February 14, 2017
One of the clearest indicators of overwhelming and complete acceptance of ECE unified field theory is that the average number of distinct visits a year to combined sites www.aias.us and www.upitec.org was 266,640 from 2009 to 2012 and 276,376 from 2012 to 2016. The main university interest is from the top two hundred or so in the world. Since ECE and ECE2 are so perfectly and objectively based on geometry, the only logical or constructive criticism must be based on criticism of geometry itself. ECE and ECE2 are highly imaginative variations on a theme, similar to J. S. Bach, “The Well Tempered Clavier” or the Diabelli variations of Beethoven. The bad parts of the obsolete standard model, are ingredients in a pig’s breakfast of unknowables, a variation on a theme of Pauli: not even crazy. The pigs ran “Animal Farm”, the thought police of “1984”. Not any more.”
There is no interest at all, and your ‘scientometrics’ are clearly contrived or misinterpreted. Can you not find just one conventional indicator to bolster your unlikely claim? We re-iterate: there is no independent referencing of ECE in reputable journals; there is not even any referencing of ECE by loony journals; there are no positive reviews (apart from Penderghastly’s) of your books; there is no interest in those YouTube videos of your views; nobody (reputable) sends you personal praise by e-mail; and nobody (sane) protests to us in your defence. Your incorrect differential geometry has been comprehensively torn apart,
and your only concept of ‘logical and constructive’ criticism was to have your then-friends at Telesio-Galilei set a lawyer on the expert mathematician who pointed out your incompetence:
You were Trump, even before Trump. He is haunted by fact-checkers, so are you. Get used to it.