Talk:Alexander Dewdney
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Yikes. I read Dewdney's 911 stuff. Terrifying. He is simply insane. Now I really regret writing to him when he was at scientific american. WHAT a nut job. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Seminumerical (talk • contribs) 02:16, 27 December 2005.
- Name-calling without any specifics. --IslandGyrl 02:50, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- Yeah, I'd be interested to know exactly what you find fault with, too. I just found out about the collapse of 7 World Trade Center and it seems pretty bizarre to me. —Keenan Pepper 05:12, 2 April 2006 (UTC)
But operation pearl has nothing to do with the Building 7 collapse. Why don't you read it. Bov 02:23, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
- I have since read it, and though it's not directly related, I wouldn't say it has "nothing to do with" it. —Keenan Pepper 03:01, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
-
- Seminumerical: I had my own thoughts about 9/11, but did not know that such a huge enlightened community of researchers questioning the official account of 9/11 did exist, until I came across this page. Do you sincerely think that all of them would adopt "such a hilarious nonsense science fiction story" if their scientific minds were not profoundly convinced, in view of the evidence, that this is true? They would do this just for fun, or because they don't like Bush? oh, I see: they're "simply insane", of course... — MFH:Talk 01:01, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Muslim
Are you sure he is a Muslim? His personal page mentions slightly his 9/11 activities and extensively his environmental activities, but nothing about religion. Besides don't converted Muslims usually take an Arabic name?
- I removed this unsourced claim. No reference about him being converted to islam on his homepage or CV. --Magabund 10:42, 17 September 2006 (UTC)
-
- AK Dewdney wrote this - http://www.physics911.net/islamnotsuicidal.htm "Finally, it might be asked on what authority a western scientist may write so confidently about the nature of Islam. The author has been a muslim for over 35 years, has studied it closely, has traveled extensively in Muslim lands, and has met over his lifetime literally thousands of Muslims of every race and from almost every country. At no time, in his many conversations with fellow Muslims, has he ever heard any Muslim sing the praises of Osama bin Laden." --75.10.220.86 00:10, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
- readded religious affiliation. 75.10.220.86 00:55, 12 December 2006 (UTC)
Because of this article I know that the guy who attracted me to my career is now a flake. Thanks Wikipedia :( Gazpacho 13:08, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
Gazpacho: Name-calling is not an argument. On the contrary, if one side of a discussion seems to have nothing to offer except name-calling, it could be taken as a sign that the proponents of that side do not have a case. In any case, calling the subjects of articles names ("flake") really ought to have no place in our activity as Wikipedia editors. —IslandGyrl 04:19, 19 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Unauthorized sequels?
The main article could be improved if it dealt more with his literary achievements and less with his religious opinions.
Speaking of literary achievements, maybe a link could be added to a list of unauthorized sequels to his Planiverse novel? It strikes me that his Planiverse thought experiment could be improved on, and probably has been improved on, by numerous other authors out there/198.177.27.18 (talk) 04:51, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

