On Fri, 31 Mar 2006 16:02:05 GMT, Irv Finkleman
wrote:

1. The discoverer pitches the claim directly to the media.

Or a vanity publisher.

2. The discoverer says that a powerful establishment is trying to
suppress his or her work.

Almost always prefaced here in mumbling about Gurus.

3. The scientific effect involved is always at the very limit of
detection.

Think ±59% error that "proves" a theory.

4. Evidence for a discovery is anecdotal.

Just looking at the headers here reveal how one correspondent (who
shall go unnamed) posts twice in response, and then responds to his
responses.

5. The discoverer says a belief is credible because it has endured for
centuries.

Appeals to Galileo, Occam, Plushbottom, and Kelvinator seem to be
popular for whoring.

6. The discoverer has worked in isolation.

With his reports of vast support by email from a legion of admirers.

7. The discoverer must propose new laws of nature to explain an
observation.

Can anyone spell the fundamental property of Standing Wave
steady-state RMS phase current flowing in a Kirchhoff distributed
network?

C is for the endless carping;
E is for the S12 voltage Ponzi;
C is for the stray capacitance shuffled Enron style;
I is for the current like a Republican budget that never balances;
L is for the inductance in this three card Monte.

Put them all together, and you've got the seven warning signs
described.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC