Message-ID: <49AC1AEC.3070001@yahoo.com>
I have been talking with Straub via email and phone. Today we got his
"final" decision (see below), that Elsevier will take down the ECE page.
The reason he gives is that his "research" tells him MEU is a
questionable and unaccredited operation. Even if we addressed this point
and perhaps admit that we discissused it too openly too soon, I doubt it
would change the situation, he will do more research and find something
else.
Straub told me last week the reason he offered us the ECE page is that
he wanted to be on the side of a future Nobel Prize winner and be there
among the first. He was reluctant to take down the page because he
didn't want to "lose" Myron. It was also clear that he hoped in a fit of
idealism that the controversy would work itself out positively and
magically on his site with little effort on his part.
But we don't need him. aias.us probably gets more response from
knowledgable sources than his site.
I think what set him off was Myron's blasting Elsevier on the blog, not
just repoting what happened, but casting dire aspersions on him and
Elsevier as a whole. I think to Straub that was more offensive than
anything the others did. As a business man, anything that attacks the
integrity of your business needs to be neutralized.
I think all comments about Elsevier should be taken down except for a
bare recital of the facts. 1) Myron .was invited, 2) Myron created a
page, 3) his opponents showed up with their same charges and didn't
address the refutations already made, 4) a controversy ensued with
Elsevier on how to handle this, 5) the page was withdrawn. It may be
that with some of our own devices, other recognition, corporate effort,
the films and the university, Straub will regret this and return to us.
I would like leave him on polite terms. If he returns, we dictate the
terms. I think Straub fired us before we quit. I made it clear to him
that's what we would do if we didn't have the proper controls. That's
why I would leave it at "the page was withdrawn".
I wish we could concentrate on ECE theory, the theory itself and how to
bring it to the world. All the various side battles just impede us. I
think it is fine for Myron to tell us how he feels about things, that's
how his process works and it has produced spectacular results. But the
blog should be pure ECE science. Any discussions on the blog about the
decrepit state of science, standard modelers, universities, publishers,
politicians, harassment, police, legal interpretations, prosecutions
among others should be left out. It is just fuel and incentive to let
people drive off track and take us with them.
Also I don't believe that website statistics are proof of general
acceptance of ECE or that no response to a paper means it has been
accepted . I don't let that get in my way in looking at his work for
what it is but I think quite a few others don't accept this reasoning
and become resistant to what Myron says. I think anything that can be
looked upon as self-promotion hurts. This all came up briefly in my
conversation with Straub.
I think the website statistics are very welcome and useful. I would
regard them as proprietary information not to be released (it is
additional fuel for the others, it tells them who they can harrass).
We should keep is as a catalog of who is interested and possibly
potential colleagues. In the internet marketing business this kind of
info is very carefully protected.
I would like to write Straub that I understand his decisions but I think
his reasoning about MEU is wrong. I would like a statement on why it is
wrong. But I would continue that we have arrived at the same conclusion
about the site as he but for different reasons. We have lived with this
controversy and are not willing to engage in it without some form of
moderation which we would strive to be fair and seem fair. And that even
Wikipedia has fallen far short of its noble goals, it is a hotbed for
this kind of controversy and that it is very usual for the opponents of
some person or issue post the issuse first at Wiki, make the article
seem objective by feeding negative material and leaving out the
positive (this is easy to do), establish themselves as "experts" to
Wiki, get control on the page and block any attempt to correct it. .
Wiki itself has little clue on how to fix this. Several lawsuits have
been over thisand many more people wish they could sue.
I would like the board's ideas before I respond to Straub. Please
forward this to the board.
Sincerely,
-------- Original Message --------
Dear Thomas,
Many thanks for your email and for the open discussion we have on the
ECE page. Please allow me to address your remarks regarding 'Elsevier
inviting Myron Evans to author a page'. When we designed the editorial
strategy we felt that it should be a wiki where authors should have a
scientific level and both authors and commenters should be identified by
name'. As a rule for having a 'scientific level' we set that an author
should have at least some publications in an ISI-recognised journal.
Myron Evans does fit that criteria and I believe that that is the reason
why he was invited/accepted to become an author. I cannot trace back how
exactly he was invited/accepted.
I have pondered our discussion and the various options over the weekend,
and also did some more 'web-research' into the subject and its players.
During this research I came across the Myron Evans University at
http://www.myronevansuniversity.org/index.html I was quite surprised to
read that this University is offering Ph.D. degrees in the area of the
application of the Einstein Cartan Evans theory. A quick check on the
website of the Department for Innovation, Universities & Skills at
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/recognisedukdegrees/index.cfm?fuseaction=institut
es.list learned me that this 'university' is not officially recognised.
I believe, but could be mistaken, that advertising an entity as being a
university offering degrees, without proper recognition from relevant
authorities, is not allowed.
I fear that this can have a negative impact on the perceived quality of
SciTopics specifically and Elsevier in general. Therefore I have decided
to take down the ECE page from SciTopics. In all fairness I will
therefore also not allow the opponents to publish a page.
Many thanks,
-----Original Message-----
Dear Dr. Straub,
You have mentioned that the ECE page has caused a lot of discussion at
Elsevier which have included your lawyers, perhaps more than once. That
is quite a distraction for a simple page on the website.
It occurred to me over the weekend that Myron simply posted to your
website as you requested him to do. While doing that, he used the
choices given to him on the website of blocking messages knowing full
well that the people who have been following him around would find their
way to SciTopics because he talked of it on his blog which they follow
very closely. As I understand it, nothing had been said to Myron that
the buttons could not be used.
The other parties must have made quite a commotion at Elsevier with
calls and letters and suggestions that various actions may or may not be aken
when their messages were blocked. It is they who have created this
situation, not Myron. Myron's understandable reaction only started when
the decision was made to block him. Neither he nor we have made any
threats towards Elsevier nor do we have any interest in doing so.
Even though you gave the others a page, they have not used it. Do they
have any other interests besides their ongoing conflict with Myron?
I too would like to see an ongoing civil discussion about ECE. That will
be difficult considering the history of these participants but I would
be willing to try to move this issue forward. But I need the mechanisms
to do so.
Please let me know what your decision is.
Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 11:44:12 -0600
From: Thomas Widlar
Thomas Widlar
Subject: RE: Fwd: Update: SciTopics site on shortcomings of ECE theory
Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 09:42:42 +0100
From: Straub, Bas SC (ELS-AMS)
To: Thomas Widlar
Bas Straub
From: Thomas Widlar [mailto:twidlar@yahoo.com]
Sent: 02 March 2009 03:32
To: Straub, Bas SC (ELS-AMS)
Subject: Re: Fwd: Update: SciTopics site on shortcomings of ECE theory
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Thomas Widlar