@Lou

Quote:

People like you never move forward.

Of course I have not moved forward, that is why I am posting this response using a remington typewriter hybridised with a slide rule because home computing hadn't been invented when I left school.
Actually it was not until four years after I had built my first computer, that IBM started selling their PC range of computers. Do at least try to keep up.

From your response to BrianK
Quote:

I haven't failed to accept 4 forces, I have refused.

There is none so blind as he that refuses to see.

Quote:

Now scientists are posulating that we are in a binary system on a 24000 year cycle.

Yet another Clearly Ridiculous Alternative Proposal . There are no scientists postulating such a ridiculous fantasy. There is of course some fantasist called Cruttenden, trying to flog a book called "Lost Star of Myth and Time" whose storyline has been posted on creation wiki as though it were "scientific consensus" despite the total lack of any scientific or observational evidence to support the claim.

Quote:

I will not be hand-fed archaic textbook information and be told that is all I can believe.

And yet you adhere rigidly to the Holy Writ (and badly writ, to boot) expounded by Zecharia Sitchin.

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

@Lou

Quote:

No, it's not religion, it's business. Too many books need updating. Too much funding supporting the status quo. So while individual scientists accept new facts, they aren't accepted by the average Joe until many years later when text books are finally updated.

I'd disagree. Once people are out of that area they generally don't refer back to their textbooks any more. You make it seem like news comes out about science and the person says 'Hey not in this book therefore they're wrong'.

If someone really wants to know this stuff they are understanding what is going on to a deeper level than their K-12 textbooks provided. And certainly in college textbooks are supplemented by other source materials which I've seen some profs update each quarter.

If something radical happened, say EM was found to be the Unified Theory, what should happen, and does in the good schools, is they use the textbook in other areas which are still accurate and provide supplemental materials.

In my experience education isn't as static as it would appear you've experienced.

@Nimrod

Quote:

@Lou Quote: Now scientists are posulating that we are in a binary system on a 24000 year cycle. Yet another Clearly Ridiculous Alternative Proposal . There are no scientists postulating such a ridiculous fantasy. There is of course some fantasist called Cruttenden, trying to flog a book called "Lost Star of Myth and Time" whose storyline has been posted on creation wiki as though it were "scientific consensus" despite the total lack of any scientific or observational evidence to support the claim.

Thanks for this Nimrod. I was trying to find this item had any scientific backing whatsoever. If this is the info it appears it's based on more fiction than Stichin. (Sorry a bad rhyme couldn't be wasted.)

Quote:

Quote: I will not be hand-fed archaic textbook information and be told that is all I can believe. And yet you adhere rigidly to the Holy Writ (and badly writ, to boot) expounded by Zecharia Sitchin.

Touche

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote: @Lou Quote: People like you never move forward. Of course I have not moved forward, that is why I am posting this response using a remington typewriter hybridised with a slide rule because home computing hadn't been invented when I left school. Actually it was not until four years after I had built my first computer, that IBM started selling their PC range of computers. Do at least try to keep up. From your response to BrianK Quote: I haven't failed to accept 4 forces, I have refused. There is none so blind as he that refuses to see. Quote: Now scientists are posulating that we are in a binary system on a 24000 year cycle. Yet another Clearly Ridiculous Alternative Proposal . There are no scientists postulating such a ridiculous fantasy. There is of course some fantasist called Cruttenden, trying to flog a book called "Lost Star of Myth and Time" whose storyline has been posted on creation wiki as though it were "scientific consensus" despite the total lack of any scientific or observational evidence to support the claim. Quote: I will not be hand-fed archaic textbook information and be told that is all I can believe. And yet you adhere rigidly to the Holy Writ (and badly writ, to boot) expounded by Zecharia Sitchin.

It's not that I adhere to Sitchin is that your are so convinced your archaic beliefs are all you can believe that you refuse anything else.

I have read the 4 forces "theory" and have shown you what an epic fail gravity is mathematically and yet you cling to these out-dated theories like a religion.
To me you are the blind one and infact I told you this from the beginning in thread 1.

As for your childish assertion, why don't you look up "The Great Year" video.
There are many articles regarding this system as a binary star system (which is the norm not the exception) throughout the internet but haven't made it into your ancient reading materials.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2003/denver_2003/2774163.stm

Hmmm... Over 8 years later and still nothing, huh?

http://www.newscientist.com/special/seven-things-that-dont-make-sense-about-gravity

Last edited by Lou on 24-Jun-2011 at 06:10 PM.

@Lou

Quote:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2003/denver_2003/2774163.stm Hmmm... Over 8 years later and still nothing, huh?

That's rather overlysimplistic. These experiments have yielded various results. LINK . Most importantly is a better understanding of our universe. As cited in the article 2015 new equipment will come on line with a 10x improvement in accuracy. So as we wait for Aug-Oct to see Elenin fizzle and still not effect our planet. You'll have to wait probably another decade. Once installed experiments must be done, papers must be written, and peer reviews conducted. And that's not to mention verifying experiments must still be done.

Be careful not to fall into an arguement from ignorance. Afterall absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If you wish to hold up a different theory, that of EM is everything, you aren't supported by less than total success. Instead you still have the large step of demonstrating your experiments and predictions do work better. (Something I believe you've clearly admitted is something you can't do and believe scientists will do in the future.) So you're not out of the woods yet. Science continues it's skeptical inquisitive nature of the universe.

Last edited by BrianK on 24-Jun-2011 at 08:14 PM.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @Lou Quote: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/in_depth/sci_tech/2003/denver_2003/2774163.stm Hmmm... Over 8 years later and still nothing, huh? That's rather overlysimplistic. These experiments have yielded various results. LINK . Most importantly is a better understanding of our universe. As cited in the article 2015 new equipment will come on line with a 10x improvement in accuracy. So as we wait for Aug-Oct to see Elenin fizzle and still not effect our planet. You'll have to wait probably another decade. Once installed experiments must be done, papers must be written, and peer reviews conducted. And that's not to mention verifying experiments must still be done. Be careful not to fall into an arguement from ignorance. Afterall absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. If you wish to hold up a different theory, that of EM is everything, you aren't supported by less than total success. Instead you still have the large step of demonstrating your experiments and predictions do work better. (Something I believe you've clearly admitted is something you can't do and believe scientists will do in the future.) So you're not out of the woods yet. Science continues it's skeptical inquisitive nature of the universe.

Gravity was defined in the late1600's or early 1700's I believe and there is not one shred of direct tangible evidence that it exists. All data is based on estimated net results and not one graviton, gravity wave or piece of dark matter has ever been found after 300 years. Isn't it time to call it quits and invest the money somewhere else?
You people treat gravity like it's the holy grail. It's more like the emperor's new clothes...

@Lou

Quote:

I have read the 4 forces "theory" and have shown you what an epic fail gravity is mathematically and yet you cling to these out-dated theories like a religion.

The only thing that you have done in this entire thread that has any connection to mathematics is to post one equation that has absolutely no relevance to what you attempted to connect it to, which is why you have consistently failed to insert numbers into the equation to demonstrate how it applies. I am not the person who cited the out-dated drivel of Charles Hapgood as proof of a discredited fairytale. As regards holding opinions like a religion, I believe that T-J had the best response to that ridiculous assertion in post #338
Quote:

Present me with some evidence and I'll change my views. If I worshipped Physics 101, I'd be awaiting the second coming of Newton and condemning the heretics Einstein and Hawking. If I worshipped Geology 101, the true god would be Hutton and Lyell would be his prophet. I would regard Agassiz or Wegener as apostates of the worst order. But because I do not worship, I have accepted the evidence for Einstein's relativity or Hawking's quantum. I have accepted Agassiz' glacial cycle and Wegener's plate tectonics, also based on the overwhelming evidence for them.

While I do not know of any of the people quoted involved in geology, I can understand the point that T-J was making. The point that I have previously used to respond to this accusation is that as an engineer, I use the correct tool to do the job in front of me.

Quote:

To me you are the blind one and infact I told you this from the beginning in thread 1.

The only thing that you have done consistently since the beginning of thread 1 is post up all sorts of Clearly Ridiculous Alternative Proposals. It seems that there is no C.R.A.P that you will not post, whether it is by the inept pseudohistorian, Sitchin, the convicted faker of evidence, Von Daniken, that LIEder woman who keeps hearing voices in her head, or even N. K. Shah who seems to have updated his website to include his latest discovery, lower case letters!!!!!

Quote:

As for your childish assertion, why don't you look up "The Great Year" video.

O.K. I watched yet another video.
Quote:

02:11 "Could it be that our sun is in a binary orbit?"

An interesting idea, where is the evidence? After another 35 minutes of waffle about modern "new age" misinterpretations of earlier religious beliefs, the video finally gets to the point and puts forward an idea that may or may not warrant serious investigation, what is never presented at any point in the entire video is any evidence to support the idea.
Quote:

03:33 "that plots the positions of stars and possibly their distances"

Evidence? Having made this assertion the video moves on without offering a shred of evidence to support the statement.
Quote:

37:55 "Scientists have confirmed that the rate of precession is increasing"

Another statement made with not a shred of supporting evidence
Quote:

38:20 "The cycle of a binary system might also be observed in the geological record. Mathematician Milutin Milankovic noticed the Earth has had global warming and cooling that roughly correlate to the length of the great year"

I will leave it for people with a better understanding of geology to explain Milankovitch cycles. All that I will say on the subject is that there is no evidence here that indicates either the presence or absence of a binary companion.
Quote:

41:24 "I can not have any positive opinion about this,but I will not rule it out"

The key statement by the only person who actually knew what he was talking about in this whole video. Apart from this one statement this entire video was a total waste of time. The comment on the disclose.tv website stated that this video has been pulled everywhere else. Probably on grounds of quality.

"Some modern day scientists" who contributed to the film.
John Anthony West, Author of The Case for Astrology,in which he presents "compelling new evidence that proves the astrological premise": that correlations exist between events in the sky and on earth, and that correspondences exist between the human personality and the positions of the planets at birth.
Graham Hancock, a sociologist with no training in archaeology, who fell for Hapgoods junk idea about crustal displacement, and Von Danikens fakery in "Chariots of the Gods". The loss of credibility that he suffered as a consequence of this has caused him to change careers and he now describes himself as a novelist.
Alice B. Kehoe, a retired anthropologist who seems to have a justified bee in her bonnet about the way that the pre Columbian American population have consistently been given the dirty end of the stick.
Ronald Mellor, a teacher of Greek and Roman history, specialising in ancient religions. He is currently working on a study of oriental religion in Roman Pompeii.
Brother Achalananda Formerly Stanley Guy, now senior minister at the Self Realization Fellowship Lake Shrine Temple in Los Angeles
Uwe Homann, at last an astronomer. He and his father being members of the Sirius Research Group were debunked when making claims in support of Cruttenden in 1989 as shown in this post from September 2009
Werner Dappen, Professor of Physics and Astronomy. His contributions to this video were to explain what a binary system was, and then to make the only scientific statement in the entire video. this was his comment at 41:24.

I should also point out that if there is a binary companion on a 24000 year cycle it would render the existence of Nibiru and its 3600 year orbit totally impossible even if other details had not already succeeded in doing that before now.

Last edited by Nimrod on 25-Jun-2011 at 12:37 AM.
Last edited by Nimrod on 25-Jun-2011 at 12:29 AM.

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

@Lou

Quote:

You people treat gravity like it's the holy grail. It's more like the emperor's new clothes...

So come up with something better and we will worship the ground you walk on. So far all you have come up with is Clearly Ridiculous Alternative Proposals

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

@Lou

Quote:

Gravity was defined in the late1600's or early 1700's I believe and there is not one shred of direct tangible evidence that it exists. All data is based on estimated net results and not one graviton, gravity wave or piece of dark matter has ever been found after 300 years. Isn't it time to call it quits and invest the money somewhere else?

You make it sound like we've been trying to find a graviton or a gravity wave for 300 years. Technology to do this hasn't available for two decades at best. The quantum nature of gravity is an idea that's not 300 years old. Certainly there are quite a few postulates which have yet to be proven. And no one, other than you, are acting as if we know this all.

You contend it's EM. Yet when EM is measured it is insufficent and is a much worse predictor. Again a Unified Force Theory is still a holy grail of physics which is being worked on. So, it's not as if gravity is causing anything to standstill. In the interim it gives us lots of predictability in a system; keeps Mercury in orbit, launches satelittes, and discovers planets hundreds of lightyears away. All of which is evidence, btw.

Last edited by BrianK on 25-Jun-2011 at 05:07 AM.
Last edited by BrianK on 25-Jun-2011 at 04:57 AM.
Last edited by BrianK on 25-Jun-2011 at 04:46 AM.
Last edited by BrianK on 25-Jun-2011 at 04:44 AM.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @Lou Quote: Gravity was defined in the late1600's or early 1700's I believe and there is not one shred of direct tangible evidence that it exists. All data is based on estimated net results and not one graviton, gravity wave or piece of dark matter has ever been found after 300 years. Isn't it time to call it quits and invest the money somewhere else? You make it sound like we've been trying to find a graviton or a gravity wave for 300 years. Technology to do this hasn't available for two decades at best. The quantum nature of gravity is an idea that's not 300 years old. Certainly there are quite a few postulates which have yet to be proven. And no one, other than you, are acting as if we know this all. You contend it's EM. Yet when EM is measured it is insufficent and is a much worse predictor. Again a Unified Force Theory is still a holy grail of physics which is being worked on. So, it's not as if gravity is causing anything to standstill. In the interim it gives us lots of predictability in a system; keeps Mercury in orbit, launches satelittes, and discovers planets hundreds of lightyears away. All of which is evidence, btw.

Can you answer me this: why does water bead...as in on a windshield?

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote: @Lou Quote: I have read the 4 forces "theory" and have shown you what an epic fail gravity is mathematically and yet you cling to these out-dated theories like a religion. The only thing that you have done in this entire thread that has any connection to mathematics is to post one equation that has absolutely no relevance to what you attempted to connect it to, which is why you have consistently failed to insert numbers into the equation to demonstrate how it applies. I am not the person who cited the out-dated drivel of Charles Hapgood as proof of a discredited fairytale. As regards holding opinions like a religion, I believe that T-J had the best response to that ridiculous assertion in post #338 Quote: Present me with some evidence and I'll change my views. If I worshipped Physics 101, I'd be awaiting the second coming of Newton and condemning the heretics Einstein and Hawking. If I worshipped Geology 101, the true god would be Hutton and Lyell would be his prophet. I would regard Agassiz or Wegener as apostates of the worst order. But because I do not worship, I have accepted the evidence for Einstein's relativity or Hawking's quantum. I have accepted Agassiz' glacial cycle and Wegener's plate tectonics, also based on the overwhelming evidence for them. While I do not know of any of the people quoted involved in geology, I can understand the point that T-J was making. The point that I have previously used to respond to this accusation is that as an engineer, I use the correct tool to do the job in front of me. Quote: To me you are the blind one and infact I told you this from the beginning in thread 1. The only thing that you have done consistently since the beginning of thread 1 is post up all sorts of Clearly Ridiculous Alternative Proposals. It seems that there is no C.R.A.P that you will not post, whether it is by the inept pseudohistorian, Sitchin, the convicted faker of evidence, Von Daniken, that LIEder woman who keeps hearing voices in her head, or even N. K. Shah who seems to have updated his website to include his latest discovery, lower case letters!!!!! Quote: As for your childish assertion, why don't you look up "The Great Year" video. O.K. I watched yet another video. Quote: 02:11 "Could it be that our sun is in a binary orbit?" An interesting idea, where is the evidence? After another 35 minutes of waffle about modern "new age" misinterpretations of earlier religious beliefs, the video finally gets to the point and puts forward an idea that may or may not warrant serious investigation, what is never presented at any point in the entire video is any evidence to support the idea. Quote: 03:33 "that plots the positions of stars and possibly their distances" Evidence? Having made this assertion the video moves on without offering a shred of evidence to support the statement. Quote: 37:55 "Scientists have confirmed that the rate of precession is increasing" Another statement made with not a shred of supporting evidence Quote: 38:20 "The cycle of a binary system might also be observed in the geological record. Mathematician Milutin Milankovic noticed the Earth has had global warming and cooling that roughly correlate to the length of the great year" I will leave it for people with a better understanding of geology to explain Milankovitch cycles. All that I will say on the subject is that there is no evidence here that indicates either the presence or absence of a binary companion. Quote: 41:24 "I can not have any positive opinion about this,but I will not rule it out" The key statement by the only person who actually knew what he was talking about in this whole video. Apart from this one statement this entire video was a total waste of time. The comment on the disclose.tv website stated that this video has been pulled everywhere else. Probably on grounds of quality. "Some modern day scientists" who contributed to the film. John Anthony West, Author of The Case for Astrology,in which he presents "compelling new evidence that proves the astrological premise": that correlations exist between events in the sky and on earth, and that correspondences exist between the human personality and the positions of the planets at birth. Graham Hancock, a sociologist with no training in archaeology, who fell for Hapgoods junk idea about crustal displacement, and Von Danikens fakery in "Chariots of the Gods". The loss of credibility that he suffered as a consequence of this has caused him to change careers and he now describes himself as a novelist. Alice B. Kehoe, a retired anthropologist who seems to have a justified bee in her bonnet about the way that the pre Columbian American population have consistently been given the dirty end of the stick. Ronald Mellor, a teacher of Greek and Roman history, specialising in ancient religions. He is currently working on a study of oriental religion in Roman Pompeii. Brother Achalananda Formerly Stanley Guy, now senior minister at the Self Realization Fellowship Lake Shrine Temple in Los Angeles Uwe Homann, at last an astronomer. He and his father being members of the Sirius Research Group were debunked when making claims in support of Cruttenden in 1989 as shown in this post from September 2009 Werner Dappen, Professor of Physics and Astronomy. His contributions to this video were to explain what a binary system was, and then to make the only scientific statement in the entire video. this was his comment at 41:24. I should also point out that if there is a binary companion on a 24000 year cycle it would render the existence of Nibiru and its 3600 year orbit totally impossible even if other details had not already succeeded in doing that before now.

After seeing all the investations you've done, I really have only one thing to say: get a life. I would never delve that deeply into something someone posted on the internet. You, sir, have issues...

@Lou

Quote:

After seeing all the investations you've done, I really have only one thing to say: get a life.

You asked me to watch a video, so I watched a video. That took a little over 3/4 of an hour. You seemed to be implying that it was important so I paid attention. I then googled the people included in the video, that took about ten minutes. I didn't bother googling the narrator as he was just a paid voice. I then typed my response for about ten minutes. If I hadn't you would only have whined about your evidence being ignored, like you have done previously.

Quote:

I would never delve that deeply into something someone posted on the internet.

That, sir, is why you routinely believe Clearly Ridiculous Alternative Proposals

Quote:

You, sir, have issues...

No... just a retentive memory, and an analytical mind.

Last edited by Nimrod on 25-Jun-2011 at 10:44 AM.

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

@Lou

Quote:

Can you answer me this: why does water bead...as in on a windshield?

Surface tension - the property of attraction of water molecules with each other.

Can you answer me this why do protons stay together?

@Lou

Quote:

After seeing all the investations you've done, I really have only one thing to say: get a life. I would never delve that deeply into something someone posted on the internet. You, sir, have issues...

In the past you and MikeB complained people weren't really watching your videos.

Now you complain that someone did watch your video and even took it to the next step - consideration. Who are these people, do they know what they think they know? What sources are they likely using to make these statements and draw these conclusions? It quickly appears the group is fairly well infected with Woo.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @Lou Quote: Can you answer me this: why does water bead...as in on a windshield? Surface tension - the property of attraction of water molecules with each other.

Well to me, water and other liquids beading looks like the best small scale example of gravity but in reality it's just basic laws of thermodynamics. Interestingly, one scientist proposed that that is what we see as gravity and that even general relativity conforms to that.

Quote:

Can you answer me this why do protons stay together?

Superglue.

@Nimrod

Quote:

Nimrod wrote: @Lou Quote: After seeing all the investations you've done, I really have only one thing to say: get a life. You asked me to watch a video, so I watched a video. That took a little over 3/4 of an hour. You seemed to be implying that it was important so I paid attention. I then googled the people included in the video, that took about ten minutes. I didn't bother googling the narrator as he was just a paid voice. I then typed my response for about ten minutes. If I hadn't you would only have whined about your evidence being ignored, like you have done previously. Quote: I would never delve that deeply into something someone posted on the internet. That, sir, is why you routinely believe Clearly Ridiculous Alternative Proposals Quote: You, sir, have issues... No... just a retentive memory, and an analytical mind.

My point is you are taking this too seriously.

@BrianK

Quote:

BrianK wrote: @Lou Quote: After seeing all the investations you've done, I really have only one thing to say: get a life. I would never delve that deeply into something someone posted on the internet. You, sir, have issues... In the past you and MikeB complained people weren't really watching your videos. Now you complain that someone did watch your video and even took it to the next step - consideration. Who are these people, do they know what they think they know? What sources are they likely using to make these statements and draw these conclusions? It quickly appears the group is fairly well infected with Woo.

There are plenty of such videos. Both the History Channel and Discovery channel have such things. What's ridiculous is to label any and every one involved in the makings of them as zeolots who follow Von Daiken.

It's easy to attept to discredit someone on paper. If you dig deep enough, you'll find dirt on everyone. If Einstein was a convicted rapist, would his theories be thrown out the window by default? Would they be any less valid? This is the ridiculous reasoning I see here.

@Lou

Quote:

If Einstein was a convicted rapist, would his theories be thrown out the window by default? Would they be any less valid?

This leads to a very interesting moral question, which Tom Lehrer also addressed in one of his songs.
Quote:

Don't say that he's hypocritical Say rather that he's apolitical "Once the rockets are up, who cares where they come down That's not my department," says Wernher von Braun

So I suppose that the answer would have to be that while morality is nice, truth is truth.
Of course if Albert believed that he had fairies living at the bottom of his garden it would no longer be his morality that was in doubt.
And I still wouldn't let Bernie Madoff within a mile of my pension savings.

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

@Lou

Quote:

Well to me, water and other liquids beading looks like the best small scale example of gravity but in reality it's just basic laws of thermodynamics. Interestingly, one scientist proposed that that is what we see as gravity and that even general relativity conforms to that.

Makes sense as Laws of Thermodynamics are manifestiations of mass-energy transformations. You just gotta get 1 step deeper.

Quote:

Superglue.

This reads as unserious. If people have the respect to answer your question to the best of their ability why do take the disrepectful road?