Quote:
Originally Posted by DJDD
does this mean that out-of-favour theories or theories that have been found to be wanting (i.e. no longer mainstream) should not be discussed at all.
I have found some discussion on these topics, whether as a start of a thread or as a response, to be very illuminating, both for historical reasons and as a confirmation of the practice of scientific method.
|
Not at all !!
I find I've actually learned heaps by reading (and listening carefully to) some of the mainstream responses to non-mainstream posters.
The thing I'm trying to do, is to get the non-mainstreamers to accept that at the end of the day, when all their issues have been discussed, the forum's intent is to promote
mainstream science and rational thought. Either we take this view collectively, or we don't. Its no use pretending we back both horses.
The problem is that mainstream (& rational thinking), handles non-mainstream ideas very effectively. But when these points have been made multiple times over in a thread, someone has to yield for the sake of the whole thing degenerating into a personal mud-slinging match. Some non-participants may find this entertaining, but I assure you from first-hand experience, those who get involved in these melees are locked in a survival battle, and more often than not, it is
almost impossible to get out of them. We lose science experts, because of this aspect.
My assertion is that the views which represent the broader IIS community must take precedence after a fair debate, and these must be mainstream (& rational thinking) science views. We have children involved in these forums. Do we support them taking away a perspective not supported in mainstream science or rational thinking ?
What is it that we stand for as a community ?
Cheers