Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #534240 > unrolled thread

‘Based On Nonsense’

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-20 10:49 -0800
    Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-20 11:00 -0800
      Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-21 17:16 -0800
        Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 00:57 -0500
          Re: 'Based On Nonsense' john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-11-21 22:17 -0800
            Re: 'Based On Nonsense' benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 01:30 -0500
              Re: 'Based On Nonsense' Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 08:18 -0800
                Re: 'Based On Nonsense' "Alex Sutter" <invalid@troll-lo-lo.com> - 2015-11-22 08:36 -0800
                  Re: 'Based On Nonsense' HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 08:48 -0800
                    Re: 'Based On Nonsense' Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 09:17 -0800
              Re: 'Based On Nonsense' HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 08:31 -0800
            Re: 'Based On Nonsense' HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 08:26 -0800
            Re: 'Based On Nonsense' Puppet_Sock <puppet_sock@hotmail.com> - 2015-11-24 12:43 -0800
              Re: 'Based On Nonsense' gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-24 16:28 -0600
                Re: 'Based On Nonsense' john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 15:25 -0800
                  Re: 'Based On Nonsense' benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 23:49 -0500
            Re: 'Based On Nonsense' gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-24 16:27 -0600
          Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-21 23:11 -0800
            Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-11-22 09:30 +0100
              Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-22 00:41 -0800
                Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 08:40 -0500
                  Re: 'Based On Nonsense' john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-11-22 07:45 -0800
                  Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-22 13:00 -0800
                    Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-11-26 07:10 +0100
                    Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ gilber34 <fafa@invalid.com> - 2015-11-26 09:01 -0600
            Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Sjouke Burry <burrynulnulfour@ppllaanneett.nnll> - 2015-11-22 22:32 +0100
              Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-22 14:17 -0800
                Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-22 21:37 -0800
                  Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-24 22:08 -0800
                    Re: 'Based On Nonsense' Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 22:20 -0800
                    Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-11-25 07:40 +0100
                      Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 10:24 -0800
                        Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbBertopal.org> - 2015-11-25 18:32 +0000
                          Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-25 12:01 -0800
                          Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-11-26 04:48 +0100
                            Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Jack Monaco <jacksh@umbBertopal.org> - 2015-11-26 14:21 +0000
                              Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Thomas Heger <ttt_heg@web.de> - 2015-11-27 08:05 +0100
          Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-11-23 11:02 -0600
            Re: 'Based On Nonsense' The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-23 11:38 -0800
            Re: 'Based On Nonsense' Walter Ilinois <walin@wej98j5q.org> - 2015-11-23 20:44 +0000
            Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 19:57 -0800
              Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-23 23:40 -0500
                Re: The great unwashed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-11-23 21:46 -0800
                  Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-11-23 22:23 -0800
                    Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2015-11-24 08:31 -0500
                  Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. "W.T.S. = Golden_Truth_Golden_Light!!!" <m14m@earthlink.net> - 2015-11-24 06:00 -0600
                    Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-24 06:49 -0600
                      Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Slimer <.m@nsn.s> - 2015-11-24 08:57 -0500
                    Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-11-24 10:10 -0800
                      Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-24 11:14 -0700
                      Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 13:59 -0500
                        Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-24 12:07 -0700
                          Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 14:48 -0500
                            Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-24 13:03 -0700
                  Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2015-11-24 08:16 -0600
                    Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. "Alex W." <ingilt@yahoo.co.uk> - 2015-11-24 15:54 +0100
                    Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 13:43 -0500
                      Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-24 12:07 -0700
                        Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 14:50 -0500
                          Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-24 13:02 -0700
                          Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-11-24 14:04 -0600
                            Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-24 13:08 -0700
                              Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-11-24 18:05 -0600
                                Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-24 17:15 -0700
                      Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Christopher A. Lee <c.lee@fairpoint.net> - 2015-11-24 13:56 -0600
                      Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Mitchell Holman <noemail@comcast.net> - 2015-11-24 14:32 -0600
                        Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. chrisv <chrisv@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-24 14:44 -0600
                          Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 12:55 -0800
                          Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2015-11-24 14:10 -0700
                  Re: Only 14% of Americans believe in GodlessEvolution. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 13:22 -0500
                Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 06:08 -0800
                Re: The great unwashed. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-24 13:21 -0500
                  Re: The great unwashed. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-11-24 11:35 -0800
                    Re: The great unwashed. snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk (Sn!pe, DoW #2) - 2015-11-24 19:56 +0000
                    Ben Jacoby should play poker. Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> - 2015-11-26 06:02 -0800
                      Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-11-26 11:42 -0500
                        Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-26 12:48 -0500
                          Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-11-26 13:17 -0500
                            Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-11-26 10:41 -0800
                              Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-11-26 13:48 -0500
                                Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. buZZard <buzz@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-26 20:32 -0500
                                Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-26 23:52 -0500
                              Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. buZZard <buzz@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-26 20:29 -0500
                            Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-27 00:14 -0500
                        Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-11-26 10:39 -0800
                          Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-11-26 13:46 -0500
                            Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-27 00:10 -0500
                      Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-26 12:36 -0500
                        Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-11-26 12:49 -0500
                          Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-11-26 10:43 -0800
                            Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-11-26 13:51 -0500
                              Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. buZZard <buzz@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-26 20:34 -0500
                                Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Sir Gregory Hall, Esq." <greghall@yacht_master.fake> - 2015-11-26 20:41 -0500
                                  Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. buZZard <buzz@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-26 20:58 -0500
                                    Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-11-26 20:23 -0800
                                      Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. buZZard <buzz@nospam.invalid> - 2015-11-26 23:30 -0500
                                  Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2015-11-26 20:23 -0800
                          Re: Ben Jacoby should play poker. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-11-27 00:15 -0500
            Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc. Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-27 11:14 -0800
              Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-27 12:00 -0800
              Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-27 16:53 -0800
              Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc. The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-11-27 19:15 -0800
                Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc. Hägar <hsahm@yahoo.com> - 2015-11-28 08:43 -0800
          Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ wdstarr@panix.com (William December Starr) - 2015-11-26 08:26 -0500
            Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Henry Wilson <HGW@home.com> - 2015-12-09 10:34 +0000
              Re: 'Based On Nonsense' john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2015-12-09 03:18 -0800
              Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Tom Roberts <tjroberts137@sbcglobal.net> - 2015-12-09 08:31 -0600
                Re: 'Based On Nonsense' Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-09 07:51 -0800
                  Re: 'Based On Nonsense' benj <none@gmail.com> - 2015-12-09 16:41 -0500
                  Re: 'Based On Nonsense' moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-10 16:28 +0000
                    Re: 'Based On Nonsense' Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-10 16:01 -0800
                      Re: 'Based On Nonsense' "Alfred Summers" <invalid@eyample.com> - 2015-12-10 17:55 -0800
                      Re: 'Based On Nonsense' moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-11 03:23 +0000
                        Re: 'Based On Nonsense' Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-11 07:23 -0800
                          Re: 'Based On Nonsense' moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2015-12-11 22:33 +0000
                            Re: 'Based On Nonsense' Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2015-12-11 15:41 -0800
                    Re: 'Based On Nonsense' The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2015-12-10 22:10 -0800
                      Re: 'Based On Nonsense' pnalsing@gmail.com - 2015-12-10 23:24 -0800
                Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’ Henry Wilson <HGW@home.com> - 2015-12-10 19:29 +0000

Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]

#536020 — Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc.

Notroll2015 wrote:
> 
> "Hägar"  wrote in message
> news:2LednWuWaq0TNsXLnZ2dnUVZ5gCdnZ2d@giganews.com...
> 
> "Jeff-Relf.Me"  wrote in message
> news:Jeff-Relf.Me@Nov.23{4.35P.Seattle.2015}...
> 
>   Most scientists think "Life" requires liquid water. Ben_Jacoby
> (benj), on the other hand, thinks something like "Star Wars" could be
> true. Darwin showed how we're related to monkeys; fearing it might
> justify murder and such, many reject it. Truth is: We're robots,
> programmed to get food, water, air, etc. Like the sun, stars and
> everything else... we consume "exergy" (energy that can do work); i.e.
> we ratchet entropy. "Randomness" is ignorance, nothing more.
> 
> ***The problem for Hagar is that no woman could drink enough beer to make
> him look doable.
> 
> *** Actually, it is SEX and BEER that motivates humankind aspire to
> greatness ....
> ... SEX because it feels good and BEER, because there are lots and
> lots of ugly women out there ....


If that is the case then he needs to do a 'bill cosby'...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#536038 — Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc.

Kevrob wrote:
> 
> On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 2:14:24 PM UTC-5, Hägar wrote:
> > "Jeff-Relf.Me"  wrote in message
> > news:Jeff-Relf.Me@Nov.23{4.35P.Seattle.2015}...
> >
> >   Most scientists think "Life" requires liquid water. Ben_Jacoby
> > (benj), on the other hand, thinks something like "Star Wars" could be
> > true. Darwin showed how we're related to monkeys; fearing it might
> > justify murder and such, many reject it. Truth is: We're robots,
> > programmed to get food, water, air, etc. Like the sun, stars and
> > everything else... we consume "exergy" (energy that can do work); i.e.
> > we ratchet entropy. "Randomness" is ignorance, nothing more.
> >
> >
> > *** Actually, it is SEX and BEER that motivates humankind aspire to
> > greatness ....
> > ... SEX because it feels good and BEER, because there are lots and
> > lots of ugly women out there ....
> 
> You might have to substitute BEER with WINE COOLERS when explaining
> things from the female point of view.
> 
> Kevin R


real girls drink beer...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#536086 — Re: We're robots, programmed to get food, water, air, etc.

"The Starmaker"  wrote in message news:56591C34.6912@ix.netcom.com...

Kevrob wrote:
>
> On Friday, November 27, 2015 at 2:14:24 PM UTC-5, Hägar wrote:
> > "Jeff-Relf.Me"  wrote in message
> > news:Jeff-Relf.Me@Nov.23{4.35P.Seattle.2015}...
> >
> >   Most scientists think "Life" requires liquid water. Ben_Jacoby
> > (benj), on the other hand, thinks something like "Star Wars" could 
> > be
> > true. Darwin showed how we're related to monkeys; fearing it might
> > justify murder and such, many reject it. Truth is: We're robots,
> > programmed to get food, water, air, etc. Like the sun, stars and
> > everything else... we consume "exergy" (energy that can do work); 
> > i.e.
> > we ratchet entropy. "Randomness" is ignorance, nothing more.
> >
> >
> > *** Actually, it is SEX and BEER that motivates humankind aspire 
> > to
> > greatness ....
> > ... SEX because it feels good and BEER, because there are lots and
> > lots of ugly women out there ....
>
> You might have to substitute BEER with WINE COOLERS when explaining
> things from the female point of view.
>
> Kevin R


real girls drink beer...


*** I take it none of you are regular denizens at the corner saloon. 
There
is an old song out there that goes something like this: "Don't the 
girls all
get prettier at closing time ..." and yes, beer is still the beverage 
of
choice of real men.
The world's faggotry  may opt for wine coolers ... 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#535583 — Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’

In article <XOc4y.155775$sK.94170@fx14.iad>,
benj <none@gmail.com> said:

> How many suns in OUR Galaxy? How many galaxies in the universe
> (that we see)?  People blindly accept probability waves in nothing
> at all as QM truth, yet when one points out the OVERWHELMING
> probably that alien life forms exist elsewhere in the universe,
> science laughs and calls the idea "kook".

No it doesn't.  You're either mistaken or lying.
(And I know which way I'd bet.)

-- wds

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538177 — Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’

On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 08:26:37 -0500, William December Starr wrote:

> In article <XOc4y.155775$sK.94170@fx14.iad>, benj <none@gmail.com> said:
> 
>> How many suns in OUR Galaxy? How many galaxies in the universe (that we
>> see)?  People blindly accept probability waves in nothing at all as QM
>> truth, yet when one points out the OVERWHELMING probably that alien
>> life forms exist elsewhere in the universe, science laughs and calls
>> the idea "kook".
> 
> No it doesn't.  You're either mistaken or lying.
> (And I know which way I'd bet.)

There is plenty of life throughout the universe. What is more, it is 
similar to life on this planet.

All living things need legs and arms and fins to get around in water or 
on rough land. The laws of physics and chemistry are the same everywhere 
and the same element are available. All planets that support life will 
have water and oxygen, moons and tides and be similar to our earth.

The DNA molecule doesn't have much choice about what it produces.

I reckon bits of DNA have been floating around hte universe for billions 
of years, dropping onto various planets and infecting the life there..or 
starting it..

> -- wds

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538181 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

And there is proof out there that they
have been seeding the Earth with the
same message for 20,000 years

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538187 — Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’

As usual, Henry Wilson promotes more nonsense.


On 12/9/15 12/9/15   4:34 AM, Henry Wilson wrote:
> There is plenty of life throughout the universe. What is more, it is
> similar to life on this planet.

We have no evidence of life anywhere else but earth. Your bald assertion cannot 
make it so.


> All living things need legs and arms and fins to get around in water or
> on rough land.

This is just plain false, even here on earth. The dominant life form on earth, 
bacteria, has none of that. Yet they live in abundance, everywhere around us. 
Life as we know it would be impossible without them.

	There are LOTS more bacteria cells in your body than human cells.

Not to mention other complex life forms, such as jellyfish and molluscs (to name 
just two).

As usual, you just display your personal ignorance.


> I reckon bits of DNA have been floating around hte universe for billions
> of years, dropping onto various planets and infecting the life there..or
> starting it..

This is the first sensible thing you have said here, though even it is pure 
speculation. The rest is plain and simply not so.


Tom Roberts

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538201 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 9:31:44 AM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
> As usual, Henry Wilson promotes more nonsense.

Personal opinion, shared. Thanks, U.N.C.L.E. Tom. Tommy can you hear me?

> On 12/9/15 12/9/15   4:34 AM, Henry Wilson wrote:
> > There is plenty of life throughout the universe. What is more, it is
> > similar to life on this planet.
> 
> We have no evidence of life anywhere else but earth. Your bald
> assertion cannot make it so.

We? Who is this We we WE you Tom are a member of? Do They pay well?
Health insurance, 401K, pension plans too? Got their WeWEwe link?

Twenty years ago, other stars had no planets. Right? Right.
Did these planets just fall out of nowhere into the sky recently?

> > All living things need legs and arms and fins to get around in water or
> > on rough land.
> 
> This is just plain false, even here on earth. The dominant life form on earth, 
> bacteria, has none of that. Yet they live in abundance, everywhere around us. 
> Life as we know it would be impossible without them.
> 
> 	There are LOTS more bacteria cells in your body than human cells.
> 
> Not to mention other complex life forms, such as jellyfish and molluscs (to name 
> just two).
> 
> As usual, you just display your personal ignorance.

You too, but more of your bias is displayed. Since Henry was making a
simple case for higher lifeforms -- of the so-called humanKind. Be
nice. No matter, no energy either, how difficult it may be to be kind.

> > I reckon bits of DNA have been floating around hte universe for billions
> > of years, dropping onto various planets and infecting the life there..or
> > starting it..
> 
> This is the first sensible thing you have said here, though even it is pure 
> speculation. The rest is plain and simply not so.

Rather dictatorial. You know this for certain and how?

> Tom Roberts

-- Mahipal "IPMM... Quis custodiet ipsos custodes? We we WE do!"

"Be prepared for heated discussion.  People have strong opinions about
some issues, and discussions can get a little "loud" at times.  Don't
take it personally if someone seems to always jump all over everything
you say.  Everyone was jumping all over everybody long before you got
there!  You can keep the discussion at a low boil by trying to stick
to the facts.  Clearly separate facts from opinion--don't let people
think you are confusing your opinions with scientific truth.  And keep
the focus of discussion on the ideas, not the people who post them."
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Administrivia/newsgroups.html

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538293 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

On 12/09/2015 10:51 AM, Mahipal wrote:
> On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 9:31:44 AM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
>> As usual, Henry Wilson promotes more nonsense.
>
> Personal opinion, shared. Thanks, U.N.C.L.E. Tom. Tommy can you hear me?
>
>> On 12/9/15 12/9/15   4:34 AM, Henry Wilson wrote:
>>> There is plenty of life throughout the universe. What is more, it is
>>> similar to life on this planet.
>>
>> We have no evidence of life anywhere else but earth. Your bald
>> assertion cannot make it so.
>
> We? Who is this We we WE you Tom are a member of? Do They pay well?
> Health insurance, 401K, pension plans too? Got their WeWEwe link?
>
> Twenty years ago, other stars had no planets. Right? Right.
> Did these planets just fall out of nowhere into the sky recently?
>
>>> All living things need legs and arms and fins to get around in water or
>>> on rough land.
>>
>> This is just plain false, even here on earth. The dominant life form on earth,
>> bacteria, has none of that. Yet they live in abundance, everywhere around us.
>> Life as we know it would be impossible without them.
>>
>> 	There are LOTS more bacteria cells in your body than human cells.
>>
>> Not to mention other complex life forms, such as jellyfish and molluscs (to name
>> just two).
>>
>> As usual, you just display your personal ignorance.
>
> You too, but more of your bias is displayed. Since Henry was making a
> simple case for higher lifeforms -- of the so-called humanKind. Be
> nice. No matter, no energy either, how difficult it may be to be kind.
>
>>> I reckon bits of DNA have been floating around hte universe for billions
>>> of years, dropping onto various planets and infecting the life there..or
>>> starting it..
>>
>> This is the first sensible thing you have said here, though even it is pure
>> speculation. The rest is plain and simply not so.
>
> Rather dictatorial. You know this for certain and how?
>
>> Tom Roberts

MyPal Tom is just suing his "superpowers" again like all the debunkers 
do here. "I said it, and that's all the proof you need!"

How many stars in a  galaxy? How many galaxies in the universe?

The statistics that mankind is a unique occurrence, however one wishes 
to believe we started, makes it virtually impossible.  Advanced alien 
humanoid lifeforms are FAR more statistically probable than the 
statistics of QM or other "accepted" science.

-- 

       ___           ___           ___            ___
      /\  \         /\  \         /\__\          /\  \
     /::\  \       /::\  \       /::|  |         \:\  \
    /:/\:\  \     /:/\:\  \     /:|:|  |     ___ /::\__\
   /::\~\:\__\   /::\~\:\  \   /:/|:|  |__  /\  /:/\/__/
  /:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/  /
  \:\~\:\/:/  / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/  /  \::/  /
   \:\ \::/  /   \:\ \:\__\       |:/:/  /    \/__/
    \:\/:/  /     \:\ \/__/       |::/  /
     \::/__/       \:\__\         /:/  /
      ~~            \/__/         \/__/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538416 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> writes:

>On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 9:31:44 AM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:

>> We have no evidence of life anywhere else but earth. Your bald
>> assertion cannot make it so.

>Twenty years ago, other stars had no planets. Right? Right.
>Did these planets just fall out of nowhere into the sky recently?

Twenty years ago, we had no _evidence of_ planets around other stars.

Just like today, we have no _evidence of_ life anywhere else but earth.

Today, we have evidence of planets around other stars.

And perhaps in 20 years, we'll have evidence of life elsewhere.

Tom's statement is correct.  Without any evidence of extraterrestial
life whatsoever (so far), Ralph Rabbidge's claim is just hogwash.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538547 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 11:29:03 AM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 9:31:44 AM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
> 
> >> We have no evidence of life anywhere else but earth. Your bald
> >> assertion cannot make it so.
> 
> >Twenty years ago, other stars had no planets. Right? Right.
> >Did these planets just fall out of nowhere into the sky recently?
> 
> Twenty years ago, we had no _evidence of_ planets around other stars.
> 
> Just like today, we have no _evidence of_ life anywhere else but earth.

All that evidential emphasis! Doesn't mean anything in the real picture.

> Today, we have evidence of planets around other stars.
> 
> And perhaps in 20 years, we'll have evidence of life elsewhere.

Will that life have materialized from pixelated images out of nowhere?
 
> Tom's statement is correct.  Without any evidence of extraterrestial
> life whatsoever (so far), Ralph Rabbidge's claim is just hogwash.

Tom must just read via the s.p.r. NG. To each his own.

-- Mahipal "IPMM... Evidence is what we We WE permit to reveal..."

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538558 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

LOL!  Eat a nutsack.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538572 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> writes:

>> Today, we have evidence of planets around other stars.
>> 
>> And perhaps in 20 years, we'll have evidence of life elsewhere.

>Will that life have materialized from pixelated images out of nowhere?

Learn English.  No evidence of X does not mean X does not exist.  It means
we just don't know whether X exists or not.

20 years ago, the planets we now know about certainly existed.  Yet it
is still valid to say that we had no evidence of them 20 years ago.

Same as now.  Extraterrestial life may exist, or it may not exist, right
now.  We have no evidence of it.  If we do discover such life in the 
future, it does not mean it suddenly popped into existence just because
I said "no evidence".
> 
>> Tom's statement is correct.  Without any evidence of extraterrestial
>> life whatsoever (so far), Ralph Rabbidge's claim is just hogwash.

And _because_ we have no evidence of extraterrestial life, neither does
Ralph.  That's why Ralph's claim is hogwash, not because it doesn't exist.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538608 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 10:23:22 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >> Today, we have evidence of planets around other stars.
> >> 
> >> And perhaps in 20 years, we'll have evidence of life elsewhere.
> 
> >Will that life have materialized from pixelated images out of nowhere?
> 
> Learn English.  No evidence of X does not mean X does not exist.  It means
> we just don't know whether X exists or not.

Which university do you recommend to study English? I will learn
English after you MM learn to think. Words have two meanings and you
refuse to understand either. That you're inflexible in your way of
thinking, does not translate into others having to turn off their
brains. Do the Maths. I ought entrap the Apostrophes' Police here.

> 20 years ago, the planets we now know about certainly existed.  Yet it
> is still valid to say that we had no evidence of them 20 years ago.

There is simple deductive reasoning and extrapolation. Even in the
light of evidence, some humans choose to be blindsighted.

> Same as now.  Extraterrestial life may exist, or it may not exist, right
> now.  We have no evidence of it.  If we do discover such life in the 
> future, it does not mean it suddenly popped into existence just because
> I said "no evidence".

In my limited and broken English... you may say whatever you desire.

> >> Tom's statement is correct.  Without any evidence of extraterrestial
> >> life whatsoever (so far), Ralph Rabbidge's claim is just hogwash.
> 
> And _because_ we have no evidence of extraterrestial life, neither does
> Ralph.  That's why Ralph's claim is hogwash, not because it doesn't exist.

Have you heard of MUFON? Btw, how is Ralph not a member of your “we We WE?”

-- Mahipal “IPMM... Us us US... Them them THEM.... Pink Flo(y)dIsmIshQ”

Bruno, Giordano |ˈbro͞onō| (1548–1600), Italian philosopher. A
supporter of the heliocentric Copernican view of the solar system,
envisaging an infinite universe of numerous worlds moving in space, he
was tried by the Inquisition for heresy and burned at the stake. Well done.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538676 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> writes:

>On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 10:23:22 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:

>> Learn English.  No evidence of X does not mean X does not exist.  It means
>> we just don't know whether X exists or not.

<snip babble>

No evidence in the babble that you know the difference between "no 
evidence of X" and "X does not exist".

I am not surprised.

(Since I used "No evidence..." in my reply, can you even comprehend it?)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538686 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

On Friday, December 11, 2015 at 5:33:40 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 10:23:22 PM UTC-5, Michael Moroney wrote:
> 
> >> Learn English.  No evidence of X does not mean X does not exist.  It means
> >> we just don't know whether X exists or not.
> 
> <snip babble>
> 
> No evidence in the babble that you know the difference between "no 
> evidence of X" and "X does not exist".
> 
> I am not surprised.
> 
> (Since I used "No evidence..." in my reply, can you even comprehend it?)

No Michael Moroney, only you can comprehend anything. Obviously! Squared.

-- Mahipal "IPMM... "

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538587 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

Michael Moroney wrote:
> 
> Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> writes:
> 
> >On Wednesday, December 9, 2015 at 9:31:44 AM UTC-5, Tom Roberts wrote:
> 
> >> We have no evidence of life anywhere else but earth. Your bald
> >> assertion cannot make it so.
> 
> >Twenty years ago, other stars had no planets. Right? Right.
> >Did these planets just fall out of nowhere into the sky recently?
> 
> Twenty years ago, we had no _evidence of_ planets around other stars.
> 
> Just like today, we have no _evidence of_ life anywhere else but earth.
> 
> Today, we have evidence of planets around other stars.
> 
> And perhaps in 20 years, we'll have evidence of life elsewhere.
> 
> Tom's statement is correct.  Without any evidence of extraterrestial
> life whatsoever (so far), Ralph Rabbidge's claim is just hogwash.


First you must learn to define What 'Life' Is before you can find it.


a sand pebble can be considered Life. a stupid rock also.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538589 — Re: 'Based On Nonsense'

On Thursday, December 10, 2015 at 10:10:52 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote:

> 
> First you must learn to define What 'Life' Is before you can find it.
> 
> 
> a sand pebble can be considered Life. a stupid rock also.

Not by anyone with half a brain it won't...

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#538481 — Re: ‘Based On Nonsense’

On Wed, 09 Dec 2015 08:31:29 -0600, Tom Roberts wrote:

> As usual, Henry Wilson promotes more nonsense.
> 
> 
> On 12/9/15 12/9/15   4:34 AM, Henry Wilson wrote:
>> There is plenty of life throughout the universe. What is more, it is
>> similar to life on this planet.
> 
> We have no evidence of life anywhere else but earth. Your bald assertion
> cannot make it so.

You don't need evidence. You just need common sense and a way to rid 
yourself of the religious garbage you are taught when you attend your 
church. 
There is nothing special about Homo sapiens. It is just another animal 
with somewhat larger and more efficient memory banks than the others on 
this planet.

Obviously, wherever there is water and oxygen, there will be a likelihood 
some kind of life. Many higher forms will be mobile and since nature has 
never evolved rotary motion...and probably cannot...arms legs and fins 
would be expected. Tom obviously knows little about the way many single 
celled organism use cilia to get around.
Of course bacteria do not have legs or arms, but many micro-organisms do 
have mechanisms that get them around. 

Whether or not all life would possess the same DNA coding used on this 
planet is debatable but since the same elements would be expected on 
billions of other planets one would naturally expect plenty of life that 
is somewhat similar to that here on Earth.

If you are under the impression that humans are something special, then 
you should be talking theology rather than physics.

>> All living things need legs and arms and fins to get around in water or
>> on rough land.
> 
> This is just plain false, even here on earth. The dominant life form on
> earth, bacteria, has none of that. Yet they live in abundance,
> everywhere around us. Life as we know it would be impossible without
> them.

I was obviously talking about higher and mobile forms of life.

> 	There are LOTS more bacteria cells in your body than human cells.
> 
> Not to mention other complex life forms, such as jellyfish and molluscs
> (to name just two).
> 
> As usual, you just display your personal ignorance.

Apart from fish etc., small forms of aquatic life cannot fight the tides 
but jellyfish and cephelapods like squid and Nautilus can move themselves 
around quite well using tentacles, etc..,...

>> I reckon bits of DNA have been floating around hte universe for
>> billions of years, dropping onto various planets and infecting the life
>> there..or starting it..
> 
> This is the first sensible thing you have said here, though even it is
> pure speculation. The rest is plain and simply not so.

Everything I say is sensible. The ionosphere would probably stop the 
molecules from disintegrating when then hit a planet's atmosphere.

I suppose you believe everything the pope tells you. After all you fell 
for all that Einsteinian nonsense.
 
> Tom Roberts

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 6 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 5 [6]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web