@Lou

Quote:

Isn't it logical fallacy telling me I'm wrong because I can't prove that I'm right or wrong?

It's certainly not a fallacy to demonstrate that you and MikeB have failed to display correct reasoning and valid evidence. You tell us that magnetism is the true and correct reason for the orbits of the planets. It is of course very fair to denote that you have failed in your attemp to demonstrate this as true and therefore are left with an unfalsibile belief. Unfortunately, in it's present state your belief is worse than science as it has no constructs which are falsibile.

Quote:

Why does gravity need dark matter to be right and our solar system is the magical exception to the 5/6 rule?

Gravity doesn't need Dark Matter. It needs what it needs. It's your misunderstanding that Dark Matter is somehow a necessary considition. Gravity is considered the better option because it has predictability and falsibility. With Gravity we launch rockets and discover planets lightyears away. Magnetism as you and Mike have presented here can do no such thing.

Quote:

Seems those space probes aren't always where 'we' thought...

Not sure if it was you but I already posted an answer to the Pioneer probes being off 'problem'. Phong shading models are a near perfect match to thermal factors being the cause. LINK This is going through some more validation/ LINK .

Until we weed out X or know the true answer (also weeding out X) you can't fairly assume you know the answer. It could be what we know about gravity is wrong. But there are about a dozen other guesses to prove or disprove too. Another one of the argument from Final Consequence failures.

@Nimrod

Quote:

So Ancient stories have more validity than more recent discoveries. In that case I suppose our recent understanding of the weather is wrong because the Norse believed that during a thunderstorm, Thor rode through the heavens on his chariot pulled by the goats Tanngrisni ("gap-tooth") and Tanngnost ("tooth grinder") The rumbling of his chariot wheels was thunder, while sparks struck from the clouds, by the goat hooves were seen as lightning.

Yes and no. You will have to use your intelligence to determine the historical relevance.

For example there is a great difference between historical documentation set in stone such as in the Chinese Bamboo Annals, Sumerians Epic of Gilgamesh or inscriptions found in piramids worldwide or a verbally transmitted story told to children.

For example if aliens would evaluate human history based on what they get to see on merely the cartoon network (instead of for example national geographics and the discovery channel) they will get a very distorted view about human believes and history.

That's not to say the stories of Thor may not be based on some actual events. The Sumerians tell stories about Extra Terrestial Human Sapiens with access to far superior technology. Many of the Roman / Greek / Chinese, Indian "gods" resemble Sumerian writings. The Sumerian viewed them as a master race instead of what you would call a god. Yes, they engineered modern man, but they were able to breed with common humans creating demi-gods or rather a crossing between Nibiru (master) human beings and Earthly workforce human beings.

Quote:

What you are being asked is how a force, any force, can be large enough to cause tectonic shifts, while remaining too small to cause tidal shifts.

Magnetism. Put two magnetically weak materials together and they will need to be very close to each other to be attracted (cohesive/adhesive force). Put two strong magnets next to each other and they can influence each other from much greater distance.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @Lou Quote: Isn't it logical fallacy telling me I'm wrong because I can't prove that I'm right or wrong? It's certainly not a fallacy to demonstrate that you and MikeB have failed to display correct reasoning and valid evidence. You tell us that magnetism is the true and correct reason for the orbits of the planets. It is of course very fair to denote that you have failed in your attemp to demonstrate this as true and therefore are left with an unfalsibile belief. Unfortunately, in it's present state your belief is worse than science as it has no constructs which are falsibile.

But I have shown you how imperfect the concept of gravity is. Did you even read the link? Even if I am wrong, I have already proven gravity is wrong. In the orignal thread I listed Einstein's musings on Special Relativity and how he admitted it was too complex to calculate the magnetic effect of composite matter but that it would hold true. This is why it isn't practical to use, we simply don't have the means to calculate such things and instead make an estimation of 'mass' using Newtonian physics or more accurately 'general' relativity.

So the reality is as much as I can't be proven right, I can't be proven wrong.

Quote:

Quote: Why does gravity need dark matter to be right and our solar system is the magical exception to the 5/6 rule? Gravity doesn't need Dark Matter. It needs what it needs. It's your misunderstanding that Dark Matter is somehow a necessary considition. Gravity is considered the better option because it has predictability and falsibility. With Gravity we launch rockets and discover planets lightyears away. Magnetism as you and Mike have presented here can do no such thing.

I've explained many times that 'gravity' is an estimate of the effects of objects passing thru EM fields, it works 'for the most part' but does have error. Works 'mostly' good enough in this star system, not so much else where without introducing the mythica 'dark matter'. The most amusing part of all 'graviational anomolies' is that there is always a corresponding change in EM. Even your Gravity Probe B's measurements were actually measurements of changes in EM...yet fools still believe because they can predict a side-effect that the side-effect has it's own independent source.

Quote:

Quote: Seems those space probes aren't always where 'we' thought... Not sure if it was you but I already posted an answer to the Pioneer probes being off 'problem'. Phong shading models are a near perfect match to thermal factors being the cause. LINK This is going through some more validation/ LINK . Until we weed out X or know the true answer (also weeding out X) you can't fairly assume you know the answer. It could be what we know about gravity is wrong. But there are about a dozen other guesses to prove or disprove too. Another one of the argument from Final Consequence failures.

FYI even Voyager 1 & 2 aren't exactly where predicted...it's not just Pioneer.
One side effect of induction is heat. Look at the sun and all geodynamos. Is heat a side-effect of gravity? We can show that heat exists thru-out the universe...as does EM...what a novel concept... I know heat affects the wiring in my car and plays havok with my sensors and circuits...

Last edited by Lou on 23-May-2011 at 02:26 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

Yes and no. You will have to use your intelligence to determine the historical relevance.

Or to put it another way, you cherry pick your "facts" to suit your theory, rather than develop your theory from the facts. I don't suppose you have read my little list have you? Just in case I will repeat it here.
Quote:

1. Base your conclusions on the evidence. Not vice versa. 2. Measure objectively, not guess selectively. 3. Back up statements with evidence. Claiming something to be a fact does not make it a fact. 4. Use large sample numbers for statistical analysis. 5. Use blind sampling for tests 6. Tests must include control groups. 7. Cite your sources of information. 8. Sources must be reliable, verifiable, and backed with evidence. 9. Opinion is not fact 10. No false evidence.(don't cheat)

Number 1 definitely needs some attention

Quote:

Quote: What you are being asked is how a force, any force, can be large enough to cause tectonic shifts, while remaining too small to cause tidal shifts. Magnetism. Put two magnetically weak materials together and they will need to be very close to each other to be attracted (cohesive/adhesive force). Put two strong magnets next to each other and they can influence each other from much greater distance.

You get worse as time goes on in your attempts to defend the indefensible
Point #1 Your hypothetical attractive point in space can be either a strong attractive force, or a weak one. It does not get the option of picking and choosing which it is to suit the convenience of some crackpot story about an invisible magnetic failed star.
Point #2 I have a car parked outside, and can see it from my window. It is made primarily of steel. Your hypothetical invisible magnetic failed star is able to shift entire land masses yet my car resolutely refuses to fly. It should at least weigh a bit less by this point, or more depending on the time of day.
Point #3 Seawater is not pure H2O. It contains many dissolved and suspended impurities, many of which are metallic. Your hypothetical invisible magnetic failed star would have an even stronger tendency to attract tides rather than non-magnetic rocks.

The challenge remains for you to provide a mathematical basis for your hypothesis.

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

@Lou

Quote:

Even if I am wrong, I have already proven gravity is wrong.

Again Tu Quoque at it's finest! Again - just because someone is wrong it doesn't promote your guess to being right. You still have to go through the work to prove it.

Quote:

So the reality is as much as I can't be proven right, I can't be proven wrong.

A necessary condition for acceptance is proof that you are right. Just because you can't prove the invisible untouchable atmosphere temperature fire breathing dragon in my garage doesn't exist doesn't mean it does. And if you can't be proven right the idea of magnetism brings us no workable science so we'll never be able to take advantage of any of it's effects. It's fairly worthless. Guess we'll simply have to continue to take advantage of the proven effects and keep launching those satellites based on gravity.

Quote:

FYI even Voyager 1 & 2 aren't exactly where predicted...it's not just Pioneer.

AND this proves magnetism how? Yup nothing successful in that area there.

Quote:

Is heat a side-effect of gravity? We can show that heat exists thru-out the universe...as does EM...what a novel concept... I know heat affects the wiring in my car and plays havok with my sensors and circuits

Strawman fallacy on the field. No one here ever said that Gravity is the only force. What we've repeatedly said is gravity is the predominant force on planets, and on spacecraft. In the case of the Pioneer Anomaly the magnitude out of alignment is so very tiny that a very small force, heat, could cause it.

Again we don't know the cause so claiming it's all because of a poor understanding of gravity is conflation of a conjecture. Bzzt! Another fallacy on the field. The proper answer for Pioneer and Voyager is research continues on the cause of minute alignment errors.

Last edited by BrianK on 23-May-2011 at 02:58 PM.

@Lou

Quote:

So the reality is as much as I can't be proven right, I can't be proven wrong.

That may be how your religion works, but it is not how science works. If you have a problem with an existing theory , you have to replace it with a better one. Your better theory needs to have proofs. Assertions, no matter how loudly, frequently, or obnoxiously made are not proofs

Quote:

I've explained many times that 'gravity' is an estimate of the effects of objects passing thru EM fields

And I have explained, just as often that there is something called "order of magnitude". I used an equation that you quoted as proof that you were correct, to demonstrate magnitude in post # 856. BrianK had already given a similar demonstration in post # 821 yet you cling desperately to your idea that the smaller force has the greater effect. Your insistence on giving pre-eminence to EM forces is like insisting that the reason your car reaches speeds of 60mph is due to the thrust of the exhaust, and the existence of the gearbox is merely a side effect.

Quote:

FYI even Voyager 1 & 2 aren't exactly where predicted...it's not just Pioneer.

Same problem. Same solution. End of problem.
If we had used your theories however these probes would not be pointed at the heliosphere, having already arrived at the photosphere years ago.

Last edited by Nimrod on 23-May-2011 at 03:17 PM.

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

@MikeB

Quote:

or a verbally transmitted story told to children.

Thousands of years of hearsay is valid evidence? Tell us you weren't serious.

I don't know what the Dutch call it but here we've played a game called Telephone. During summer camp, for example, you line up a dozen kids. At one side you tell a story to the first kid. The first kid tells the 2nd kid. The 2nd kid tells the 3rd.. And so on until the last kid is told the story. Then the last kid recites the story to everyone, including the primary cause. Guess what? Every jump produces errors to at some point the final story has no resemblence of the original. -- Try it and you'll see why verbal stories are quick to become unreliable.

Quote:

The Sumerians tell stories about Extra Terrestial Human Sapiens with access to far superior technology.

Yes if you accept that Stichin is right. (And he's not)

A couple of good reads and see the bottom of the articles for more details.
Why was the Japan Earthquake so big? Turns out there are other more mundane hypothesis rather than an undetected brown dwarf aligning with Jupiter a week later.

And how we're finding Jupiter sized lonely planets by using Gravitational Microlensing .

Strangely that invisible brown dwarf Nibiru can't be found by microlensing? I'd have to surmise it's because if it even exists it's simply not that massive.

And this even trickles into 'Dark Matter'. We now have a new group of objects we didn't think really existed before, planets w/o a close solar system. Dark Matter was to make up for 'missing mass'. It begs the question of how common are these and how does that change the mass we know of in the known universe. What' the impact on the missing mass? Right now it's too early to say; the exciting thing is science will continue to research and figure this out.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: And how we're finding Jupiter sized lonely planets by using Gravitational Microlensing .

EM bends light.

@BrianK

Quote:

Thousands of years of hearsay is valid evidence?

No.

Quote:

Tell us you weren't serious.

I stated you should try to use your intelligence to distinguish between the two.

Thor is a Germanic hearsay figure. It may be related to the Greek god Zeus. Zeus is the Greek version of the Sumerian "god" Anu, the (former) king of Nibiru. But Thor being Zeus is speculation.

Quote:

Yes if you accept that Stichin is right.

Not only him. But credit where credit is due, without his translations we wouldn't have progressed this well.

Last edited by MikeB on 23-May-2011 at 06:26 PM.
Last edited by MikeB on 23-May-2011 at 04:48 PM.
Last edited by MikeB on 23-May-2011 at 04:45 PM.

@Lou

Quote:

EM bends light.

This is what is called an assertion. Where is your evidence that this lensing occurred as a result of EM forces?

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

@MikeB

Quote:

Not only him. But credit where credit is due, without him translation wouldn't have progressed that well.

Zecharia Sitchin was a pathological liar who was totally unable to read ancient Sumerian and Akkadian texts. His so called "translations" have been proven to be works of fiction. Not just by Micheal Heiser, but by the entire academical community. He has absolutely NO credibility, and his scribblings are as relevant to real world history as the "Lord of the Rings" trilogy.

At this point you totally fail to meet the requirements of item 8 on my list

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

@Nimrod

Michael Heiser is a christian zealot and incompetent with regard to Sumerian language and culture.

The christian religion stole and destroyed much of the ancient world (such as the Mayans). He should stick to biblical stuff. Parts of the bible are just distorted versions of earlier writings such as from the ancient Sumerian writings and Persian Zoroastrian religion combined with politics of the time (/lawbook).

@MikeB

Quote:

Michael Heiser is a christian zealot and incompetent with regard to Sumerian language and culture.

Micheal Heiser is not the entire academical community. The academical community reaches across a broad sweep of religious beliefs, and non belief. What Heiser does have, that Sitchin never had, was an ability to read and understand the ancient languages in question. Heiser is not the only person who can read these languages. The other people who are engaged in translating these documents do agree with Heiser on the contents of the translations.

Quote:

The christian religion stole and destroyed much of the ancient world (such as the Mayans). He should stick to biblical stuff. Parts of the bible are just distorted versions of earlier writings such as from the ancient Sumerian writings and Persian Zoroastrian religion combined with politics of the time (/lawbook).

Apart from the line "He should stick to biblical stuff. " Your opinion almost exactly agrees with my own. I can only fault you in that you are too polite. Our joint opinion of the history of the Christian religion is, however, totally, completely, and absolutely irrelevant. I have already made this point about opinion before, and it applies to my opinion just exactly as it applies to yours. When I quote my "rules of evidence" I hold myself to the same standard of truth as I hold others.

Last edited by Nimrod on 23-May-2011 at 07:07 PM.

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

@MikeB

Quote:

Thor is a Germanic hearsay figure. It may be related to the Greek god Zeus. Zeus is the Greek version of the Sumerian "god" Anu, the (former) king of Nibiru. But Thor being Zeus is speculation.

And has no bearing on existence of Nibiru as a brown dwarf. For that one needs to validate the stories with other lines of evidence. Such as perhaps... Gravitational Microlensing?

Quote:

But credit where credit is due, without his translations we wouldn't have progressed this well.

It's quite twisted to claim credit for someone with a complete misunderstanding who make up their own sci-fi story and mucked up completely is stimulus to scholars taking a serious look but okay whatever floats your boat.

Last edited by BrianK on 23-May-2011 at 07:34 PM.
Last edited by BrianK on 23-May-2011 at 07:30 PM.

@Nimrod

Quote:

ability to read and understand the ancient languages in question.

Incorrect, but let's stop here before we degrade this discussion any further. In my view he was without a doubt the best amongst the very best with regard to knowledge and understanding of ancient sumerian writings and culture.

You think he's a fraud. I don't care, eventually he will be found to have had far superior knowledge and your faith in Einstein's theories for example will even at some point be proven to be incorrect. After this people will look back and wonder why people didn't see the obvious.

Japanese universities discovered 10 Jupiter-like planets in 18 months, floating far away from nearby stars:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCouuQqfalU

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote: @Lou Quote: EM bends light. This is what is called an assertion. Where is your evidence that this lensing occurred as a result of EM forces?

Proof?
Quote:

Electromagnetic waves can bend light through an indirect, quantum effect—but to such a tiny degree that we cannot measure it. This quantum effect (called Delbrück scattering) "is a process where, for a short time, the photon disintegrates into an electron and positron pair," says Norbert Dragon, physicist at the Institute for Theoretical Physics in Hanover, Germany. The charged pair interacts with an EM wave and then recombines into the photon with a changed direction. Thus, the EM wave bends the light.

Now picture that happening along the around a large celestial body with a strong EM field...like ZOMG 'gravity' bends light!

Last edited by Lou on 23-May-2011 at 08:22 PM.

@MikeB

Quote:

Incorrect, but let's stop here before we degrade this discussion any further. In my view he was without a doubt the best amongst the very best with regard to knowledge and understanding of ancient sumerian writings and culture. You think he's a fraud. I don't care, eventually he will be found to have had far superior knowledge and your faith in Einstein's theories for example will even at some point be proven to be incorrect. After this people will look back and wonder why people didn't see the obvious.

So lets get this straight. You honestly believe that this unqualified moron is supposed to be able to read documents that no other academic with years of study behind them can read properly. So how exactly did the Annunaki manage to build a spaceship out of bricks and mortar?

From reading the posts on this thread I can tell that BrianK may have some connection with the Aerospace industry and knows more about astronomy than I do. If I want to know something about geology, I can always ask T-J. ( I have already diverted one question his way on post #147.) You on the other hand seem to think that you are the worlds greatest expert on all subjects, simply because you are a true believer. Your belief that opinion carries more weight than evidence is what has stopped the learning process in your existence, since you believe that you already represent the sum total of all human knowledge.

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

@Lou

Quote:

Electromagnetic waves can bend light through an indirect, quantum effect—but to such a tiny degree that we cannot measure it.

but to such a tiny degree that we cannot measure it. Have I ever used the term "Orders of magnitude" before.
Quote:

1. Base your conclusions on the evidence. Not vice versa. 2. Measure objectively, not guess selectively. 3. Back up statements with evidence. Claiming something to be a fact does not make it a fact. 4. Use large sample numbers for statistical analysis. 5. Use blind sampling for tests 6. Tests must include control groups. 7. Cite your sources of information. 8. Sources must be reliable, verifiable, and backed with evidence. 9. Opinion is not fact 10. No false evidence.(don't cheat)

Item 7 would help, then I can check the validity of item 8
Also "Norbert Dragon". Would that be the same Norbert Dragon who was an associate of Rubeus Hagrid?

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