I did not mean for my post to suggest that our science section should entertain crackpot ideas
... and I know so many of you feel I offer only crackpot ideas as to gravity
but in my defence I really do not think I make any leaps in logic and only base my comments upon observations I make using a mechanical mechanism to explain what is before me
...I always seek a tangible and supportable machinery when considering anything.....
I do note that if you disagree with "GR" or "big bang" then the term crack pot is wheeled out immediately and given the weight of credibility both these theories enjoy it is perhaps reasonable to assume anyone who would dare seek an alternative to such solid science is indeed a crack pot...
However any theory or position that needs to defend its right to exist by first destroying the character of the "thinker" rather than to confront and engage the fundamentals of the premise of the hypothisis presented is unfortunate as no doubt it is the idea that is up for review rather than the personality traits of the proposer of the idea under consideration.
I certainly hope the new name for our "science" section works as a place where the real scientist and those with a mere casual interest can discuss ideas and findings they feel may be of interest to others members.
alex
