"The truth that there are no truths."
I established the following from John Dore today. The statement has been slightly modified.
"Should we knowingly lie to students in order to help an electrician to wire up a house?" The answer from John Dore FIET on 18.10.2020 is; "No." “Ivor
You should not promulate falsehoods as a matter of principle.”
I need the answer to the question from Nobellist Brian Josephson; ex head of the Cavendish Archie Howie; Ex Board of Directors of the IEEE Tony Davies.
The future of science is at stake. Alternatively, the three may say the future of science is not at stake.
If they are scientists, they have to comment. Or they may say a "senior scientist" is not obliged to comment.
Josephson sent me more than 100 emails.
Howie sent me 30 emails of length 30 lines. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/howieland.htm In 1983 he wrote 2 pages on Cattq.
Tony Davies sent me 20,000 words in emails.
Fri, 16 Oct, 20:45 (4 days ago)
Howie was head of the Cavendish Laboratory from 1989 to 1997. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cavendish_Laboratory
In 1983 he wrote to me 2pp about cattq http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm , mentioning the eggs to Oxford. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/x64t2.htm He is a westerner. (He sends ten times as many eggs too slowly.)
I tried again 10 years later. In 1993 Pepper wrote to me. http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/2812.htm taking the southerner position. You see that he dismissed the (Howie) westerner position over cattq. Pepper worked for Howie in the Cavendish. Sir Michael Pepper was later "knighted for services to physics". https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X0l1diFGxIg
For the next 30 years they refused to discuss their contradictory positions.
I shall further elaborate their truly scandalous behaviour, blocking scientific advance for nearly half a century.
The key issue is not whether, when we come to cattq, http://www.ivorcatt.co.uk/cattq.htm , Howie’s westerner or Pepper’s southerner answer is correct. Further, the key issue is not their technical competence. Much more important, their moral competence is the issue. It is necessary for someone in their position to either state that cattq is unimportant, or else they have to do something about their disagreement. If they fail to do anything, it will mean not only that they are not scientists, but also they are totally immoral and destructive. Leaving such a matter unresolved for further time will be extremely destructive.
Ivor Catt 20.10.2020