MorningGlory Posted December 31, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.11 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 31, 2017 1 hour ago, Enoch2021 said: You forgot to answer these... "Really? For instance...?" In response to your 'claim': "I'm sorry but you don't promote science" and... "THEN, show a for instance...?" In response to your 'claim': "you promote CTs pretty much exclusively." Or should we just chalk these up as your Garden Variety: Generalized Sweeping Ipse Dixit Baseless 'bare' Assertion Fallacies that contain as much Veracity as Phlogiston? regards So let's be truthful here. You deny pretty much anything but the flat earth theory. THAT is the truth, not that you post 'science'. It's a Garden Variety Gypsy Triscuit Fiddle Faddle Whacked Out Conspiracy Theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted December 31, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted December 31, 2017 8 minutes ago, MorningGlory said: So let's be truthful here. I don't know any other way. Quote You deny pretty much anything but the flat earth theory. Huh?? I don't deny (Not Exhaustive): Hydrogen Bonding, Computer Interfaces, Bread Ties, Swimming Pools, Aminoacyl tRNA Synthetases, Knowledge of the 'Which Path Information' Collapsing Wave Functions, Spontaneous Parametric Down Conversion, Paintings of Dolphins, Condensation Reactions, Pizza Hut, Redox Reactions, Information, Functional Sequence/Specified Complexity, Logging, Apples, The Color Orange, Teeth, Alpha Helices, Water, Straws, Rifles, Tanks, Oceans, Ponds, Bullfrogs, Picnic Tables, The State of Missouri, Hair Dryers, Nails, Glue, Jelly Doughnuts, Rain, Snow, Clouds, Hair... Do you need more?? And, For the 687th TIME: Flat Earth isn't a "Theory" it's a SHAPE. Quote It's a Garden Variety Gypsy Triscuit Fiddle Faddle Whacked Out Conspiracy Theory. For the 688th TIME: Flat Earth isn't a "Theory" (Conspiracy or otherwise) it's a SHAPE. Do you understand this or do I need to break this down further? regards 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted December 31, 2017 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.11 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted December 31, 2017 14 minutes ago, Enoch2021 said: For the 688th TIME: Flat Earth isn't a "Theory" (Conspiracy or otherwise) it's a SHAPE. Do you understand this or do I need to break this down further? regards The alleged 'flat earth' IS a theory and, yes, it's a conspiracy theory. I don't need YOU to break down anything, thank you, since I don't believe any of that nonsense. If you have two degrees in sciences, how in the world could you propagate stuff that was proven wrong over 500 years ago? 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted January 1, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted January 1, 2018 21 hours ago, MorningGlory said: The alleged 'flat earth' IS a theory Factually Incorrect. Watch... Define a "Theory"...? THEN... SHOW how Flat Earth is a "Theory"...? Quote and, yes, it's a conspiracy theory. Non-Sequitur Fallacy. How can the shape of something be a Conspiracy...? Or a Theory...? Quote If you have two degrees in sciences, how in the world could you propagate stuff Well, as Explained to you personally better than 10 TIMES now... Ya See, Flat/Sphere (or any other shape) is OUTSIDE the purview of The Scientific Method. WHY?? Well... The sine qua non of "Science" is The Scientific Method. The sine qua non of The Scientific Method is "Experiments" (Hypothesis Tests). The sine qua non of Experiments is "Hypothesis". "The Scientific Method is Hypothesis-Driven;"http://www.pages.drexel.edu/~pyo22/students/hypothesis.html A Scientific Hypothesis is your Experiment Statement; it expresses a TESTABLE proposed CAUSE and EFFECT Relationship - (The Phenomena that was Observed in Step 1) . It's a classic: "If" this "Then" that, motif. "A Scientific Hypothesis is based on CAUSE-EFFECT reasoning. A scientific hypothesis does not merely state X and Y may be related, but EXPLAINS WHY they are related. Loehle, C: Becoming a Successful Scientist -- Strategic Thinking for Scientific Discovery; Cambridge University Press, p. 57, 2010 Because Experiments (Hypothesis Tests) ONLY adjudicate 'Cause and Effect' --- How/Why questions. Whatever SHAPE something is (Flat, Sphere, or Spinning/Not Spinning ect)...is a "WHAT/IS" question; it's tantamount to asking: How/Why is a Breadbox Rectangular, True or False?? i.e., You can NEVER formulate a Viable Alternative Hypothesis; Ergo...you can NEVER formulate a Viable Null Hypothesis; Ergo...This isn't "Science"!! Which part of this ^^^^ is particularly confusing?? Quote that was proven wrong over 500 years ago? Appeal to Age (Fallacy). regards 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted January 1, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.11 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 1, 2018 1 hour ago, Enoch2021 said: i.e., You can NEVER formulate a Viable Alternative Hypothesis; Ergo...you can NEVER formulate a Viable Null Hypothesis; Ergo...This isn't "Science"!! Which part of this ^^^^ is particularly confusing?? Your repeated, ad nauseum, attempts to sound smarter than everyone else are falling flat, Enoch. Why the need to be condescending to everyone who doesn't buy your flat earth THEORY? 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted January 1, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted January 1, 2018 4 minutes ago, MorningGlory said: ME: i.e., You can NEVER formulate a Viable Alternative Hypothesis; Ergo...you can NEVER formulate a Viable Null Hypothesis; Ergo...This isn't "Science"!! Which part of this ^^^^ is particularly confusing?? You: Your repeated, ad nauseum, attempts to sound smarter than everyone else are falling flat, Enoch. This was a legitimate point after a very thorough explanation made to you PERSONALLY better than 10 Times. Just because you, WITHOUT WARRANT WHATSOEVER flippantly "couch it" with your conjured... "attempts to sound smarter" nonsense... doesn't make it so and doesn't relieve you of the conclusion or the facts leading to said conclusion. Quote Why the need to be condescending to everyone Because it's NOT Condescending as I just explained. A Better Question is, why do you CONTINUOUSLY fall back to Appeals to Emotion Fallacies ?? Could it be that you have no coherent Argument/Positions? (It's Rhetorical) regards 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted January 1, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.11 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 1, 2018 7 minutes ago, Enoch2021 said: Because it's NOT Condescending as I just explained. A Better Question is, why do you CONTINUOUSLY fall back to Appeals to Emotion Fallacies ?? Could it be that you have no coherent Argument/Positions? (It's Rhetorical) I live in the reality that God created. No appeal to emotion; I am a logical person. And the above is just one more attempted put down of someone who doesn't buy your theories. Now if you don't mind stopping the derailing of this thread...what do you think of Dr. Kaku's statements? And how they compare to those of Albert Einstein? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
enoob57 Posted January 1, 2018 Group: Worthy Ministers Followers: 35 Topic Count: 100 Topics Per Day: 0.02 Content Count: 41,184 Content Per Day: 7.98 Reputation: 21,460 Days Won: 76 Joined: 03/13/2010 Status: Offline Birthday: 07/27/1957 Share Posted January 1, 2018 25 minutes ago, MorningGlory said: I live in the reality that God created. No appeal to emotion; I am a logical person. And the above is just one more attempted put down of someone who doesn't buy your theories. Now if you don't mind stopping the derailing of this thread...what do you think of Dr. Kaku's statements? And how they compare to those of Albert Einstein? You might be the perfect woman 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Enoch2021 Posted January 1, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 11 Topic Count: 19 Topics Per Day: 0.01 Content Count: 3,396 Content Per Day: 0.90 Reputation: 730 Days Won: 4 Joined: 12/21/2013 Status: Offline Birthday: 12/26/1963 Share Posted January 1, 2018 20 minutes ago, MorningGlory said: I live in the reality that God created. ok Quote No appeal to emotion Yes it surely was. Quote I am a logical person. ok. Post the Syllogism that SUPPORTS your 'Spinning-Ball' Religion...? Quote someone who doesn't buy your theories. Good, I'm not selling any "Theories". Quote what do you think of Dr. Kaku's statements? I already answered this question. Quote And how they compare to those of Albert Einstein? Well Einstein was a Blundering Nincompoop and his Mytho-MatheMAGICAL Fairytales PUMMELED. As Evidenced by... So Relativity, sr and gr via different mechanisms (Speed vs. Gravity), can: Dilate/Bend/Warp...TIME !! 1. Primary School Falsification: TIME is a "Conceptual" relationship between 2 motions. Specifically, it's based on an "Alleged" single rotation of the Earth on it's axis in respect to the Sun (A Day). It's a "CONCEPT" (Non-Physical). It is without Chemical Formula/Structure, no Dimensionality/Orthogonality, and no Direction or Location. You can't put some in a jar and paint in red. I mean c'mon now, let's reason together...can you Dilate/Bend Warp Non-Physical "Concepts"?? Is it your contention that if you have Poison Ivy on the brain you could scratch it by thinking of Sand Paper?? " FREEDOM " is a Concept also...can you Bend that?That which you are using to measure...isn't the thing you're measuring. ** A Football Field is 100 Yards long but a Football Field isn't Yardsticks!! If I bend a Yardstick...does the Football Field bend also? ** (The Yardsticks are analog to the Clock) -- (The Football Field is analog to TIME)So if something affects say...Cesium Atomic Clocks, or any modern "Clock" for that matter, does that then IPSO FACTO mean the Earth's "Alleged" rotation in relation to the Sun is Affected? These Two Mytho-matheMagical Fairytales (sr and gr) were falsified 30 seconds after their respective publications by 3rd graders @ recess, for goodness sakes. IN TOTO, each are Massive Reification Fallacies on Nuclear Steroids!! 2. Grown-Up Falsification: "Non-Locality"-- a brief synopsis: http://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_quantum_nonlocality.html Nonlocality occurs due to the phenomenon of entanglement, whereby particles that interact with each other become permanently correlated, or dependent on each other’s states and properties, to the extent that they effectively lose their individuality and in many ways behave as a single entity. Because of this Well Established Phenomena in 1935, which Pummeled his Fairytales gr and sr, Einstein coined the phrase "Spooky Action @ a Distance", then he and his buddies conjured a 'thought experiment', (SEE: 'EPR Paradox' 1935 ) in a feeble clumsy attempt to 'Debunk' Quantum Mechanics. Why? Well... he couldn't have anything traveling faster than the Speed of Light, cause his 'theories' would IMPLODE. (Side Note: He never published in Physical Review Letters again because he didn't appreciate the Paper being "Peer-Reviewed" i.e., Pretentious Pompous Pseudo-Scientific Bleep http://journals.aps.org/pr/abstract/10.1103/PhysRev.47.777 Because of the seemingly Impossibility of TESTING his 'thought experiment', it apparently covered the Pretentious Pompous Pseudo-Science Mytho-Mathemagical Philosopher's Butt and the very public argument between he and Niels Bohr (who was of the opposite position) was relegated to the dustbin of history never to be reconciled. BUT THEN... In the 1960's, John Bell explored Einstein's 'alleged' Paradoxical thought experiment and proposed an Inequality (Bell's Inequality). If it was shown to be false, Einstein and his theories would take a dirt nap.http://www.drchinese.com/David/Bell_Compact.pdf Then John Clauser, a frustrated Grad Student...because of his poor grades in QM, was rustling through books and papers in the campus library when he came across John Bell's Paper. And that, as they say folks, is HISTORY !! ... Bell's Inequality was first Violated Experimentally in 1972 by John Clauser and Stuart Freedman:http://dieumsnh.qfb.umich.mx/archivoshistoricosMQ/ModernaHist/Freedman.pdf Then in 1982, Alain Aspect PhD Physics Jacked it "Yard" FOREVER !! Ergo, Einstein and his "theories" = Dirt Nap !! (He got "De-Bunked") http://www.qudev.ethz.ch/phys4/studentspresentations/epr/aspect.pdf Ever since Aspect's Falsification, "Non-Locality" has been CONFIRMED BY EXPERIMENT roughly 1875 times, Without Exception!!! See... New Scientist "RealityCheck" 23 June 2007: Speaking to the Landmark Experiment: Gröblacher, S. et al; An experimental test of non-local realism Nature 446, 871-875 (19 April 2007) | doi :10.1038/nature05677. http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v446/n7138/full/nature05677.html "There is no objective reality beyond what we observe". Leggett's Inequality along with Bell's (again) have been violated. "Rather than passively observing it, WE IN FACT CREATE REALITY". Physicsworld April 20 2007: http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/2007/apr/20/quantum-physics-says-goodbye-to-reality , also speaking to this experiment, went as far as to claim that, ‘quantum physics says goodbye to reality.’ Validated/CONFIRMED AGAIN (for the 1874th Time), here: "Our experiment confirms Bohr’s view that it does not make sense to ascribe the wave or particle behaviour to a massive particle before the measurement takes place". Manning A.G et al. (2015): Wheeler's delayed-choice gedanken experiment with a single atom; Nature Physics 11, 539–542, doi:10.1038/nphys3343.http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v11/n7/abs/nphys3343.html And another, just a Flurry of Blows... "Our data hence imply statistically significant rejection of the local-realist null hypothesis." i.e., Goodbye Realism. Hensen, B et al: Loophole-free Bell inequality violation using electron spins separated by 1.3 kilometres; Nature 526, 682–686 (29 October 2015) doi:10.1038/nature15759http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v526/n7575/abs/nature15759.html Who else wants to Chime In on Realism (??) ... Xiao-song Ma et al. (2013): Quantum erasure with causally disconnected choice. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 110, pp. 1221-1226. The authors PUMMEL Naive Realism and take Local-Causality to the Woodshed (again). "The presence of PATH INFORMATION anywhere in the universe is sufficient to prohibit any possibility of interference. It is irrelevant whether a future observer might decide to acquire it. The mere possibility is enough." [Ergo, The LACK of 'which-path Information' anywhere in the Universe is sufficient enough to prohibit any possibility of Wave Function Collapse. i.e. Formation of Matter!!] "No NAIVE REALISTIC picture is compatible with our results because whether a quantum could be seen as showing particle- or wave-like behavior would depend on a causally disconnected choice. It is therefore suggestive to abandon such pictures altogether."http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3557028/ THEREFORE: There are 2 Doors that can be breached per the results of these Experiments: Door #1: Information (however they conjured that ?? ) can travel Faster than the Speed of Light. 'Einstein's 'theories' KABLOOIE !!!Door #2: Space and Time are Illusions. 'Einstein's 'theories' KABLOOIE !!! Take your pick....? Einstein himself after 30 years of attempting a Unified Field Theory finally reckoned with it prior to his death and was partial to the Latter Door (as am I)... "I must confess that I was not able to find a way to explain the atomistic character of nature. My opinion is if that the objective description through the field as an elementary concept is not possible then one has to find a possibility to AVOID the continuum (together with SPACE and TIME) ALTOGETHER but I have not the slightest idea what kind of elementary concepts could be used in such a theory". Letter from Albert Einstein to David Bohm, 28 October 1954. Colodny, Robert G; From Quarks to Quasars--Philosophical Problems of Modern Physics: University of Pittsburgh Press, 1986, p. 380 To overturn the Scientific Falsification of "Locality" and by direct proxy ---- Philosophical Naturalism/Realism (aka: atheism); whereby invalidating Idealism "Christianity" (which is not a "religion", btw) and as an ancillary benefit collect yourself a 'Feather in your Cap' Nobel Prize... Please take up the Quantum Randi Challenge (arXiv:1207.5294, 23 July 2012)https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.5294http://www.science20.com/alpha_meme/official_quantum_randi_challenge-80168 ... ( The Quantum Randi Challenge, hence forth QRC, challenges any pseudo-scientist [You, as it were] who claims that quantum physics is not true and that quantum entanglement experiments can be explained by a classically realistic and locally causal model.)https://arxiv.org/vc/arxiv/papers/1207/1207.5294v1.pdf A Nobel Prize AND $1,000,000(USD) is being offered: All you have to do is... Prove Naive Realism or Local Realism is True and not Observation Dependent. 4 Years + and still no takers, I wonder why? I'll monitor the Presses!! A 2FER: Einstein's Mytho-matheMAGICAL Fairytales and atheism taken to the Woodshed and PUMMELED into the Incoherent Oblivion in One Fell Swoop!! regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MorningGlory Posted January 2, 2018 Group: Royal Member Followers: 0 Topic Count: 1,022 Topics Per Day: 0.16 Content Count: 39,193 Content Per Day: 6.11 Reputation: 9,977 Days Won: 78 Joined: 10/01/2006 Status: Offline Author Share Posted January 2, 2018 5 hours ago, enoob57 said: You might be the perfect woman Thank you, Steven. What a nice compliment. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts