pseudoscience

["Tesla list" <tesla-at-pupman-dot-com>]

Original poster: "Mike Nolley by way of Terry Fritz <twftesla-at-qwest-dot-net>" <nolleym-at-willamette.edu>

    I just wanted to say that I deeply appreciate the fact that this
list is *not* like
    Keelynet, etc.  It is (hopefully) based upon the collective
experimental evidence of a group of amateurs, *not* on lies,
fabrications, or esoterica.
    The thing I hate most about pseudoscience is that it typically
invalidates all of the real science or valid experimentation that look
*anything* like it.  This makes it all the more imperative that hobbies
like ours stay rooted in experimental evidence, not far-out or
declamatory theories which may or may not explain it.
    Alot of the discussions on Keelynet revolve around supposed
experiments made by 1 person, and the attempts to duplicate those
experiments by others.  Typically there are involved prohibitively
expensive materials, extraordinarily complex or "secret" mechanics not
revealed by the experimenter, men in black, litigation, etc.
    It refreshes me to be a part of a list completely without these
confusing and maddening elements.
            --Mike