SSM Plebiscite

[LP]

I say they're fruitless because the amount of money, time and energy expended has yielded very little. If there was something worth reporting, it would be common knowledge, and not arid technical mumbo jumbo that appears in places intended for cosmo wonks or physicists.

Your very defensive, what is wrong?

It is common knowledge, like the large open public access Gaia project, the LHC or the SKA, but you won't find a fish slapper writing about them! Denial doesn't make it hidden, that is just a form of selective ignorance.

As for the rest of your post, you have I assume never read Thomas Kuhn, or else you wouldn't be making such outlandish statements. Science is no more interested in truth than any other institution. The reason why science won't meaningfully explore any other options is that there is too much invested in, and too much riding on, the current theories. The Titanic doesn't change course easily. Neither, it seems, do certain egos.

Kuhn was the worst kind of tinfoil central, for profit tinfoil, and it's not even clear that he believed his own mantra which is a huge first warning sign. Yet you seem happy to accept opinion when it's a generalisation offered for profit, like most New Age texts.

Arxiv is free, as is PLOS, ResearchGate and any number of resources of Open Access journals if you care to do due diligence! Further most major science projects make their data freely available, there is nothing hiding, it isn't hidden in vaults like the Vatican. While you choose to ignore all the freely available data, apparently if it is free for you to peruse and use then it's not really evidence, you want it in plain language and when you get it that way you ask for the evidence in the best possible Trump way. Maybe that says more about you PaulP, that I find very disappointing!