[RightWhale]

Kopeikin has violated scientific protocol by changing the equations to be used for the analysis after the results are in, thereby presumably avoiding the embarrassment of having to announce an unexpected result

His point was that the equations used in the analysis were incorrect. There are countless numbers of physicists looking at this right now. Van Flandern alternates in a random pattern between reality and kookism, so it would be well to read the paper for oneself or wait for further letters to the editor. I was going to read the paper last night, but the associated diagram will take some time to decipher, and the formulas seem to be scattered into constituent atoms.

[aruanan]

Van Flandern alternates in a random pattern between reality and kookism, so it would be well to read the paper for oneself or wait for further letters to the editor.

Ha ha. Sometimes kookism is more a measure of the degree to which the expectations by which one interprets kookism are out of line with reality than the degree to which the presumed kookism actually departs from reality. I haven't seen in any of the Mars photos anything that looks definitively artificial. But then, astronomers with a lot less to go on than Flandern has have thought they saw canals on Mars where none existed. Still, the "seeing faces in the carpet" phenomenon in the interpretation of Mars photographs shouldn't detract from otherwise cogent arguments on the speed of gravity.