[cristianpascu]

So, say, if someone comes to you with a clean demonstration of how and why something is happening in the world, people verify it and it proves correct, and (s)he says the idea was revealed while smoking pot in a mystical hotel in north canada, or france for that matter, you'd say no one should take the theory seriously? Good job!

[dalke]

I believe that gnufied is saying that this isn't a clean demonstration. If one paragraph of explanation is buried in 1,000 pages of dreck, then is the onus on the reader to find the nugget, or the author to emphasize the important part?

If you've ever hung around a physics or astrophysics department you'll find that a lot of people send in explanations of how modern science is wrong. For example, http://www.universetoday.com/108044/why-einstein-will-never-... comments:

> One of the benefits of being an astrophysicist is your weekly email from someone who claims to have “proven Einstein wrong”. These either contain no mathematical equations and use phrases such as “it is obvious that..”, or they are page after page of complex equations with dozens of scientific terms used in non-traditional ways. They all get deleted pretty quickly, not because astrophysicists are too indoctrinated in established theories, but because none of them acknowledge how theories get replaced.

[GFK_of_xmaspast]

Have you read this dude's posts. There's a big difference between Kerkule staring at the fireplace and stuff like this:

http://johnhartnett.org/2015/01/26/supernova-remnants-and-th...

[ajkjk]

No, but fortunately that's not at all what the parent poster said either.