User talk:Kudpung

Please sign your message.

Status: Unknown

Hi, welcome to my talk page!

I make plenty of errors - if you are here to complain about a tag, a warning, a deletion, or a block, please assume good faith.
If I have erred, don't hesitate to tell me, but being rude will get you nowhere.
If you have erred, chances are I'll help you get round it and over it, but I don't suffer fools gladly ;)
Please click here to leave a new message.

On line now? It is 9:17 PM where this user lives near Udon Thani, Thailand

RfA clerking

I am currently drafting a clerking proposal because the clerking proposal on WP:RFA2015 is informal and vaguely defined. I do not want to open a multi-phase RfC just to confirm past consensus, so you know of any other major attempts at proposing clerking or similar system at RfA other than Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Clerks? Thanks, Esquivalience ^t 03:25, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely, Esquivalience, why re-invent the wheel. Change its tyres thoughby all means. There is a perfectly good stand-alone clerking proposal at Wikipedia talk:Requests for adminship/Clerks. It didn't get consensus because people do not want RfA to become an area where they can no longer misbehave with impunity. Like all attempts at RfA improvement, any new initiatives will probably fail for the same reasons. I would nevertheless give them my 100% support. Incremental changes like these, if made, are none--Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)theless likely to gain more traction as a stand-alone proposal rather than long winded RfAs that try to treat many issues at the same time. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 10:31, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Help

Please take a look at Newton Public Schools. There is an ongoing dispute between several editors, one of whom is pushing hard on a POV and is to put it mildly, very verbose. Please help if you can. Thanks. John from Idegon (talk) 18:38, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done. See talk page, John. Perhaps you would like to organise the RfC. I won't take part in it because I'm now involved as the protecting admin, but I'll keep an eye on it and warn anyone who tries to monopolise it. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 19:13, 1 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have never done an RfC, but at this point, the talk page is so trashed I cannot even tell who said what, much less when. Its almost like politics! John from Idegon (talk) 11:20, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

meh

REMEMBER, WE ARE ALL VOLUNTEERS. as are the contributors. Thanks.Letterhead330 (talk) 23:14, 2 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

you have read the english translation of......what? No clue what youre talking about. There is a panel of scientists involved in bosnian pyramids. Clearly, you are focussing on the discoverer in a prejudiced fashion and ignoring all the other contributors to the discovery's proving. Wouldnt you say?

did you read LaViolettes page?

Moreover based on the predictions of this theory, he developed an alternative cosmology that effectively replaces the big bang theory. In fact, in 1986, he was the first to cast doubt on the big bang theory by showing that it makes a far poorer fit to existing astronomical data when compared to this new non-expanding universe cosmology.

The subquantum kinetics cosmology also led him to make successful predictions about galaxy evolution that were later verified with the Hubble Space Telescope.

Dr. LaViolette is credited with the discovery of the planetary-stellar mass-luminosity relation which demonstrates that the Sun, planets, stars, and supernova explosions are powered by spontaneous energy creation through photon blueshifting. With this relation, he successfully predicted the mass-luminosity ratio of the first brown dwarf to be discovered.More recently, his maser signal blueshifting prediction has found confirmation following publication of the discovery of a blueshift in the Pioneer 10 spacecraft tracking data.

Dr. LaViolette is the first to predict that high intensity volleys of cosmic ray particles travel directly to our planet from distant sources in our Galaxy, a phenomenon now confirmed by scientific data. He is also the first to discover high concentrations of cosmic dust in Ice Age polar ice, indicating the occurrence of a global cosmic catastrophe in ancient times.Based on this work, he made predictions about the entry of interstellar dust into the solar system ten years before its confirmation in 1993 by data from the Ulysses spacecraft and by radar observations from New Zealand.

He also originated the glacier wave flood theory that not only provides a reasonable scientific explanation for widespread continental floods, but also presents a credible explanation for the sudden freezing of the arctic mammoths and demise of the Pleistocene mammals. Also he developed a novel theory that links geomagnetic flips to the past occurrence of immense solar flare storm outbursts.

He is the developer of subquantum kinetics, a novel approach to microphysics that not only accounts for electric, magnetic, gravitational, and nuclear forces in a unified manner,

comment

http://starburstfound.org/letters-of-support/ Kudpung... presidential letter - didnt realize theyre clickable, it was Reagan -- still a president, and this man invented several quantum and astronomy sciences. This is the letters of support link - you might read it. Your system is geared to reject the very people who create wiki, and something appears awry in that methodology. How exactly can WIKI work out, when you reject volunteers editing wrong info pages? (2006 is last links for the "claimed" now proven pyramids; 2016 is a whole decade of discoveries youre refusing, and I heard of this from Semir's site, but now I know it to be not an accident. Sorry, but I dont see any rectification and the slurs on Dr. La Violette will make interesting video fodder for the way WIKI operates. It is okay for me to document this treatment, and is that alright, or will it be construed as something personal? (all the comments so far avoid fixing the problem and by golly, theyre insulting.) Letterhead330 (talk) 23:17, 2 December 2015 (UTC) Superwave Theory[reply]

• Letter from Senator Packwood to the U.S. National Science Foundation

• Letter from Christopher Lehman, Special Assistant to the President

• Letter from Dr. Korotkovitch (Leningrad) to the National Science Foundation

• Letter from Senator Kennedy of Massachusetts

• Letter from Sir Crispin Tickell UK Mission to the UN

• Letter from Wilbert Chagula, Tanzanian ambassador to the UN Cosmology

• Letter from professor Georges de Vaucouleur, University of Texas, Austin

• Letter from professor Jean-Claude Pecker, College of France and professor Jean-Pierre Vigier, director of research CNRS

• Letter from professor Jean-Claude Pecker, College of France

• Letter from professor Jean-Pierre Vigier, director of research CNRS

• Letter from Grote Reber, father of radio astronomy

• Letter from professor Paul Marmet, National Research Council of Canada

• Letter from professor Dean Turner, University of Northern Colorado Feeling Tone Theory

• Letter from professor Karl Pribram, Neuropsychology Laboratory, Stanford University

• Letter from professor Walter Freeman, Division of Neurobiology, UC Berkeley

• Letter from professor Ted Packard, Chairman, Department of Educational Psychology, University of Utah

• Letter from professor Richard Rowan, Director of Counseling Services, The Evergreen State College

• Letter from Dee Dickinson, Coordinator, New Horizons for Learning

• Letter from Hazel Henderson, Co-Director, Princeton Center for Alternative Futures Aerospace Technology: NASA Space Plane Correspondence

• Letter from Charles Morris, Asst. Dir. NASA Aero-Space Plane Program

• Letter to Charles Morris, Asst. Dir. NASA Aero-Space Plane Program

Requests for Information

• Institutional affiliations of people requesting information on Starburst research (1984-1989)