Posts being deleted again on the alternative forum

I am so incredibly ready for this! I mean it—I really, truly want this to happen! Log in I’ve gotta vent for a second about that one moderator who keeps deleting posts over on the Science Magazine PDF threads. Seriously, it happens constantly! It’s getting to the point where it’s actually killing the vibe of the discussions. When you start scrubbing people's contributions like that, you're directly messing with the flow of the debate and making it impossible for anyone to really build an argument or stay engaged. It’s such a bummer because it totally changes the dynamic of the whole conversation!

Look, if anyone wants to jump into the fray and weigh in on a topic with some actual arguments, please, go for it! We want you here as active members of the community. But let’s get one thing straight: deleting posts just because they aren't "alternative" enough—or because they point out that someone is being ignorant, unread, overly religious, or just plain trolling with fake facts—is totally wrong. Honestly, wiping out posts like that isn't just breaking the rules of basic decency; it's a blatant attempt to manipulate the conversation and a massive abuse of power. Let's keep things fair, shall we?

Look, let’s get one thing straight: this PDF is actual "Science Magazine," not just some collection of wild fantasies and ramblings from self-proclaimed alternative theorists!

Konkretno: korisnik LUN piše post:
I honestly can't believe I'm even bringing this up again, but I just had to share! I was sitting there thinking about everything we discussed earlier, and it hit me like a ton of bricks. You know how sometimes you feel like you're just spinning your wheels, trying to make sense of things that seem totally disconnected? Well, I think we might be looking at this all wrong. I was reading through some old notes—and yes, my handwriting is a total disaster, please don't judge me—and I realized that if we apply a bit more of that Noetic perspective we were talking about, the whole picture starts to shift. It’s almost like when you're staring at a complex math problem and suddenly, out of nowhere, the solution just clicks. It’s not about forcing the pieces together; it’s about letting them find their own rhythm. I know, I know, I sound like a bit of a dreamer here. I'm probably just overthinking it and making myself sound way more profound than I actually am! But seriously, there’s something about the way these patterns emerge that feels too consistent to ignore. It's like watching a master conductor lead an orchestra toward the Seventh Symphony—everything starts to align perfectly if you just listen closely enough. What do you guys think? Am I just rambling on my own little cloud, or is there actually something to this? I'd love to hear your thoughts, even if they involve telling me to go grab a coffee and get real!

Honestly, this guy is such a trip! If he isn't straight-up lifting content—which, let’s be real, he does constantly without even bothering to drop a source or use quotation marks—he’s busy spinning this web of absolute nonsense. He comes out with these conclusions that are just... well, they're silly, inaccurate, and frankly hilarious if you don't take him seriously. The wildest part? We've already dismantled his arguments multiple times in the previous thread using actual links to peer-reviewed studies from Science Magazine. It's like talking to a brick wall, but a very loud, very confused brick wall!

Here’s my take on that post:

I made sure to save this one, knowing full well it was probably going to get deleted!

"Quote:
Check out this post!
You know, I was just looking into this, and it's honestly mind-blowing! The Yonagun structures are estimated to be around 10,000 years old, which actually lines up perfectly with the timeline for when the Great Pyramid of Giza was built. Isn't that wild? It’s one of those crazy historical coincidences that really makes you stop and think!

Brenda Gonzalez12 says:
So, I was thinking about this earlier today—what exactly constitutes an "artifact"? It’s one of those terms we throw around all the time in history classes or when we're browsing through museums, but if you really sit down and peel back the layers, it gets pretty interesting! In the simplest sense, an artifact is basically anything made, modified, or used by humans. We aren't just talking about some dusty old pottery shard sitting in a glass case at the Smithsonian (though those are cool too!). An artifact can be anything from a prehistoric stone tool to a modern smartphone, or even something as simple as a hand-carved wooden spoon from your grandmother's kitchen. What makes it an "artifact" rather than just a random object found in nature is that unmistakable thumbprint of human intention. If you find a perfectly smooth river stone, that's just geology. But if you find a stone that someone shaped into a sharp edge to scrape animal hides? Boom. You've got an artifact. You've got proof that someone, somewhere, had a goal and the ingenuity to achieve it. It’s honestly kind of mind-blowing when you think about it. Every single thing we touch—the tools we use to build skyscrapers in Chicago or the gadgets we use to scroll through social media—is part of a massive, continuous chain of human creation. We are constantly leaving these little physical breadcrumbs behind, telling the story of who we were, how we lived, and what we valued. I always find it a little humbling. We spend so much time worrying about our daily grind, but we're actually just the latest chapter in a very long book of makers and builders. It's all just one big, ongoing project!
Honestly, that’s just plain wrong. It doesn't make any sense, there isn't a shred of evidence to back it up, and frankly, it feels like you're just making things up as you go! It’s about as logical as claiming a pile of trash could be shaped into a Star Trek Borg and then somehow transformed into the Moon.

Quote:
Check out this post!
You know, I’ve been diving deep into this lately, and honestly, it’s fascinating! There are quite a few archaeologists out there—the really sharp ones, anyway—who just won't bite on the idea that this structure is some kind of random natural formation. Even when you throw hard evidence in front of them, like what the geologists are seeing, they still hesitate to call it "just nature." The real kicker? It's the chemical makeup of the stones themselves. They contain specific mineral compositions that simply don't exist naturally in this part of the country. It’s almost like finding a piece of high-tech silicon in the middle of a desert canyon; it just doesn't add up! It makes you wonder what else is hiding in plain sight, right?

Brenda Gonzalez12 says:
Look, let’s be real here: there are legitimate archaeologists and then there are total frauds, but you can't really split them into "smart" versus "dumb." It’s about the work! Besides, if we're talking facts, geologists have already completely debunked everything you're claiming. So, honestly? You're just talking nonsense again.

So, what kind of CHEMICAL composition are we actually talking about here? If you’re bringing up rocks, you’re almost certainly referring to their MINERALOGICAL makeup. Honestly, instead of wasting all that mental energy on those weird Yonagun theories, why not just focus and give me a straight answer regarding the composition of granite, diorite, and syenite? You've been dodging my questions about the pyramids and how hard those specific rocks actually are, and frankly, that ties right back into this whole discussion!

Quote:
Check out this post!
It really brings to mind that whole mystery surrounding the discovery of those massive megalithic blocks over by the Aswan dam, which sits about 580 miles away from the Giza plateau.

Brenda Gonzalez12 says:
Whoa, looks like we’ve got ourselves a brand new breakthrough on our hands! 584 miles Do the Aswan Dam. Not a single inch more, not a single inch less. And honestly, what kind of logic are you even using here? Look, I get it—you’ve got this massive collection of links and an endless series of explanations detailing exactly how those stone blocks drifted down the Nile. It's all very impressive on paper, truly. But for some reason, none of that seems to be clicking in your brain! I can't help but wonder...

Quote:
Check out this post!
Look, I really don't think we should toss out all the possibilities just because exploring the underwater site itself is proving to be such a headache. There are still so many fascinating angles to consider! My only real concern—and I hope I'm not being too cynical here—is that they don't go shoving some poor soul who went missing into this whole construction project just to close the case. Let's keep our heads on straight, okay?

Brenda Gonzalez12 says:
I’m positive they’re out there somewhere! According to the latest reports, a bunch of fishing boats have already ended up stranded due to those crazy ocean currents and sudden weather shifts we've been seeing lately. But hey, that’s probably beside the point for this discussion!

Quote:
Check out this post!
This incredible underwater structure really makes you want to start comparing the Yonagun site to other massive megalithic monuments around the world that seem to date back to roughly the same era. Here’s just one example to get us started:

Check out this shot on the left—it’s an incredible view of an underwater structure! Yonagun, So, if you take a look over on the right side, we’ve got this picture! I honestly can’t get enough of exploring these ancient sites! There is just something about standing in front of massive, perfectly fitted stone structures that makes you feel so small in the best way possible. It really puts everything into perspective, doesn't it? I was just thinking about how incredible the engineering must have been back then—it’s almost mind-blowing when you consider they didn't have any of our modern tools. It definitely makes me want to dive deeper into some Natural Science readings to wrap my head around how they actually pulled it off! Imagine stumbling upon this massive stone complex sitting right on the northern edge of a city like Denver, where you’d expect to find nothing but modern suburbs, but instead, you hit this incredible relic from an ancient empire. It’s absolutely mind-blowing to think about how they built something that sturdy!

Brenda Gonzalez12 says:
If we were looking at the structure's actual shape, maybe we could draw some comparisons. But there's one huge issue with the LUN theory. Just how big is the "jump" between those "steps" at the Yonagun site? Seriously, try answering that...

And besides that—since I'm clearly just trying to see how much nonsense you can cram into a single post before it loses all meaning:

Quote:
LUN says: Check this post
The Yonagun monument is about 10,000 years old which makes it roughly the same age as the Great Pyramid of Giza.

Brenda Gonzalez12 says:
<--- regarding that pyramid comparison.
Then you go and totally trip over your own feet in the very same post (YES LUN, you were the one who used "roughly the same age" as your example!):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacsayhuam%C3%A1n
"Sacsayhuamán was originally built for military purposes to defend against tribes threatening the Inca Empire. Construction began under Pachacutec after 1438. The first person to describe the fortress was the Spanish chronicler Inca Garcilaso de la Vega, who writes that it took about 50 years to build during the reign of Huayna Capaca. By the time the Spanish conquistadors arrived, the structure was already fully completed. From the fortress itself, you get a panoramic view of all of Cusco and the surrounding area."

Are you just out here stealing people's text and copying it, or did you completely lose your mind when you realized the first part of your post contradicts what you just wrote?

Sorry LUN, you basically made a joke out of yourself. You don't even need anyone else to insult you or point out your ignorance. You're doing it all on your own.

It's irrelevant, you're feeding us fake data, total gibberish, and copied nonsense. Hey mods, go ahead and delete this post again!"

Honestly, the level of absurdity being voiced here is incredible. In one single post, this user manages to contradict their own timeline, citing conclusions that have absolutely zero connection to reality. AND FOR SOME REASON THIS POST GETS DELETED (unlike that first one). Of course, I added that little comment at the end on purpose. I already warned someone in the "Alternative History" section about this habit of deleting "non-controversial posts" that "AREN'T ALTERNATIVE."

After that, the guy replies with this post:
http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=6...&postcount=156

In which he offers "arguments" that have been brought up about ten times across seven pages of this thread as the ONLY evidence for his claim. Look, if someone participates in a seven-page discussion from day one, and based on everything read, there is only ONE "argument" in favor of their theory—and that argument has already been debunked and explained—but they still post that same "argument" again, what else would you call it besides trolling? That was the direct question I asked him in my post:

http://www.forum.com/showpost.php?p=6...&postcount=159

Do I even need to tell you HOW THIS POST WAS DELETED TOO?
😠

But here it is, let the admins take a look:
Quote:
LUN says: Check this post
Someone asked which geologist was conducting the research?

It was conducted by Professor Masaaki Kimura, a marine geologist from the University of the Ryukyus in Okinawa, who spent several years studying the Yonagun structures.

Brenda Gonzalez12 says:
Then how do you explain the fact that Robert Schoch—who is himself a proponent of alternative theories (he's the one everyone talks about regarding the Sphinx) and who was practically treated like a hero because of his research—basically tore Kimura apart and said it has nothing to do with anything and is just a natural formation?

And how do you explain that despite your "10,000 years" claim, even Kimura himself mentions it being 6,000 years old, or even 4,000 years old? Honestly, you've proven today that you really don't have a clue when it comes to basic math, so...

How do you account for the fact that this formation is located in rock types that form similar erosion patterns all over the world (which has already been pointed out to you several times)?

And here we go again... LUN, why on earth are you trolling this thread yet again?!

Honestly, just head back to the first couple of pages. Everything you're asking about—the questions, the answers, even the links—is already there. There are even videos that completely debunk those vague claims you keep making.

And since we're talking about being polite... did you actually bother to read my previous post? Did YOU really write what's in there and claim it was "your own handiwork"?? Comparing the 15th century to 10,000 B.C.E. and suggesting they belong to the same era? Talking about buildings versus "structures"??
LUN, you wrote that! You exposed yourself then, and you're exposing yourself again right now. Instead of actually answering the question, you just start trolling the thread and pivoting to these hazy ideas and questions that have already been settled. This thread isn't 1,000 pages long; it's only seven! So, do us all a favor, scroll back to page one, and maybe learn a thing or two, LUN.

Go ahead, feel free to report me for ad hominem attacks or trolling... that seems to be your go-to move whenever you get caught in a lie or a massive blunder.

Does anyone seriously expect people to spend more than five seconds on a single post anymore? Like, searching for sources? Hunting down actual articles? Honestly, anyone could just drop a link to a Smurf cartoon or Star Trek and try to lecture us about pyramids. They can ruin the thread, the whole forum, and annoy the mods. People are out here trying to prove it's not "the truth" that the Star Trek Borg are roaming Earth...

If any of the moderators feel like this thread should be run based on how someone wants to be "alternative," while the rest of us holding different scientific views aren't welcome, then please, say it out loud right now. Then we can just rename the PDFs and the entire thread to reflect that bias.

Or maybe I should start reporting every single post that has already been answered within this thread as trolling? Should I report every little word that "offends" me as an ad hominem attack, or every link that doesn't perfectly fit the topic as "spam"?? If that makes everyone feel better... sure, we can play that game. But let's be real, it would totally destroy any meaningful discussion here.

PS. Just so we're clear, I'm saving a copy of this post... just in case it disappears in the meantime.

Ethan Brooks59 said:If someone actually wants to contribute to a debate using real arguments, they should just act like a regular user. Deleting posts just because they aren't "alternative"—meaning you're scrubbing anything where people show ignorance, religious bias, or trollish nonsense—is a total violation of basic decency. It’s a blatant abuse of power and an attempt to manipulate the conversation.

I've stepped in plenty of times to tell people to keep it civil and stop the insults. Clearly, being polite doesn't work here, so we've moved straight to the delete button. Civil discourse is everything.
Everyone has the right to voice what they believe, whether it's backed by facts or just pure fantasy. People are free to share their theories and whims; if you want actual data, go find a textbook.

So, does this mean I can actually start dumping all my wild theories about Batman, Flash Gordon, or the Star Trek Borg here? Look, you and I both know that if I take the "regardless of whether there's any actual evidence" route, I’m basically going to be trolling this thread on purpose. I'll drive the whole discussion into total absurdity and pure nonsense—and honestly, once the other guys jump in, it’ll turn into such a ridiculous mess that it’ll easily become the dumbest topic and the most brainless PDF on the entire forum. So, I have to ask... is that actually the goal?

Look, I’m all for everyone having the right to believe whatever they want—really, I am! But there’s a massive difference between personal faith and just straight-up spreading nonsense as if it's fact. Honestly, I think we need to have a serious conversation about this specific situation because, frankly, enough is enough. We've got to put a stop to this kind of thing before it goes any further!
The topic is in the PDF! Science Magazine So, I was just diving into this scientific PDF, and honestly? It’s a wild ride! It basically walks you through all these different events and phenomena that—believe it or not—just can't be fully explained by standard scientific facts alone. It’s one of those deep dives that really makes you scratch your head and rethink what we actually know!
Hey, if you're going to rename that other PDF you mentioned, just go ahead and call it whatever you want—I won't bother bringing it up again! Honestly, people can write whatever they feel like. But look, once you put "Science" in the title, everyone knows exactly what that's supposed to mean. It’s not about wild imagination or random "theories," regardless of whether there's actually any evidence to back them up or not. Sorry, but I have to disagree with you on this one!

So, here’s the deal...
So, here’s the deal: someone walks in and confidently claims something is 10,000 years old—just because they felt like blathering it out, no evidence whatsoever—only for it to turn out that it was actually built back in the 15th century. After they've been repeatedly corrected with actual facts and solid proof, you’d think there would be some sort of polite reaction, right? Hmmm. I’m sorry, but at this point, I can only assume this guy is either intentionally trolling us or there’s something else going on. Now, look, psychiatry definitely isn't my field, so I’m not about to start throwing around diagnoses—especially since we all know that’s strictly against the rules on this forum anyway! I have no way of knowing if the person in question is just struggling, under the influence, or perhaps a total fanatic. All I can really conclude is that he's probably just a troll.
That’s exactly why I reacted the way I did!

So, imagine this scenario: you’re sitting there, pouring your heart into a post about St. Peter's Square in Rome, maybe sharing some cool history or a personal memory. Then, out of nowhere, someone starts blowing up your notifications. They aren't just disagreeing with you, either—they’re flat-out insisting that the whole thing is actually the Taj Mahal and that it’s somehow 15,000 years old! And to top it all off, they start throwing insults your way like they own the place. What are you going to do? Honestly, I mean, come on! You can't just sit there and take it. Of course you're going to react! You can't let someone just wander into your digital space, spread total nonsense, and then get personal. It's human nature to stand your ground!

And this is where the decency just completely evaporates. You can't even get a reaction to his posts—his post is still sitting there right alongside those absolute idiots and their so-called "facts"—yet everyone else's content gets wiped immediately!

So, I’d really love to hear what the other mods think about this situation. Honestly, sorry to say it, but I think you might have slipped up here—and I mean this with nothing but respect! It feels like you took a side on this one, and now we’ve got total chaos breaking out in the PDF threads. If that was actually the plan... well, then mission accomplished, I guess! 🍿

Review:

Michelle Robinson said:I have intervened in this discussion numerous times to insist on decorum—requesting that everyone communicate politely without resorting to insults or trivialization. It is patently obvious that such an approach yields zero results, given that the current trend has shifted toward mass deletions. Decent communication remains the cornerstone of any functional discourse.
Everyone possesses the right to express their beliefs, regardless of whether those beliefs hold any actual merit, just as they have the right to peddle their fantasies and fringe theories. For anything else, there are plenty of other PDF files available.

Your methodology is a disaster; it bears no relation to a comprehensive alternative, and certainly nothing to pedagogy.

It is quite baffling that you haven't read

The Noetic approach to reality is written by... you simply won't believe it.
Do you even grasp the implication?

I will not dwell on the recent incident where you attempted to defend yourself with falsehoods... suggesting that if one doesn't understand something, one should merely "ask." Furthermore, there is the matter of blatant fallacy, which you fail to sanction despite your desperate desire for "polite" communication.
And please, spare me the "it doesn't hurt" rhetoric. There are individuals here who possess genuine knowledge, people who don't require an internet connection to function, and who exert the necessary effort to demonstrate core truths to forum members of more limited intellectual capacity. Some grasp it, others do not—whether by design or by birth.

You may delete posts or hand out bans as you see fit, but my dear... do not be so incredibly naive as to attempt to hide behind cheap platitudes, regardless of whether this space is a meaningful inquiry or merely a playground for sadomasochistic tendencies.Follow the established rules of the forum rather than your own arbitrary standards, which are fundamentally fraudulent. This is precisely why reality is so fractured; because of this supposed "refinement," you allow others to treat you like a fool, yet when you finally prove that *they* are the fools, you whine and recoil.
Consequently, it is hardly surprising when you call someone a fool or attempt to grade their IQ to facilitate their understanding. All of this, of course, is done in the name of your precious "refinement."🤦

Thank you for reading. Though, once again, I suspect it will go over your head.☕

I’d also point out that the alternative platform doesn't actually do anything about people who are proven, serial trolls.

Ethan Brooks59 said:...
The topic is in the PDF. Science Magazine. So, we're looking at a scientific paper that dives into phenomena that just can't be explained by standard facts alone. It's pretty wild.
Fine, rename that other PDF you’re talking about then. I won't bother typing it out. And honestly, let people say whatever they want. If "Science Magazine" is in the title, everyone knows exactly what that means. It doesn't mean imagination or random "theories," regardless of whether there's any actual proof behind them. Sorry, but you're just wrong.

...

Just addressing what was quoted here: that PDF is titled "Science Magazine" and lives over on the Alternative section. Just because "science" is in the name doesn't mean the rules or etiquette change for that specific thread compared to the rest of this forum. If you want to debate using the standards from the "Natural Science" section, go do it over there.

Kimberly White63 said:I’ll just address the quote here: that specific sub-forum is called "Science Magazine," and it lives within the Alternative section. Just because the word "science" is in the title doesn't mean the rules or social etiquette there are any different from the rest of this forum. If someone wants to debate using the strict standards of the "Natural Science" section, they should go over there.

I'm right there with you! That's exactly why the Natural Science section uses different terminology and a completely different approach. But let's be real—you don't go to Natural Science to find people calling granite "the hardest rock ever," and you don't go to the History section to find folks claiming 15th-century buildings are actually 10,000 years old. Over there, we dive into the specifics; we don't spend our time debating the absolute basics. On the Alternative side, though, you run into people who act like they skipped middle school entirely. They want to have deep discussions about geology without knowing basic rock types, or try to interpret the mathematical proportions of the Great Pyramid of Giza without even knowing the Pythagorean theorem, or hunt for astronomical alignments while being totally clueless about the stars in Orion. Look, it's perfectly fine if someone doesn't know something. It's just plain silly when they try to mask their ignorance by hiding behind "alternative theories." That isn't being alternative; it's just being wrong. Come on, Ryan Gomez4, you've been around long enough—remember that whole saga about living water? You had to shut down so many threads because they were honestly just nonsense. According to Robert Rodriguez9, all those topics should have stayed open because everyone has the right to write and think whatever they want. Sure, they can think what they want, but it should stay within the scope of the topic and common sense! Would you seriously sit there and let a thread run where someone claims people don't live in the Southern Hemisphere because they'd just fall off the bottom of the Earth? Of course you wouldn't! We live in the 21st century, for crying out loud. But by the logic being used now, that thread could totally stay in the Alternative section because "everyone has the right to believe and write what they want." To me, that's just ridiculous. It destroys what makes the Alternative section special—which is offering a different perspective on science. It should still be a perspective rooted in facts, not stories about rocks jumping out of holes, screaming water in pipes, or ice crystals having seven sides because someone played the Seventh Symphony for them.
And the moment you point that out, people start acting like it's a personal attack. Then comes the drama, the reports, the whining, and now, finally, the deleting of posts. And this is coming from the very people who are supposed to maintain a certain standard here—making sure threads stay on topic and posts remain relevant.
If this keeps up, it feels like all of us trying to bring a more scientific lens to the things these "alternative theorists" claim are miracles—even though most of it isn't unexplained at all—are actually unwelcome. It's almost like the moderators are suggesting that if we don't like how things are going, we should just go post on other forums.
Well, if that's the case, then let's just be honest about it... let's be open about where we actually stand.

Look, we’re an open book. We aren't out here kicking anyone off the subforum, but we constantly remind people how this place works and demand they respect the rules.

Awesome! That’s exactly what I was looking to hear.🙂
So, in that case, I’m asking if my deleted posts regarding the Yonagun topic could please be restored. And look, if we aren't going to delete certain posts, then let's just leave the others alone too. I'm totally fine with whatever happens—just keeping things fair and open. 👍

Ethan Brooks59 said:or ice crystals growing seven branches because they were listening to the Seventh Symphony.
.

Just look at your own behavior.
You’re mocking things you don't even grasp.
There is actual research out there showing how water behaves at its freezing point, crystallizing into entirely different structures depending on variables like light or pressure, and even acoustic influences—concepts you clearly haven't a clue about.

And here you are, treating this like some joke you can drag out for years, thinking that just because you have a handle on mineralogy or petrology—and I actually enjoy reading your takes on rocks since I know you get that part—that you can somehow explain away everything that falls under the umbrella of Science Magazine or niche archaeological theories.

Ethan Brooks59 said:Perfect. That’s exactly what I wanted to hear.🙂
So, I'm asking for my deleted posts regarding the Unknown topic to be restored. If some posts aren't getting wiped, then none of them should be. Let's have some consistency here. 👍

The posts aren't coming back because you were being abusive. Stop attacking people and taking things personally, and maybe you won't have anything deleted in the first place.

No worries at all!

Just a heads-up: from here on out, I’m going to be super strict about reporting any off-topic chatter, spam, or those annoying personal attacks. Honestly, it’s going to make our discussions way more interesting. It'll be a blast, I promise! 😁😁

Review:

Kimberly White63 said:I will limit my response strictly to what was quoted: the PDF is titled "Science Fringe," and it resides within the Alternative section. The mere presence of the word "science" in the title does not imply that this specific sub-forum operates under different rules or social norms than the rest of the site. If anyone wishes to engage in discussions following the spirit of "Natural Science," they should do so in that specific section.

Look, please don't assume we lack respect for the moderators or fail to grasp the difficult position you find yourselves in; frankly, we are fortunate not to be in your shoes, but...
As I previously stated, science emerges from the Alternative sphere. However, you must understand that the Alternative crowd isn't the issue; rather, it is the utter nonsense they spew to undermine actual knowledge.
They offer no constructive options, only a denial of reality—which, as you know, is typically a symptom of psychological trauma that frequently results in... well, certain psychological profiles. Therefore, one must attempt to educate them using a vernacular they can actually comprehend.

It is perfectly understandable that you feel entitled to take measures that you believe, or hope, will make the topic more engaging. No one is disputing that right.

However, the core issue regarding the unacceptable behavior of gšm is purely technical in nature. It isn't a complex problem; even someone with the intellectual capacity of a toddler could prove its validity through simple experimentation... at which point, we’ll likely see some pseudo-intellectual appearing to lecture us on spirituality. 🤣

Regarding the technicalities, I will submit a formal suggestion for improvement since this isn't the appropriate venue, but I will reiterate: the behavior of gšm is both unacceptable and dishonest. My last post was deleted despite meeting absolutely no criteria for removal, save for the arbitrary whims of gšm. Believe me, she didn't even have the time to read it, yet there were a hundred explanations provided.

Then there are these "polite" posts that have been circling the drain for years from the same individuals, despite everything being clarified via links, logic, and alternative perspectives. As a moderator, perhaps you should ask them what exactly remains unclear... much like asking why a simple water level tube fails to function as a leveling tool.
Ignoring them isn't the solution, because they are simply generating clutter. Meanwhile, others—myself included—are genuinely trying to learn about the unknown or explore different ways of thinking, only to repeatedly encounter people addicted to conflict, essentially forcing you to play the role of an enabler providing solace to the aggrieved.

Furthermore... I have been partially barred from Natural Science due to the similar inclinations of the moderators and their associates, who proved incapable of engaging in actual debate (the same moderator even earned a red mark due to an obsession with me... though they failed to react in time, which another moderator admitted). Consequently, my path is already set, and these matters mean nothing to me, nor should they to you.

That thread turned into a total gutter. Everything I wrote holds true today, regardless of the moderators' expectations. Let's just say that particular individual isn't exactly a paragon of virtue... it isn't about a specific policy, it's just a matter of fact.
If someone is cheating, I won't "help" them just because I am also playing with an advantage.

gšm is utterly unfit, even for Science Fringe, because she cannot even distinguish a standard disagreement from a "flame" war.
I can sympathize with the fact that she doesn't have time to read what doesn't interest her since she already has her own loyal followers... but it is entirely unnecessary and baseless to delete my post when it contained no prohibited content, especially while she goes so far as to lie to the administrator. You are capable of viewing that post and commenting on it yourself, rather than allowing "her" to present a narrative based on other deleted or censored posts to suggest that I am attacking those with differing views... which is merely a clumsy attempt to draw conclusions from a false premise.
As for polite communication, true politeness involves responding openly and directly, not resorting to lies. We are all human, and we all err.

Regarding Brenda Gonzalez12, she is undoubtedly an expert from whom one could learn an immense amount, yet she chooses instead to descend into hysterics and incessantly spout the same absolute garbage. Meanwhile, the moderator sits idly by, taking zero action... it isn't the thief who is truly caught, but rather the one who gets caught ...

And please, don't just suggest we "ignore" them. While ignoring might be easy, ethics dictate that one must extend a hand to the unwell; we shouldn't raise our hands against people like them, nor should we distance ourselves from them (Brenda Gonzalez12 and myself)

🙏Jerry Robinson56, have you ever thought about getting into writing critiques, social commentary, columns, reviews, or maybe even dropping a book? 🙏
I’m pretty sure you could make a killing doing it.
It feels like wasted potential.

@Jerry Robinson56/">@@Jerry Robinson56: I’m not going to quote your entire post since there's someone else in between us and I don't want to clutter the thread.

You’re right and you’re wrong. I already warned you about getting too aggressive, because if you keep it up, I’ll have to delete your posts—even when they’re actually on-topic and decent.

Attacking a colleague isn't right. I'm not saying that just to be polite; I'm saying it because she genuinely puts in the work. Unlike me lately, since I've been feeling pretty discouraged by the overall vibe on this forum and my own inability to fix it.

Your post right here proves my point: you mix logical arguments with personal attacks like they're one and the same.

So, I'm suggesting once more that you try to chill out and think before you steamroll people. Though, maybe that's impossible for you since that's just how you roll, and who am I to try and change you?

I don't care how you deal with mods on other sites, but over at Alternative, nobody gets banned because a moderator has a grudge. If that were the case, a few users would have been kicked off long ago.

I appreciate you taking the time to respond; it was a generous use of your attention. I realize I haven't provided an exhaustive deep dive into this specific subject yet—and I certainly intend to expand on my position more thoroughly in due course—but the core principles I am laying out here remain universally applicable to everyone on this forum.

Kimberly White63 said:Jerry Robinson56: I won't bother quoting your specific post here; there is an intervening comment between yours and my response, and quite frankly, there is no sense in cluttering up the page with unnecessary scrolling.

You are both right and wrong. I have already cautioned you about indulging in such overly aggressive outbursts; if you continue, I will be forced to delete your posts, which are otherwise perfectly relevant and quite dry.

That is true, but this is where we finally arrive at the crux of the matter. I didn't raise an objection regarding the previous deletions or the instances where my posts were censored—those were legitimate calls, and she was objectively correct to act. However, this latest deletion is nothing short of a disgrace. She scrubbed the post almost instantly without even bothering to read it. To make matters worse, her subsequent "response" was a total farce. I suppose I could grant some leniency there, considering my initial phrasing was somewhat ambiguous, though any reasonable person should have grasped my intent. But once the question was properly articulated? That’s when she resorted to outright lying.One can certainly observe the details laid out in that particular post.

Kimberly White63 said:I find your attacks on our colleague to be entirely misplaced. I am not offering this observation out of some misguided sense of professional solidarity, but rather from a position of sincere conviction. She is genuinely striving to perform her duties to the highest possible standard—a stark contrast to my own recent performance, as I have already candidly admitted in my report that I haven't been putting in much effort lately. I find myself profoundly disillusioned by the overall atmosphere of this PDF, as well as my own utter inability to bring it into any semblance of order..

It is not your responsibility to offer comfort. When you encounter individuals who are pathologically exclusionary and aggressive in their rhetoric, there is no point in attempting to provide solace. In those instances, one finds that the only pragmatic course of action is to mirror their tone; otherwise, any attempt at assistance is entirely futile.
Violence begets more violence—unless, of course, one isn't being sufficiently forceful about it. I realize how blunt that sounds, but it is simply an unyielding law of nature. You aren't going to change certain people by pointing out the truth or attempting to show empathy for "them." Some things are just immutable.

She is failing miserably at her "job," if one can even call it that. This is a technical subject where reality can be proven definitively every single time—take, for instance, that transparent hose filled with water used to establish a level position. Or consider those deleted posts where she so eloquently explained why there isn't a single chair in sight and how the "landing problem" was supposedly solved. Instead of actually addressing the root cause, she simply hides the cure. And let’s be honest, she’s hiding the version that doesn't come with side effects. She approaches her work much like a bureaucrat attempting to justify blatant nepotism.
And where exactly is this topic heading? You can see it for yourself.

Kimberly White63 said:Even your own post serves as a perfect illustration of the point I made earlier: you have a persistent tendency to conflate logical arguments with personal attacks.

One can observe that they aren't immediately clicking... Just look at the sequence involving that particular individual—it’s quite transparent, isn't it? In all my previous posts, there hasn't been a single insult; I have simply been providing clear, logical explanations. Yet, he persists in initiating a new flame in every subsequent thread, only to be met with an entirely civil response each time. Let me be clear: Alternative is not a playground for nonsense or for mocking Natural Science. It is a dedicated pursuit of what is possible.

Unknown is contrary to the forum rules, but if a moderator fails to engage with the "other" side, what choice remains for you? Simply sit there and take it?
I am an atheist😉 and I merely reflect their own image back at them.
Believe it or not, I am capable of writing with clinical precision—believe that instead, and it will hurt more—but this is how it is... we aren't machines, we are human beings.

Furthermore, the repetition of the word "clean" in the post I was referencing was intentional. If you have doubts, specify the word or sentence and I shall clarify, though nothing should be left to uncertainty. Even Brenda Gonzalez12's posts involve a man exhausting himself with explanations, whereas this Unknown finds satisfaction only in trivialities... quite frankly. And even in those little gadgets...

Kimberly White63 said:So, I suggest once again that you attempt to communicate with a bit more composure and think before you steamroll someone (though I realize you might find that difficult since that is simply your way of communicating, and who am I to try to change you).

A good approach is a correct approach. I understand both Brenda Gonzalez12 and several others here, much like Jason Grant, Ibrahim, and many more. It isn't about changing behavior, but about application; collisions are a natural occurrence that invigorate both sides, albeit not simultaneously. The only true insults are lies and injustice... passion can be used as an excuse... I must mention again the example of the moderator who, after an objection was raised, rescinded his warning; he possesses extraordinary logic, and although many criticize him, he is not wrong. And that was the only instance, because the rest were handed out to me personally...
He could have easily noted that I was already in the "clear"... you understand, correctness.

Kimberly White63 said:I don't want to get involved in your relationship with moderators on other forums, but on Alternative, no one has suffered due to a moderator's personal animosity; if that were the case, a few users would have been permanently banned long ago.

That was not my intention, as to quote you, who am I... I simply wanted you to know that the path ahead is predictable and well-trodden. There is no "haggling." If I am wrong, I will admit it and remain silent, accepting the outcome; if I am right, it is game over unless proven otherwise.
A permanent ban might be a cure, but corruption and threats are more potent than execution, and a simpler way is to directly establish an undeniable fact.
If someone refuses to accept that 1+1=2 and denies it entirely...?
Note: technical matters—biological and chemical ones—are delicate.
But one can observe the discrepancy without issue, though there is always room for "two" for the sake of entertainment.
Progress only occurs through the acceptance of the undeniable; everything is written, no matter how bizarre it may seem.

Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away.

Just wanted to add my two cents here: those posts from "one side," filled with all their usual nonsense, are still hanging around in the thread about Unknown. It’s basically like comparing an object that's 10,000 years old to something from the 15th century. And when someone points out how ridiculous that sounds, their comment gets deleted.

Instead of just giving a heads-up to the user in question—you know, the one who can't answer a single direct question and instead just dumps links where they've copied someone else's work, rambling through contradictions within a single post—the mods decide to let them run wild under the guise of being "Alternative" or "edgy." And then we get this:

All this just shows the extreme limits some people reach when they a) don't care what they write, b) have no clue what they're talking about, c) don't understand the subject matter, d) blindly trust any random "author" they find, e) refuse to listen even when you explain exactly where they're wrong, f) maliciously report every single post out of spite (which you and Unknown know all too well, Ryan Gomez4), g) view any interaction as a personal attack, and h) insult, belittle, and troll threads, effectively suffocating anyone with a different opinion or even just the ability to think for themselves—all while hiding behind terms like "freedom of speech" or "right to an opinion."

Look, democracy as a concept is actually quite conservative and sits at total odds with anarchy. In a true democracy, EVERYONE has the right to say whatever they want, but you also have to stand behind your words. You have the right to express your thoughts, sure, but you also carry the responsibility for what you say. In a discussion—especially on a forum (rather than a playground in some preschool)—we should all be presenting our views using ARGUMENTS. Real ones. Things we can actually back up. Otherwise, we've got a serious problem.
If we don't, this isn't a forum or a democracy; it's just anarchy and pure idiocy.
A place where anyone can claim absolutely anything. One minute, they'll claim the Pyramid is made of ice cream; by the afternoon, it's a chunk of a frozen asteroid falling from the sky; and by evening, it's a moon sinking into the sand. And heaven forbid you ask for a source! Then you're suddenly an ignoramus, an idiot, a fool, or a doubting Thomas. Well, why don't you prove the Pyramid isn't just ice cream, chocolate, a digital drawing, or a piece of Kryptonite from a planet called Unknown?
Is this really the standard for a thread that has 300 pages and half a million views (when talking about Pyramids)?

Or is the actual goal to flood this Science Fringe section with as many "alternative" morons as possible? We've got people who don't even grasp the basics of what they're "debating," creative religious fanatics (we've seen a few of those), toddlers, and seniors who think Lenin, Mao Zedong, Stalin, Josip Broz Tito, or Elvis Presley are still walking the earth (and are actually being hidden from the public by some shadowy group running the world from the shadows). It feels like we're just messing around with the term "Alternative" until we've completely screwed ourselves over.

I always find myself coming back to that "living water" topic. If this is what people consider "democracy" nowadays, I have a few pretty hilarious ideas for that thread. And in that case, I demand that posts aren't deleted, that "freedom of thought" isn't stifled, and that any attempt to tamper with that freedom is STRICTLY SANCTIONED.

It's all the same to me.

And by the way, I've reported a ton of posts for actual harassment and violations of the forum rules, and nobody is doing anything... so please, I'm not rushing, just a gentle reminder. ☕

P.S.
If you want to see how things actually function in "reality" (or the reality of the "Alternative" crowd), just look at THIS thread right now. This thread only has 17 posts so far , not 1,000 posts and 60 pages.
In the post:
POST no. 5. - TROLLING THE THREAD just to start a fight.

POST br. 10
- This is totally off-topic, and honestly, it’s veering pretty close to an ad hominem attack

POST br. 14 - This is straight-up trolling, personal attacks, and even outright insults

We have two moderators—well, actually two female moderators, since it's obvious is out on vacation—and yet, there isn't a single reaction.

The rules don't apply to everyone equally, apparently! Usually, posts like this get wiped from the threads immediately. Just calling someone an "idiot" is more than enough reason to moderate. That's why I'm speaking up about this right now.

@Brenda Gonzalez12:

Post #14 was made on this thread. On this subforum, only the Natural Science moderators have the authority to delete or archive anything.

@Jerry Robinson56/">@@Jerry Robinson56: I’ll ask the admin or a supermod to check out the disputed post and make a call.

Brenda Gonzalez12;:

What exactly was your point there?
It seems you’ve mastered the art of the insult—like when you go after Unknown, for instance.
We already know how this works; it's just your standard playbook for when you run out of actual arguments.

And now you’ve decided to come for me too, have you?
Let’s take this one step at a time.

POST br. 5. - JUST TROLLING THE THREAD TO START A FIGHT.

Pointing something out isn't trolling.

POST br. 10
- off-topic, and honestly, bordering on an ad hominem attack.

Why are you dodging the question?
On the Alternative forums, you seem to make a hobby out of mocking anything labeled "alternative."
Why can't you give a straight explanation?
Just so you know, the acoustic influence on crystal formation is a proven scientific fact. You love to wrap yourself in the flag of science whenever it suits you on the Alternative boards, but while plenty of things remain scientifically unexplained, the specific thing you're making fun of here is actually backed by data—it just doesn't bother you because you don't want to face it.
It’s easy to sit there and mock something simply because you don't grasp the concept behind the post.
Plus, you're making a fool of yourself over on the Natural Science boards.
So let's not pretend this is "off-topic" when you're clearly just using the Alternative section to ridicule anything that doesn't fit your narrow view.

POST br. 14 - blatant TROLLING, AD HOMINEM, and outright insults.

That was meant for Jerry Robinson56, whom I respect and who respects me.
We have mutual respect.
Did you even notice that I actually gave him a compliment?
The whole thing had nothing to do with you, but if you want to learn something, look at Jerry Robinson56—look at how he communicates with actual substance, solid arguments, and a bit of class and humor.
People like him are actually worth talking to.
The internet doesn't revolve around you, Brenda Gonzalez12, and you aren't the only person on these forums, so stop acting like this is your private monologue.
And why do you keep attacking Unknown like this? You've already been warned about that kind of behavior.
Why are you playing the victim?

How this all kicked off
To put it simply.
On one of those fringe science channels, they were debating whether the "Pyramids of Giza" found underwater in the USA might actually rewrite everything we know about human history.
Brenda Gonzalez12 keeps trying not to prove what are clearly undeniable facts, and out of sheer frustration, she ends up picking fights with everyone on the forum, even blaming the moderators for her own inability to make a case, which honestly just makes her a nuisance.

Take this specific post, for example:

Brenda claims that these are all just ???natural occurrences.???
I mean, how do you even continue a conversation with that?