Click Here
home features news forums classifieds faqs links search
6071 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
Ports: 1024,5555, 6665-6669
SSL port: 6697
Channel: #Amigaworld
Channel Policy and Guidelines

Who's Online
20 crawler(s) on-line.
 117 guest(s) on-line.
 1 member(s) on-line.


 Beajar

You are an anonymous user.
Register Now!
 Beajar:  4 mins ago
 Rob:  6 mins ago
 DiscreetFX:  1 hr 9 mins ago
 agami:  1 hr 9 mins ago
 RobertB:  1 hr 29 mins ago
 OlafS25:  2 hrs 19 mins ago
 Bruce72:  2 hrs 21 mins ago
 MEGA_RJ_MICAL:  3 hrs 8 mins ago
 t0lkien:  3 hrs 13 mins ago
 amigakit:  3 hrs 34 mins ago

/  Forum Index
   /  Free For All
      /  Nibiru, what if ? - part 2
Register To Post

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 Next Page )
PosterThread
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 2:55:16
#2721 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote:
@Niolator

Lou states that
Quote:
The originator of all 'Niburu' lore himseld - Z. Sitchin - said Niburu isn't due until ~2900AD
however the fact that he conveniently 'forgets' is that Sitchins tales of Nibiru have less basis in fact than Tolkiens "Lord of the Rings" trilogy. Sitchin has exactly as much credibility as Von Daniken, and that is a negative quantity. The entire reason that Lou is bringing up all of these alternatives to science is that science disproves the possibility that Sitchin could have any validity. He would rather accept the unevidenced statements of one man who has no credentials than accept the weight of evidence. and part of this means that he attacks my credentials, even though he hasn't got a clue what my level of credentials is, because I have only ever cited evidence, not credentials, or the lack thereof.

Stop being a nimrod.
Science continues to prove Sitchin's solar system creation theory correct.

Here's but 1 example:
"So, You See, As Nibiru Orbits…

No, that is not (yet) a quote from a report in the scientific journal Nature, but that is what the conclusion is of a study by six astronomers (including one from a NASA institute) published in the Journal's July 16, 2009 issue.

The Asteroid Belt between Mars and Jupiter is presumed to be the remnant of 'something' that was there and broke up. So how come it includes bits and pieces of matter found only in the outer reaches of the Solar System? The enigma is compounded by the fact that these strange bits and pieces contain organic-rich matter. The group's findings: These are bits and pieces of "primordial trans-Neptunian objects" left in the Asteroid Belt as orbiting 'comets' or 'cometlike objects' pass through it and collide with its asteroids, leaving behind a 'footprint'.

Substitute 'Nibiru' with its "organic-rich matter" for "comets or cometlike objects" as it passes periodically through the Asteroid Belt, and you get the true answer -- another instance of modern science catching up with ancient knowledge."

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 2:57:21
#2722 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

Oh look...another scientist has something to say about gravity... I wonder what it could be...

http://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWRONG/GRAVI3_6.1_5-30-2005.htm

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 3:27:57
#2723 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
Lou wrote:Quote:

BrianK wrote:
And science does look at the alternative postulates to the Dark Matter postulate. Turns out that MOdified Newtonian Dynamics doesn't appear to completely explain things either. Which is great! It means we keep looking.

Recall MOND is something you proposed last year.

Others proposed, or more properly, postulated it as a possible answer to the problems which 'Dark Matter' seem to solve. And like all other ideas in science until it's demonstrated to reflect reality we can't accept it as truth. However, it is interesting you harp on 'Dark Matter' and appear to be blind to any of these other ideas that also are postulated as possible resolves to the problems 'Dark Matter' may answer.

The plus here is I follow up on postulated answers as that evidence comes available. I'd like to think you would too. The problem that you have is the severe lack of overlay with your EM_is_God postulate and reality. Really you have something that's not even wrong it's worse than wrong.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 3:36:19
#2724 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:

Oh look...another scientist has something to say about gravity... I wonder what it could be...

http://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWRONG/GRAVI3_6.1_5-30-2005.htm

I'm not sure what you see wrong here. Just a few pages ago, and earlier in the thread, you posted ad nasuem about rejecting Gravity because of the lack of evidence the Graviton existed. Now you post Kierein who explains what the Graviton is. You know the Graviton which you told us is not real. You seem to like two headed coins. It reminds me of how you rejected Einstein because he used Big G. Then a few posts later accepted Brandenburg because he used Big G. At least you're consistently inconsistent.

Last edited by BrianK on 16-Nov-2012 at 03:36 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 3:43:54
#2725 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Niolator

Quote:
Yes, I reacted against that too. I suppose Lou means that the Sun has revolved around the center of the galaxy a full revolution. The problem with that thinking is that the Mayan calendar has nothing to do with a galactic year at all. The Mayan calendar is about 5200 year long per revolution but a galactic year is about 240 million earth years.

I have no clue what Lou meant by 'Galactic Center'. He either used the term inappropriately OR has some definition that the scientific world doesn't. Either way it was wrong. As for the Mayan calendar there are a few different calendars but none of them has a 240 million earth year cycle. Nor do they pinpoint where time zero is in reference to galactic rotation.

Last edited by BrianK on 16-Nov-2012 at 03:45 AM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 17:36:01
#2726 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1223
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:
Science continues to prove Sitchin's solar system creation theory correct.
What kind of idiotic claim is this supposed to be. The excerpt that you quoted was not science proving anything, it was an inept science fiction writer who was reiterating his own stupid fantasy on a website dedicated to perpetuating the myth that he is something other than a failed sci-fi scribbler, who had less understanding of what made a good story than L. Ron Hubbard and his Battlefield Earth . The bits that you edited out from the post would have given the game away.
You deleted the lines Quote:
October 21, 2009 Posted by Zechariah Sitchin
from the header and Quote:
October 2009 Zecharia Sitchin
from the end of the post that I found here As I have explained previously, linking back to the original stupid mindless moronic assertion, does not add evidence for the original stupid mindless moronic assertion.


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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 22:19:53
#2727 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:

Oh look...another scientist has something to say about gravity... I wonder what it could be...

http://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWRONG/GRAVI3_6.1_5-30-2005.htm

I'm not sure what you see wrong here. Just a few pages ago, and earlier in the thread, you posted ad nasuem about rejecting Gravity because of the lack of evidence the Graviton existed. Now you post Kierein who explains what the Graviton is. You know the Graviton which you told us is not real. You seem to like two headed coins. It reminds me of how you rejected Einstein because he used Big G. Then a few posts later accepted Brandenburg because he used Big G. At least you're consistently inconsistent.

Apparently you're just a skimmer.
The graviton describer there is not a real particle. He was insinuating that is actually the absence of light [pressure].

So we've known that you only skim what you link now we know you only skim what I link too.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 23:02:44
#2728 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
Science continues to prove Sitchin's solar system creation theory correct.
What kind of idiotic claim is this supposed to be. The excerpt that you quoted was not science proving anything, it was an inept science fiction writer who was reiterating his own stupid fantasy on a website dedicated to perpetuating the myth that he is something other than a failed sci-fi scribbler, who had less understanding of what made a good story than L. Ron Hubbard and his Battlefield Earth . The bits that you edited out from the post would have given the game away.
You deleted the lines Quote:
October 21, 2009 Posted by Zechariah Sitchin
from the header and Quote:
October 2009 Zecharia Sitchin
from the end of the post that I found here As I have explained previously, linking back to the original stupid mindless moronic assertion, does not add evidence for the original stupid mindless moronic assertion.

when are you going to realize that you named yourself appropriately?
http://phys.org/news7056.html &
http://www.astronomynow.com/news/n1005/05asteroid/ &
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/1018/Moon-formed-from-humongous-Earth-collision-new-theories-attempt-to-explain

Suprise! You are wrong again. The suprise is only yours of course as you are consistently wrong with your archaic [lack of] knowledge.
When will you realize that everything you learned 40 years ago is barely valid today?

Last edited by Lou on 16-Nov-2012 at 11:12 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 23:05:39
#2729 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:

Oh look...another scientist has something to say about gravity... I wonder what it could be...

http://www.angelfire.com/az/BIGBANGisWRONG/GRAVI3_6.1_5-30-2005.htm

I'm not sure what you see wrong here. Just a few pages ago, and earlier in the thread, you posted ad nasuem about rejecting Gravity because of the lack of evidence the Graviton existed. Now you post Kierein who explains what the Graviton is. You know the Graviton which you told us is not real. You seem to like two headed coins. It reminds me of how you rejected Einstein because he used Big G. Then a few posts later accepted Brandenburg because he used Big G. At least you're consistently inconsistent.

Are you on crack or something? Brandenburg did not use a fixed value for G. He use a calculated value based on how the electron orbits the proton. If you actual bothered reading things rather than skimming you might actually have a clue.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 23:07:11
#2730 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
Lou wrote:[quote]

Recall MOND is something you proposed last year.


Others proposed, or more properly, postulated it as a possible answer to the problems which 'Dark Matter' seem to solve. And like all other ideas in science until it's demonstrated to reflect reality we can't accept it as truth. However, it is interesting you harp on 'Dark Matter' and appear to be blind to any of these other ideas that also are postulated as possible resolves to the problems 'Dark Matter' may answer.

The plus here is I follow up on postulated answers as that evidence comes available. I'd like to think you would too. The problem that you have is the severe lack of overlay with your EM_is_God postulate and reality. Really you have something that's not even wrong it's worse than wrong.

So let's recap. You proposed MOND and it's determined to be wrong but you can't discredit GEM Unification Theory and you're upset. Ok I got it now, thanks.

Last edited by Lou on 16-Nov-2012 at 11:08 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 16-Nov-2012 23:14:51
#2731 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/11/121115133000.htm

warm water on Mars

...

gee I wonder how Mars blew a meteor into space only to have it land here eventually...

Last edited by Lou on 16-Nov-2012 at 11:30 PM.
Last edited by Lou on 16-Nov-2012 at 11:29 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 17-Nov-2012 0:13:07
#2732 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1223
From: Untied Kingdom

@Lou

Quote:
http://phys.org/news7056.html & http://www.astronomynow.com/news/n1005/05asteroid/ &
Amazingly enough, there were such theories more than 40 years ago when I was a schoolboy. The reason for such theories was that scientists were aware of the existence of organic compounds in and on meteorites. The existence of these compounds however does not prove the existence of Nibiru, any more than it proves the existence of Psychlo, or Qo'noS, or any of the other fictional planets put out by any of the sci-fi authors over the last hundred or more years.

Quote:
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/1018/Moon-formed-from-humongous-Earth-collision-new-theories-attempt-to-explain
A scientific theory is an explanation of a particular event, or sequence of events supported by evidence Having read the post from the Christian Science Monitor I can only find a list if suppositions and assumptions but never a sinle item of evidence The article refers to the fact that a previous "collision theory" has been discredited by evidence. In an attempt to resuscitate this postulate, two conflicting postulates have been offered, neither of them supported by evidence. They both offer possible solutions by describing events that might have happened. Basically there are too many occurences of "if" and "could" for me to consider this as anything other than a fishing expedition, and not a scientific fishing expedition either.

Quote:
Are you on crack or something? Brandenburg did not use a fixed value for G. He use a calculated value based on how the electron orbits the proton.
And if I calculated a value for G based on the speed at which paint dries, would it be any more valid? Brandenburg claims to have solved the mysteries of life, the universe, and everything, but his value of 42 is unsupported by evidence, and some of his assumptions can be demonstrated to be invalid as they do not match actual measured values.

Quote:
but you can't discredit GEM Unification Theory
This claim makes the fals assumption that GEM has any credit in the first place. The maths is very pretty, but it bears no relationship to actual measured values. The original GEM "theory" is something soft, brown, and smelly, and GEM unification is nothing other than a polished turd.
You are seeking acceptance for your postulate, so the onus of proof is for you to produce evidence to prove your that your postulate is not only as good as, but better and more accurate. It is not for the rest of the world to waste its time convincing you that your fantasy is constructed on a foundation of false assumptions.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 17-Nov-2012 2:16:11
#2733 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

You earlier accusations baseless as typical. No need to respond to prattle.

Quote:
So let's recap. You proposed MOND and it's determined to be wrong but you can't discredit GEM Unification Theory
If you recall I introduced MOND to you because you claimed GEM was the only answer to Dark Matter. Turns out you're wrong there's about a dozen other postulates. Science fully knows Dark Matter isn't proven. Though the math works really well.

As for GEM I don't need to discredit. You asserted it so it's your job to credit it. It's to your own discredit that you've failed in that task.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
olegil 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 17-Nov-2012 10:21:26
#2734 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 22-Aug-2003
Posts: 5895
From: Work

@Lou

What would it take to block these wavelengths then? I really want a zero-gravity room. I've got a spare house in need of new roofing (and wall insulation) anyway

Well, either I put in a new roof and chimney and try my best to drain around the cellar to make it possible to live there at least part of the year, OR I tear it down. But that's beside the point.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 17-Nov-2012 15:36:04
#2735 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

@Lou

Quote:
gee I wonder how Mars blew a meteor into space only to have it land here eventually...
Actually that didn't happen. Meteors burn up in our atmosphere. It's meteorites that land here. How planets release meteroids that become meteors and then meteorites have a variety of explainations. These are usually violent causes such as volcanoes or impact of a meteorite on the surface of the planet that ejects planetary materials into space.

Do you know how we determine these to be from Mars? It's a use of the best probability. We don't have direct martian rocks to compare to and we didn't see the flight path. Based upon composition, position, size, and other properties scientists conclude these are not earth objects but a meteorite and from there conclude they are most likely from Mars. The Martian claim is not directly known but inferred.

I suppose Martian material can get here from other ways such as LGM. Though with any LGM evidence by any of these rocks the inferrence is going to be fairly low. Perhaps they had rail guns setup on Mars and shot some rocks at us for fun. An atomic event (like a nuclear war) might cause the material. But, since Martian meteorites are not radioactive it's improbable to be nuclear related.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
BrianK 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 17-Nov-2012 22:00:21
#2736 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 30-Sep-2003
Posts: 8111
From: Minneapolis, MN, USA

Double the data on LHC's Higgs shows Higgs. Kinda boring as it further confirms the Standard Model.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
olegil 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 18-Nov-2012 9:15:27
#2737 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 22-Aug-2003
Posts: 5895
From: Work

@Lou

Which part is it you're doubting?

A planet that can form a 22 km high volcano on it's own and has impact craters up to the size of 7km deep and 2300km diameter cannot by any stretch of your imagination blow a rock into space, is that it?

And a rock in space cannot by any stretch of your imagination hit earth, that's the other problem, right?

You're not very good at imagination in either case. Have you got ANY idea of the amount of energy needed to create the Hellas Planitia or Olympus Mons?

Now THERE is something you'll not find us trying to explain by men moving rocks any time soon

Edit: An even more likely candidate is actually the North Polar Basin, as it could very well be an impact crater as well. 40% of a planet not much smaller than Earth, that's a BIIIG BADA BOOOM.

How can you even start denying the possibility of something that throwing off a few rocks that eventually hit us?

Last edited by olegil on 18-Nov-2012 at 09:19 AM.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Nimrod 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 18-Nov-2012 9:56:08
#2738 ]
Super Member
Joined: 30-Jan-2010
Posts: 1223
From: Untied Kingdom

@olegil

Quote:
Edit: An even more likely candidate is actually the North Polar Basin, as it could very well be an impact crater as well. 40% of a planet not much smaller than Earth, that's a BIIIG BADA BOOOM. How can you even start denying the possibility of something that throwing off a few rocks that eventually hit us?
Lou is not denying any of the possibilities that you are listing, what Lou is doing is extending the possibility of a large impact on Mars into tha absolute irrefutable proof that the "something" that "may have" impacted Mars was a moon orbiting a planet called Nibiru, the inhabitants of which genetically engineered a slave race on this planet to mine all of the gold... it is called a leap of faith.

Leaps of faith are something that religious zealots use as a substitute for rational logical thought processes.

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

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Niolator 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 18-Nov-2012 14:08:13
#2739 ]
Super Member
Joined: 3-May-2003
Posts: 1420
From: Unknown

@Lou

Quote:
The Asteroid Belt between Mars and Jupiter is presumed to be the remnant of 'something' that was there and broke up. So how come it includes bits and pieces of matter found only in the outer reaches of the Solar System? The enigma is compounded by the fact that these strange bits and pieces contain organic-rich matter. The group's findings: These are bits and pieces of "primordial trans-Neptunian objects" left in the Asteroid Belt as orbiting 'comets' or 'cometlike objects' pass through it and collide with its asteroids, leaving behind a 'footprint'.


So where is this enigma you are referring to? Matter from the outer solar system is continuously being transported inwards into the inner parts of the solar system. That they contain organic matter is nothing to be surprised about. Organic matter is practically any matter containing carbon and our solar system was created in a nebula containing vast amounts of carbon.

Of course some of the matter coming in from the outer reaches is caught by and stuck in the asteroid belt. If would be a real enigma if there were no organic matter from the outer solar system in the asteroid belt. If it all came from this alleged Niburu there would be nothing left of the planet as all it's matter would have gathered in the asteroid belt over the aeons.

By the way, what's with you and all the other Niburu/12th of December proponents? You all seem to want the world to end. It seems like you have a death wish or something.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Lou 
Re: Anybody remember Nibiru?
Posted on 20-Nov-2012 14:29:53
#2740 ]
Elite Member
Joined: 2-Nov-2004
Posts: 4169
From: Rhode Island

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote:
@Lou

Quote:
http://phys.org/news7056.html & http://www.astronomynow.com/news/n1005/05asteroid/ &
Amazingly enough, there were such theories more than 40 years ago when I was a schoolboy. The reason for such theories was that scientists were aware of the existence of organic compounds in and on meteorites. The existence of these compounds however does not prove the existence of Nibiru, any more than it proves the existence of Psychlo, or Qo'noS, or any of the other fictional planets put out by any of the sci-fi authors over the last hundred or more years.

Quote:
http://www.csmonitor.com/Science/2012/1018/Moon-formed-from-humongous-Earth-collision-new-theories-attempt-to-explain
A scientific theory is an explanation of a particular event, or sequence of events supported by evidence Having read the post from the Christian Science Monitor I can only find a list if suppositions and assumptions but never a sinle item of evidence The article refers to the fact that a previous "collision theory" has been discredited by evidence. In an attempt to resuscitate this postulate, two conflicting postulates have been offered, neither of them supported by evidence. They both offer possible solutions by describing events that might have happened. Basically there are too many occurences of "if" and "could" for me to consider this as anything other than a fishing expedition, and not a scientific fishing expedition either.

Quote:
Are you on crack or something? Brandenburg did not use a fixed value for G. He use a calculated value based on how the electron orbits the proton.
And if I calculated a value for G based on the speed at which paint dries, would it be any more valid? Brandenburg claims to have solved the mysteries of life, the universe, and everything, but his value of 42 is unsupported by evidence, and some of his assumptions can be demonstrated to be invalid as they do not match actual measured values.

Quote:
but you can't discredit GEM Unification Theory
This claim makes the fals assumption that GEM has any credit in the first place. The maths is very pretty, but it bears no relationship to actual measured values. The original GEM "theory" is something soft, brown, and smelly, and GEM unification is nothing other than a polished turd.
You are seeking acceptance for your postulate, so the onus of proof is for you to produce evidence to prove your that your postulate is not only as good as, but better and more accurate. It is not for the rest of the world to waste its time convincing you that your fantasy is constructed on a foundation of false assumptions.

What Sitchin proposed 40 years ago is only gaining credibility now. Like I said, science is corroborating him. Nothing AS YOU CLAIMED is discrediting his proposal, so you once again stand WRONG.

As for GEM Unification Theory, if I can and have pointed out silly physics errors you have made in this thread, what makes you think anything you can say to discredit Brandenburg holds any water?

Last edited by Lou on 20-Nov-2012 at 03:00 PM.

 Status: Offline
Profile     Report this post  
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | 32 | 33 | 34 | 35 | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | 47 | 48 | 49 | 50 | 51 | 52 | 53 | 54 | 55 | 56 | 57 | 58 | 59 | 60 | 61 | 62 | 63 | 64 | 65 | 66 | 67 | 68 | 69 | 70 | 71 | 72 | 73 | 74 | 75 | 76 | 77 | 78 | 79 | 80 | 81 | 82 | 83 | 84 | 85 | 86 | 87 | 88 | 89 | 90 | 91 | 92 | 93 | 94 | 95 | 96 | 97 | 98 | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | 110 | 111 | 112 | 113 | 114 | 115 | 116 | 117 | 118 | 119 | 120 | 121 | 122 | 123 | 124 | 125 | 126 | 127 | 128 | 129 | 130 | 131 | 132 | 133 | 134 | 135 | 136 | 137 | 138 | 139 Next Page )

[ home ][ about us ][ privacy ] [ forums ][ classifieds ] [ links ][ news archive ] [ link to us ][ user account ]
Copyright (C) 2000 - 2019 Amigaworld.net.
Amigaworld.net was originally founded by David Doyle