Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
5615 members 
Amiga Q&A /  Free for All /  Emulation /  Gaming / (Latest Posts)
Login

Nickname

Password

Lost Password?

Don't have an account yet?
Register now!

Support Amigaworld.net
Your support is needed and is appreciated as Amigaworld.net is primarily dependent upon the support of its users.
Donate

Menu
Main sections
Home
Features
News
Forums
Classifieds
Links
Downloads
Extras
OS4 Zone
IRC Network
AmigaWorld Radio
Newsfeed
Top Members
Amiga Dealers
Information
About Us
FAQs
Advertise
Polls
Terms of Service
Search

IRC Channel
Server: irc.amigaworld.net
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

(Uses JAVA Applet and Port 1024)
Visit the Chatroom Website

Who's Online
 45 guest(s) on-line.
 0 member(s) on-line.



You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 TRIPOS:  19 mins ago
 Wizzard_o:  21 mins ago
 daveyw:  22 mins ago
 Acill:  32 mins ago
 NutsAboutAmiga:  33 mins ago
 Sir_RUSH:  36 mins ago
 g01df1sh:  50 mins ago
 A1200:  50 mins ago
 petrol:  51 mins ago
 Srtest:  57 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Free For All
      /  Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Register To Post

Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 Next Page )
PosterThread
Moxee 
Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 9-Apr-2014 18:23:39
#1 ]
Team Member
Joined: 20-Aug-2003
Posts: 6291
From: County Yakima, WA State, USA

Part 1 is here

Part 2 is here

Part 3 is here

Carry on...

_________________
Moxee
AmigaOne X1000
AmigaOne XE G4
I'd agree with you, but then we'd both be wrong.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 14-Apr-2014 12:57:01
#2 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:
funny how you forget that real galactic observations is where relativity fails.

I am perfectly willing to accept that the observed amount of matter and energy didn't match the levels assumed when (Mrs?) Einstein first proposed GR, but when the discrepancies were noted the theories showed where to look, and what to look for. And strangely enough when scientists look in the places that the theory tells them to look, they find the things that the GR tells them that they will find so that now there are regular announcements about dark matter/energy being found all over the place. Of course some closed minded individuals will continue to deny the evidence while desperately clinging to their outmoded belief structure that has yet to match a single prediction to the actual measured value.

Quote:
nd for you belief is all it is because you bend over backwards with incompetent counters to the reality of radiation pressure...

I have never tried to counter the reality of radiation pressure. I am fully aware that it exists. I have even quoted its measured levels.
Your persistent refusal to understand the simple fact that there are measured values that contradict your pet fantasies. as well as to realise that your pet fantasy has no valid evidence to support it at all, let alone render it in any way "better" than the evidence based science that you seek to supplant reminds me of the quote from the game "Alpha Centauri"
Quote:
Man's unfailing capacity to believe what he prefers to be true rather than what the evidence shows to be likely and possible has always astounded me. We long for a caring Universe which will save us from our childish mistakes, and in the face of mountains of evidence to the contrary we will pin all our hopes on the slimmest of doubts. God has not been proven not to exist, therefore he must exist.
The only reason that you keep attacking current scientific understanding is that it clearly disproves the existence of your fantasy planet Nibiru, and shows your holy prophet Sitchin to be a delusional Walter Mitty character.
The fact that you still refuse to accept is that science is filling the gaps without recourse to the fantasies that you hold so dear. Luminiferous Aether has been consigned to the dustbin of history, along with the Sumerian gods that you worship as "space aliens"

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 14-Apr-2014 18:40:53
#3 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8095
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Nimrod

Nibiru announcement on 3/26!

On that day an asteroid with rings was found and a dwarf planet that doesn't have the Nibiruian lovers claimed path.

Oops. More Nibiruians displaying their Chicken Little Syndrome

Last edited by BrianK on 14-Apr-2014 at 06:41 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 15-Apr-2014 0:58:31
#4 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3833
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
funny how you forget that real galactic observations is where relativity fails.

I am perfectly willing to accept that the observed amount of matter and energy didn't match the levels assumed when (Mrs?) Einstein first proposed GR, but when the discrepancies were noted the theories showed where to look, and what to look for. And strangely enough when scientists look in the places that the theory tells them to look, they find the things that the GR tells them that they will find so that now there are regular announcements about dark matter/energy being found all over the place. Of course some closed minded individuals will continue to deny the evidence while desperately clinging to their outmoded belief structure that has yet to match a single prediction to the actual measured value.

Relativity said CRAP about dark energy. The devil's in the details and you keep failing. You can't accept GR is local simpleton physics. The real world is quantum.

Quote:

Quote:
nd for you belief is all it is because you bend over backwards with incompetent counters to the reality of radiation pressure...

I have never tried to counter the reality of radiation pressure. I am fully aware that it exists. I have even quoted its measured levels.
Your persistent refusal to understand the simple fact that there are measured values that contradict your pet fantasies. as well as to realise that your pet fantasy has no valid evidence to support it at all, let alone render it in any way "better" than the evidence based science that you seek to supplant reminds me of the quote from the game "Alpha Centauri"

...snipped the quote that's actually about your fallacy..

The only reason that you keep attacking current scientific understanding is that it clearly disproves the existence of your fantasy planet Nibiru, and shows your holy prophet Sitchin to be a delusional Walter Mitty character.
The fact that you still refuse to accept is that science is filling the gaps without recourse to the fantasies that you hold so dear. Luminiferous Aether has been consigned to the dustbin of history, along with the Sumerian gods that you worship as "space aliens"


Nice of you to admit your science comes from video games...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VTANZaYPCkw
Again, the devil's in the details. You epically fail but others who want to BELIEVE you will.

You talk about radiation from stars and ignore how much they block. What they output merely interferes with what is coming in.

You are filling the gaps with fantasies. GR is a fantasy.
It keeps getting adjusted just like you adjust your pants when they keep falling down.

You got nothing for me when I proved to you that 'the electron' was just the amount of EM energy within a ball with the accepted diameter of 'the electron'.
It's all EM waves. Everything else is fantasy.

You are the emperor with no clothes...

Remember reports of shape-shifting ufos....I'm sure you don't believe in them...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aVrGGcyngLU

Your vision of reality is fail.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 17-Apr-2014 13:19:59
#5 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou
Quote:
You can't accept GR is local simpleton physics. The real world is quantum

I will quote from the wikipedia article, not because it is all that I know but because it sums up the irony of your statement to perfection.
"Quantum mechanics (QM also known as quantum physics, or quantum theory) is a branch of physics which deals with physical phenomena at nanoscopic scales where the action is on the order of the Planck constant. It departs from classical mechanics primarily at the quantum realm of atomic and subatomic length scales. And you claim that GR is a localised effect

Quote:
Again, the devil's in the details. You epically fail but others who want to BELIEVE you will. You talk about radiation from stars and ignore how much they block. What they output merely interferes with what is coming in.

So when you go outside at night and take a look at the night sky, is it a bright view with occasional dark pinpricks, or a dark background with tiny twinkly lights.
You are still ignoring the word MEASURED.
Scientists have MEASURED the levels of energy and RP coming from the Sun. They have also MEASURED the levels of energy coming from other sources. It took the Voyager probes over thirty five years of travelling away from the sun for the radiation from the sun to fall to background levels. Do you understand what the term MEASURED means in the real world?

Quote:
Remember reports of shape-shifting ufos....I'm sure you don't believe in them...
If we build shape shifting aircraft in the near future it will be because engineers like those employed by Lockheed have designed and built them without any assistance from e.t., just like all of the other things humans have built throughout history.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 18-Apr-2014 13:48:32
#6 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8095
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Nimrod

A good point I ran into elsewhere that applies here. When someone uses scientific terms by redefining their definition it is because they are peddling pseudoscience.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 22-Apr-2014 4:03:08
#7 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3833
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Right because dark energy isn't pseudo-science and in fact everything that you have to hack onto GR is as well...

http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/04/bouncing-neutrons-fail-to-find-dark-matter-or-energy/

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 30-Apr-2014 0:22:06
#8 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3833
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote:
@Lou
Quote:
You can't accept GR is local simpleton physics. The real world is quantum

I will quote from the wikipedia article, not because it is all that I know but because it sums up the irony of your statement to perfection.
"Quantum mechanics (QM also known as quantum physics, or quantum theory) is a branch of physics which deals with physical phenomena at nanoscopic scales where the action is on the order of the Planck constant. It departs from classical mechanics primarily at the quantum realm of atomic and subatomic length scales. And you claim that GR is a localised effect

You are so dumb. You chastise me for quoting from a wiki then do it yourself.
I said quantum physics is closer to reality than GR.
the GR scale is just a manifestations of complex quantum interactions as has been proven many times.
GR is just a hack approximation of local space and scale. In fact it is full of errors like the double force paradox.

Quote:

Quote:
Again, the devil's in the details. You epically fail but others who want to BELIEVE you will. You talk about radiation from stars and ignore how much they block. What they output merely interferes with what is coming in.

So when you go outside at night and take a look at the night sky, is it a bright view with occasional dark pinpricks, or a dark background with tiny twinkly lights.
You are still ignoring the word MEASURED.
Scientists have MEASURED the levels of energy and RP coming from the Sun. They have also MEASURED the levels of energy coming from other sources. It took the Voyager probes over thirty five years of travelling away from the sun for the radiation from the sun to fall to background levels. Do you understand what the term MEASURED means in the real world?

Actually the devil's in the nimrod.
Your tiny pee brain seems to only accept visible light as light.
Last time I checked, there's a 120 order of magnitude difference between what you think is empty space and reality.

Quote:

Quote:
Remember reports of shape-shifting ufos....I'm sure you don't believe in them...
If we build shape shifting aircraft in the near future it will be because engineers like those employed by Lockheed have designed and built them without any assistance from e.t., just like all of the other things humans have built throughout history.

Man is better at copying than creating. Just look at Einstein and "his" theory of GR...

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 30-Apr-2014 0:54:24
#9 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3833
From: Rhode Island

Many moons ago I suggest that "space" was a superconductor...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140423095208.htm
Hmmm...

What does a reality slap feel like when myth becomes reality?
http://kotaku.com/some-people-think-the-atari-landfill-dig-is-fake-1569444040

Yes, magnetism is more useful than gravity:
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140429125504.htm

John Brandenburg, and many other plasma physicists and proponents of the electric universe theory have claimed to reproduce galactic effects in the lab.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140429105156.htm
Who would have thunk it?

How many nimrods does it take to twist light?
http://phys.org/news/2014-04-properties.html

Last edited by Lou on 30-Apr-2014 at 12:57 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 1-May-2014 20:28:34
#10 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8095
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:

Lou wrote:
Right because dark energy isn't pseudo-science and in fact everything that you have to hack onto GR is as well...

You seem to not know what 'pseudoscientific' means. It's something that exists and is claimed to be 'scientific' while failing to have uncovered in a scientific manner. Dark Energy may well be bad or wrong science, but it doesn't make it pseudoscientific. Take, for example creationism. They claim the universe and world were made in 7 days because the book said so. There's no scientific foundation to base the belief of creationism on. Dark Energy as defined is a scientific idea. IF it turns out to be wrong then it's a wrong scientific idea.

Thanks for the failed experiment. Science is full of wrong experiments. They're almost always a positive because it's through being wrong that we learn. The question that remains is did the experiment fail because the scientific idea was wrong or did it fail because of something innately wrong with the experiment itself.

That last question can't be answered until we know more about the result. Which means, in turn, more experiments. Now, if those future experiments show us more about Dark Energy or if they show us more about some other scientific postulate, it really doesn't matter. In so far, that with either one of them we're learning more about our universe.


One important distinction you've yet to make is that a failed experiment only shows a failed experiment. If a GR experiment failed it doesn't mean that your Electric Universe is accurate. Instead the Electric Universe person must provide better quantitative and qualitative information. IF they can do that then the scientific paradigms shift.

I've mentioned in the past to go read Thomas Kuhn. Did you ever do so? Or perhaps any other philosophers who take on trying to understand how the system of science operations? You really need to. It'd help to clear up your misunderstandings here.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 2-May-2014 5:53:36
#11 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3833
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

The only misunderstanding here is that you accept "good enough" despite the fact that it's clearly wrong.

As for "experiment" I just linked where plasma physicists modelled galactic interaction in the lab, something GR fails to do, and you still are asking where the "experiment" is...

This is a classic case of a nimrod's "see no evidence, speak no evidence, hear no evidence" syndrome...

Last edited by Lou on 02-May-2014 at 06:00 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 2-May-2014 5:57:19
#12 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3833
From: Rhode Island

Speaking of wrong, while I believe quantum principles is the way to go... The "standard model" is stupid.

http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/04/forget-the-higgs-neutrinos-may-be-the-key-to-breaking-the-standard-model/

Every time science peers deeper into sub-atomic "particles" they keep finding more empty space.

It's all waves and treating things as particles is another exercise in dumbing down and pointing in the wrong direction.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 2-May-2014 20:23:40
#13 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8095
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
The only misunderstanding here is that you accept "good enough" despite the fact that it's clearly wrong.

Science NEVER accepts 'good enough'. It's constantly reassessing if we know what we think we know. As a follower of this methodology of discovery I too realize that there's no such thing as 'good enough'.

Quote:
As for "experiment" I just linked where plasma physicists modelled galactic interaction in the lab, something GR fails to do, and you still are asking where the "experiment" is...
So it's stronger than your 'have claimed to reproduce galactic' statement? In so far as it's been validated and duplicated?

Quote:
The "standard model" is stupid
To bring it back to your first statement we all have known that the "Standard Model" is not 'good enough' to predict everything. The Standard Model has an excellent record of confirmation against it's predictions. It's worked, very, very well. But, again we know it's not everything so therefore not 'good enough' and the work continues.

Quote:
It's all waves and treating things as particles is another exercise in dumbing down and pointing in the wrong direction.
This stuff is not a wave, according to the present state of research. Though it is neither a particle either. . But, instead something considered a wavicle.

What appears to be happening is because people exist, operate, and communicate about the macro environment, we don't experience wavicles. In order to better communicate the event happening within a common frame of reference it may be easier to treat the interaction as waves or as particles.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 3-May-2014 0:00:20
#14 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3833
From: Rhode Island

http://www.examiner.com/article/new-evidence-emerges-that-monroe-planned-to-reveal-jfk-saw-crashed-ufos

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 3-May-2014 0:04:23
#15 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3833
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
The only misunderstanding here is that you accept "good enough" despite the fact that it's clearly wrong.

Science NEVER accepts 'good enough'. It's constantly reassessing if we know what we think we know. As a follower of this methodology of discovery I too realize that there's no such thing as 'good enough'.

Who's talking about science? I'm talking about the general ilk here...

Quote:

Quote:
As for "experiment" I just linked where plasma physicists modelled galactic interaction in the lab, something GR fails to do, and you still are asking where the "experiment" is...
So it's stronger than your 'have claimed to reproduce galactic' statement? In so far as it's been validated and duplicated?

Why not follow a link?
In fact, remember how the guy from the holographic universe site posted on here saying galaxies were connected by filaments...
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/04/140429185005.htm


Quote:

Quote:
It's all waves and treating things as particles is another exercise in dumbing down and pointing in the wrong direction.
This stuff is not a wave, according to the present state of research. Though it is neither a particle either. . But, instead something considered a wavicle.

What appears to be happening is because people exist, operate, and communicate about the macro environment, we don't experience wavicles. In order to better communicate the event happening within a common frame of reference it may be easier to treat the interaction as waves or as particles.

It is all waves and I've linked to a site that showed direct examples about how waves can produce all the effects thought to be from particles.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 5-May-2014 22:03:46
#16 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:
http://www.examiner.com/article/new-evidence-emerges-that-monroe-planned-to-reveal-jfk-saw-crashed-ufos

'Coz it's all about Roswell

The scientific principle states that ALL assertions are deemed FALSE unless evidenced as TRUE. This includes the assertion "it's all EM". This is backed up by the Lex Parsimoniae which states that among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected.
What you are doing is presupposing the conclusion, trawling through mountains of information for the few scraps that seem to support your original postulate (little green men) and ignoring mountains of evidence that contradicts your predetermined conclusion.

The other thing that you still don't understand is that even if aliens did arrive at some point in the 1940's, it doesn't validate all your other C. R. A. P.

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 6-May-2014 2:10:37
#17 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3833
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

The other thing you don't understand is that you keep getting proved wrong.

Remember the talk about giants?
http://theviralpost.com/ecuador-giants-shown-to-the-world/

You still have no reply to me after proving to you that mass is just a measure of EM energy in a given sized sphere...

You've been proven wrong beyond any reasonable doubt and you still come back to troll....

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 6-May-2014 5:48:14
#18 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8095
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

A way that aliens weren't needed to build the pyramids.
http://www.iflscience.com/physics/mystery-how-egyptians-moved-pyramid-stones-solved

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 6-May-2014 17:47:27
#19 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1182
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:
he other thing you don't understand is that you keep getting proved wrong.

When and where? You have made this assertion many times, and every time I have asked this same question. All you need do is provide a link to the post where you proved me wrong.

Quote:
Remember the talk about giants?

Yes indeed, I remember you posting links to
some pictures that were entries into a photoshop competition and claiming that they were evidence of giants. I believe Olegil and others dealt with it effectively.
Your article claims that samples were sent to the Smithsonian for testing, so I will wait until the Smithsonian publishes the results before accepting the claims made.

"You've been proven wrong beyond any reasonable doubt and you still come back to troll..."
This from somebody that posted an equation for magnetic levitation to show how a non magnetic moon orbits the Earth "because EM", and then admitted desperately trawling up any old C.R.A.P. that he could find Or doesn't that count?
You are like the sad creationists who keep claiming that ica stones are proof that man lived with dinosaurs like an episode of "The Flintstones"

_________________
When in trouble, fear or doubt, run in circles, scream and shout.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Nibiru, what if ? - Part 4
Posted on 9-May-2014 0:14:11
#20 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 3833
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
he other thing you don't understand is that you keep getting proved wrong.

When and where? You have made this assertion many times, and every time I have asked this same question. All you need do is provide a link to the post where you proved me wrong.

Quote:
Remember the talk about giants?

Yes indeed, I remember you posting links to
some pictures that were entries into a photoshop competition and claiming that they were evidence of giants. I believe Olegil and others dealt with it effectively.
Your article claims that samples were sent to the Smithsonian for testing, so I will wait until the Smithsonian publishes the results before accepting the claims made.

"You've been proven wrong beyond any reasonable doubt and you still come back to troll..."
This from somebody that posted an equation for magnetic levitation to show how a non magnetic moon orbits the Earth "because EM", and then admitted desperately trawling up any old C.R.A.P. that he could find Or doesn't that count?
You are like the sad creationists who keep claiming that ica stones are proof that man lived with dinosaurs like an episode of "The Flintstones"

You are delusional now.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright 2000 - 2017 Amigaworld.net.

Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle