you have made no killing points at all.

Unless you call ruining peoples eyesight with that web-page design a killing point. . .

__________________
"There is no problem that cannot be solved by a suitable application of high explosives" - US Army Demolitions School

http://worldsofothersuns.home.comcast.net/

Priory of the Dungeon.

Well, I understand Priory of Zion was already trademarked, so....

I'll bet this goes into Millenium's list, though

__________________
"I have this theory that the Apollo missions were faked when NASA found out that general relativity was wrong because the Earth was expanding due to the Sun's iron core being influenced by magnetic waves from the electric universe after being perturbed by Planet X and thereby causing global warming. Where should I start a thread about this?" ~ ToSeek

"Those are the people that wonder how a thermos knows whether to keep something hot or keep something cold." ~ NeoWatcher

that's not how you expose the truth.
this is how you expose the truth.

__________________
"blacker than the blackest black... times infinity."- Nathan Explosion
The.. Best.. Thread..Ever...

well, I doubt we will get an answer from aguest, (s)he will just hide behind what is on the web:

And then the priory of the dungeon site, equally unreadable (1st 2 chinese symbols, "mi" superstition/magic, "gong", palace). "the committee" is not democratic, meaning the nobel committee, SO WHAT?? It is private funds from Mr. Nobel's heritage, and the committee can do with it what they want, inside the rules tht Mr. Nobel gave.

I guess aguest would like to be nominated for the Nobel prize (as the barbarian on his website most likely).

In all, who knows what aguest wants, but it would be good if (s)he came here and explained more about all this, so we can have a discussion.

__________________
************************************************** *************************
Optimism does not change the laws of physics. (T'Pol)
A good scientist has freed himself of concepts and keeps his mind open to what is. (Dao De Jing 27)
************************************************** *************************
Martin ( http://www.geocities.com/DrMartinV )