Originally Posted By: JohnJohnJohn
you won't find Barry Setterfield's claims supported in mainstream scientific journals. and you know this if you are being sincere. I'm not saying that definitely proves he is wrong but let's at least be honest...he is certainly not mainstream!


To my bookshelves:

Barry teamed up with Trevor Norman of Flinders University in Adelaide, and in 1987 Flinders itself published their paper, "Atomic Constants, Light, and Time." Their math department had checked it and approved it and it was published with the Stanford Research Institute logo as well.

One simply cannot get more "mainstream" than the Stanford Research Institute!


Scientific American 267:6 (1992), p. 19;. J. Gribbin, New Scientist 9 July (1994) pp17

R. Matthews, Science 271 (1996), pp759

http://www.wnd.com/2004/07/25852/


There are plenty more "mainstream" papers available where other scientists, even and especially the secular scientists, have studied Barry's work and came to the conclusion that, while his work creates a dilemma for them, it is nonetheless a good work and a scientific finding.

I'm sitting here recalling a convention of same where one of the mainstream secular scientists up on the dias, whose name I can't remember now, stated that he reviewed and understood Barry's work, found it to be actual and real, but, stated that he just "did not want it to be so!" At least this one was honest about it.


--Mac

PGmusic FAQs, Tutorials and Updates! click here

You must be Audiominds.
www.audiominds.com