Telesio Galilei Academy of Science a Fraud?

[Laura]

It's looking more and more like a duck. A very checkered history and tangled web indeed... always one step ahead of the regulatory commissions, eh?

 

[Chu]

It looks more and more like there is much more than "mathematics and logics", like "San" Francisco put it... Very interesting... and we are only digging what is available and published online. Not a very pretty picture...

 

[Mike]

This snippet was found at the below web address in the blog section. I tried to use the wayback machine to bring up the blog page from where this is posted from with no success. Maybe someone else will have some luck. I also tried to hash out the connection between ascension securities and Steriwave Shareholders – Francesco Fucilla with no success, but there looks to be something there.
http://www.123people.co.uk/s/ascension+securities

To Steriwave Shareholders: The Ascension Securities Scandal

As can be seen from the attached, the Ascension Securities scandal began to break on 20th May, when Francesco Fucilla sent a hysterical e mail message to several people to say that dark forces are moving against him. ...

Without seeing exactly what is being referenced above it is hard say for sure, but looks like Francesco Fucilla does send hysterical emails and post so the person posting as FF might just be him.

 

[dant]

Did you ever wonder what happens
when you shine the light on bugs?
Will they scurry for cover?

 

[Laura]

This snippet was found at the below web address in the blog section. I tried to use the wayback machine to bring up the blog page from where this is posted from with no success. Maybe someone else will have some luck. I also tried to hash out the connection between ascension securities and Steriwave Shareholders – Francesco Fucilla with no success, but there looks to be something there.
http://www.123people.co.uk/s/ascension+securities

To Steriwave Shareholders: The Ascension Securities Scandal

As can be seen from the attached, the Ascension Securities scandal began to break on 20th May, when Francesco Fucilla sent a hysterical e mail message to several people to say that dark forces are moving against him. ...

Without seeing exactly what is being referenced above it is hard say for sure, but looks like Francesco Fucilla does send hysterical emails and post so the person posting as FF might just be him.

Seems to have been a now scrubbed post on Myron Evans blog. _http://atomicprecision.wordpress.com/2009/12/26/to-steriwave-shareholders-the-ascension-securities-scandal/

Wonder what persuaded Evans to scrub the post since he was an insider who, ostensibly, was tossed out on his ear at some point. Or so we have it from a source.

 

[Laura]

From: _http://boards.fool.co.uk/hi-all-well-its-been-a-long-time-coming-and-11641716.aspx

Recommendations: 8

Hi All.

Well it's been a long time coming, and many of you may now know that, Ascension Securities went into liquidation on the 7th of July, this following after F.S.A. investigators found them guilty of mis-selling certain high risk securities.

The F.S.A. wrote to me yesterday to confirm this, and to advice any clients who may have a claim as a direct result of mis-selling, to contact the official receiver at the following address.

David Merrygold, PFK (U.K.) 16 The Havens, Ransomes House, Europark, Ipswich, Suffolk, IP3 9SJ.

We may also be able to claim compensation from the Financial Services Compensation Scheme ('FSCS') if Ascension is unlikely to be unable to refund investors from the its presumed frozen assets, the F.S.C.S. state that at this moment in time Ascension has not been called into default, and that they are working with the liquidator to ensure that they know how to make a claim for compensation.

Further information about the FSCS can be obtained on this website (below).

www.fscs.org.uk.

Well this good news has been a long time coming, and I honestly felt my communications with regards to the above had fell on deaf ears, now lets hope that other companies and persons with a direct link to Ascension, (and there are many), will now also have their collars felt, I will in due course give the F.S.A. Further information on these people.

So in closing I know that many postings regarding ascension on this site where deleted on protest by Ascension, but I, and many others will now feel vindicated, and now at long last, they, and others will refrain from getting our posts pulled, hiding behind threats of Libelous or possible Defamatory content.

Anyway Thanks Jak, for very useful help throughout this long fight for justice.

 

[Mike]

Seems to have been a now scrubbed post on Myron Evans blog. _http://atomicprecision.wordpress.com/2009/12/26/to-steriwave-shareholders-the-ascension-securities-scandal/

Wonder what persuaded Evans to scrub the post since he was an insider who, ostensibly, was tossed out on his ear at some point. Or so we have it from a source.

http://www.ime.unicamp.br/~walrod/A%20SAD%20STORY.pdf

Seems that at the time or before Fucilla was producing the movie on Evans that he was aware of criticism of Evans and Ruggero Santilli. What was his response to Evans being criticized? He offered the author of the above two different positions at the Santilli-Galilei Association.

 

[seek10]

Did you ever wonder what happens
when you shine the light on bugs?
Will they scurry for cover?

Oh Boy! It looks we have another Eric Pepin(Sr.)

 

[Guardian]

I really don't give a fat rat's behind about "Francesco Fucilla," "The Telesio Galilei Academy of Science" or physics, or math, or any of the other new fanged religions called "science"

What I do care about is Free Speech. Evidently yawl don't have that in France? That really doesn't surprise me...but I digress. I'm in North Carolina, and we do have Free Speech, so I'm off to mirror this entire tread....it will be up before the sun sets. Laura and Co. have nothing to do with my decision, and they couldn't change my mind if they wanted too. It's well known in the Pagan Community that I have done, and would again do, the exact same thing for any cultural, spiritual, political, etc. type forum that was being threatened with censorship.

But hey, if this seemingly little mini mafia gang'sta wannbe wants to sue me, he's welcome to try. Everything posted here was found on the net, and is acknowledged as such, so I'd most likely win, but even if I didn't.. I own a 14 year old truck, a 15 year old dog, and a closet full of old lady cloths. What's he gonna sue me for first?

 

[aragorn]

This was quite interesting too...an Wikipedia article marked for deletion:

_http://en.wikipedia.g-webs.com/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Telesio_-_Galilei_Academy_of_Science

The result was delete. AdjustShift (talk) 17:06, 13 June 2009 (UTC)

Telesio - Galilei Academy of Science

Vanity article about unnotable pseudoscience web organization with no reliable secondary sources Mathsci (talk) 15:13, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

-Delete. Can't find any decent sources (hits seems mainly to be about their annual 'awards', but there isn't coverage in reliable sources), no news hits either. The whole organisation looks slightly odd. It is stated on the website to be at the 'University of Pecs' in Hungary, when the article says it is a British organisation, and I can't find any reference to it on the University website. Quantpole (talk) 16:25, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

-Note: This debate has been included in the list of Organizations-related deletion discussions. -- TexasAndroid (talk) 16:41, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

-Delete No third-party sources at all that I can find; only blog discussions etc by those connected with the group. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 17:14, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

-Delete A search turns up blogs, Youtube, etc, but nothing that meets our criteria. I see that despite the address in Hungary the website says 'The Academy is based in Croydon'. Dougweller (talk) 18:08, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

Against Deletion {Someone (apparently with the nick 'Webmaster6') closely associated to T.G.argues against the deletion of the Wikip article}

I am getting totally confused the meaning of this magic word Notability here. Why are you pushing this so hard? There are hundreds of article without any google hits. On the other hand why is the google is the judge in notability issues by chasing hits?

[...]

Why is this massive fight against this organisation? Where does it come from? This is a non profit organisation which has absolutely no political or commercialise goals. Devoting massive amount of money from private sources to support scientists from all over the world. I believe none of you have read the aims and goals section of the article.

I would like to address you: Why Wikipedia treats us like criminals? Is it really a crime that we are lack of some google sources. So to make it simple no matter how much good this Academy can provide to the whole world, and to the science world without this current third party issue the Academy has to be deleted??? Why?

I am absolutely sure you could make this page stay. It is just a matter of point of view. I need you think about outside the box. If you want to you can let this article to evolute into a great Wikipedia article but we need more time. Please do not bother to answer unless you do not use your third party sources google wildcard.

{Other users answer}:

Your repeated use of the first person plural "we" and "us" reflects that you are closely associated with this institute, correct? Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 19:21, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

I think your definition of notability and word as used in Wikipedia jargon are different. From WP:Notability, "Within Wikipedia, notability refers to whether or not a topic merits its own article." Also from the sub-article on organizations, "Notability applies to individual topics, not a topic's overarching classification or type. For instance, the notability of a parent topic (of a parent-child "tree") is not inherited by subordinate topics, nor is notability inherited "upwards", from a notable subordinate to its parent. If a topic is notable, there must be verifiable evidence that it independently satisfies the general notability guideline." In effect, this means that it doesn't matter how notable the people are who are in the organization, the organization by itself must be satisfy notability requirements. Practically, the effect of the rule is that in order to demonstrate notability, reliable, independent secondary sources about the subject must be found. Find those, and this article should pass the deletion.

Reliable, independent secondary sources are important. For one, they prove the subject exists and is what it claims to be. People make stuff up, going so far as to create fake webpages, blog entries, etc. to give the illusion that something exists. Without reliable, independent secondary sources, how is anyone going to know if this organization is in fact real? Another purpose of the notability rule is to keep Wikipedia from filling up with articles about every person's cat or school club. You are going to need to prove that "outsiders," i.e. people or organizations, preferably notable themselves, who are not part of this organization have cared enough about it to write something about it: that way they serve as reliable, independent, secondary sources. It may just be that the organization currently hasn't attracted enough attention so the sources don't exist yet. When the organization has attracted some attention and there are reliable, independent, secondary sources to prove it, recreate the article and cite them. Until then it will be deleted. Sifaka talk 22:18, 6 June 2009 (UTC)

[...]

Comment: The organisation is virtual. There are no secondary sources showing it exists beyond its website. For the same reasons, notability seems impossible to establish by the normal criteria of wikipedia. It seems to have been created by Francesco Fucilla and his cronies, who again have no notability in science. Wikipedia is not a mirror for fringe/pseudophysics websites. Francesco Fucilla seems to be connected with a company - steriwave.plc - which purports to be able to use an irretrievably flawed grand unified theory of physics to facilitate interstellar travel. Since he seems to have been the force behind the writing of the article, it's very hard to take it seriously, even with all the attempted name-dropping. Mathsci (talk) 12:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)
BTW, Faithdd (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · edit filter log · block user · block log) is undoubtedly a WP:SPA sockpuppet/meatpuppet account and could be indefinitely blocked if this turns out to be the case. Mathsci (talk) 12:37, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

[...]

Delete: no notability established through citatations of even marginally reputable third-party sources. Ian Spackman (talk) 17:21, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Delete - as seconder to the PROD on 31 May. At the time I could find no third party WP:RS material on this organisation and I have been no more successful today. Ian has been more than patient with repeatedly explaining on the talk page what was required in the way of sourcing over the past two weeks and nothing other than diatribes have resulted. I think enough is enough and it is now time to delete. Beeswaxcandle (talk) 08:48, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

Delete An academy science that was funded in 2007, not recognized or sponsored by any notable body, that started awarding 11 gold medals the year after the foundation. I look at the only source that could arguibily pass WP:RS and show notability (the BBC article {_http://www.bbc.co.uk/wales/mid/sites/abercraf/pages/santilligalilei.shtml} turns out to be apparently only for the area of Wales and written by a person that is related to this academy (Myron Evans, as commented by Mathsci) so it's not an independient third-party source (he's chairman and fellow of the academy and he received one of the awards of that ceremony)...

This academy needs way more independient coverage before it can pass WP:N. I suggest in good faith and good intentions that the authors talk to the academy members (if they know them) and try to coordinate efforts to get the academy to appear at sources that satisfy WP:RS' "independient third party sources" thing, and that they try again when that happens. Also, the authors will want to look at WP:ORG for "significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources" and all the explanations given there about how to pass WP:ORG. At this moment, the academy doesn't really qualify, so good luck for the next time when the academy has received more coverage and you can list it here to give it another try. --Enric Naval (talk) 23:11, 12 June 2009 (UTC)

Comment The first two links have colour pictures of Fancesco Fucilla, who funds the prizes and website and also edits the article and talk page. The only mention in the British press of anything connected with this academy is the proposal for an unaccredited Myron Evans University (MEU) when it was declared illegal by the Welsh assembly. [7] This virtual institution, now rebranded as the Maxwell-Einstein University [8], is affiliated with Fucilla's virtual organization. It is quite amazing what can be put on websites. Francesco Fucilla is professor of geoscience and the history and philosophy of science at this private unaccredited and possibly non-existent university which grants Ph.D.'s apparently. Mathsci (talk) 14:38, 10 June 2009 (UTC)

 

[ana]

You are dealing with a mind far greater than your ckicken thieving one !!

You need to remove all of the nonsense lies and criminal innuendoes designed to descredit and cause criminal damages to
all at Telesio Galilei academy of science and especially Francesco Fucilla BUSINESS !!

Your lies and criminal slanders are already being seen by financial partners and business parteners showing severe cxoncern and it will result criminal damages inevitably !!

We are lodging complaints with the police with ENERGY e=mv squared !! ( note that i do not put c for the velocity i will use to heat you will be superluminal !! eheherheh

Now you little coprolite.................... REMOVE ALL OF THE SLANDERS that are an offense to me and my directors that work for
the shareholders at no fees !!! Our board of Directors are an example to the city and the world business !! We have set the standard for the future in which businessman serve the people not themsewlves !! our shareholders are proud to invest with us for the unique level of dignity humanity honesty UNSEEN IN THE HISTORY OF OUR WORLD !!

remove every item you put on cassiopaea ASAP or take the consequences !!

San Francesco Fucilla !!

It is interesting Mr Fucilla that you advocate for openess and the right of rational disagreement as the most important principle governing your assembly and yet in coming here you show an evident lack of thereof.

How can a mind far greater than ours show seemingly such baseness and self idolatry?

I will never, ever trust in the endeavours and works of someone who seems to behave like a narcisist enraged child, because a real opened, scientific mind also knows how to communicate clearly and effectively making use of reason.

Really by entering the forum and talking, you just make the picture clearer.

I don't buy your standards, they are not an example for me.

 

[aragorn]

Re: Telesio Galilei Academy of Science a CIA Front?

Now, I have a problem:

1) Myron Evans writes about his ECE "theory"

http://www.aias.us/index.php?goto=showPageByTitle&pageTitle=Independent_Opinion_on_ECE_by_Rapoport

Prof. Diego Rapoport has recently studied the key proofs of the ECE theory and found them to be correct in all detail, notably the various proofs of the duality invariance of the Bianchi identity (details on www.aias.us blog). Prof. Rapoport recieved a Ph. D. degree in mathematical physics from Tel Aviv University in 1985 under a renowned expert in geometry, Prof. Shlomo Steinberg of Tel Aviv and Harvard. Rapoport has independently examined ECE theory and has found no errors. He also provided insights of his own and plans to develop ECE theory. He describes the basic anzatz as powerful, natural and economical.


Rapoport points out that the electromagentic potential of ECE completes the additional degree of freedom of the contravariant part of the complete torsion, then the covariant two form that is to be characterized is the electromagnetic two form. He describes this as "brilliant". There is a coupling of the potential one form and two form, and the torsion tensor is an interaction whcih has to do with a topological invariant given by this coupling. He describes ECE as providing a far more economical description of orbits than that given by Einstein and his co-workers, whose work is now known to be incorrect, thu sending an era in general relativity.


Civil List Scientist

cc Prime Minister's Office and Welsh Assembly

2) Diego Rapoprt is in TGA

Advisory Board

Diego Lucio Rapoport (Scientist)

3) Waldyr Alves Rodrigues Jr., Chairman (Physicist - Mathematician)

4) Waldyr Rodrigues criticised (even in a joint paper with me) ECE theory in an article

Theoretically Rapoport and Rodrigues should fight - because it is mathematics and it is either right or wrong. No interpretation allowed.

But they coexist under the same umbrella, one as chairman, one in advisory board. That means: it is NOT about science. It is about something else.

Yes, that is strange. You might have read this, but I found a paper where Rodrigues tells "A sad story":

_http://www.ime.unicamp.br/~walrod/A%20SAD%20STORY.pdf

One of the thing that caught my attention was this on page 7:

14. On 10/14/2007 I sent the following message to Mr. Santilli:

Dear Ruggero,
1) At Myron Evans’ blog (http://www.atomicprecision.com/blog/),we can read a message (see below) from Francesco Fucilla, president of the Santilli-Galilei Academy of Sciences saying that you, Jeremy Duuning- Davies and himself will be more than happy to give to Evans the position of deputy chairman of the academy.

2) I hope that Fucilla is mistaken and that you do not endorse his statement. But in the case you really endorse Mr. Fucilla’s statement, I am obligated by coherence to end our collaboration, resigning to my position of member of the editorial board of AGG, for I cannot be in association with anyone that supports Evans scientifically. I already told to you that his theories are simply a pot pourri of absolutely nonsense Mathematics and Physics. Simply garbage. My statement may be experimentally checked by anyone that has competently studied differential geometry at any reasonable good university.

3) I know very well, and indeed appreciate your efforts for freedom of thinking. However, freedom of thinking is useful only when used by a competent man dedicate to search the truth. When used by a crackpot and liar, as is the case of Evans this freedom may result in evil. Indeed, to see that I am right, it is only necessary to recall that Evans website received millions of hits in the last few years. This means that certainly, many simple minded people and even some others that studied science, now thinks that he is a genius and succeeded in constructing a unified field theory.

4) So, if you do not support Evans, please, let Mr. F. Fucilla and Mr. J. Dunning-Davies (who should read my attached papers7 and change urgently, for his own credibility, his opinion about Mr. Evans) know that as soon as possible, and find an elegant way (if possible)to withdraw the invitation to Mr. Evans.

5) I would like to end this message by emphasizing that any association of your name with Evans will produce damage to your reputation.
Yours sincerely,
Waldyr

He sounds pretty determined. But surprise, Rodrigues is still in the same organization as Myron Evans. What's going on...?

 

[aragorn]

From:

_http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia%3AFringe_theories%2FNoticeboard%2FArchive_15

User:Webmaster6, Francesco Fucilla et al

There have been several previous threads on this noticeboard about the Telesio - Galilei Academy of Science, a web organization either down a back lane in East Croydon or somewhere in Hungary. (It is connected with The Alpha Institute for Advanced Study, a web organization either in a village on the outskirts of Swansea or somewhere in Hungary.) This organization is devoted to pseudoscience and awards prizes mostly to those who have contested well-established parts of theoretical physics. Prizewinners include Myron Evans, Jeremy Dunning-Davies, Diego Lucio Rapoport, Alwyn Van der Merwe, Lawrence Paul Horwitz, Florentin Smarandache, other editors of Progress in Physics and Franco Selleri, whose BLP is currently up for deletion here.

The organization at first bore the name of Ruggero Santilli; it appears to be financed by Francesco Fucilla, who has edited wikipedia himself (his editing style is instantly recognizable because he uses capitalization and exclamation marks, London IPs and often adds his own signature, a tell-tale sign). Webmaster6 (talk · contribs) has been slowly adding pages to wikipedia connected with Fucilla and this organization. Several articles on promotional videos have been deleted (starting with "The Universe of Myron Evans"; here's a video of Dunning-Davies extolling Santilli's theories [22]). Both Evans and Fucilla run off-wiki commentary on the BLPs they wish to add to wikipedia and the deletion process: Evans on his blog at www.aias.us [23] and Fucilla on the Telesio-Galilei website [24]. I believe that Myron Evans actually threatened WMF with action over his BLP (later confirmed by User:Daniel), which resulted in his own biographical stub being put up for deletion by me some time back. (A neutral description of his eponymous theory took its place.) I think more eyes are needed on this little walled garden of articles and in particular the contributions of Webmaster6 who appears to have a WP:COI. No need for wikipedia to become a mirror site for pseudoscientific websites, even if there is a slightly comical aspect to the whole thing (Santilli's magnegas - an alternative fuel based on his own new molecule, made from reprocessed human waste, tested on a Ferrari). Mathsci (talk) 10:33, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

 

[Vulcan59]

How can a mind far greater than ours show such baseness and self idolatry?

I will never, ever trust in the endeavours and works of someone who behaves like a narcisist enraged child, because a real opened, scientific mind also knows how to communicate clearly and effectively making use of reason.

Really by entering the forum and talking, you just make the picture clearer.

I don't buy your standards, they are not an example for me.

my emphasis

Couldn't have said it any better.

 

[Z...]

I own a 14 year old truck, a 15 year old dog, and a closet full of old lady cloths. What's he gonna sue me for first? :lol

I am guessing- closet full of old lady clothes ;)