Monday, 17 December 2012

PSI and AIAS Affiliation


October-November 2012

" .. advocates of transparency and accountability .. "
(http://principia-scientific.org/about/why-psi-is-a-private-assoc)
and
" .. the illusion of knowledge .. ”

UPDATES (see Appendix C for earlier updates)

2014-10-17 to 19 Added to Appendix A an E-mail with Trans Tech Publications regarding Dr. David J Fisher's review of the book "Life and Times of Myron Evans and links to some posts on Dr. Evans's blog.
2014-10-09 Moved Appendices A and B to B and C respectively and added a new Appendix A "Recent E-mail exchanges involving AIAS "fellows", John O'Sullivan and others".
2014-08-29 In Section 1.0, entry 3 a reference has been added to an E-mail from the records office of Northampton University on 22nd Nov. 2012 refuting John O'Sullivan's claim to have been a lecturer there.
2013-07-11 E-mails added, including AIAS founder Dr. Myron Evans asking that PSI  " .. should remove all AIAS names .. " from the list of " .. member biographies.

This article supplements information provided in "SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd" Section 4.0 "Over-ambitious and Misleading Membership Claims" (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/spotlighton-principia-scientific.html). Along with sub-section 4.2 "Alpha Institute of Advanced Studies" of that same article it will also form the basis of the article "SpotlightON - The Alpha Foundation of Advanced Studies" (http://spotlighton-cacc.blogspot.co.uk/2014/10/spotlighton-alpha-foundation-of.html).




"this group has damaged the credibility of skepticism about climate change and provides a convenient target when people want to refer to “deniers” and crackpots"
Professor Judith Curry

"The struggle for truth continues"
John Anthony O'Sullivan

"A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on."“The truth is incontrovertible, malice may attack it, ignorance may deride it, but in the end; there it is.”

Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill
(http://jpetrie.myweb.uga.edu/bulldog.html)


Section 1.0 of this article provides copies of the several relevant entries provided within Dr. Myron Evans’s blog about the brief affiliation between AIAS and PSI.

Section 2.0 includes a selection of responses from those AIAS members who are also claimed to be members of PSI regarding their status within PSI.

Section 3.0 addresses affiliations between AIAS and other organisations such as the Telesio - Galilei Academy of Science. Both Sections 2 and 3 are "works-in-progress". 

Appendix B presents relevant E-mail exchanges with PSIA members regarding the claims to their membership of PSI.


1.0 Relevant Entries in Dr. Myron Evans's Blog

This section provides, in reverse chronological order, copies of the several relevant entries provided within Dr. Myron Evans’s blog (http://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/).

===============

Entry posted November 7, 2012 at 7:37 am

AIAS has not Joined PSI

Aftet due diligence AIAS has decided not to join PSI.
==============

Entry  posted November 5, 2012 at 5:59 pm

Repudiation of the Kyoto Accord

This should be the national anthem! I come out against Obama as a U. S. dual citizen.

In a message dated 05/11/2012 16:25:15 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Canada has Dr. David Suzuki who has been instrumental in the creation of the Kyoto Accord. Alberta has a provincial anthem (ha ah!) that goes something like

We are wealthy in Alberta
With our oil and natural gas
They can take Kyoto and
Shove it up Suzuki’s you know what.

Doug

On Mon, Nov 5, 2012 at 4:53 AM, wrote:

This accord is being essentially repudiated now by the British Government as the uselessness of wind turbines becomes clear. Canada has already repudiated it and I urge all industrialized nations to follow.

British Civil List Scientist

In a message dated 05/11/2012 12:43:33 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Hi John,
Congratulations to one and all! We will cross a milestone tomorrow, in the US Presidential election, 6 Nov 2012.

I am not a fortune- eller, but I expect a quantum leap in post-WWII trends after the United Nations was established on 24 Oct 1945:

1. Falsehoods promoted as consensus “settled” science, and

2. Loss of human rights “protected” by the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and the US Bill of Rights.

I will post empirical dots on the first trend line later today on my web page, after http://omanuel.wordpress.com/about/#comment-1702

The economist, E. M. Smith, reported the facts about AGW yesterday:


“The entire structure of Kyoto was a wealth transfer from Rich nations to Poor nations. It was to hobble the west and enrich those invested in the planned money transfer and industrial movement. That game has played out. It’s a done deal.”

AGW was never about global climate. It has now completed its primary mission.

With deep regrets,
- Oliver K. Manuel
Former NASA Principal
Investigator for Apollo

Date: Monday, November 5, 2012, 4:18 AM

Myron Evans and his team at Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies http://www.aias.us/ (AIAS) are demonstrating commitment and leadership towards our common goal of advancing objective, open science free from political coercion. We now have a great opportunity. PSI will be publishing further articles supportive of the science of AIAS and PSI senior fellow Joe Olson will be taking responsibility for helping grow our knowledge about the AIAS’s work on the unified theory of physics. PSI will also be urging other science associations to take note that the wider scientific community is beginning to accept that our common enemy is faux government science in all its forms. We are better equipped to overcome it by recognizing shared objectives and working together wherever possible. Dr Evans has published an open letter to Joe Olson and PSI at his blog. I recommend it as an uplifting read for everyone wishing to be a part of the resurgence of the traditional scientific method and the defeat of post-normalism:
Thank you,

John
=================

Entry posted November 5, 2012 at 2:51 pm


Legal Precedents


Thanks this will be very useful. I did try for a long time to find a solicitor to advise Lord Carlisle Q. C. Finding a pro bono lawyer seems essential before we start the case. Most people cannot afford legal costs.
In a message dated 05/11/2012 14:41:57 GMT Standard Time, john0sullivan@btinternet.com writes:
Thanks. That helps. I will contact Richard Buxton, SOCME and Brandon Lewis. I particularly want to engage in discussions with representatives of such groups and, where possible, their legal advisers. In my view, the Fenland case would be moot and the dismissed Battle case may assist only insofar as to learn what pitfalls to avoid. My view is that we should source the pro bono services of a Swansea law firm to be on hand at the court as the case progresses. This will mitigate on costs. I will happily initiate such a search. For clarification, although I have a law degree I’m not licensed to practice law in the UK. Most of my experience is in NY human rights and NY employment law (inc. mandamus petitions) plus teaching law in the UK at college level at Northampton University.
http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com


NB: Two weeks later (22nd November 2012) the University of Northampton Records Manager advised that " .. the University has no record of a Mr John A. O’Sullivan being employed by the University .. If you have contact details for Mr O’Sullivan we would be grateful if you could share them with the University because we would like to investigate the issue further with a view to deciding on any legal action .. ". That E-mail was copied to the Director of Human Resources (http://www.northampton.ac.uk/directories/people/deborah-mattock) who had been " .. Lecturer in Law .. a Senior and Principal Lecturer .. " throughout the period (1987-1999) that John O'Sullivan had claimed to have been a lecturer there.


More comments on John O'Sullivan's questionable educational and employment claims (including that questionable LLB that he places ahead of his BA Hon. PGCE) can be found in "Curriculum Vitae for John O'Sullivan (2010)" (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/curriculum-vitae-for-john-osullivan-2010.html), in which Appendix B, Note 4a) gives the full E-mail from the University and Note 2b) discusses the source of that LLB.
================== 

Entry posted November 5, 2012 at 1:05 pm

AIAS / PSI Cooperation

This is most helpful and generous. The worst aspect of contemporary pseudoscience is dogma, this becomes clear over time in the way that refutations of well known but flawed theories are ignored.

In a message dated 05/11/2012 10:18:34 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Myron Evans and his team at Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies http://www.aias.us/ (AIAS) are demonstrating commitment and leadership towards our common goal of advancing objective, open science free from political coercion. We now have a great opportunity. PSI will be publishing further articles supportive of the science of AIAS and PSI senior fellow Joe Olson will be taking responsibility for helping grow our knowledge about the AIAS’s work on the unified theory of physics. PSI will also be urging other science associations to take note that the wider scientific community is beginning to accept that our common enemy is faux government science in all its forms. We are better equipped to overcome it by recognizing shared objectives and working together wherever possible. Dr Evans has published an open letter to Joe Olson and PSI at his blog. I recommend it as an uplifting read for everyone wishing to be a part of the resurgence of the traditional scientific method and the defeat of post-normalism:
Thank you,

John

============

Entry posted November 5, 2012 at 12:31 pm


Cooperation with PSI and AIAS and beyond

It is a pleasure to be part of PSI. For my part I would like to be active both within AIAS and PSI, in theoretical physics and in the European platform for the removal of wind turbines.

In a message dated 05/11/2012 10:18:34 GMT Standard Time, john0sullivan@btinternet.com writes:

Myron Evans and his team at Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies http://www.aias.us/ (AIAS) are demonstrating commitment and leadership towards our common goal of advancing objective, open science free from political coercion. We now have a great opportunity. PSI will be publishing further articles supportive of the science of AIAS and PSI senior fellow Joe Olson will be taking responsibility for helping grow our knowledge about the AIAS’s work on the unified theory of physics. PSI will also be urging other science associations to take note that the wider scientific community is beginning to accept that our common enemy is faux government science in all its forms. We are better equipped to overcome it by recognizing shared objectives and working together wherever possible. Dr Evans has published an open letter to Joe Olson and PSI at his blog. I recommend it as an uplifting read for everyone wishing to be a part of the resurgence of the traditional scientific method and the defeat of post-normalism:
Thank you,

John
==============

Entry posted November 5, 2012 at 7:06 am

Letter to Joe Olsen and PSI

This is an excellent letter from Robert Cheshire and sums up everything in a coherent and lucid manner. No more “conspiracy theories” please.

LettertoPSIFAOJoeOlsen.doc
=============

Entry posted November 4, 2012 at 1:32 pm

Updated PSI Members Page

I think that the PSI membership is very impressive.

Many thanks. The updates to PSI members’ page made as requested and those further AIAS members now added:

http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com
==============

Entry posted November 4, 2012 at 8:38 am

List of Other AIAS Fellows.

This is a list of other AIAS Fellows who have indicated no objection to joining Principia.

1) Robert Fell, Computer Engineer, Swansea. Graduate of Warwick University and extensive industrial experience.
2) Alexander Labounsky, retired Chief Engineer of The Boeing Company, graduate of Columbia University, extensive experience of new energy devices.
3) Dr. Frank Lichtenberg, ETH Zurich, in depth knowledge of ECE theory, currently preparing an invited review for J. Found. Phys. Chem.
4) Michael J. Jackson of Lubbock, Texas, has carried out extensive voluntary work in preparing pdf files from the www.aias.us diary or blog, and interweaving them with feedback data. Extensive knoweldge of low energy nuclear reactions and other aspects of new energy.
5) Stephen J. Crothers, probably the most able scholar in Einsteinian type general relativity, has produced many definitive refutations of big bang, black holes and other fallacies and errors of Einsteinian general relativity.
6) Robert Cheshire, has produced a great deal of voluntary work on behalf of AIAS, including broadcasts of essays and poetry, and fine animations. An able and forceful critic of the standard model of physics. Narrator in the film “The Universe of Myron Evans” (2008) (available on the net).
7) Prof. Emeritus Alwyn van der Merwe, University of Denver, probably the most eminent editor in new physics of the late twentieth century, Editor Emeritus of J. Found. Phys. Chem. Extensive knowledge of B(3) theory, O(3) electrodynamics and ECE theory. Pioneering editor of “Foundations of Physics” and “Foundations of Physics Letters”, probably the best journals in new physics of the late twentieth century. Editor of a well known book series “Fundamental Theories of Physics” with about three hundred volumes published. He was born in South Africa, became a Queen Victoria Scholar, studied theoretical physics in the University of Amsterdam under Jan de Boer ad S. A. Wouthuysen, earned doctorates from Amsterdam and Bern, and was a research associate of Henry Morgenau at Yale University and Hans Jensen at Heidelberg. In 1975 he succeeded Morgenau as editor of “Foundations of Physics” and founded “Foundations of Physics Letters”. He taught at the City University of New York before being appointed at the University of Denver, where he is currently Professor Emeritus. Strong supporter of fairness and balance in publication, read and edited every paper personally, dealing politely but firmly with irrational conduct.
8) Prof. Costas Cefalas, Hellenic Institute Athens, Greek representative for nanotechnology at the EEC. Strong supporter of B(3) and ECE theory and its applications in industry.
9) Franklin Amador, nominated this year for “Marquis Who’s Who in the World”, distinguished engineer, voluntarily typeset volumes of “Generally Covariant Unified Field Theory”, (in seven volumes, Abramis 2005 – 2011), a most valuable contribution. Extensive knowledge of the work of Tesla and other aspects of new energy. Resides and works in California and Japan.
10) Simon Clifford, has done extenive voluntary work on behalf of AIAS, including the construction of new energy circuits and voluntary help in the early essay broadcasts. Graduate of Durham, has worked for the Ministry of Defence and Malvern Instruments. Able electronics engineer with extensive knowledge of the subject.
==============

Entry  posted November 4, 2012 at 7:45 am

AIAS / Principia Cooperation

This is just what is needed, and many thanks. AIAS is also affiliated with Cambridge International Science Publishing (www.cisp-publishing.com , CISP) and I am pleased to mention its recent relevant publications as follows. These give the basic background and it would be very helpful if they were given publicity and are all recent CISP publications. They would make ideal course books where appropriate.

1) M. W. Evans, Ed., Journal of Foundations of Physics and Chemistry, ISSN 2046 9888, six issues a year from June 2011 (www.cisp-publishing.com, CISP).
2) M. W. Evans, Ed. “Definitive Refutations of the Einsteinian General Relativity”, softback and e book ISBN-13: 978-1-907343-08-7, 200 pp., 22 pounds stirling; hardback ISBN 978-1-907343-38-4, forty pounds stirling.
3) M. W. Evans, S. J. Crothers, H. Eckardt and K. Pendergast, “Criticisms of the Einstein Field Equation”, large format hardback, ISBN 978-1-907343-28-5, 480 pp, 95 pounds stirling.
4) Kerry Pendergast, “The Life of Myron Evans”, ISBN 978-1-907343-40-7, 300 pp., 50 pounds stirling.
5) Myron Wyn Evans, “O Wraidd ei Ddoe” (first volume of autobiography), published in 2012 in association with Authors Online, 15.99 pounds stirling, 281 pp, ISBN 978-0-7552-0700-8, available in hardback and multi e format from www.authorsonline.co.uk .

There are currently 229 source UFT papers, many of which have been published in the journal (attached list). The source UFT papers have split physics into two: ECE unified physics and the incorrect and obsolete standard model of physics now coming under heavy criticism from all quarters. Over about a decade the UFT papers have generated about twenty million hits.

These books are also available from all good book shops.

In a message dated 04/11/2012 00:21:30 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Joe,
Glad to have you take on this special responsibility. I see the arrival of Prof Evans and his associates as the signal for us to kick start PSI on a new branch of work unrelated to climate science.As one of the original founder members of PSI I know you’ve been keen from the outset to see us do far more in the realms of cutting edge science, so I’m confident you will give this project your fullest commitment. In this I know you won’t let the side down. The best way to begin is to become thoroughly familiar with the work of Evans and his colleagues at AIAS. You will have enormous responsibility but can gain the prestige of ensuring PSI establishes legitimacy as a publisher of non-climate science papers.

Feel free to involve, as you see fit, those team members you believe can help PSI most working with Prof Evans and his colleagues e.g. Bob Ashworth and Oliver Manuel.

In the first instance, please familiarize yourself with the work of Prof Evans, the Alpha Foundation’s Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS) and the The Unified Physics Institute of Technology (UPITEC). You may even want to begin with an introductory PSI article to explain to readers what the unified model of physics means. Remember, many of our readers are lay people, not just scientists, so your work needs to have the broadest appeal.

Like me, I’m sure you will see this as a great opportunity to grow PSI’s understanding about research into a unified model of physics and the new science and technology that becomes available with such insights.
Many thanks!
John

http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com
===============

Entry posted November 4, 2012 at 7:07 am



The Non Existent Higgs Boson

It would go a long way in cement our ties with Prof Evans and his colleagues if we could put together some kind of positive PSI summary of his groundbreaking work. It is beyond me being a non-scientist to do any such write up but as someone on the PSI team who has always been immersed in studying Einstein’s work it may be right up your street.

Many thanks,

John

This is excellent work. The flaw in GWS theory is pointed out in UFT225.
In a message dated 03/11/2012 23:18:08 GMT Standard Time, writes:
Myron
others currently on the Slayer team with paradigm shifting research include Bob Ashworth, Chem E with his “Confirmation of the Helical Travel of Light”, peer reviewed and published in Physics Letters….
and Joe Postma, MSc Astronomy with his newest “Absence of a Measurable Greenhouse Effect”, peer reviewed and published by PSI….we look forward to joining forces and creating a new emperaical paradigm….
Joe 0
Subject: Re: Only 14% of heat transfer from surface can be affected.
This would be most helpful, and many thanks.
In a message dated 03/11/2012 11:44:54 GMT Standard Time, john0sullivan@btinternet.com writes:
Joe,
http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com

===============

Entry posted November 3, 2012 at 6:32 pm

Glad to work with Timothy Ball


I would be glad to work with Timothy Ball, from whom I can learn a lot about climate science. I am keen to begin legal proceedings against turbine developers who have ruined our beautiful countryside here in Wales. So I am most grateful for the help and interest of John O’Sullivan and Principia. My arguments in theoretical physics are very well known worldwide (feedback to www.aias.us).

In a message dated 03/11/2012 17:21:43 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Tim,
Lovely article. I’m passing this to Hans to add to our PSI website, when his time permits. As you are Chair of PSI I would cordially invite you to open lines of communication with our newest member, Myron Evans, Founder and Director of the Alpha Foundation’s Institute for Advanced Study (AIAS) and of the Unified Physics Institute of Technology (UPITEC). Myron and I see great potential for cooperation between us. I am eager to visit with him in Wales later this month to strategize further in common cause. Just like us, Myron has faced resistance to his innovative work.
In addition, I will be assisting Myron and his fellow anti-windfarm campaigners in mounting a legal challenge against wind farms in local Welsh communities. Your vast knowledge of such falsities in climate science will prove useful to such legal arguments. We are all keenly aware that it is trumped up global warming alarmism that underpins all the “renewables” boondoggles, so working together we can better achieve our goals.
Many thanks,
John
http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com
===========

Entry posted November 3, 2012 at 9:41 am



Refutations of the Higgs Boson and Einsteinian General Relativity



I first refuted the Higgs boson theory in about November 1991 at the Cornell Theory Center, in papers published in Physica B on thewww.aias.us Omnia Opera section. This was by inference of the B(3) field, which split physics entirely into what has become ECE and standard model. This is as deep a split as Copenhagen versus causal realist. The B(3) field refutes conclusively the U(1) sector symmetry of the Higgs theory, and since then I have refuted U(1) in about four hundred papers and books, avidly read worldwide offwww.aias.us. The unique feedback data bank I have built up shows this beyond any doubt. So attempts to ignore ECE cannot but fail. I demonstrated several basic error in the GWS theory in UFT225 onwww.aias.us (to be published in J. Found. Phys. Chem, www.cisp-publishing.com). The CERN experiment is carefully contrived to claim the existence of an idea proven wrong not only by myself but by many others for many years. There are over twenty adjustable parameters in the theory, which is obviously meaningless on these grounds alone. The CERN Director was carefully groomed for a CBE, and Higgs, whose own output is very low, (miniscule compared with mine, and in my opinion of no significance), is being carefully groomed for a Big N. We are told that it is not premature to award a Nobel Prize for something that does not exist. Higgs was sent a letter of congratulations from Cameron, whose knowledge of physics is worse than his knowledge of economics, which by popular acclaim, is zero, the Scrooge of the Century. I have pointed out all my refutations in a letter addressed to David Cameron, but despite (or perhaps because of) my being a Civil List scientist appointed by Tony Blair, my letter was intercepted and sent to – you guessed it – CERN. So I was told that they are right by knee jerk and that I must accept the fact that they are right, otherwise their funds might be cut. Unfortunately I have always been left and replied, whereupon I was sent a postcard by the unknown bureaucrat. In the same way Al Gore and a Committee were groomed for another Big N for what is scientifically a wildly erroneous fantasy that has caused immense economic harm. Even Cameron is beginning to feel the heat, which is criticism, not global warming. He is a multi millionaire, and may just possibly have an interest in wind turbines. Now he has been pulled back by his own tories, so a purge of the cabinet has ensued. The only ones left are far right – they may fall off the table. Similarly, many others and I have refuted the Einsteinian general relativity in many ways for many years, some of which are very easy to understand. Essays on this topic are very popular, broadcast by Robert Cheshire on www.aias.us. All this mediaeval fantasy is due to a lack of basic scholarship, the unwillingness to put in the hours of hard work, or for an athlete, the hours of hard training. The result is a fat and flabby mess.

In a message dated 02/11/2012 09:51:02 GMT Standard Time, writes:
Hi Doug,

Agreed. Now that Prof Claes Johnson and Joe Postma affirm your analysis on this I will certainly pass it among select others in the team so that they can add any comments as they see fit. Among those added here are two of our newest members, Lionell Griffith and Nobel Science Prize nominee, Prof Myron Evans ( see Einstein–Cartan–Evans theory) . As we have now affiliated with the Unified Physics Institute of Technology (UPITEC) and the Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies we will be inviting members of those associations to assist on such matters as we work together with them in a spirit of mutual cooperation and advancement of our shared goals to promote new scientific ideas.

Many thanks,
John

http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com


============== 

Entry posted November 3, 2012 at 6:58 am

Biographies of AIAS Fellows

Their biographies are all online in “Marquis Who’s Who”, but unfortunately there is a small subscription to enter the Marquis site. Marquis is the world’s leading reference vehicle, founded in Chicago, 1899. Briefly and from memory the bio’s are as follows, they can be checked for detail by looking up Marquis online. I will soon propose the other AIAS Fellows with short bio’s.

1) Dr Horst Eckardt is President of UPITEC and a graduate of Clausthal University, doing his doctorate in computational quantum mechanics with application to solids. He works in Munich for the Siemens Company and has greatly contributed to ECE theory, being a co author of many papers.
2) Sean Mac Lachlan works for Hewlett Packard in Boise Idaho, and was the second webmaster of www.aias.us. He owns www.atomicprecision.com and www.upitec.org, and is Secretary of UPITEC, a not for profit organization registered in Boise, Idaho.
3) Dr. Doug Lindstrom graduated from the University of British Columbia and worked for the Alberta Research Council. He has contributed greatly to ECE theory, notably introducing the Lindstrom antisymmetry constraint.
4) Prof. Jose Croca heads a well known research group in the University of Lisbon that has refuted the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle in many careful experiments. He is a prominent intellectual of the causal realist school of Einstein and de Broglie.
5) Kerry Pendergast is a Royal Society Hauksbee Medallist, and graduated M. Sc. in Prof. Sir John Meurig Thomas’ group at the Edward Davies Chemical Laboratories, University College of Wales, Aberystwyth. He was a pioneer of electron microscopy of single atoms, and was a prominent and very successful teacher in Gwent, before retiring to become a writer and author. He resides in Blaina and Aberystwyth, and is my biographer, “The Life of Myron Evans” (Cambridge International Science Publishing, www.cisp-publishing.com.)
6) Prof. Corneliu Ciubotariu is a prominent general relativist from Romania who devised the general metric for the Evans Vigier field, or B(3) field for which I am told I was nominated for a Nobel Prize. These things are supposed to be confidential, but I have no reason to doubt that I have been nominated.
7) Ray Delaforce is a prominent engineer who resides in the United States. He was the first to discover the petal orbits of ECE theory as described in recent UFT papers on www.aias.us.
8) Prof. Bo Lehnert is a King of Sweden Gold Medallist, and Member of the Royal Swedish Academy. He was a student of the Nobel Laureate Hannes Alfven in Stockholm University, and independently inferred a B(3) type field that overturns the standard model dogma.
9) Nils Abramson is retired from a full professorship at Stockholm University, and is notable for his contributions to optics.
10) Prof. Bill Coffey is Professor and Fellow of Trinity College Dublin, author of many papers and books on Brownian motion. He was a co author of mine in several books and papers.
11) Prof. Jo Moscicki is Professor in the Jagiellonian University in Krakow, and sometime scientist at the EDCL in Aberystwyth. He divides his time between Krakow and Cornell University.
12) Dr Liuda Pozhar is a prominent scientist of the liquid state, who has worked in Kharkov and Cornell University. Presently she works in Britain as a senior lecturer or reader I believe. This can be checked with Marquis online.
13) Prof Sisir Roy is Professor in the Indian Statistical Institute in Calcutta. He worked on the B(3) type field with Bo Lehnert.
14) Also, Victor Riecansky, publisher of Cambridge International Science Publishing (www.cisp-publishing.com) is an AIAS Fellow and has been included in Marquis recently. I am sure he would like to join Principia, as would the other AIAS Fellows, whose bio’s I will send over shortly. I am sure they will correct me if I get a detail wrong.

In a message dated 02/11/2012 15:33:04 GMT Standard Time writes:

Myron.
Thanks for that. I will be aiming to have our webmaster upload to our PSI site a revised and updated list of members and would like to add short bios for the 14 fellows from AIAS. Do you have to hand anything I can use in that regard? I believe they are as follows:...
2) Horst Eckardt, AIAS Deputy Director, President of UPITEC....
3) Sean MacLachlan, AIAS Fellow, Secretary of UPITEC....
4) Douglas Willard Lindstrom, AIAS Fellow....
5) Jose Ramhalo Croca, AIAS Fellow....
6) Kerry Richard Pendergast, AIAS Fellow....
7) Corneliu Ciubotariu, AIAS Fellow....
8) Raymond W. J. Delaforce, AIAS Fellow....
9) Bo Peter Lehnert, AIAS Fellow, B(3) type theory....
10) Nils Hugo Abramson, AIAS Fellow....
11) William Thomas Coffey, AIAS Fellow, B(3) type theory....
12) Jozef Kazimierz Moscicki, AIAS Fellow....
13) Liudmila Antonovna Pozhar, AIAS Fellow....
14) Sisir Roy, AIAS Fellow, B(3) type theory.

Many thanks,
John
http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com
============

Entry posted November 2, 2012 at 10:27 am

FOR POSTING: Updated CV

I have updated my CV to mention the honour of appointment to Principia and I ask Dave Burleigh to post this updated CV summary in the appropriate place in www.aias.us. Many thanks in anticipation.

In a message dated 29/10/2012 12:36:46 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Dear Professor Evans,
This is excellent news. Welcome to the Principia Scientific International (PSI) team! I can confirm that my organization would be most happy to be of immediate assistance to you and your AIAS Fellows in your related endeavours. The legal avenue you propose looks like it may prove fruitful and I will garner more from material on your site at www.aias.us. I’m sure my colleagues will be just as intrigued as me to study this further. On the science side of the battle please allow me to introduce to you and your colleagues a welcome new development.
....
PSI has now published our definitive refutation of the so-called greenhouse gas theory, the basis of all scientific claims for reducing CO2 emissions that foists on us tax-hungry and ill-thought out “renewable” boondoggles. The paper is fresh off the press and we will be eagerly promoting it and inviting further critical evaluation throughout the scientific community (not just among a self-serving clique of climatologists). Several experts in thermodynamics have peer-reviewed the work and affirm that it proves in great detail that the calculations used by government climatologists to advocate restrictions of CO2 emissions are based on misinterpretations of data and scientific laws (see Page 51 of the document for the short summary). Our chair, Dr Tim Ball is currently engaged, as are other team members, in private discussions with leading climatologists, Dr. Richard Lindzen and Dr. Roy Spencer, on the implications of this new paper.
....
The paper may be found online at:
....
It will be my great pleasure to announce on our website your addition to the team. Unless I hear from you otherwise, I will take the liberty of adding a short bio for you on our select members page. For sure there is much we can achieve together that would never be accomplished separately. As such, we certainly welcome further new members by your recommendation herein and we relish the opportunity to forge productive ties with AIAS. Certainly all on your c.c list are cordially invited to apply to join. An email directly to me or via our website will suffice. For more information about us please visit the ‘Policies’ and ‘About’ sections at our website. I will email again in due course to agree a mutually convenient time and date for our phone discussion/meeting. I am also taking the liberty of adding to your c.c. list selected email addresses of some of my senior colleagues so as to facilitate further dialogue among us.
...
Truly,
John O’Sullivan LLB, BA Hon. PGCE
Coordinator, Principia Scientific International
http://principia-scientific.org/
..., NR31 9UN
Tel:0787.....
=============

Entry posted November 2, 2012 at 8:20 am

Article by John O’Sullivan

Many thanks again! This is a photograph taken at Craig y Nos Castle in 2008 during some filming there of “The 
Universe of Myron Evans”, which is now on the net.

In a message dated 01/11/2012 20:04:04 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Myron,
I’ve gone ahead and posted the news announcement I sent you yesterday. See here
http://principia-scientific.org/index.php/latest-news/
Please let me know if there any corrections you feel are necessary. Also, we would like to add a photo of your good self to accompany that of Tim Ball. I’ve checked Google images and there are a few there but very small. If it’s no trouble to you and you have one to hand, would you please forward me a photo that you feel is suitable?
Thanks
John
http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com
=================== 

Entry posted November 2, 2012 at 8:11 am



Legal Measures against Turbines


This is very helpful as usual. In view of the compliance initiative, violation of the European Convention on Human Rights has become a solid basis for filing an injunction against the Betws development based on a detailed development of the attached statement of claim. The statute of limitations is no longer a problem. Betws violates human rights, conservation laws, environmental laws and is a direct assault on democracy, in that a very large majority against of written objections was ignored. So under Section 41 of the Commons Act of 2006 an injunction can be filed to seek its demolition, and similarly for the demolition of all turbines sites forced through against a large local opposition. Section 41 states that illegal works on commonland can be demolished by court order. The Welsh ministers are overruled by compliance under the Aarhus Accord. If Betws is demolished or stopped it would set a precedent for a moratorium on all mainland turbine development. Turbines are known to be useless so their demolition would leave the way for a stable, gas fired, grid across Europe. Section 38 of the 2006 Commons Act forbids all works on commonland without ministerial consent. Ministerial consent can no longer be given against a very large local majority against, because that would be a violation of human rights under the Aarhus Accord. The European human rights court has been made more accessible under the Swords initiative. It used to be that all legal processes inside a member state had to be exhausted before a filing could be made in the European court. That of course is prohibitively expensive for all but the very wealthy. So an injunction can be sought to prevent Mynydd y Gwair under Section 38 of the 2006 Commons Act. In plain language no one wants our landscape to be obliterated so that the Duke of Beaufort can get even richer. Swansea Council recently had to pay him 270,000 pounds for ancient fishing rights that were suddenly discovered when a bridge was built across the Tawe. The Council meekly caved in, but should have fought him to the European court.


In a message dated 01/11/2012 18:19:33 GMT Standard Time, writes:
Mark,
Many thanks! I’ve added them to my records. Had a great phone chat with Prof Evans and we will work together on strategy. There is much detail for me to get my teeth into so will put together a document to brief legal counsel. I can see I will need to acquire the services of a welsh barrister to work pro bono. Will check my contacts to see if we can find someone. Will be in touch soon.

Best
John

http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com

===================

Entry posted November 1, 2012 at 8:15 am 

Call for Local Referenda on Wind Turbines


Croeso i bawb, welcome to all! In view of the strength of feeling against turbines on Mynydd y Gwair and Betws I call for a local referendum and demand that the Welsh Ministers do not over rule a 95% opposition. I call for a halt to the Betws development and an immediate enquiry into irregularites. I urge Swansea Councils to throw out Mynydd y Gwair on the grounds of the Swords initiative across Europe and on the grounds of the Hemsby precedent in High Court. Any party that betrays the unanimous voice of the People is destined for oblivion.
In a message dated 31/10/2012 14:16:10 GMT Standard Time, writes:
Mark,
Yes, please do feed us all such information. I see the initiative Professor Evans is leading in Wales as a great vehicle for us in that there is such passion in the local community. Having lived and worked in the Port Talbot and Swansea areas I have seen far more placards protesting wind farms in Wales than I’ve anywhere in my travels around the UK. Wales is especially being blighted by these monstrosities as central govt has seen it as a soft touch in such matters.Many thanks,John
http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com
==================

Entry posted November 1, 2012 at 8:08 am

Coordinating anti Turbine Groups in Wales

This would be very important in my opinion, and glad to make the acquaintance of Pat Swords. I feel that all turbine development in Wales should be halted.

In a message dated 31/10/2012 13:05:59 GMT Standard Time, writes:

John,

Thank you for telling me of your plan. I congratulate you and welcome this initiative.
If I can be of help in contacting other Welsh groups that are not part of your list,
and perhaps convince some to join, I will gladly oblige.

Best regards

Mark

Mark Duchamp +34 693 643 736
Executive Director, EPAW
www.epaw.org
President, Save the Eagles International
www.savetheeaglesinternational.org
Chairman, World Council for Nature
www.wcfn.org

On 31 October 2012 11:53, JOHN OSULLIVAN wrote:

Mark,
Thank you for your timely contribution to this thread. I salute your commendable and productive efforts to date. EPAW’s initiative with Pat Swords in seeking to compel an Internal Review of the EU’s energy plan seems the best way forward on a national scale.

With the strength of feeling in South Wales on this issue it looks to me as if we can readily form a very broad consensus group to progress matters here. Indeed, it is now incumbent upon Swansea City and County Councils, Neath Port Talbot Borough Council and others to meet with us so we can draw up a mutually agreeable plan of action. In that way the legal costs, in full or in part, may be mitigated.

I believe local authorities will now see they have a golden opportunity to show leadership in this respect being that the EU, via UNECE, has already conceded the illegality of wind farm development as per their admitted breach of the Aarhus Convention. As such all local authorities, as per the due diligence requirement, must now ascertain for themselves their own immediate legal responsibilities.

At minimum, and at no cost to itself, Swansea City Council and County Councils could ameliorate local concern by making a press announcement that it recognizes the gravity of this issue and that it will undertake to meet with representatives of all sides to consider a plan of action. That will send a signal to the UK national government. To my mind, everyone has a stake here in seeing that this issue is now raised in Parliament before we all incur unnecessary and avoidable legal expense and further waste of resources. Clearly, it is for central government to sort out the legal mess it has fostered, not regional and local authorities or grassroots communities and advocates.

As such, there is a golden opportunity for all the aforementioned authorities and interest groups to unite with us and lobby at ministerial level. It is a win-win situation for all on this thread and I urge everyone to recognize this as the obvious and most expedient approach.

For my part, I have committed myself to assist Professor Evans. If anyone on this list is interested in meeting personally at a venue to be agreed in the Swansea area for direct consultation, I’m available for any mutually agreeable date in the latter half of November.
Truly,

John O’Sullivan LLB, BA Hon. PGCE
...., NR31 9UN
Tel: 0787 ... ....

Coordinator, Principia Scientific International
======================== 

Entry posted November 1, 2012 at 8:03 am



Legal Challenge to Turbines in Europe




Executive Director, EPAW


President, Save the Eagles International


Chairman, World Council for Nature


Many thanks for your draft. I have given it careful review.

<!–[if

!supportEmptyParas]–> <!–[endif]–>

As such, it is a requirement under the Convention that the EU must apply those principles as adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro. In a nutshell all EU States must properly reassess their National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAP).

<!–[if

!supportEmptyParas]–> <!–[endif]–>

Pat Swords, author of the successful complaint to the UN that the EU now agrees it must apply, advises: “the Compliance Committee has shown that the EU’s renewable energy programme is proceeding without ‘proper authority’.” Currently, the EU has about 60,000 wind turbines and related infrastructure, which have cost some €180 billion.

<!–[if

!supportEmptyParas]–> <!–[endif]–>

I concur with Pat Swords that the EU and its 27 Member States must be suspend all further wind farm development until the conclusion of consultation as stipulated in the ruling. I have advised the Devon community I’m assisting in this matter and they are instructing their legal counsel accordingly. Among PSI there are only two of us qualified in law, myself and Alberto Miatello in Italy. I’m adding Alberto’s email for convenience so he may make use of all such evidence as he sees fit in his home country.

Best,

John

Good to hear from Mark Duchamp, with whom I have been corresponding for some years during a fifteen year battle against Betws and Mynydd y Gwair. The full horrors of the Betws development are apparent to the apathetic. There is no significant global warming, it is not caused by carbon dioxide, and the Westminster Government has just done a delta function U turn, switching to gas fired power stations. So I call for a moratorium on wind turbine construction and a local referendum on Mynydd y Gwair and Betws, with powers of demolition. Compensation to the order of billions for environmental damage can be sought from the wind turbine companies.
In a message dated 31/10/2012 03:20:28 GMT Standard Time, writes:
Dear all,
It is also useful to know that EPAW – www.epaw.org – with the help of Pat Swords, has lodged a complaint to the European Ombudsman, a petition to the EU Parliament, and recently requested an Internal Review of the EU’s energy plan:
Here is what Pat Swords said about it:
“At an EU level if one was to take legal action against the Directive, then one could put the brakes on the whole 27 Member States.
“… the EU has not complied with its obligations under Aarhus and has made it well nigh impossible for a citizen / citizen group to go after it in the European Court. Generally speaking one would have to go through the national legal routes first. This lack of justice is being challenged by others at the moment. There is also a mechanism under the EU’s Aarhus Regulation (1367/2006), in which (with quite a bit of difficulty) one can go direct into the European Court to challenge the EU Institution directly.
“At the moment this route is being developed, if you see No. 13 below in respect of EPAW’s request for Internal Review:
“This might well in the short to medium period open up an opportunity for EPAW to go in and challenge in the European Court, which is not a complex or expensive Court, just one which is very difficult to get into.”
unquote
When the European Commission rules out the requested Internal Review, an opportunity will appear for a recourse to the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg. EPAW doesn’t have the financial means to hire a lawyer (we have no means, period), so it will be a waste of a unique opportunity to deliver a serious blow to the energy plans of the 27 EU countries.
I am copying Pat Swords into this email.
Best wishes
Mark
Mark Duchamp +34 693 643 736
On 30 October 2012 09:21, wrote:
Many thanks indeed, this is indeed useful information. It is clear that the Swansea County Councils must consult legal advice on this point and throw out Mynydd y Gwair immediately. If the Welsh Ministers attempt to catalyse a crisis of democracy, become loathsome tyrants, and ignore a 95% opposition, they are acting illegally in my opinion on the grounds of UNECE. Betws was driven through against very weak opposition. Monstrous trubines are being built on some of the most beautiful and precious landscape in the whole of Europe. Betws violated many human rights, conservation laws, environmental laws, and ignored an 85% written objection majority. The opposition to Mynydd y Gwair consists of twenty groups, and is polled at 95%. It includes Swansea City and COunty COuncils, and Neath Port TAlbot Borough Council, town councils, community councils, CADW of the Welsh Government, environmental groups, conservationists and many others. What is needed now is the organization of a fund to cover legal costs of filing an injunction against Betws and a national fund to fight wind turbines through the courts. Perhaps a steering committee can be organized and a treasurer elected.
In a message dated 29/10/2012 18:06:44 GMT Standard Time, writes:
Professor Evans,
I note that you have not included in your legal argument any reference to the astonishing new ruling by the Compliance Committee of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Perhaps you’ve not been advised of it yet. I strongly urge that you amend your proposed statement of claim to include reference to this potential game changing decision made last Summer. In it UNECE decided it was incumbent on all member EU states to enforce the Aarhus Convention. This gives additional weight to your human rights arguments and need for governments to apply due process (which they patently haven’t!).
I hope that helps.
www.slayingtheskydragon.com
================== 

Entry posted November 1, 2012 at 7:41 am

Cooperation between Principia and AIAS

Many thanks for these kind remarks. As you see I am posting all these mailings on the www.aias.us blog, which reaches one hundred and forty three countries.

In a message dated 30/10/2012 12:43:30 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Joe,
I see you are very taken by the work Professor Evans. I agree, it quite simply “blows your socks” off. Professor Evans invites us to use any material on www.aias.us that may help the cause for both PSI and AIAS. In line with our groundbreaking new paper by Joe Postma debunking the GHE (link below) we have a fantastic opportunity to perform mutually beneficial work to ensure that the findings of Postma and Evans reach the widest possible audience. Let’s all work together to unseat the discredit science elite that has actively sought to be gatekeepers to such advances.
I have no doubt that Professor Evans and his many colleagues at AIAS will reciprocate as we all care deeply about truth and integrity in science. It is important that we spread the word: http://principia-scientific.org/publications/Absence_Measureable_Greenhouse_Effect.pdf

Many thanks,
John

http://www.slayingtheskydragon.com
============

Entry posted November 1, 2012 at 7:41 am

Legal Challenge to Betws and Mynydd y Gwair

Many thanks indeed,you are welcome here any time. This is a great help those who see Betws being destroyed before their eyes. As you know the word comes from the Latin “beatus”, which means “blessed”, and was a significant site of the early Celtic or insular Christianity which reached its highest peak of civilization with the Book of Kells, Leabhar Cheanannais. Thanks also for your kind comments on my blog. It is very interesting to see that a Nobel Prize claim for global warming has been withdrawn. Those intellectuals of up to two thousand years ago would have recognized the face of barbarism. Among them was my distant ancestor, Dewi Sant, St. David, who was also descended from Prince Brychan (or Bruachan) Brycheinog.

In a message dated 30/10/2012 10:51:03 GMT Standard Time, writes:

I would like to be involved further in this to help set up a legal challenge to compel Swansea City Council to throw out Mynydd y Gwair. Because we now have this new EU ruling upholding the UN’s Aarhuus Convection requirements on public consultation, we have compelling ammunition to mount such a legal challenge to prevail upon Welsh Ministers, Swansea City Council and County Councils as well as Neath Port Talbot Borough Council in the courts. We can demonstrate unequivocally that Betws not only violated many human rights but were facilitated in that by equally unlawful conduct by UK and Welsh government authorities. I will make it a priority to visit with you in person to discuss plans for this.

John O’Sullivan LLB, BA Hon. PGCE
Coordinator, Principia Scientific International
http://principia-scientific.org/
...., NR31 9UN

Sent: Tuesday, 30 October 2012, 8:21
Subject: Compliance Committee of the United Nations: Betws and Mynydd y Gwair are Illegal

Many thanks indeed, this is indeed useful information. It is clear that the Swansea County Councils must consult legal advice on this point and throw out Mynydd y Gwair immediately. If the Welsh Ministers attempt to catalyse a crisis of democracy, become loathsome tyrants, and ignore a 95% opposition, they are acting illegally in my opinion on the grounds of UNECE. Betws was driven through against very weak opposition. Monstrous trubines are being built on some of the most beautiful and precious landscape in the whole of Europe. Betws violated many human rights, conservation laws, environmental laws, and ignored an 85% written objection majority. The opposition to Mynydd y Gwair consists of twenty groups, and is polled at 95%. It includes Swansea City and COunty COuncils, and Neath Port TAlbot Borough Council, town councils, community councils, CADW of the Welsh Government, environmental groups, conservationists and many others. What is needed now is the organization of a fund to cover legal costs of filing an injunction against Betws and a national fund to fight wind turbines through the courts. Perhaps a steering committee can be organized and a treasurer elected.

In a message dated 29/10/2012 18:06:44 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Professor Evans,
Many thanks for your draft. I have given it careful review.

I note that you have not included in your legal argument any reference to the astonishing new ruling by the Compliance Committee of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Perhaps you’ve not been advised of it yet. I strongly urge that you amend your proposed statement of claim to include reference to this potential game changing decision made last Summer. In it UNECE decided it was incumbent on all member EU states to enforce the Aarhus Convention. This gives additional weight to your human rights arguments and need for governments to apply due process (which they patently haven’t!).
...
As such, it is a requirement under the Convention that the EU must apply those principles as adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro. In a nutshell all EU States must properly reassess their National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAP).
...
Pat Swords, author of the successful complaint to the UN that the EU now agrees it must apply, advises: “the Compliance Committee has shown that the EU’s renewable energy programme is proceeding without ‘proper authority’.” Currently, the EU has about 60,000 wind turbines and related infrastructure, which have cost some €180 billion.
...
I concur with Pat Swords that the EU and its 27 Member States must be suspend all further wind farm development until the conclusion of consultation as stipulated in the ruling. I have advised the Devon community I’m assisting in this matter and they are instructing their legal counsel accordingly. Among PSI there are only two of us qualified in law, myself and Alberto Miatello in Italy. I’m adding Alberto’s email for convenience so he may make use of all such evidence as he sees fit in his home country.

I hope that helps.
Best,
John
================= 

This entry was posted on October 30, 2012 at 9:11 am

FOR POSTING : “Against Global Warming”, a new essay by Robert Cheshire.

This is a brilliant new essay by Robert Cheshire and I am forwarding it to Dave Burleigh for posting in the essay section of www.aias.us and simultaneously posting it on the blog. It inverts “Dogma” to give “Amgod”, a suitable summary of some of those among us who walk on immense pylons and flail their arms like the demented. Also forwarding to the entire Principia group.

In a message dated 29/10/2012 18:06:44 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Professor Evans,
Many thanks for your draft. I have given it careful review.

I note that you have not included in your legal argument any reference to the astonishing new ruling by the Compliance Committee of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). Perhaps you’ve not been advised of it yet. I strongly urge that you amend your proposed statement of claim to include reference to this potential game changing decision made last Summer. In it UNECE decided it was incumbent on all member EU states to enforce the Aarhus Convention. This gives additional weight to your human rights arguments and need for governments to apply due process (which they patently haven’t!).
....
As such, it is a requirement under the Convention that the EU must apply those principles as adopted at the 1992 Earth Summit held in Rio de Janeiro. In a nutshell all EU States must properly reassess their National Renewable Energy Action Plans (NREAP).
....
Pat Swords, author of the successful complaint to the UN that the EU now agrees it must apply, advises: “the Compliance Committee has shown that the EU’s renewable energy programme is proceeding without ‘proper authority’.” Currently, the EU has about 60,000 wind turbines and related infrastructure, which have cost some €180 billion.
....
I concur with Pat Swords that the EU and its 27 Member States must be suspend all further wind farm development until the conclusion of consultation as stipulated in the ruling. I have advised the Devon community I’m assisting in this matter and they are instructing their legal counsel accordingly. Among PSI there are only two of us qualified in law, myself and Alberto Miatello in Italy. I’m adding Alberto’s email for convenience so he may make use of all such evidence as he sees fit in his home country.

I hope that helps.
Best,
John
============ 

Entry posted October 29, 2012 at 4:37 pm

Principia Scientific International

It is a pleasure to meet your colleagues. I attach a list of AIAS Fellows and others in “Marquis Who’s Who”. The AIAS Fellows are numbers one to fourteen. The other AIAS Fellows here are also well known. The others on my mailing list are not all scientists, but may be interested in joining if your rules allow. SOCME for example is the organization that fights the Mynydd y Gwair proposal, and Sia^n Ifan and Gethin ap Gruffudd are from Llys Genhedlaeth (Embassy) Owain Glyndw^r. They have been very active in fighting the Betws development, and in general do great work throughout Wales. The others here are not scientists, so probably cannot join. I think that the safest thing is to begin by adding the fourteen AIAS Fellows listed in Marquis. Others may like to join later. The ECE websites are currently generating 1.7 million hits a year. Since April 30th 2004 I have filtered out the visits from the sector I call universities, institutes and similar, and that is attached, showing unprecedented interest in ECE and by implication, rejection of the standard model of physics. I feel that there is a need to establish an anti turbine majority in Europe as soon as possible, one that would try to implement Section 41 of the 2006 Commonland Act in Britain and aim to demolish illegal turbine sites, or those forced through against large opposing local majorities. It would also seek to prevent more turbine developments using Section 38.

In a message dated 29/10/2012 12:36:46 GMT Standard Time, writes:

Dear Professor Evans,
This is excellent news. Welcome to the Principia Scientific International (PSI) team! I can confirm that my organization would be most happy to be of immediate assistance to you and your AIAS Fellows in your related endeavours. The legal avenue you propose looks like it may prove fruitful and I will garner more from material on your site at www.aias.us. I’m sure my colleagues will be just as intrigued as me to study this further. On the science side of the battle please allow me to introduce to you and your colleagues a welcome new development.
...
PSI has now published our definitive refutation of the so-called greenhouse gas theory, the basis of all scientific claims for reducing CO2 emissions that foists on us tax-hungry and ill-thought out “renewable” boondoggles. The paper is fresh off the press and we will be eagerly promoting it and inviting further critical evaluation throughout the scientific community (not just among a self-serving clique of climatologists). Several experts in thermodynamics have peer-reviewed the work and affirm that it proves in great detail that the calculations used by government climatologists to advocate restrictions of CO2 emissions are based on misinterpretations of data and scientific laws (see Page 51 of the document for the short summary). Our chair, Dr Tim Ball is currently engaged, as are other team members, in private discussions with leading climatologists, Dr. Richard Lindzen and Dr. Roy Spencer, on the implications of this new paper.
...
The paper may be found online at:
http://principia-scientific.org/publications/Absence_Measureable_Greenhouse_Effect.pdf
...
It will be my great pleasure to announce on our website your addition to the team. Unless I hear from you otherwise, I will take the liberty of adding a short bio for you on our select members page. For sure there is much we can achieve together that would never be accomplished separately. As such, we certainly welcome further new members by your recommendation herein and we relish the opportunity to forge productive ties with AIAS. Certainly all on your c.c list are cordially invited to apply to join. An email directly to me or via our website will suffice. For more information about us please visit the ‘Policies’ and ‘About’ sections at our website. I will email again in due course to agree a mutually convenient time and date for our phone discussion/meeting. I am also taking the liberty of adding to your c.c. list selected email addresses of some of my senior colleagues so as to facilitate further dialogue among us.
...
Truly,
John O’Sullivan LLB, BA Hon. PGCE
Coordinator, Principia Scientific International
http://principia-scientific.org/
...., NR31 9UN
Tel:0787....
==============

Entry posted October 29, 2012 at 6:58 am

Principia Scientific International

This is a very interesting development, I will be pleased to accept your kind offer and join Principia Scientific International – much appreciated. If there is mutual interest I can also recommend one or two AIAS Fellows. I will be pleased to meet or phone at your convenience. We are in the process of organizing a meeting here at home in Craig Cefn Parc or in Aberystwyth on the new low energy nuclear reactors, which are a promising source of energy, and also the Alex Hill spacetime devices (www.et3m.net, www.upitec.org, www.atomicprecision.com). I am also interested in applying for an injunction in Court to have the Betws wind turbine development demolished under Section 41 of the 2006 Commonland Act, on the grounds that it violates human rights and numerous other grounds. Section 41 asserts that illegal works on commonland must be demolished. I cannot do this alone however, because I am not entitled to legal aid. I discussed this with Alex Lord Carlisle Q. C. at the House of Lords and he advised that my proposal was ingenious. As you may know he is the leader of a national anti wind turbine platform in the Lords. However he thinks it would be a tough legal fight and his fees are of course prohibitive. He thinks that the government might try to enact new legislation to prevent demolition, but the government cannot defy the law. If it were won however it would lead to a precedent for court orders to demolish wind turbines. Similarly the Mynydd y Gwair proposal is opposed furiously by 95% of the local electorate, and in that case an injunction to prohibit the development taken out under Section 38 of the 2006 Act, which prohibits all works on commonland without ministerial consent as you know. In this case SOCME advises me that this would be a second line of defence, they wish to exhaust all objection procedures first in so far as I understand. In my opinion the Hemsby High Court precedent means that the Welsh Ministers cannot over-rule a 95% local opposition. Similarly, given the organization and the political will, the Pen y Cymoedd propsals could be fought to the House of Lords and European Human Rights Court.
Please feel free to use any material on www.aias.us and its blog that may help the cause.
=====================

Entry posted October 28, 2012 at 10:58 am


Carbon Dioxide does not Cause Global Warming
This is well known to real scientists, one very good summary is found on

The Westminster government has quietly dropped the entire global warming propaganda and plans more gas fired power stations, so there is no longer any need for wind turbines at all. The truth is that warming of the climate CAUSES higher carbon dioxide concentrations, not the other way around. In the geological past, e.g. 500 million years ago, carbon dioxide concentrations were twenty times higher than today (www.earthguide.ucsd.edu) without any catastrophic rise in temperature. There is no correlation between carbon dioxide concentration and global surface temperature. The atmosphere is not a greenhouse, it allows free flow of air, while a greenhouse is an enclosed space. There have been fraud, data laundering and misrepresentation by senior scientists and others. These must be prevented from having any further influence on society. They have already caused tremendous economic and environmental damage and are intellectually dishonest in the extreme. On 13th October this year the Daily Mail reported Met Office data showing that temperatures for the past fifteen years have been stable. This was based on data very quietly released by the Met Office, because it contradicts their scaremongering. The Met Office immediately asserted that the data, which show no warming, show warming after all, but in the future. This is a disgraceful farce. NASA data have shown recently that there is currently a dramatic cooling of the very high atmosphere due to a decrease in the sun’s activity. Climate changes in the past have been 10 to 20 times more severe than in the past century, and have occurred in as little as twenty years. The human race cannot do anything about that at all. Climate is always changing. So wind turbines were bred from scaremongering, and are useless and horribly destructive to landscape. They threaten the very basis of democracy. Finally, countries such have China have ignored the Kyoto accord and have poured sulphur dioxide into the atmosphere from coal burning (rubbishy coal, not anthracite as we have here in Wales). That has had the effect of grotesque pollution, and cooling the atmosphere with volumes of filthy smoke. So China should face condemnation from the rest of the world and people should not buy Chinese products.
=================== 

Entry posted October 28, 2012 at 8:45 am

The Economic Disaster of Wind Turbines

By googling around this becomes very obvious. For example, Obamanomics in the US has run up trillions of dollars in debt and lost ten thousand wind jobs because of outsourcing to other countries. The article in “American Thinker” (www.americanthinker.com) of Sept. 4th 2012 is among the best I have seen. It shows that after thirty years of development in California, over fourteen thousand turbines have been abandoned, they just spin as industrial junk, producing nothing, killing rare wildlife. Wind produces only 2.3% of CA’s energy needs after thirty years of development. Europe is dropping subsidies, resulting in catastrophic job losses and rises in sovereign debt, especially in Spain, Greece and Portugal, three bankrupt countries where people are reportedly looking for food in dustbins. After about ten years, the outage times of turbines gradually rise to 100%, i. e. they stop working. In 2009 for example B. P. fired 40,000 people in Spain after the government dropped subsidies by 30%. As I predicted, the wind turbines have to be demolished. The City of Palm Springs for example has enacted an Ordinance to have derelict turbines demolished. Some operators keep the turbines spinning just to keep oil flowing. They are not actually producing any electricity. Old wind farms cannibalize parts, so only the tower is left, without any blades. Many turbine companies in Europe are going bankrupt, and the new junk turbines flooding in from China are more unreliable than ever. Wind is currently nine times more expensive than gas, and massive new reserves of shale gas are being discovered all the time, enough for hundreds of years ahead. An enormous field of shale gas has been discovered in Britain, with its massive reserves of coal. The windy Scottish bagpipe economy is essentially bankrupt, and Salmonds’ green revolution is showing signs of gangrene. The Scottish landscape is an ugly ruin. What has happened on Betws is that the development has arrived just as subsidies are being dropped. So I predict that in a very few years Betws will be covered with rotting derelict junk, producing nothing. Then Neath Port Talbot Borough Council will be faced with a huge bill for demolition. The wind companies just cut and run and leave the rest of us to clean up their disgusting junk. New legislation must stop turbines, demolish existing wind farms, and make turbine executives personally responsible for debt. Bribed politicians must be exposed mercilessly and expelled from politics and society. Greedy pseudofarmers must be made to pay back their ill gotten subsidies to the government.
====================== 

2.0 Responses from AIAS Members on their PSI Status

Contact with AIAS was first made on 6th November 2012 in response to an article "AN EPIC WEEK OF SUCCESS FOR PSI" on 1st November by John O'Sullivan, "CEO & Legal Consultant" of blogging group Principia Scientific International. John claimed that " .. We’ve seen a sudden and most welcome influx of new members and we are now affiliated with the Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies .. ".

AIAS was asked to advise if that claim of John's was correct and the response from AIAS founder Dr. Myron Wyn Evans to AIAS members and others (62 recipients) was " .. We did our due diligence and decided not to join PSI but act as observers .. ". After it was pointed out to Dr. Evans (Ccd to others including PSI "Chairman" Dr. Tim Ball and "Compliance Officer" Philip Foster) that AIAS members were listed on the PSI web-site as PSI members (http://principia-scientific.org/about/why-psi-is-a-private-assoc.html) he responded on 8th November that " .. I informed Mr. O' Sullivan that the due diligence of PSI had resulted in AIAS deciding not to join it. Obviously, he should remove the names of AIAS colleagues from PSI. .. I have decided that from now on AIAS will not affiliate itself with any other institution. Individual Fellowships are awarded only after  a long assessment time, and to people who are capable and contribute positively  to new science .. ".

On 12th November PSI founding members were reminded of those misleading AIAS/PSI membership claims but still (2013-02-28) the names and bios of AIAS members remain on the list of claimed PSI members. On 23rd Feb. 2013 Victor Riecansky, owner of Cambridge International Science Publishing which publishes AIAS books and a journal, who is listed as a PSI member, was asked about this. On 24th he gave me his permission to say that he is NOT and has never been a member of PSI.


Victor is not the only AIAS member to deny being a member of PSI but there appears to be some reluctance among most AIAS members who have been contacted to make any comment.

For the full context of the extracts quoted in this section see Appendix B "AIAS E-mails about PSI Membership".


3.0 AIAS and other Affiliations

Several of the AIAS members listed as being PSI members (http://principia-scientific.org/about/why-psi-is-a-private-assoc.html) are also listed on the Board (http://www.telesio-galilei.com/tg/index.php/board-and-members) of the Telesio - Galilei Academy of Science, founded in September 2007 by “Francesco Fucilla, Founding Father (Scientist)”. That web-site also shows the 9 Telesio Galilei Academy Gold Medal Winners 2008, among whom are AIAS members “ .. Franklin Amador .. Kerry Pendergast .. Stephen Crothers .. Myron Wyn Evans.. ” (http://www.telesio-galilei.com/tg/index.php/academy-award-2008) all of whom are also listed as being PSI members.

That 2008 awards event was also reported on Dr. Evans’s blog (http://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2008/04/11/santilli-galilei-awards-ceremony-of-the-7708/) and by BBC Wales (http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/mid/sites/abercraf/pages/santilligalilei.shtml). At that time the relationship between Dr. Myron Evans’s AIAS and Francesco Fucilla’s Telesio - Galilei Academy appears to have been one of at least mutual respect. In his 2008 CV (http://www.telesio-galilei.com/tg/images/stories/photos/award2008/Myron_Wyn_Evans_CV.pdf) Dr. Evans mentioned that he was Chairman of the Santilli-Galilei Association and Director and Vice Chairman of Steriwave Plc. as well as his 2008 Santilli-Galilei Gold Medal and Prize for distinguished service to physics.

In February 2008 WalesOnline ran an article "Plan for new Welsh university" which said  " .. A CONTROVERSIAL academic has announced plans to establish his own university in Wales, funded by an oil multi-millionaire living in Florida .. Myron Evans, a doctor of chemistry living at Craigcefnparc near Swansea, has issued invitations to a launch event for the Myron Evans University, to be held at Craig-y-Nos Castle, near Ystradgynlais, Powys, in July .. The benefactor, Francesco Fucilla .. ” (http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/2008/02/26/plan-for-new-welsh-university-91466-20523036/).

The Evans-Fucilla relationship appears to have taken a turn for the worse in 2009. The “Francesco Fucilla  Satires” web-site includes a page of allegations “About Mr Myron Evans. Deliberated criminal campaign against Francesco Fucilla, his Family, Fellow Directors, Friends and Shareholders” (http://www.francesco-fucilla-satires.com/FFSatires_05-08-12/Statement_By_Prof_of_Profs/About%20Mr%20Myron%20Evans.pdf) which alleges attacks by Dr. Evans on Francesco Fucilla’s “ .. Family, Fellow Directors and Companies etc .. triggered when in 2009 we dismissed Mr Evans from Steriwave, Global energy and the Telesio Galilei Academy .. ”.

An article “The Reasons for the Attacks by Mr Myron Evans Against Professor Francesco Fucilla” provides some details behind those allegations QUOTE: ..

The attacks on Steriwave, Francesco Fucilla and Family started in 2009 soon after I proposed the appointment of Prof Rodrigues JR (The man that proved beyond doubts that Myron Evans kindergarten physics and mathematics was completely wrong) to the Chairmanship of Telesio Galilei Academy and Steriwave.

Prof Waldyr Alves Rodrigues JR, is a world leading Mathematician and Physicists, whose work has ridiculed the work of Mr Evans and the Alpha Institute of Advanced Studies of Mr Evans. See the case history documented and click on this link http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Einstein%E2%80%93Cartan%E2%80%93Evans_theory

I appointed Prof Rodrigues to replace Mr Evans, when in 2010 I personally got to realise that Mr Evans and the Alpha Institute of Kindergarten Studies were all incompetent physicists and mathematicians, exactly as stated by Prof Rodrigues Mignani, and many other leading scientists, that laugh at the nonsense he and his aias members publish daily .. UNQUOTE.

This apparent conflict between Evans and Fucilla looks to have embraced other groups of individuals, including the "Quantum Future Group" and the "Fellowship of the Cosmic Mind" (http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php). There are some interesting comments on the Caseopen Forum  web-site  (http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?topic=27261.60) and on the "Francesco Fucilla Satires" pages (http://www.francesco-fucilla-satires.com/FFSatires_05-08-12/F_Fucilla_The_Truth.html).

TO BE UPDATED
meanwhile see:
- http://www.francesco-fucilla-satires.com/
- http://www.worldsci.org/php/index.php?tab0=Scientists&tab1=Display&id=1165


Appendix A Recent E-mails with AIAS "fellows", John O'Sullivan and Others

NB: Dr. Myron Evans, founder and "President" of AIAS, has also posted several of these exchanges and related ones on his own blog (e.g. see http://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2014/09/27/peter-who/http://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2014/09/28/ignorance-of-torsion/ and http://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2014/09/28/ridley-is-a-known-cyberstalker/.
================== 

From: Pete Ridley ...
To: editors st Trans Tech Publications ...CC: d.j.fisher ....Sent: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 11:25Subject: Drs. David J Fisher and Myron W Evans


Hi ...,

As you know, I E-mailed Dr. Fisher as you suggested but I have had no response from that E-mail address either. As I mentioned previously, I wish to contact Dr. Fisher regarding exchanges that I have had with Dr. Evans and "fellows" of Dr. Evans's Alpha Foundation of Advanced Studies (AIAS). I have posted those exchanges in Appendix A of my blog article "PSI and AIAS Affiliation" (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/psi-and-aias-affiliation.html) which also discusses the review of a Dr. David J Fisher about whom I have said QUOTE: .. 

Not everyone is impressed by Dr. Evans’s receipt of a Civil List Pension. Dr. David J Fisher, a member of the editorial board of the “Defect and Diffusion Forum” periodical published by Trans Tech Publications (http://www.scientific.net/DDF) reviewed the "The Life of Myron Evans: A Journey Through Space and Time" (published in March 2011) by AIAS member Kerry Pendergast. and in his review "Crackpot Well on His Way to Becoming a Conman" commented perhaps unkindly " .. Not to put too fine a point on it: the only scientist currently receiving a Civil List Pension is a downright crackpot .. " (http://www.amazon.com/The-Life-Myron-Evans-Journey/product-reviews/1907343407).
It appears that Dr. Fisher is taking a renewed interest in living scientists who are currently recipients of a Civil List Pension. On 18th July 2014 he submitted a FOI request to “ .. Dear Cabinet Office, in connection with a biographical guide to famous British scientists which I am preparing, could you please supply details (proposers, seconders, ministerial involvement, etc.) of Civil List Pensions awarded to still-living scientists. Yours faithfully, Dr D. John Fisher” (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/civil_list_pension#incoming-550094). Maybe Dr. Fisher will respond with an update about this.
UNQUOTE.

It is possible that I have made a mistaken connection between the author of that review and the David J Fisher of Cardiff, Wales who does editorial work for Trans Tech Publications which is why I am trying to contact the latter. There is another David J Fisher, member of the Institute of Physics (http://iopscience.iop.org/0031-9120/32/2/012/pdf/pe72l1.pdf), who also lives in Cardiff, which is just a short journey from Dr. Evans's home near Swansea who may also have been the reviewer of Dr. Evans's life story. I have no wish to mislead anyone so am trying to establish whether or not those three David J Fisher are one and the same.
"The Life of Myron Evans ... ", written by AIAS "fellow" Kerry Pendergast, attracted two different reviews by David J Fisher, "Tilting at Windmills" on 8th Dec 2011 (http://www.amazon.co.uk/review/R3FJPOU9YXXXHO) and "Crackpot Well on His Way to Becoming a Conman" on 24th February 2012 (http://www.amazon.com/ss/customer-reviews/1907343407/ref=?_encoding=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0)Dr. Evans commented on the former saying " .. So the person who posted the malicious Amazon attack on Kerry Pendergast is probably David Fischer of the functional genome centre in the University of Zurich .. " (http://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2012/07/15/criticism-of-peter-atkins-and-david-fischer/) which appears to be incorrect.

I was hoping that the David J Fisher who does editing for Trans Tech and the Davif J Fisher who posted those reviews would be prepared to help clear up this uncertainty but neither seem to be willing to help. Reviewer Dr. David J Evans did respond to a comment of mine following his "Crackpot .. Conman" review in which I drew his attention to my blog article but he refrained from making any mention of it, which I interpret as suggesting that he is an editor for Trans Tech.
Can/would Trans Tech Publications kindly shed some light on this (and perhaps also on the blog "Crackpotwatch" which appears devoted to ridiculing Dr. Evans and his AIAS "fellows" - http://crackpotwatch.wordpress.com/2014/09/27/losing-your-memory-ron/ and http://crackpotwatch.wordpress.com/2014/09/23/we-cannot-wait/)?

Best regards, Pete Ridley

NB: This E-mail relates to a 24th February 2012 review of the book "The Life of Myron Evans: A Journey Through Space and Time" authored by AIAS "fellow" Kerry Prendegast. The review "Crackpot Well on His Way to Becoming a Conman" was written by one Dr. David J Fisher  (http://www.amazon.com/ss/customer-reviews/1907343407/ref=?_encoding=UTF8&*Version*=1&*entries*=0) 

==================== 

From: Emyrone ...
To: johnosullivanpsi ...
CC: Stephen Crothers...; peterridley...; Klaus Witzel...; Axel Westrenius...; fdamador...; raydela...; d.fisher... 
Sent: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 7:42
Subject: Malicious Inuendo

I agree, recently the South Wales police issued such a no contact order against an assailant that had committed a vicious verbal common assault against me. The order if broken means prosecution under the 1997 Prevention of Harassment Act. I have blocked both Ridley and Fisher. The latter also has a record of harassment, he is associated with the troll "Aaron Vee" and a hate blog. The Police Commissioner for Wales, Rt. Hon. Alun Michael, advised me that trolls committing common assault are liable to prosecution. They have issued death threats against me, and a variety of other threats, which may be used in evidence against them.  
================== 

From: John OSullivan ...
To: Emyrone...
CC: Stephen Crothers...; Pete Ridley...; Klaus Witzel...; Axel Westrenius...; Franklin Amador...; raydela...; d.fisher...
Sent: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 6:59
Subject: Re: No Cantact order

I would also support any such police complaint. Ridley has no interest in discussing science, only harassing and defaming those individuals his sick mind obsesses over. He probably should be sectioned under the mental health Act.

John O'Sullivan
CEO: Principia Scientific International  http://principia-scientific.org/
.....
=================== 

From: Emyrone...
To: Stephen Crothers...; peterridley...; Klaus Witzel...; Axel Westrenius...; fdamador...; raydela...; johnosullivanpsi...
CC: d.fisher...
Sent: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 6:22
Subject: No Cantact order

If Ridley and Fisher continue to harass the police can be asked to issue a no contact order under the Prevention of Harassment Act 1997.
=================== 

From: Stephen Crothers...
To: Pete Ridley...; Emyrone...; .Klaus Witzel...; Axel Westrenius...; rbarnard...; fdamador...; raydela...; johnosullivanpsi...
CC: d.fisher...
Sent: Wed, 1 Oct 2014 6:07
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Peter Ridley,

Your emails have nothing to do with science, only your personal vandetta. You are wasting everybody's time with your drivel. 

Stephen J. Crothers.
=============== 

From: Emyrone...
To: peterridley...; Stephen Crothers...; Klaus Witzel...; Axel Westrenius...; fdamador...; raydela...; johnosullivanpsi...
CC: d.fisher...
Sent: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 20:08
Subject: Do nto send further e mail

Ridley, do not send me e mail. This is the second request. I have blocked you electronically. This e mail from you is evidence of first degree harassment. repeat do not send me e mails. If you do you will be reported to the police. Similarly for Fisher. We no know that Fisher has no credentials in general relativity and recently his remarks were removed from public view. In my opinion Ridley and Fisher are harassers and anything they may write may be used in evidence against them.
================= 

From: Pete Ridley...
To: Emyrone...; Stephen Crothers...; Klaus Witzel...; Axel Westrenius...; rbarnard...; fdamador...; raydela...; johnosullivanpsi...
CC: d.fisher...
Sent: Tue, 30 Sep 2014 19:30
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

ATTACHMENT: E_mails_with_Crothers_AIAS_members_-_less_PandC.doc

NB: Once again I have removed Andrzej Krasinski ... from the circulation, following his request on 24 Sept. I have also added Dr. David J Fisher who I mention in my response, in the hope that he can enlighten us on his FOI request concerning the Civil List Pensions. 

Several contributors to this thread of E-mail exchanges (WORD version attached but with P&C one-to-one exchanges between Stephen Crothers and me removed) seem to have become increasingly excited since Mr Crothers’ original unsolicited E-mail of 15 Sep 2014 5:58 on the Subject of “G. 't Hooft, Nobel Laureate, and General Relativity”. I think that it is worthwhile responding to parts of what some individuals have been saying, starting with Dr. Evans.

Dr. Evans’s initial self-promoting E-mail of 27th Sept. (see Appendix A) included “Peter Who? .. No e mailing to me Mr Ridley .. I have never heard of you, Ridley .. Why does he attack me behind my back? .. ”.
Let me take Dr. Evans back a couple of years to John O’Sullivan’s proud announcement in his PSI blog article “AN EPIC WEEK OF SUCCESS FOR PSI” on 1st November 2012 that “ .. we are now affiliated with the Alpha Institute for Advanced Studies. No less than fourteen of our new members appear in 'Who's Who,’ with the most notable figure among them being Welshman Professor Myron Evans, a Nobel Science Prize nominee .. ” (http://www.principia-scientific.org/an-epic-week-of-success-for-psi.html). Let me remind Dr. Evans of the exchanges that took place between us during 6th – 8th Nov. 2012.

Those E-mail exchanges followed his blog entry of November 2, 2012 saying “ .. I have updated my CV to mention the honour of appointment to Principia .. ” (my bold because, although I can understand someone feeling honoured to be awarded a Civil List Pension or raised to Armiger, I find it hard to imagine someone being honoured to join the blog of an out-of-work high-school art teacher). This was followed only 5 days later with Dr. Evans’s blog entry of November 7, 2012 “ .. Aftet due diligence AIAS has decided not to join PSI .. ”. Dr. Evans’s 8th Nov. 2012 E-mail included the comment that “ .. Mr. O' Sullivan .. should remove the names of AIAS colleagues from PSI .. ”.

Then there were those E-mail exchanges that Dr. Evans was privy to in Feb. and July of 2013 between AIAS fellows/members and me concerning claims that AIAS members were still being named as members of John O’Sullivan’s PSI blog. Dr. Evans may have forgotten his comment to Ray Delaforce on 9th July 2013 " .. I will have no further contact with Ridley and they should remove all AIAS names .. ". As I said to Ray “ .. I'm rather surprised at Professor Evans's comment .. Maybe he thinks that I am a member of PSI and close associate of John O'Sulivan's, which is way off the mark .. ”.

For the full context of those cherry-picked quotations see my Dec. 2012 article “PSI and AIAS Affiliation” Appendix A “E-mails about PSI Membership” (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/psi-and-aias-affiliation.html).

I leave it to others to decide for themselves if Dr. Evans’s claim to have neither heard of nor had E-mails from Pete Ridley stands up to scrutiny.

As for Dr. Evans’s complaint about me attacking him behind his back, not only did he tell AIAS fellow Ray Delaforce in July 2013 that he would have no further contact with me let me remind him of how he chose in Feb. 2013 to block my E-mails, with the result that  whenever I tried to E-mail him I received the message “ .. Your email could not be delivered because the recipient is only accepting email from specific email addresses .. ”. I see that Dr. Evans has decided to do the same with Dr. Barnard, shying away rather than engage with him in scientific debate!!

Let me also remind Dr. Evan of his E-mail to me of 4th May 2013 which included “ .. Do not send me any further e mail .. ” (see http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/psi-acumen-ltd-due-diligence-selected-e.html). 

Now lets consider some rather strange comments made by Dr. Evans:

1) - “ .. For the record I am employed directly and for life by the Head of State here in Britain, as a Civil List Pensioner .. I am pleased to be employed directly by Queen Elizabeth .. We are distant cousins .. ”.

5 years ago on his blog Dr. Evans claimed “ .. I am employed directly by Queen Elizabeth II as a Civil List Pensioner, formally through a P60 issued by the Treasury in London .. ” (http://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2009/11/14/civil-list-pensioner/). Well, I am a retired Chartered Electrical Engineer, receiving several pensions provided by previous employers, all of which provide me with a P60 but I am NOT employed by them any longer. 

I see that Dr. Evans shares the honour of receiving a Civil List Pension with people like “ .. erotic painter Molly Parkin .. the outrageous author and painter .. ” (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/celebritynews/9277314/Erotic-painter-Molly-Parkin-is-shocked-to-receive-rare-honour-from-the-Queen.html) but I would be most surprised if she has been claiming since May 2012 to be employed directly by Queen Elizabeth.

Apparently “ .. Civil list pensions are personal awards given by Her Majesty the Queen ... The annual cost of civil list pensions paid to 53 people in 2012-13 was £126,293. The average pension is £2,383 .. ” (http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2013-06-17a.158859.h). In its 1907 article “Civil List Pensions” the spectator, discussing the award of Civil List Pensions to the Editor of Punch and others, made the interesting point that “ .. The pensions should be reserved for those who not only have put their art or research above all considerations of money-making, but as a matter of fact have not made money out of it, and so are in necessitous circumstances. The pensions should be given neither for public service alone nor for poverty alone, but for public service combined with poverty .. we find it difficult to think that the selection of Sir Francis Burnand for a pension of £200 can be justified” (http://archive.spectator.co.uk/article/13th-july-1907/8/civil-list-pensions). Of course ideas change over time and 107 years later that £200 is the equivalent of about £21,230 (http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1633409/Historic-inflation-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html) which makes the current level of Civil List Pension look rather derisory by comparison.

Not everyone is impressed by Dr. Evans’s receipt of a Civil List Pension. Dr. David J Fisher, a member of the editorial board of the “Defect and Diffusion Forum” periodical published by Trans Tech Publications (http://www.scientific.net/DDF) reviewed the "The Life of Myron Evans: A Journey Through Space and Time" (published in March 2011) by AIAS member Kerry Pendergast. and in his review "Crackpot Well on His Way to Becoming a Conman" commented perhaps unkindly " .. Not to put too fine a point on it: the only scientist currently receiving a Civil List Pension is a downright crackpot .. " (http://www.amazon.com/The-Life-Myron-Evans-Journey/product-reviews/1907343407).

It appears that Dr. Fisher is taking a renewed interest in living scientists who are currently recipients of a Civil List Pension. On 18th July 2014 he submitted a FOI request to “ .. Dear Cabinet Office, in connection with a biographical guide to famous British scientists which I am preparing, could you please supply details (proposers, seconders, ministerial involvement, etc.) of Civil List Pensions awarded to still-living scientists. Yours faithfully, Dr D. John Fisher” (https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/civil_list_pension#incoming-550094). Maybe Dr. Fisher will respond with an update about this.


2) “ .. the UNCC Saga .. covered up by the scheming .. Ridley .. ”

How Dr. Evans could conclude that I had any power or desire whatsoever to cover up the posts on his own blog about his time as Professor of Physics at the University of Colorado at Charlotte is beyond me, especially taking into consideration that in my E-mail of 26 Sep 2014 I provided direct links to his four relevant “UNCC Saga” posts:
- http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga1.pdf,
- http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga2.pdf,
- http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga3.pdf and
- http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga4.pdf .


3) “ .. The "accusations" at UNCC were .. evil, ludicrous fabrications that enraged the international community. 

Dr. Evans attached to his E-mail an interesting “Selection of reactions” (http://upitec.files.wordpress.com/2014/02/auncccriticisms.pdf) but he failed to include what precisely those individuals were reacting to. Perhaps they had only been privy to Dr. Evans’s view of the ”UNCC Saga”.

4) “ .. So Mr Ridley is still fabricating charges, twenty years later, using my own account of UNCC .. ”

Perhaps Dr. Evans would be kind enough to specify precisely what charges he believes that I have fabricated and where so that I can review what I have said and consider whether or not a retraction or apology are warranted. I have no desire to fabricate or misinterpret anything about anyone. All that I try to do is to identify the facts as best I can and form reasonable opinions based thereon.

5) “ .. After I resigned in utter disgust and contempt for UNCC I felt no need to ask any part of academia for employment because I do not want to go back to academia, it would be a big step backwards .. ”

The question I have is did Dr. Evans choose not to seek employment in academia or had he come to the conclusion that after his employment by UNCC had come to an end in 1995 he might find it difficult to find suitable employment in academia. As he said in his Dec. 1992 letter to “ .. Friends and former Colleagues in Wales .. numerous applications for tenured employment have been turned down or just ignored .. It was made clear to me that I would never be employed in the University of Wales .. Despite my qualifications, the latter is denied to me in the University of Wales .. I appealed many times for employment in the University of Wales, but was refused or ignored .. On many occasions I appealed for gainful employment by Cornell University, but was never interviewed .. I have never been properly interviewed in the University of Wales .. Over these years, numerous reasons have been contrived for denial of interview ..  ” (http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga3.pdf).

Perhaps Dr. Evans would kindly explain how, having resigned from what I understand to have been his one and only full Professor post at an accredited academic institution (UNCC from 1992-1995) it could be considered a “big step backwards” for him to find another full Professor post elsewhere in academia.

6) “ .. Why should I wish to be employed as an academic professor? .. ”

Although I have my opinion, those academic professors at the University of Wales are better placed than I am to give him a satisfactory answer to that question. 

7) “ .. Mr Ridley .. is the arch fabricator of history, the small minded totalitarian with a jackboot on both shoulders .. ”

What else can I say about that bit of nonsense – ‘nuff said!!


Getting back to Dr. Fisher’s remark about that Civil List Pension, he is not the only one to make unkind comments about Dr. Evans, who said in his E-mail of 27th Sept. that “ .. The idea of a ‘Myron Evans University’ was floated by a third party who broke all his promises .. ”. I understand that the third party to be his one-time close associate and supporter Francesco Fucilla (http://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/wales-news/plan-for-new-welsh-university-2198432). Mr (or is it Professor?) Fucilla, "Chevalier De Gaillac", "Founding Father of the Telesio - Galilei Academy of Science" (http://www.telesio-galilei.com/tg/images/stories/documents/Academy_News/telesio%20galilei%20page%20pff%20news.pdf) made some less than complementary comments in his article “About Mr Myron Evans. Deliberated criminal campaign against Francesco Fucilla, his Family, Fellow Directors, Friends and Shareholders” (http://www.francesco-fucilla-satires.com/FFSatires_05-08-12/F_Fucilla_The_Truth/About%20Mr%20Myron%20Evans.pdf).

I wonder if Mr Fucilla is aware of Dr. Evans’s April 16, 2012 post (http://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2012/04/16/false-accusations-by-lilian-gammon/) and the attachment thereto (http://drmyronevans.files.wordpress.com/2012/04/adoctorsletter2.pdf). 

More on the exciting Evans-Fucilla saga can be found in section 3.0 “AIAS and other Affiliations” of my Dec. 2012 article “PSI and AIAS Affiliation”  (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/psi-and-aias-affiliation.html). 


Now let us look at what Stephen Crothers had to say in his E-mail of 28th Sept. “ .. Your remarks about the employment history and academic credentials of Professor Myron W. Evans have nothing whatsoever to do with any scientific issue, and neither do your remarks on Mr. John O’Sullivan and Principia Scientifica International (PSI). That you made such comments attests to your unscientific agenda .. ”. Mr Crothers seems to be eager to change the subject away from “SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd”.

I don’t believe that since I became involved in the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change (CACC) debate in 2007 I have ever claimed that my agenda was a scientific one. My first article in 2007 on the subject of CACC was “Politicization of Climate Change and CO2” (http://nzclimatescience.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=374&Itemid=1), not about the science but about the politics. Also, the name of my blog is “Global Political Shenanigans”. Mr Crothers seems to have overlooked the fact that the subject heading of the vast majority of these 40-or-so E-mail exchanges (excepting the first 4 and one of his on 18th Sept.) has been - SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd”. I would be most surprised if he could find anything from me in this thread of E-mails or anywhere else which suggested that I have a scientific agenda. Let me make it clear to everyone else, I am a layman who DOES NOT HAVE  A SCIENTIFIC AGENDA although I am happy and eager to improve my lay understanding of all relevant science.  

In my initial response to the originating E-mail from Mr Crothers I focussed not on any scientific issue but on the PSI blog of out-of-work high-school art teacher John O’Sullivan, on Dr. Myron Evans’s AIAS and on my blog Global Political Shenanigans.

If Mr Crothers had wanted a scientific discussion then observational astrophysicist Dr. Robin Barnard was up for one with both Mr Crothers and with Dr. Evans. Mr Crothers chose to avoid responding directly to Dr. Barnard’s 12 FACTS and I have to wonder why!!

Lets take a quick look at the E-mail from Klaus Witzel on 26th Sept. I have to admit that I found it very difficult to understand what Klaus was going on about and don’t have any inclination for it to be explained.

As for the PSI blog's "CEO and Legal Consultant" John O’Sullivan’s two contributions on 27th and 28th Sept. - I refer you to my blog Global Political Shenigans, particularly the 7 most popular of my 50 articles:
- http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/curriculum-vitae-for-john-osullivan-2010.html 
- http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/spotlighton-principia-scientific.html 
- http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2013/07/spotlighton-psi-acumen-ltd.html 
- http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/professor-judith-curry-threatened-with.html
- http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/professor-judith-currys-letter-to.html 
- http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/psi-due-diligence-20102011-selected-e.html 
- http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/05/selected-e-mails-with-slayerspsi.html 


On 18th September Dr. Evans’s blog carried a quote from Daniel J. Boorstin “The greatest obstacle to knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge” (http://upitec.wordpress.com/page/5/) – Amen to that!!

Best regards, Pete Ridley
=================

From: John Osullivan...
To: Stephen Crothers...
CC: Pete Ridley...; Axel Westrenius...; rbarnard...; fdamador...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 11:07
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Even Hawking now admits no black holes and the UK national press is waking up to it with the latest publication of the work of Professor Mersini-Houghton:
http://www.principia-scientific.org/black-holes-do-not-exist-and-the-big-bang-theory-is-wrong.html 

All in all, we can say Crothers is being proved correct.

John O'Sullivan
CEO: Principia Scientific International  http://principia-scientific.org/
... 
=================== 

From: Emyrone...
To: Stephen Crothers...; rbarnard...
CC: peterridley...; Axel Westrenius...; fdamador...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 10:45
Subject: Ignorance of Torsion

The most blatant error in black hole theory is neglect of torsion. By now this is well known internationally. The reaction of dogmatists like Barnard is also well known. The general public is well aware that black holes do not exist, and that the funding of physics is being cut severely. I am still waiting for the dogmatists to address proofs one to five on www.aias.us, and the commutator method. Stephen Crothers reduces Barnard's argument to nonsense. All of this is taking place within the context of a blatantly incorrect torsionless theory. That has been refuted many times by ECE theory. The dogmatists immediately resort to ad hominem attacks because they are unable to argue scientifically. If Hawking has admitted that black holes do not exist then funding for this work should cease immediately and an enquiry started into why so much money has been wasted on rubbish physics.       
================== 

From: Stephen Crothers...
To: Emyrone...; rbarnard...
CC: Pete Ridley...; Axel Westrenius...; Franklin Amador...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 9:43
Subject: Re: Peter Who?

Professor Myron W. Evans,

Below is the reply I sent to Barnard via Axel Westrenius. Barnard ignored the facts, of course. He does not even understand escape velocity or the meaning of an asymptotic condition or the invalidity of the Principle of Superposition in General Relativity.

Barnard also falsely attributes to me a theory? What theory is that? I have no theory. Also, contrary to Barnard's plaintive cries, no scientist is obliged to construct a new theory simply because he proves the current dogmas patently false. 

Steve Crothers
________________________________

To
Rbarnard..., Axel Westrenius...,  
CC
Peterridley..., fdamador..., Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...

Dear Axel,

I have been watching but must now step in ( .. etc. etc. etc. – SEE BELOW)
================== 

From: Emyrone...
To: rbarnard...
CC: Stephen Crothers; peterridley...; Axel Westrenius...; fdamador...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 6:30
Subject: BArnard Blocked

I am blocking BaArnard electronically because he knows nothing about Cartan geometry or about my work or credentials. His remarks are typical of an empty headed dogmatist and he is not a scientist. He has lost the argument agoianst Crothers and has lost the argument against geometry. He is unable to refute the commutator theorem so resorts immediately to ad hominem insults without knowing anything about my work. His remarks are an insult to science. All of BArnard's remarks are refuted in great detailo on www.aias.us.
=================== 

From: Barnard, Robin...
To: Emyrone...
CC: Stephen Crothers...; Pete Ridley...; Axel Westrenius...; Franklin Amador...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Sun, 28 Sep 2014 6:20
Subject: Re: Peter Who?

I was hoping to engage in some sort of scientific discourse with Mr Crothers, but he has completely ignored a number of objective facts that do not fit in with his theory, such as the fact that general relativity is demonstrably real, confirmed by observations of stars near the Sun during Solar eclipses; it is also encountered every day by anyone who ever uses a GPS system, since the GPS satellites must correct for relativistic effects in order to properly determine your position. He just says that they are false without offering any alternative explanation.

The new article that hit arxiv this week (but has not been accepted by any journal, or passed peer review) has been subject to intense criticism in the scientific community, as it has large fundamental flaws. Much of the effort in black hole theory attempts to address the so-called "information paradox" that is present in the mathematics, but not a paradox in reality. The idea is that material falling into a black hole could then be ejected by Hawking radiation, but any information about that matter is lost. However, Stellar mass black holes are so massive that the Hawking radiation is essentially zero, less than one particle over the age of the universe. Also, black holes that are small enough to evaporate are too small to accrete material in the first place. Thus the work of Hawking et al. on reconciling this so-called paradox is pretty much pointless.

It seems that to Evans and Crothers, mathematics is something to have faith in, not something to be reasoned over. I am therefore removing myself from further discussion with these people, and will flag any further corespondence as spam.
================== 

From: Emyrone...
To: Stephen Crothers...; peterridley...; Axel Westrenius...
CC: rbarnard...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...; fdamador...
Sent: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 21:26
Subject: No Black Holes

The idea of a "Myron Evans University" was floated by a third party who broke all his promises and wasted the time of many colleagues, so what relevance has that to the action of a commutator of covariant derivatives on any tensor? I took legal action against that third party and was awarded damages out of court. That was four years ago. The commutator gives the torsion and curvature simultaneously and isolates the connection. The latter takes the antisymmetry of the commutator. If the connection is symmetric the commutator vanishes and curvature vanishes. That is enough to refute black hole theory, so this entire dialogue is completely irrelevant to my thinking. This is a protracted argument about the solution of the Einstein field equation, which is a trivially incorrect equation because of its neglect of torsion. I am not interested in the solution of an incorrect equation or in this discussion from some Harvard academic I have never heard of, or some  perpetrator of inuendo. The commutator equation cannot be refuted and the Einstein theory is obsolete. if you are not going to pay attention to a simple refutation then you are not scientists. Ridley quotes the well known fraudster Bruhn who disappeared in 2008. There are no black holes due to neglect of torsion.
=================== 

From: Emyrone...
To: Stephen Crothers...; peterridley...; Axel Westrenius...
CC: rbarnard...; fdamador...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 19:09
Subject: Peter Who?

Peter Who? Ridley's cheap inuendo will not change geometry. No e mailing to me Mr Ridley. I looked you up on google and can find no credentials except kitchen systems for waste caddies. Stephen Crothers has you comprehensively beaten. For the record I am employed directly and for life by the Head of State here in Britain, as a Civil List Pensioner, and doing very well thank you, a member of the Gentry on merit and by descent. For your information the The Head of State of the countries of Britain is Queen Elizabeth II. I earned a Scientiae Doctor (D. Sc.) at the age of 27, which is a distinction higher than full professor (wikipedia no less). I have never heard of you, Ridley, but I do recognize the familiar inuendo and cheap shots. No attempt at scientific argument. This ad hominem method is always used by those who are not competent in their subject area or any other. It has just been admitted this week that black holes do not exist - the British "Daily Mail". What is this Ridley's employment record and who is he? Why does he attack me behind my back? I am pleased to be employed directly by Queen Elizabeth and why should I go back to academia now? My true record is in my Autobiography and CV on the home page of www.aias.us above my coat of arms. So a few remarks will put the record straight. I do not have a "career", I work.
1) Fifteen Prestigious Fellowships in open competition, a world record of its type (attached list) 
2) Career at Aberystwyth was outstanding and is very well known. My SERC Fellowship was brought to an end illegally after I exposed severe and endemic academic corruption (Autobiography Volume Two). 
3) Meldola Medal and Harrison Memorial Prize, Royal Society of Chemistry.
4) Youngest D. Sc. in modern history.
5) IBM Professor at Kingston New York, 1986, promoted direct from junior post doctoral to full professor. Many publications for IBM with Lie, Clementi and others. Lead writer MOTECC, invited to Cornell, fall of 1988. My first wife was also invited to Cornell. She is a fine lady and multiple IBM award winner.  
6) Senior Research Associate Cornell Theory Center.
7) Guest of the University of Zurich.
8) Full Professor at UNCC, against 122 candidates, good to excellent student assessments, (these are online in the UNCC Saga but covered up by the scheming Perkin Warbeck, sorry Ridley), many publications. UNCC condemned internationally for many years. Condemned outright and in public by the great Jean-Pierre Vigier and many others as a McCarthyist purge against B(3) theory, later nominated several times for a Nobel Prize. That was 1995. I resigned in protest and never looked back at academia. Why should I after what I found there? The "accusations" at UNCC were: "sending to much e mail" and "working from home". These were evil, ludicrous fabrications that enraged the international community. So Mr Ridley is still fabricating charges, twenty years later, using my own account of UNCC. Severe international condemnation of UNCC attached. Ridley uses my own accurate history - UNCC Saga, so that proves that he can read. 
9) AIAS Director 1998, then AIAS President.
10) Appointed by Crown and Parliament as Civil List Pensioner 2003, in an Act of Parliament similar to an Act of Congress needed for a Supreme Court Justice for example. Appointment is on merit, and the nominator was the Royal Society / Royal Society of Chemistry. That was almost a decade after the UNCC witchhunt. In a similar manner to a Supreme Court Justice, the appointment is for life. It is also a high honour akin to Order of Merit (O. M.) or companion of Honour (C. H.).  
11) Coat of Arms 2008, raised to the Gentry or Untitled Nobility of Wales and England by the College of Arms. Scotland has its own system of awarding arms by the Lord Lyon of Scotland.  
12) Thirty one editions of "Marquis Who's Who", America, World, Science and Engineering.
13) "Burke's Peerage and Gentry", Royal Section because I am of Royal descent, and on merit. I trust that Mr Ridley will not question my paternity, or that of the Queen. We are distant cousins. 
14)  Many honours and awards, nominated Nobel Prize, Wolf Prize, Milner Award and Priestley Medal, and  less senior awards and prizes.
15) Founder and First Coordinator of the European Molecular Liquids Group from the National Physical Laboratory.   
16) After I resigned in utter disgust and contempt for UNCC I felt no need to ask any part of academia for employment because I do not want to go back to academia, it would be a big step backwards. UNCC caused my first wife and I a great deal of hardship - real hardship.long years of hardship. Now things are fine and I thank Pete for his kind concern.    
17) Why should I wish to be employed as an academic professor? Many have left academia to go on to higher things and I have left all of that behind me - "Goodbye to All That". 
18) Ridley's use of the words "smelly business" is just cheap, four letter word, inuendo, but that is not a scientific argument. 
19) At Cornell my work was used for an NSF Quarterly Report as outsanding. It helped t bring in fnding for Cornell Theory Center. I was not paid by Cornell, so I asked them for pay for my work. That is standard practice in socialist and societal circles: from each according to ability, to each according to need. I don't recall Mr Ridley being there, or indeed anywhere else. He is the arch fabricator of history, the small minded totalitarian with a jackboot on both shoulders. He goes behing my back so now gets my answer to his face.  
20) Over a thousand books, papers and reviews, all in Google Scholar. Two books of poetry and many other publications.
21) The idea of a "Myron Evans University" was that of a third party, meant to be in honour of yours truly. This is common practice on the Continent of Europe, for example Paris Diderot, Universite Pierre et Marie Curie and endless other examples. In Britain there is Prifysgol Owain Glyndw^r and Brunel University, the Isaac Newton Institute and so on. I don't mind being in that company. Evidently it makes Mr Ridley green with bile. Take an aspirin, a boiled egg, and plenty of rum and sleep it off.  
In summary Mr Ridley appears to be a purveyor of kitchen systems. His credentials are unknown and I have looked for his publciations with an electron microscope but cannoy find any. The "Daily Mail" in Britain has just carried an article that rejects black holes, and I was infomred this morning that the venerable Hawking has admitted they do not exist. It is a trivial matter to prove by Cartan geometry that they cannot exist. No doubt Mr Ridley is a great expert in Cartan geometry as well as the purveyor of odorous inuendo. Stephen Crothers has completely out argued the dogmatists and the new this week is that he is right.             
==================== 

From: John Osullivan...
To: Stephen Crothers...
CC: Pete Ridley...; Axel Westrenius...; rbarnard...; fdamador...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 16:46
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

As many have learned, Ridley is a known wackjob and cyberstalker with a penchant for creating fake email ID's. Increasingly ignored/consigned to spam.

http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/2011/02/26/pete-ridleyfsmail-net-is-the-presumed-cyberstalker/

John O'Sullivan
CEO: Principia Scientific International  http://principia-scientific.org/
...

On 27 September 2014 15:22, Stephen Crothers ... wrote: Pete Ridley, (1) Your remarks about the employment history and academic credentials of Professor Myron W. Evans ( .. etc. etc. etc. – SEE BELOW)
==================== 

From: Stephen Crothers...
To: peterridley...; Axel Westrenius...
CC: rbarnard...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...; fdamador...
Sent: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 15:29
Subject: Fw: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

------------------ original message ---------------- 
On Friday, 26 September 2014, 23:40, Klaus Witzel wrote:

Dear Steve,

In your emails with Robin Barnard, Pete Ridley, Axel Westrenius [and some unnamed others], Robin Barnard states that he is an observational astrophysicist and he also lists 12 items which he claims to be fact. Excuse me that in my questions to Robin Barnard I seem to mix a few subjects and cast them on amenability to authentication; I'm an independent researcher who can afford that.

To begin with, I served as electronic investigator (educated and trained at the NATO forces in Europe during the Cold War, assisted by huge computing power and our highly skilled investigation algorithms). In this profession we usually cannot see the subject of electronic investigation with naked eyes, but we knew precisely how to make every single signal amenable to authentication. As members of national and international military forces it was always clear to us that even the slightest misinterpretation can be inevitably life-threatening (for either side). Has Barnard understood what is meant by amenable to authentication?

Can I ask Barnard how he makes his 12 claims amenable to authentication, in particular their wished for mass, momentum and energy (by 95% of dark what)? I'm now going to reflect an example on how academics are expected to work (taking the astrophysical 95% dark nothingness as base for my judgement), to work in our post-modern society, during education and for sake of their graduation: by omitting unobtainable authentication and instead appeal to ex falso quodlibet, for cutting corners to further their careers.

My example may appear far fetched, but I use the argument in science legitimately for pondering that only the secret-guild of anointed academics claim to be privy to freaking esoteric unknowingness.

The example consists of a series of data points from the archaeological record (like everything our universe), which in ancient times may have been subject to study a mathematical interrelation, and this shall serve as empirical evidence amenable to authentication, for the sake of my argument.

The academics (here: literary scholars) want to read these data points as two nontrivial series: 2801, 5602, 11204, 196077, and: 7, 49, 343, 2401, 16807, 19607. In this "interpretation" the last number per series can be sum of the previous terms which then represents a mathematically fascinating progression. It is worth to note that scholars in addition ignore all other signs, except the numeric data points, of the authentic inscriptions (they already made up their mind what the series are about, without knowing, aka: freaking esoteric unknowingness).

But: the scholars also disfigure one of the data points, the authentic source says 2301 instead of 2401, yet then the wanted progression is unobtainable. Now, by accepting the perverted series for publication in a "science" journal, every student is now mentally tortured to believe that the ancient scientists were so stupid they must have made mathematical errors (instead of researching eclipses and the Sun), otherwise our student will fail the next exam. Has Barnard understood this scholarly method of brainwash? It is the method behind every kindergarten dogma, we: right and they: wrong.

In the attached 2 pictures you find: authenticable data points, authenticable equations, authenticable observations, line by line, and only thereafter: authenticable interpretations. Since Barnard appears to have only little experience with authentication, it should suffice him to read just the terms which have been bolded for convenience. B.t.w. this example is merely one of its kind from the giant mental garbage dump that is rotting now for several centuries. The dump may contain Culminations of Knowledge, but the separation demands to afford hard honest work.

Can I ask Robin Barnard: how does he authenticate data points, how does he authenticate computations and how does he lay bare every single appeal to ex falso quodlibet? In the 12 commandments of his religion, Barnard does not even whisper about his 95% dark Holy Ghost.

Kind regards,
Klaus D. Witzel
Lower Saxony, Germany

-----Original-Nachricht-----
Betreff: Fw: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd
Datum: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 18:54:32 +0200
Von: Stephen Crothers ...
An: undisclosed recipients: ;!!!!!

On Friday, 26 September 2014, 2:51, Stephen Crothers ... wrote:

Dear Axel, 
I have been watching but must now step in  .... etc. etc. etc. – SEE BELOW
================= 

From: Stephen Crothers ...
To: Pete Ridley ...; Axel Westrenius...
CC: rbarnard...; fdamador...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 15:22
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Pete Ridley,

(1) Your remarks about the employment history and academic credentials of Professor Myron W. Evans have nothing whatsoever to do with any scientific issue, and neither do your remarks on Mr. John O’Sullivan and Principia Scientifica International (PSI). That you made such comments attests to your unscientific agenda.

(2) I have no need to individually address the 12 points made by Robin Barnard of Havard University because my response to him already covers all the salient facts which prove his premises and conclusions false. There is no such thing as a black hole or a big bang and so Barnard’s interpretation of observations in terms of them, although standard, is false. I refer you back to my response to Barnard. You too have ignored it. 

(3) I reiterate that according to proponents of black holes a black hole has and does not have an escape velocity simultaneously and at the same place (i.e. at the ‘event horizon’). That is impossible and alone completely invalidates black hole theory.  Professor Joss Bland-Hawthorn of Sydney University stated on national television that the escape speed of a black hole is the speed of light and therefore light can't escape! That you cannot see illogic in possession of an escape velocity and no escape velocity simultaneously and at the same place means that there is nothing more to say to you. Logic will never prevail in discourse with you because you do not use it; neither will logic prevail over any other proponent of black holes, for the same reason. No proponent of black holes even understands escape velocity. 

(4) The charge of arrogance you levelled at me is nonsense. Any professor of physical science who maintains that black holes are real is indeed a blithering professor on account of (3) alone. No such professor is capable of peer-reviewing any scientific paper on the subject and should not hold the position of professor at all. It is such blithering professors who have made the mess physical science is now languishing in and must be righted by those who do not blither. 

(5)  There is no possibility of conversion to the truth. Therefore, exposure of blithering professors, such as 't Hooft, is a necessary course of action. 

Steve Crothers
=================== 

From: Axel Westrenius ...
To: Pete Ridley ...
CC: Stephen Crothers ...
Sent: Sat, 27 Sep 2014 1:49
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Pete!

I will withdraw from the discussion with these last comments: 

The definition/signatures of the ‘original’ Wheeler/Penrose/Hawking Black Hole theory was very specific. One of those signatures was an Event Horizon with a radius. To my knowledge, no-one has as yet refuted Steve Crothers’ purely mathematical claim that ‘r’ for ‘radius’ in the original Black Hole theory is not a radius at all. This by itself is enough to cause the theory to collapse into a historical heap of ashes. This seems to be a good example of failure to check if the foundations are sound before beginning to apply, add and extend to a theory. So, what is it then the astronomers refer to as Black Holes out there? It obviously cannot be Black Holes as proposed by the Wheeler/Penrose/Hawking theory. What about the Event Horizon in all those so called Black Holes? Do they have radii? How so? Few would dispute that observations show that there must be something very massive and dense out there, but to call those objects Black Holes is just  misuse of outdated terminology. Until a new theory is found, we might better call them UAOs, for Unidentified Astronomical Objects. 

To all those who are dreaming about Standing on the Shoulders of a Giant; start by checking if the Giant was wrongfooted, or perhaps barefoot!

About Cahill; my point was not about Black Holes. It was about the astounding success of the geometric model of the universe even though, as Cahill et al have shown, the spacetime formalism was a historical accident caused by incorrectly taking the Michelson-Morley experiment to have given a null result. 

Cheers!
Axel
================ 

From: Pete Ridley ...
To: Stephen Crothers...; Axel Westrenius...
CC: rbarnard...; Reg.Cahill...; fdamador...
Sent: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 20:16
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Note that I have once again removed Dr. Andrzej Krasiński ... from the circulation, as he requested several days ago.
Hi Stephen,

Your question of 26th Sept. “ .. And who do you propose to 'peer review' my papers? Those blithering professors who made this mess in the first place? .. ” astounds me for its arrogance. Perhaps you prefer to have your articles subjected to open review on the Internet by lay people like Axel and me. If that is the case then you are an ideal candidate for membership of the PSI blog (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/spotlighton-principia-scientific.html) run by out-of-work high school art teacher John O'Sullivan.

You reject out-of-hand the existence of black holes yet seem very reluctant to respond directly to the 12 FACTS that observational (not theoretical) astrophysicist Dr. Robin Barnard presented as evidence that stella-mass black holes and astrophysical objects that are smaller than their event horizons do exist. I take the liberty of repeating them and invite you to show for each individual FACT that they do not provide such evidence.

FACT 1: There exists a class of star system called X-ray binaries that can produce more X-rays than a million million Suns, yet the combined mass can be less than 2 Solar masses

FACT 2: The only way of producing this much energy is accretion onto a compact object (neutron star or black hole); gravitational energy is converted to radiation as a by-product as the in-falling material loses angular momentum.

FACT 3 An X-ray binary consists of a compact object and a normal star, and the stars are so close that the compact object can capture material from the normal star. The captured material forms an "accretion disk" as it spirals in; we have observed these accretion disks in some cases

FACT 4 Some of these X-ray binaries contain pulsars, which are proven neutron stars

FACT 5 If we identify the normal star with visible or infrared light, we can find out the details of its orbit around the compact object: how long it takes to make one complete orbit, and the speed that it is going. This allows us to measure the mass ratio of the donor star and compact object

FACT 6 If we work out the mass of the donor star, we can therefore get the mass of the compact object. In most cases, this mass is ~1.4-2 times the mass of the Sun, consistent with neutron stars.

FACT 7 However, about 20 X-ray binaries in our Galaxy have compact object masses that are 4-15 times the mass of the Sun; it is thought that the maximum mass for a neutron star is about 3 times the mass of the Sun, but it could be as high as 7.

FACT 8 These binaries with masses too high for neutron stars exhibit a certain type of behaviour that is NEVER seen in neutron star binaries; they can produce emission spectra that are completely described by disk emission (a multi-temperature blackbody that is hottest on the inside and cooler as the radius increases); sometimes, some of this is Comptonized, yielding a non-thermal component as well 
FACT 9 It has recently been shown that neutron star binaries do exhibit analagous behaviour, but their emission spectra are described by a disk blackbody + a second blackbody that comes from either the surface of the star or the boundary layer between the disk and surface

FACT10 By the time material gets to the surface of the neutron star it is traveling about 90% of the speed of light, and has a temperature of about 10,000,000 degrees, so it is going to make a bang when it hits; the same goes for any star

FACT 11 The difference between the "black holes" and neutron stars during this type of behaviour is that the "black holes" are missing emission from the surface. 

FACT 12 We know from the disk temperature and time variability that the "black holes" have similar physical sizes to neutron stars, so the lack of X-ray emission from the surface cannot be due to a larger body.


Hi Axel,

I don’t think that your suggestion of 24th Sept. about inventing new terminology for a black hole will help the situation one bit. As Shakespeare said ”A rose by any other name would smell the same”.

In your E-mail of 25th you express your lay astonishment about how easily Stephen “ .. has demolished the Black Hole theory .. ”. You also expressed even greater astonishment at Dr. Myron Evans “ .. invalidating the Black Hole theory .. ”. In my opinion (like yourself, only a layman) they have done nothing of the sort, simply continuing to argue unconvincingly against the existence of black holes.

In your E-mail of 26th you commented “ .. Professor Myron Evans in Wales has more credentials to his name than most Nobel Laureates. Evans has many times acknowledged Steve Crothers’ work as at the very highest scholarly level .. ”. I really wonder if any such accolade from Dr. Evans is significant.

Ignoring any position that heh might have held at the “Myron Evans/Maxwell Einstein” University, it appears from the information provided on Dr. Evans’s web-site that he was last employed as a Professor 20 years ago  in November 1994 by the University of North Carolina at Charlotte (UNCC). It seems that his career there undertaking the role of a full Professor of Physics lasted for slightly over over 2 years, with the final year seeing allegations of inadequacies in the performance of his duties. According to his own blog posts on 16th Sept. 1993 Dr. Evans received a letter from the UNCC confirming his appointment to the Graduate Faculty for a renewable term of 5 years. A year later (30th November 1994) Dr. Evans submitted a letter of resignation to his employer following the threat of dismissal on the grounds of his alleged misconduct and neglect of duty made by the University on 23rd November (http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga1.pdf.

Dr, Evans appears to have had unrealised visions of claiming damages to the tune of $(3-5) million as a result of his treatment by UNCC.

It seems that in 1986, after a 15-year association with the University of Wales (Aberystwyth, and colleges in Bangor and Swansea) the University refused to renew his fellowship and  his “ .. numerous applications for tenured employment have been turned down or just ignored .. It was made clear to me that I would never be employed in the University of Wales .. Despite my qualifications, the latter is denied to me in the University of Wales .. I appealed many times for employment in the University of Wales, but was refused or ignored .. On many occasions I appealed for gainful employment by Cornell University, but was never interviewed .. I have never been properly interviewed in the University of Wales .. Over these years, numerous reasons have been contrived for denial of interview ..  ” (http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga3.pdf).

In order to obtain gainful employment it appears that Professor Evans moved from Wales in 1986 to join IBM in the USA. This contract lasted for 1 year after which followed several years without paid employment, other than a few relatively short periods of 6 months to a year. Then in 1992 he found employment with UNCC as a full Professor.

Further details of th ewhole smelly business can be found posted on Dr. Evans’s web site at:
- http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga1.pdf,
- http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga2.pdf,
- http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga3.pdf and
- http://www.aias.us/documents/mwe/historical/aunccsaga4.pdf .  

So, despite all of those superior credentials to his name that you talked about, Dr. Evans seems to have found it surprisingly difficult to obtain any gainful employment in the intervening decades. 

In your E-mail of 25th you said “ .. Reg Cahill’s latest paper (http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2014/PP-39-10.PDF) suggests that the cat may be possible to skin in still other ways .. ” and I understand that “cat” to be the consensus about the existence of black holes. I don’t see anything in Professor Cahill's paper denying the existence of black holes, as do Dr. Evans, Stephen and their AIAS fellows in their many articles. If I am mistaken then perhaps Professor Cahill will clarify his position.

One item of particular interest to me in that paper was Professor Cahill’s mention that “ .. Observed diminishing gravitational waves imply a cooling epoch for the Earth for the next 30 years .. ” so maybe he can convince the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change (CACC) supporters (such as Drs. James Hanson, Michael Mann, Phil Jones, etc.) that our use of fossil fuels has negligible impact on global temperatures.

Best regards, Pete
============== 

From: Stephen Crothers ...
To: Pete Ridley ...; rbarnard...; Axel Westrenius...
CC: fdamador...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 4:21
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Pete Ridley,

And who do you propose to 'peer review' my papers? Those blithering professors who made this mess in the first place? That is tantamount to requesting crooked police to investigate their own crimes. As Axel said, 'peer review is broken'. And in any event, only elementary logic is required. Any logical person can follow my arguments. One can only wonder why then you can't use logic and instead want advice from the usual suspects who are guilty of the blunders in the first place. For instance, if you can't see that having an escape velocity and not having an escape velocity simultaneously and at the same place is not a fatal inconsistency, then there is no hope for rational thought. But that is precisely what black hole theory attributes to their black holes - by no rational thought! Professor Joss Bland-Hawthorn of Sydney University stated on national television that the escape speed of a black hole is the speed of light and therefore light can't escape! I rest my case.

Steve Crothers
=================== 

From: Axel Westrenius ...
To: Pete Ridley ...
CC: Stephen Crothers ...
Sent: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 0:58
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Hi Pete!

My proofreading contribution was minimal and not at all about the theory and the mathematics. It was only about the language and typos, and to some extent drawing on the expertise in ancient Greek of an acquaintance at the University of Lund in Sweden. Steve was overly generous (perhaps unwisely) in acknowledging this. 

Professor Myron Evans in Wales has more credentials to his name than most Nobel Laureates. Evans has many times acknowledged Steve Crothers’ work as at the very highest scholarly level. There are many others too, but none of the ‘leading' journals will accept Crothers' work. Steve is rocking all the boats very uncomfortably. Some Nobel Laureates get seasick at the mere thought. The peer review system is broken. So is the Nobel Prize in physics. The Selection Committee members are all ‘old school’ and none of them would want to be seen in the company of Myron Evans. Crothers? Shudder!

Axel (ex Swede)

PS: Considering Barnard’s latest contribution, you may be interested to read Evans’ critique of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle http://www.aias.us/documents/uft/a13thpaper.pdf 
================ 

From: Pete Ridley ...
To: Stephen Crothers...; rbarnard...; Axel Westrenius...
CC: fdamador...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 21:58
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Hi folks, 
It would be helpful to me if Stephen Crothers responded specifically to each of the 12 "FACTS" stated by Dr Barnard in his E-mail of 23rd Sept. 
I see that Axel Westrenius has been an associate of Stephen Crothers since at least Sept. 2008 when he proof-read the article "The Black Hole Catastrophe" (http://gsjournal.net/Science-Journals/Research%20Papers-Relativity%20Theory/Download/1059). 
It would be interesting to know if any competent scientists rather than a layman like I am were involved in peer-reviewing the article. 
Best regards, Pete.
=================== 

From: Stephen Crothers ...
To: Barnard, Robin ...; Axel Westrenius ...
CC: Pete Ridley ...; Franklin Amador ...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...
Sent: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 17:51
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Dear Axel,

I have been watching but must now step in because Barnard has told some really big fibs that cannot pass with impunity.

(1) Barnard said:

“Mr Crothers claims that since black holes perturb spacetime in an asymptotic manner, and the universe is not asymptotic, black holes cannot exist. In fact all stars perturb spacetime in the same way, due to something we scientists (and everyone else) like to call gravity. When I pointed this out, Mr Crothers said that this indicates that black hole theory cannot even explain the stars in the sky, when it is his assumption that is wrong.”

This is patently false, as my paper and my comments on the associated webpage attest.  Barnard does not read what is in my papers or my comments. Barnard does not even understand black hole theory (but then neither does any proponent of black holes). All alleged black holes are independent universes because they are by definition either asymptotically flat (flat = zero curvature) or asymptotically curved (finite non-zero curvature) so that as the distance from the ‘black hole’ increases its spacetime decreases and approaches zero or approaches some finite curvature other than zero as the case may be. Without the asymptotic condition the mathematical expressions alleging black holes do not obtain. Thus a black hole spacetime is not tiny, contrary to that which Barnard asserted on the webpage of my paper. Hence, a black hole universe is spatially infinite. Now let X be some black hole. It therefore constitutes, by definition, a spatially infinite universe that is either asymptotically flat or asymptotically curved. Let Y be some black hole universe. It too therefore constitutes, by definition, a spatially infinite universe that is either asymptotically flat or asymptotically curved. Now superpose X and Y. This produces the universe X + Y. However, the presence of X destroys the asymptotic condition of Y and the presence of Y destroys the asymptotic condition of X. This results no matter how far from one another the black holes might be supposed, because there is no bound on asymptotic, for otherwise it would not be asymptotic. Thus a black hole universe is a one-mass universe. Hence, Barnard’s assertions above are false. He invented them and attributed them to me. Black hole theory is logically inconsistent and therefore false. 

(2) Gravity is not a force in General Relativity, because it is spacetime curvature. According to black hole theory every black hole has an infinitely dense singularity where spacetime is infinitely curved. Thus, gravity is infinite at a black hole singularity, although its mass is finite. Hence, according to black hole theory, a finite mass produces infinite gravity. 

(3) General Relativity is a nonlinear theory and so the Principle of Superposition does not hold. This means that if X is some relativity universe and Y is some relativity universe, be they the same or not, then X + Y is not a universe. Let’s be more specific. Let X be some black hole universe and Y some big bang universe. Then the superposition X + Y is not a universe.  Since the black hole expressions also pertain to stars, any star described by a black hole expression constitutes a spatially infinite universe that is either asymptotically flat or asymptotically curved and contains only that star. But when we look into the sky, how many stars are there? Black hole theory cannot account for the stars either (contrast this with Barnard’s assertions in (1) above). 

(4) The 4 different types of black holes alleged by the cosmologists pertain to different sets of Einstein field equations and so they have absolutely nothing to do with one another, and by (2) and (3) they can’t be superposed with one another or with some big bang universe. 

(5) Black hole universes are asymptotically flat or asymptotically curved. However, no big bang universe is asymptotically anything. Furthermore, the three different types of big bang universes alleged are characterised by their k-curvature; k = -1, k = 0, or k = 1 respectively. However, no black hole universe even possesses a k-curvature. In the cases of k = -1 and k = 0, the big bang spacetime is spatially infinite, but in the case of k = 1 the big bang spacetime is spatially finite. The spatially infinite spacetimes for k = -1 and k = 0 are different on account of their k-curvatures, and are different to the black hole universes because none of the latter possess a k-curvature. Thus no black hole universe can be present inside some big bang universe. This is reaffirmed by the invalidity of the Principle of Superposition (which does not hold in General Relativity).

(6) According to black hole theory, all black holes have an escape velocity and no escape velocity simultaneously and at the same place (the 'event horizon'). This is impossible. Furthermore, escape velocity is a two-body relation: one body escapes from another body. This is impossible in a model that contains only one mass, such as the black hole or lone star described by the very same black hole equation.

(7) All alleged big bang universes are expanding: because they are non-static. No black hole universe is expanding: because they are not non-static. All big bang universes are of finite age (~13.8 billion years) but all black hole universes are eternal (because they are static or stationary, i.e. they are not non-static). 

(8) Barnard said:

“Mr Crothers has forgotten that asymptotic affects, while never reaching zero, can be as near zero as to make no difference. For example, the gravity of stars in the Andromeda galaxy affect us in an asymptotic manner, but their effects are so much smaller than the Sun, Moon, and planets etc that we may ignore them.” 

I have forgotten nothing. Barnard does not understand the asymptotic character of black hole theory (see (3) and (5) above). According to the cosmologists, there is a supermassive black hole at the centres of galaxies, and hence in Andromeda and the Milky Way, and other black holes throughout the galaxies, in their millions. At each black hole there is infinite spacetime curvature and hence infinite gravity. None of these alleged black holes are asymptotically anything, thereby violating the very definition of the black hole universe. 

(9) Black hole theory is a mathematical theory. Black holes were spawned by mathematical physics, not observations. Any physical theory must satisfy two fundamental conditions: (a) logical consistency, (b) correspondence with experiment/observation. Black hole theory fails on both counts. Cosmologists merely believe the black hole phantasmagoria and so they interpret there observations to that which they don't understand, in terms of their belief, and see black holes all over the place, just as people who believe in ghosts see them all over the place. Cosmologists are ignorant of the inherent contradictions in their black hole theory and their big bang theory. Their ignorance does not rid their theories of their fatal contradictions, and so their theories are still false. 

Steve Crothers
===================== 

From: Barnard, Robin ...
To: Axel Westrenius ...
CC: Pete Ridley ...; Stephen Crothers...; Franklin Amador ...
Sent: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 13:58
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Hi Axel,
Mr Crothers has made a fundamental mistake in his work that he refuses to acknowledge. It is on the same scale as a person I saw claim to have disproved quantum mechanics when they assumed a stationary electron. The Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle states that we cannot know the position and velocity of a particle at the same time; in order to measure the position as precisely as possible, we need to use higher frequency and more energetic light, and this imparts momentum to the particle and changes the velocity. 

Mr Crothers claims that since black holes perturb spacetime in an asymptotic manner, and the universe is not asymptotic, black holes cannot exist. In fact all stars perturb spacetime in the same way, due to something we scientists (and everyone else) like to call gravity. When I pointed this out, Mr Crothers said that this indicates that black hole theory cannot even explain the stars in the sky, when it is his assumption that is wrong. 

The fact that  stars curve space is an observed fact. This was first proven by Sir Arthur Eddington, who compared positions of stars near the Sun during total eclipse with their positions at other times, and found that these stars moved with respect to the rest of the stars during the eclipse. There is an excellent movie all about this called Einstein and Eddington. Nowadays, general relativity is an everyday factor of life, because GPS must account for it when working out where you are.

Mr Crothers has forgotten that asymptotic affects, while never reaching zero, can be as near zero as to make no difference. For example, the gravity of stars in the Andromeda galaxy affect us in an asymptotic manner, but their effects are so much smaller than the Sun, Moon, and planets etc that we may ignore them.
Robin
=================== 

From: Axel Westrenius ...
To: Dr Robin Barnard ...
CC: Pete Ridley ...; Stephen Crothers...; Franklin Amador ...
Sent: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 2:42
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Hi Robin,

I get your point but from a layman’s perspective, it only amplifies my argument. The term ‘Black Hole’ is irretrievably tainted and compromised and should be relegated to history and replaced with something new, which is certainly beyond me, but perhaps not beyond you. 
Again as a layman, I am astounded by the relative ease with which Steve Crothers with basic mathematics/geometry/logic has demolished the Black Hole theory. I am even more astounded with Myron Evans’ phenomenal ongoing progress with ECE, and as a ‘side effect' if you will, also invalidating the Black Hole theory. 
I am 84 now and desperately keen to hang in there for still some time to see where all this will lead. Reg Cahill’s latest paper (http://www.ptep-online.com/index_files/2014/PP-39-10.PDF) suggests that the cat may be possible to skin in still other ways. 

Looking back to the early 1970s when the then young, aspiring to fame physicists were salivating over the new, affordable‘minicomputers’ and in wild enthusiasm immediately started to add and extend on EGR and other theory, they forgot to first use the computer to ‘do a Feynman’ and recheck that the foundations were sound. It appears that we are still suffering from that and those same, now ageing physicists find themselves in the unpalatable situation of having painted themselves into a corner. 

I still vividly remember the euphoria I and my fellow engineers felt when we fired up our shiny new 16 bit Texas Instruments minicomputer. It had a 16 MB hard disk, big as a washing machine and requiring a dedicated room with special air conditioning. 

I am writing this on my ‘shiny new’ 27” iMac. My wife (85) is sitting next to me (in her wheelchair) with her own 27” iMac, exchanging emails and Skyping with children and grandchildren across the planet and surfing the web and excitedly earbashing me about the latest world news. What a wonderful world! 

Axel
==================== 

From: Barnard, Robin ...
To: Pete Ridley ...
CC: Axel Westrenius...; Stephen Crothers...; Franklin Amador ...
Sent: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 23:56
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Hi Axel,
given that we have observational evidence for a set of dense, massive objects with no surface radiation (making a good case for an event horizon), I think that these guys qualify for black holes. A lot of theorists argue about what happens inside the event horizon, and it is entirely impossible to find out who is right, so I am not too interested about the mathematics about what happens inside. 

Robin
=================== 

From: Pete Ridley ...
To: Axel Westrenius...
CC: rbarnard...; Stephen Crothers...; fdamador...
Sent: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 15:57
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Hi Axel, 
Thanks for your lay comments on this issue. Your definition of a black hole is that given in the "Urban Dictionary" (http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=black%20hole) so should be adequate for laymen like thee and me. 
Am I correct to understand your comment about an "erroneous theory" to be referring to the AIAS argument that black holes do not exist? 
To all: 
As requested I have removed Andrzej Krasinski from the circulation. After reading the exchanges involving Axel , Andrzej and Stephen which took place back in 2007  (http://www.sjcrothers.plasmaresources.com/exchange.pdf) I can understand why Andrzej would wish to avoid further involvement in these exchanges. The penultimate paragraph of Andrzej's 18th December 2007 E-mail to Axel sums up his opinion of the arguments presented by the likes of the AIAS fellows on this issue. 
Pete
================= 

From: Axel Westrenius ...
To: Pete Ridley ...
CC: Dr Robin Barnard ...; Stephen Crothers...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...; fdamador...
Sent: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:32
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

May I as an interested layman propose that the term 'Black Hole' be reserved for objects that are thought to have the signatures according to Wheeler/Penrose/Hawking & Co., e.g. a singularity, an event horizon, etc., and 
thought to be described by the ‘standard' Black Hole Theory, and establish a different terminology for anything else enormously dense and massive? Claiming that Black Holes do not exist will then make sense to the general public as simply a consequence of, as it turned out, an erroneous theory. Science journalists are adding to the confusion, knowing that the term ‘Black Hole’ attracts a wider audience. The widely circulated ‘artist’s impression’ of M60-UCD1 was very seductive (which was of course intentional). 

Axel Westrenius
================= 

From: Andrzej Krasiński ...
To: rbarnard...; Pete Ridley ...
CC: Stephen Crothers...; Axel Westrenius...; fdamador...
Sent: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 12:21
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Gentlemen, 
Please remove my address from your mailing lists. I was dragged into this business accidentally and against my will, by one of your fellow Australians who posted my private e-mail to him in a public forum. 
Regards 
Andrzej Krasinski
================== 

From: Pete Ridley ...
To: rbarnard...
CC: Stephen Crothers...; Axel Westrenius...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...; fdamador...
Sent: Wed, 24 Sep 2014 11:02
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Hi Robin, 
Thanks for your response, which has helped me to understand this issue a little better. 
I look forward to reading any alternative explanations for your 12 "FACTS" from Stephen Crothers, Franklin Amador or any other fellows of Dr Myron Evans's Alpha Institute of Advanced Studies 
(AIAS - http://aias.us/index.php?goto=showPageByTitle&pageTitle=AIAS_staff
Perhaps Stephen or Franklin would be kind enough to forward these exchanges to their fellow AIAS/PSI members (see footnote). 
FOOTNOTE: 
Many of those AIAS fellows (http://drmyronevans.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/list-of-aias-fellows-and-others-in-marquis-whos-who.docx) are also claimed to be members of the Principia Scientific International blog run by out-of-work high-school art teacher John O'Sullivan (see SpotlightON PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd" (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/spotlighton-principia-scientific.html). 
Best regards, Pete
================== 

From: Barnard, Robin ...
To: Pete Ridley ...
CC: Stephen Crothers...; Axel Westrenius...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...; fdamador...
Sent: Tue, 23 Sep 2014 15:38
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Hi Pete,
I am an observational astrophysicist, who also does some empirically based theory, and deal with facts on a daily basis; the trick is to interpret them in a consistent way. Mathematics alone cannot possibly describe the universe; the best it can do is ensure that a person's thinking is self consistent, and offer possibilities for describing the universe that require evidence. Theory is a very valuable tool, but does need to conform to reality.

Here are some facts that support the existence of stellar-mass black holes. Note that there is no evidence for any kind of smaller black holes, nor for white holes, nor that black holes are actually mathematical singularities. Furthermore, if Hawking radiation does exist, for the stellar mass black holes that I deal with the radiation would be so miniscule that less than one particle would be emitted over the age of the Universe. However, there IS evidence for astrophysical objects that are smaller than their event horizons. I am going to take a leaf out of Mr Crothers' book and say that understanding what each fact means is not necessary, but if you want direction in finding more information, I can give it to you.

I would be genuinely very interested in any alternative theories that Mr Crothers can produce for explaining these observational facts. 


FACT 1: There exists a class of star system called X-ray binaries that can produce more X-rays than a million million Suns, yet the combined mass can be less than 2 Solar masses

FACT 2: The only way of producing this much energy is accretion onto a compact object (neutron star or black hole); gravitational energy is converted to radiation as a by-product as the in-falling material loses angular momentum.

FACT 3 An X-ray binary consists of a compact object and a normal star, and the stars are so close that the compact object can capture material from the normal star. The captured material forms an "accretion disk" as it spirals in; we have observed these accretion disks in some cases

FACT 4 Some of these X-ray binaries contain pulsars, which are proven neutron stars

FACT 5 If we identify the normal star with visible or infrared light, we can find out the details of its orbit around the compact object: how long it takes to make one complete orbit, and the speed that it is going. This allows us to measure the mass ratio of the donor star and compact object

FACT 6 If we work out the mass of the donor star, we can therefore get the mass of the compact object. In most cases, this mass is ~1.4-2 times the mass of the Sun, consistent with neutron stars.

FACT 7 However, about 20 X-ray binaries in our Galaxy have compact object masses that are 4-15 times the mass of the Sun; it is thought that the maximum mass for a neutron star is about 3 times the mass of the Sun, but it could be as high as 7.

FACT 8 These binaries with masses too high for neutron stars exhibit a certain type of behaviour that is NEVER seen in neutron star binaries; they can produce emission spectra that are completely described by disk emission (a multi-temperature blackbody that is hottest on the inside and cooler as the radius increases); sometimes, some of this is Comptonized, yielding a non-thermal component as well 
FACT 9 It has recently been shown that neutron star binaries do exhibit analagous behaviour, but their emission spectra are described by a disk blackbody + a second blackbody that comes from either the surface of the star or the boundary layer between the disk and surface

FACT10 By the time material gets to the surface of the neutron star it is traveling about 90% of the speed of light, and has a temperature of about 10,000,000 degrees, so it is going to make a bang when it hits; the same goes for any star

FACT 11 The difference between the "black holes" and neutron stars during this type of behaviour is that the "black holes" are missing emission from the surface. 

FACT 12 We know from the disk temperature and time variability that the "black holes" have similar physical sizes to neutron stars, so the lack of X-ray emission from the surface cannot be due to a larger body

The only way I can think of for removing the suface emission is for that surface to be located behind the event horizon.


Kind regards,
Robin

PS I did not get my PhD at Harvard, I am a post-doc at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics. 

On Fri, Sep 19, 2014 at 5:29 PM (New York time, so 19 Sep 2014 22:29 UK), Pete Ridley ... wrote:
Hi Stephen, 
I've now updated my "SpotlightON - PSI ... " article .. etc. etc. etc. SEE BELOW
==================== 

From: Stephen Crothers ...
To: Pete Ridley ...
Sent: Sun, 21 Sep 2014 1:07
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Dear Pete,

..... P and C .... 
Yours faithfully,
Steve Crothers

-------------------- original message ----------------- 
On Sunday, 21 September 2014, 1:06 (Oz time, so 20th @ 16:06 UK), Pete Ridley ... wrote:

Hi Stephen,

Thanks again for your prompt response. I can complete my article "SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd" entry about you by adding QUOTE:

Stephen Crothers has pointed out that he has never claimed to be a professor or Dr. of anything. He also acknowledged that being appointed or awarded such credentials by 3rd parties without accredited educational institutional authority to de so means nothing. UNQUOTE.

Please let me know if you have any objections to me doing so.

May I respectfully suggest that you consider encouraging Dr. Evans to retract his comments about your acceptance of that Ph. D Honoris Causa in March 2009 (http://drmyronevans.wordpress.com/2009/03/23/prof-stephen-crothers-accepts-ph-d-degree/) and his announcement of your appointments in Feb. 2008 (http://atomicprecision.wordpress.com/2008/02/page/6/).

Your stance regarding those announcement by Dr, Evans of your appointments and awards at the MHE University appears to be at odds with your acceptance in 2008 of the Gold Medal award from the Santilli-Galilei Association (http://www.telesio-galilei.com/tg/images/stories/photos/award2008/Stephen_CrothersCV.pdf). What accredited educational institutional authority does/did that association have? - or do gold medal awards from non-accredited science associations fall into a different category?

Sorry Stephen but I remain unconvinced by your arguments about anything.

Best regards, Pete
================== 

From: Stephen Crothers ...
To: Pete Ridley ...
Sent: Sat, 20 Sep 2014 14:11
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Dear Pete,
................... P and C ..............
Yours faithfully, 
Steve Crothers
================== 

From: Pete Ridley ...
To: Stephen Crothers...
CC: rbarnard...; Axel Westrenius...; Professor Andrzej Krasiński ...; fdamador...
Sent: Fri, 19 Sep 2014 22:29
Subject: Re: SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd

Hi Stephen, 
I've now updated my "SpotlightON - PSI ... " article (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/spotlighton-principia-scientific.html) sub-section 4.2.8 generally in line with what I sent to you but with added references. One relates to your article on 't Hooft and another to the 2008 announcement by Dr. Myron Evans of your appointment as “Professor and Vice-president elect” of the Myron-Evans/Maxwell-Einstein University that never was (http://www.mathematik.tu-darmstadt.de/~bruhn/MEU.html). I have also taken the opportunity to update the entries about Dr. Evans (one-time MEU “President elect”) and Kerry Pendertgast (one-time MEU “Professor of Astronomy”).
Please let me know if you think that I have misrepresented anything so that I can review it and consider whether or not it should be changed or an apology made. 
I watched part of one of your presentations and read much of your article on " .. 't Hooft .. ". What you seem to be saying is that the notion of black holes, etc. is not supported by the empirical evidence, despite the claims of the leading researchers. Your presentation at EU2014 “The parallax effect on a short hair” (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXF098w48fo) is representative of the few presentations, articles and comments of yours that I have glanced at. In it you make frequent appeals to logic and argue that the claims about expanding universes and black holes don’t make sense, which fits my own opinion. 

I can’t disagree with your opinions because, as a layman, they align with my own experience. My opinion is that the notions about black holes, dark matter, anti-matter, the big bang and a “bent space-time” gravitational force are valid only in the "pure-maths" world of theoretical physics. I formed this opinion after reading “The State of the Universe – A Primer in Modern Cosmology” by THEORETICAL physicist Dr. Pedro G. Ferreira, Professor of Astro-Physics at Oxford (http://www.pedroferreira.co.uk/). What I find unconvincing about your arguments is that so many researchers with far superior pedigrees than you reject your analyses as "nonsense". For example, as you know, Dr. Robin Barnard (http://www.robinbarnard.com/web_documents/rbarncv.pdf) who earned a post-grad at Harvard, said just that about your viXra article (http://vixra.org/abs/1409.0072). Unlike my position regarding the "Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Change" (CACC), on this issue I'm inclined to go along with the "consensus" arguments of scientists with far superior pedigrees than you or I. 
That takes us back to Dougy Cotton, who was "excommunicated" from John O’Sullivan’s PSI blog but appears to see himself worthy of a Nobel Prize for Physics? Unlike you, he comes across to me as being an arrogant Narcissist, similar to PSI's "CEO and Legal Consultant". More on Dougy in my article "SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen ltd" (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/spotlighton-principia-scientific.html) sub- section 3.14. You say that, like Dougy, you present the facts and let others decide on the balance of evidence. As I see it you both present what you THINK are facts but what are in many cases simply opinions.  Facts, not opinions, matter in science.

Best regards, Pete 
================== 

From: Stephen Crothers ...
To: undisclosedrecipients
Sent: Thu, 18 Sep 2014 16:06
Subject: Fw: Barnard (at Harvard) -v- Crothers, on Black Holes

On Tuesday, 16 September 2014, 22:29 (Oz time? So 16th @ 13:29 UK), Stephen Crothers

Dr. Robin Barnard, 
Harvard University

I note your comments here:

http://vixra.org/abs/1409.0072 

You are wrong. Clearly you did not pay attention to what is actually written in my paper. All alleged black hole universes are infinite because they are either asymptotically flat or asymptotically curved spacetimes by their very definition. There is no bound on asymptotic because otherwise it would not be asymptotic.Without the asymptotic condition the mathematical expressions purporting black holes do not obtain. The black hole universe is thus not contained within its 'event horizon' as you evidently imagine. Moreover, all alleged big bang universes in which black holes are supposed to reside are not asymptotically anything and therefore do not satisfy the asymptotic condition of the black hole spacetime. Consequently a black hole universe and a big bang universe can't coexist, by their very definitions. It is not I who has a fundamental misconception. If you think asymptotically flat and asymptotically curved spacestimes do not extend indefinitely, provide your means by which they stop somewhere, and specify precisely where they stop. So far you have only adduced the same old demonstrable nonsense.

And what mathematics is it you allege I don't understand? You have not substantiated your allegation. There are some 60 pages of mathematical appendices in the paper. It seems you did not notice them. Please explain to us all where my mathematics is incorrect.

Stephen J. Crothers
16 September 2014
=================== 
Several P and C exchanges between Stephen Crothers and Pete Ridley
==================== 

From: Pete Ridley ...
To: Stephen Crothers...
CC: rob...; pennbonvivant...; raydela...; ...Axel Westrenius...
Sent: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 11:37
Subject: Re: Fw: G. 't Hooft, Nobel Laureate, and General Relativity

Hi Stephen, 
Thanks for the "heads-up" on this. I'll get back to you if I have any comments after a careful review. 
Meanwhile, you may recall that in November 2012 I asked your associates at the Alpha Institute of Advanced Physics about the claim made by out-of-work high-school art teacher John O'Sullivan that AIAS members had also become members of his blog Principia Scientific International. On 8th November Myron Evans had stated quite categorically that AIAS had dissociated from PSI but John O'Sullivan still persists with his claim in order to boost his questionable claim to be running a scientific association as it's "CEO and Legal Consultant". 
Many of your AIAS associates advised me that they were NOT members of PSI but I did not have a response from you. As it is still claimed that you are a member of PSI (http://www.principia-scientific.org/why-psi-is-proposed-as-a-cic.html) would you be good enough to advise whether or not this is correct? I shall then be able to update my article "SpotlightON - PSI and PSI Acumen Ltd" (http://globalpoliticalshenanigans.blogspot.co.uk/2012/06/spotlighton-principia-scientific.html), sub-section 
4.2.8 "Stephen J Crothers" . 
Best regards, Pete
================ 

From: Stephen Crothers ... 
To: undisclosedrecipients 
Sent: Mon, 15 Sep 2014 5:58 
Subject: Fw: G. 't Hooft, Nobel Laureate, and General Relativity. 

On Thursday, 11 September 2014, 23:13, Stephen Crothers ... wrote: 
Dear Readers, 
I thank Professor Gerardus ‘t Hooft, Nobel Laureate, Editor-in-Chief Foundations in Physics, for drawing much attention to my work on black hole theory, big bang cosmology, and General Relativity, on his personal website; and for providing me thereby with the opportunity to critique in detail by means of the following paper: 
General Relativity: In Acknowledgement Of Professor Gerardus ‘t Hooft, Nobel Laureate 
Http://vixra.org/abs/1409.0072 
Stephen J. Crothers
=============== 


Appendix B E-mails about PSI Membership

No comments:

Post a Comment

Open debate is encouraged but please be civil and if quoting from others please give a citation and provide a link when appropriate.

Popular Posts

Followers