There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff—we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity. |
Fighting pseudoscience isn't free. We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $10, $20 or whatever you can today with ![]() ![]() |
User contributions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
- 21:06, 16 April 2023 diff hist +200 Talk:Nanotechnology →Physics
- 16:06, 14 April 2023 diff hist -1,103 User:Newton1030 Blanked the page current Tag: Blanking
- 16:02, 14 April 2023 diff hist -287 Talk:Nanotechnology This isn't constructive
- 15:30, 14 April 2023 diff hist +2 Talk:Nanotechnology
- 15:30, 14 April 2023 diff hist -75 Talk:Nanotechnology
- 02:13, 14 April 2023 diff hist +360 Talk:Nanotechnology
- 01:21, 2 March 2023 diff hist 0 Nanotechnology A research paper mentioned 3+ but not 4+ (TODO: cite). Also highly charged ions are less soluble, probably gets reduced before leaving the crystal lattice.
- 02:54, 24 February 2023 diff hist +263 Talk:Nanotechnology →Physics
- 02:46, 24 February 2023 diff hist +355 N Debate:Should we give Drexler more credit? Created page with "{{debate|Your name goes in here}} == Proposition == The current RationalWiki article on nanotechnology portrays Drexler's work as complete pseudoscience that defies phys..."
- 20:09, 23 February 2023 diff hist +63 Talk:Nanotechnology
- 20:06, 23 February 2023 diff hist +457 Talk:Nanotechnology →Physics
- 00:38, 22 February 2023 diff hist +30 m Talk:Nanotechnology →Homeopathy
- 00:34, 22 February 2023 diff hist -43 Talk:Nanotechnology →Homeopathy
- 00:33, 22 February 2023 diff hist +1,097 Talk:Nanotechnology →Homeopathy
- 00:06, 22 February 2023 diff hist +3 m Talk:Nanotechnology →Physics
- 03:36, 20 February 2023 diff hist +518 Talk:Nanotechnology →Physics
- 04:26, 17 February 2023 diff hist +607 User:Newton1030
- 20:38, 16 February 2023 diff hist 0 m Nanotechnology →Conservative estimation
- 20:33, 16 February 2023 diff hist +498 Nanotechnology →Conservative estimation: Cogito ergo sum
- 15:07, 16 February 2023 diff hist -21 Nanotechnology →Conservative estimation
- 15:03, 16 February 2023 diff hist -17 Nanotechnology →Conservative estimation
- 15:02, 16 February 2023 diff hist +476 Nanotechnology →Conservative estimation: My edits desperately need peer review from someone more skeptical of this, but please don't delete it outright.
- 14:48, 16 February 2023 diff hist -5 Nanotechnology Give an accurate first impression to readers - no it doesn't violate physics, but there's still issues
- 14:44, 16 February 2023 diff hist +12 Nanotechnology →Conservative estimation
- 14:41, 16 February 2023 diff hist +146 Nanotechnology Reorganized the new content
- 05:25, 16 February 2023 diff hist +230 User:Newton1030
- 05:15, 16 February 2023 diff hist +259 m Talk:Nuclear power
- 05:07, 16 February 2023 diff hist +4 m Nanotechnology Wikipedia link
- 05:05, 16 February 2023 diff hist -33 Nanotechnology →History: This was peer-reviewed scientists and engineers at MIT. Doesn't seem like science fiction to me!
- 04:37, 16 February 2023 diff hist +23 Nanotechnology →In science woo: We've already moved on from nano-technology, now we have femto-technology! It's been under our noses!
- 02:57, 16 February 2023 diff hist +234 Nanotechnology →In science woo: Patent office isn't perfect
- 02:12, 16 February 2023 diff hist +7 Nanotechnology →In science woo
- 01:17, 16 February 2023 diff hist 0 Nanotechnology →In science woo
- 01:07, 16 February 2023 diff hist -1 Nanotechnology →In science woo
- 01:05, 16 February 2023 diff hist +9 Nanotechnology →In science woo
- 01:03, 16 February 2023 diff hist +767 Nanotechnology →In science woo: Major edit, sort of related to computational chemistry (needs peer review)
- 00:51, 16 February 2023 diff hist 0 Nanotechnology →In science woo
- 00:49, 16 February 2023 diff hist +2,090 Nanotechnology →In science woo: The real issues with Drexler's work
- 23:45, 15 February 2023 diff hist -10 Nanotechnology →In science woo
- 23:43, 15 February 2023 diff hist +3 Nanotechnology →In science woo
- 23:42, 15 February 2023 diff hist +673 Nanotechnology →In science woo: Scientific research confirmed machine-phase matter can do certain things
- 03:37, 15 February 2023 diff hist +647 Nanotechnology →Toxicity: Improved nanomedicine section
- 03:19, 15 February 2023 diff hist +16 Talk:Nanotechnology →Physics
- 03:18, 15 February 2023 diff hist +793 Talk:Nanotechnology →Physics: Requesting permission to earn a Brainstar in quality
- 03:08, 15 February 2023 diff hist +884 Nanotechnology →In science woo: Cerium dioxide
- 17:06, 12 February 2023 diff hist +266 N User:Newton1030 Created page with "Hello! I am a skeptic, software engineer, and former transhumanist, currently studying nanoscience. My favorite science topics are thermodynamics, chemistry, and futurism. I h..."
- 16:38, 12 February 2023 diff hist +200 Nanotechnology →In science woo: Clarify that we are not encouraging the misleading concept of self-replicating nanobots
- 16:30, 12 February 2023 diff hist +1,513 Nanotechnology →In science woo: More accurate description of the problems with nanotech, while still remaining skeptical
- 13:24, 12 February 2023 diff hist +34 m Nanotechnology →External links: Add notes section
- 13:23, 12 February 2023 diff hist +771 Nanotechnology →In fiction: Better ecophagy section