Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #630229 > unrolled thread
| Started by | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2017-04-23 09:35 -0700 |
| Last post | 2017-04-26 18:10 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 201 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-04-23 09:35 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-23 10:06 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-04-23 10:08 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-23 11:51 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-04-24 00:48 -0400
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-04-24 00:42 -0400
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-04-24 02:11 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-04-24 16:06 -0400
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-25 06:46 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 06:39 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 07:04 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-26 20:24 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 15:40 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-27 02:22 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 21:30 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-27 20:22 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-27 13:51 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-28 02:31 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-28 15:43 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-04-28 19:43 -0400
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-29 20:38 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-30 06:10 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-04-30 14:29 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-30 10:05 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-01 15:40 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-30 10:06 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 08:35 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 08:23 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-01 16:04 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 12:15 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 10:25 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 13:02 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 16:02 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-02 01:34 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 23:14 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 23:52 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-02 14:18 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-02 07:29 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-02 09:59 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-02 10:46 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-02 12:41 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-04 08:46 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-04 12:21 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-04 11:42 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-04 21:06 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-04 18:40 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-05 13:36 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-05 15:59 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-05 22:40 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-05-06 03:06 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-06 07:12 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-06 15:36 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-07 20:45 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 06:11 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 06:22 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 06:46 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-08 14:59 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 09:43 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-08 16:54 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 10:06 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-08 19:56 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-08 15:09 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 06:27 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 06:44 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-09 16:11 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 09:25 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-05-09 17:43 -0400
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 15:27 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 09:26 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-09 14:26 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 06:01 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 07:46 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-10 17:02 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 10:15 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 10:56 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-10 19:26 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-10 15:15 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-09 16:07 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-13 23:34 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-14 19:29 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 02:39 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-05-15 21:27 -0400
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 07:57 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-15 15:49 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 09:26 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 09:32 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 11:50 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 17:54 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 10:29 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 20:37 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-16 20:43 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 10:47 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 11:24 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 14:07 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 06:31 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 08:52 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-05-17 18:58 -0400
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 19:04 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 08:54 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 10:59 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 15:59 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 13:00 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-17 19:22 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-17 15:15 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-18 13:57 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 08:17 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-18 17:14 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 10:50 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-19 01:09 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 21:59 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 11:00 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 12:49 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 16:11 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 16:32 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-05-18 18:16 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 22:03 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-05-19 06:14 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 10:05 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 13:21 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 16:34 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 07:47 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 05:55 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 06:05 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 08:26 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 06:33 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 08:43 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 06:57 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 11:59 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 10:04 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 12:18 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 10:23 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 10:36 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 12:41 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 11:37 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 10:47 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-20 01:59 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 20:02 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-05-20 11:28 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-20 11:43 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-20 12:53 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-05-20 12:15 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-20 12:49 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <nobody@gmail.com> - 2017-05-20 21:15 -0400
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-21 00:49 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 20:40 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 14:01 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 12:06 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 10:14 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd poraty350@gmail.com - 2017-05-20 00:55 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-21 00:53 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 07:27 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 13:12 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 11:37 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-05-21 12:19 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 12:33 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-05-21 13:07 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 13:54 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd "Chris M. Thomasson" <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2017-05-21 14:04 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 19:48 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-05-21 15:06 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 19:51 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 11:26 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-21 22:56 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-21 19:54 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-22 04:12 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-22 08:17 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-22 17:54 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-22 12:30 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-22 11:19 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-05-23 02:05 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 05:03 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 09:41 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 07:12 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 09:34 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2017-05-23 12:24 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-05-23 20:11 -0400
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-05-23 20:03 -0400
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 06:47 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 07:03 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 08:00 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 08:09 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 12:01 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 10:20 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-19 08:23 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 12:52 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 13:00 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 15:50 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-18 16:06 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-15 11:41 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2017-05-13 19:29 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-08 14:54 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-02 14:15 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-05-02 03:55 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-02 13:50 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 10:35 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2017-05-01 15:44 +0000
Re: CH4 for Odd Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2017-05-01 08:34 -0500
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-04-30 07:02 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 09:07 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-04-26 12:06 -0700
Re: CH4 for Odd benj <benj@nobody.net> - 2017-04-26 18:10 -0400
Page 7 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 11 Next page →
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 07:47 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ofmpgf$q0h$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #633747 |
On 5/18/17 6:34 PM, john wrote: > The stupid ones let themselves be programmed. > Then there are those that are a little unclear about the difference between knowledge and programming. Better to just suspect it's all programming and doubt everything. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 05:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <906094bb-c23f-4bfd-ae15-067449316f09@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633782 |
Odd "On 5/18/17 6:34 PM, john wrote: > The stupid ones let themselves be programmed. > Then there are those that are a little unclear about the difference between knowledge and programming. Better to just suspect it's all programming and doubt " QMers need to do a little doubting. Camel. Eye of a needle.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 06:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <dd483a43-5ce6-40d2-9d02-fd1ae8688f55@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633784 |
Odd It doesn't matter. It is not semantics. Correct knowledge gives so much more power than whatever it is that you think Science is that it will be like cavemen vs drone attack. Order and structure go up the fractal scale and down. Whether you like it or not, EVERYTHING has structure. How can it not? Your QM has made you believe that order comes from chaos and something comes from nothing. Your position is ridiculous. You're a smart man. It's just your pride preventing you from seeing that.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 08:26 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ofmrq4$u7v$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #633785 |
On 5/19/17 8:05 AM, john wrote: > Odd > It doesn't matter. > It is not semantics. > Correct knowledge gives so much more power > than whatever it is that you think Science is > that it will be like cavemen vs drone attack. Well that's a lovely statement of faith about knowledge nobody on earth has, isn't it? > > Order and structure go up the fractal > scale and down. Whether you like it or not, > EVERYTHING has structure. So John, you're calling this correct knowledge? How do you know it's knowledge. Simple answer to that question would be useful. > > How can it not? > > Your QM has made you believe that order > comes from chaos and something comes > from nothing. John, I don't know what you're smoking, but what you describe is not quantum mechanics. NOWHERE in quantum mechanics does it say anything like order comes from chaos and something comes from nothing. What you have a problem with is something for sure, but it's not quantum mechanics. > Your position is ridiculous. > You're a smart man. It's just your pride > preventing you from seeing that. > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 06:33 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d15b808d-fd8f-4aea-89fc-0af2559b1a94@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633790 |
Odd " > > How can it not? > > Your QM has made you believe that order > comes from chaos and something comes > from nothing. John, I don't know what you're smoking, but what you describe is not quantum mechanics. NOWHERE in quantum mechanics does it say anything like order comes from chaos and something comes from nothing. What you have a problem with is something for sure, but it's not quantum mechanics. " Well, maybe you can tell me where the idea that there is no underlying structure or order in "point" particles comes from? For ONE. Do you believe that, Odd? WHY do you believe that? Because they haven't been evidenced? Why do you believe things that are illogical? You call that science?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 08:43 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ofmspm$108g$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #633792 |
On 5/19/17 8:33 AM, john wrote: > Odd > " >> >> How can it not? >> >> Your QM has made you believe that order >> comes from chaos and something comes >> from nothing. > > John, I don't know what you're smoking, but what you describe is not > quantum mechanics. NOWHERE in quantum mechanics does it say anything > like order comes from chaos and something comes from nothing. What you > have a problem with is something for sure, but it's not quantum mechanics. " > > Well, maybe you can tell me where the > idea that there is no underlying structure > or order in "point" particles comes from? There is no reason to assume that everything has structure. You don't have a reason for believing it. I've asked you, and you've produced no rationale. So consider an alternate approach. Something has structure when and only when a measurement INDICATES it has structure. Like scattering experiments where you can tell the difference between hitting something with no structure and something with structure. If you don't have evidence for structure, then DON'T ASSUME structure for no reason at all. So John, what would be WRONG with shifting the assumption from "Always assume structure" to "Only assume structure when you have evidence for it"? Hmmmm? I know your mind does not want to make that shift. The question is WHY? > For ONE. > Do you believe that, Odd? > WHY do you believe that? > Because they haven't been evidenced? > Why do you believe things that are illogical? > You call that science? > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 06:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b116a7d8-48ba-4f71-9f28-8b7bad12b1fd@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633794 |
Odd " So John, what would be WRONG with shifting the assumption from "Always assume structure" to "Only assume structure when you have evidence for it"? Hmmmm? I know your mind does not want to make that shift. The question is WHY? " Because, silly duck, it is wrong. It is impossible to prove things that are too small or too fast. Obviously. So why the caveate that we don't recognize them til never? Stupid. Do science, not politics/debate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 11:59 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ofn88n$1n5u$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #633797 |
On 5/19/17 8:57 AM, john wrote: > Odd > " > > So John, what would be WRONG with shifting the assumption from "Always > assume structure" to "Only assume structure when you have evidence for > it"? Hmmmm? I know your mind does not want to make that shift. The > question is WHY? > " > Because, silly duck, it is wrong. And what on earth gives you this knowledge? As far as I can tell, you simply ASSUME that everything has structure. And you make this assumption WITHOUT CAUSE and WITHOUT RATIONALE. It is unwise to make an unfounded assumption, insist that it MUST be true, and declare any other stance to be illogical, John. That's just not smart. > It is impossible to prove things that are too small > or too fast. Obviously. So why the caveate > that we don't recognize them til never? > Stupid. > Do science, not politics/debate. > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 10:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <959ba429-768f-4246-8704-2d9187897786@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633807 |
Odd "On 5/19/17 8:57 AM, john wrote: > Odd > " > > So John, what would be WRONG with shifting the assumption from "Always > assume structure" to "Only assume structure when you have evidence for > it"? Hmmmm? I know your mind does not want to make that shift. The > question is WHY? > " > Because, silly duck, it is wrong. And what on earth gives you this knowledge? As far as I can tell, you simply ASSUME that everything has structure. And you make this assumption WITHOUT CAUSE and WITHOUT RATIONALE. It is unwise to make an unfounded assumption, insist that it MUST be true, and declare any other stance to be illogical, John. That's just not smart. > It is impossible to prove things that are too small > or too fast. Obviously. So why the " Without cause or rationale? YOU are the one not using those and supplanting them with scientific "rules" that make a mockery of the science that you espouse. You seek not to elucidate, but to obscure Shame on you
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 12:18 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ofn9ch$1pia$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #633809 |
On 5/19/17 12:04 PM, john wrote: > Without cause or rationale? > YOU are the one not using those and supplanting > them with scientific "rules" that make a mockery > of the science that you espouse. > You seek not to elucidate, but to obscure > Shame on you Scientific rules come from observation. Here's how a scientist works, John. 1. First, be careful not to make any assumptions. None. There are no God-granted-us-intuition-to-just-know rules. Here, this means, do not assume things like "everything has structure". Instead say, "It MAY be true that all things have structure OR it MAY be true that some things have structure and other things do not." 2. Whatever rules are inferred MUST come from observations. That is, if an experiment tells you that something has structure, then you know it has structure. If an experiment gives you no evidence of structure, then you may not ASSUME it must have structure anyway. The best you can do is to say it may or may not. 3. Application of the inferred rules results in the creation of mathematically predictive models. The validity of the rules is based purely on the match between the QUANTITATIVE predictions of the model and the QUANTITATIVE measurements in experiment. Here, in the spirit of not knowing whether there is structure to an electron, there are models of both kinds. There are models of structureless electrons that make certain predictions. There are other models of structured electrons that make different and distinct predictions. The measurements SO FAR agree with the first kind of model and disagree with the second kind of model. And therefore the validity of the no-structure possibility is deemed to be better than the validity of the structure possibility. NOTE this comes from comparison with experiment and NOT from any core and unquestioned assumption. 4. Continue to look for evidence that might indicate the inferred rule is wrong. In this case, experimenters continue to look for the kind of evidence that the structured-electron models predict. So far, they have found none. Please read these four steps over, three times. Note how different they are from the way an artist like you thinks. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 10:23 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <da277aef-4ba1-4e24-a97b-91a732a33c78@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633812 |
On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 10:18:15 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 5/19/17 12:04 PM, john wrote: > > Without cause or rationale? > > YOU are the one not using those and supplanting > > them with scientific "rules" that make a mockery > > of the science that you espouse. > > You seek not to elucidate, but to obscure > > Shame on you > > Scientific rules come from observation. > > Here's how a scientist works, John. > > 1. First, be careful not to make any assumptions. This is why engineers shouldn't pretend to be scientist. For a real scientist the first step is, MAKE ASSUMPTIONS!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 10:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <53e3e4df-6a79-4500-b8c3-35af09452301@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633814 |
JM Odd "On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 10:18:15 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 5/19/17 12:04 PM, john wrote: > > Without cause or rationale? > > YOU are the one not using those and supplanting > > them with scientific "rules" that make a mockery > > of the science that you espouse. > > You seek not to elucidate, but to obscure > > Shame on you > > Scientific rules come from observation. > > Here's how a scientist works, John. > > 1. First, be careful not to make any assumptions. This is why engineers shouldn't pretend to be scientist. For a real scientist the first step is, MAKE ASSUMPTIONS! " Well, back in the 80s, I was looking for a magnetic pole at right angles to galactic discs because if atoms and galaxies were alike, then there should be one. In about 1987, the VLA saw such at our galaxy's center. Does your model predict such, Odd? Oh, right, you don't have one.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 12:41 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <ofnane$1rq1$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #633816 |
On 5/19/17 12:36 PM, john wrote: > JM > Odd > "On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 10:18:15 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 5/19/17 12:04 PM, john wrote: >>> Without cause or rationale? >>> YOU are the one not using those and supplanting >>> them with scientific "rules" that make a mockery >>> of the science that you espouse. >>> You seek not to elucidate, but to obscure >>> Shame on you >> >> Scientific rules come from observation. >> >> Here's how a scientist works, John. >> >> 1. First, be careful not to make any assumptions. > > This is why engineers shouldn't pretend to be scientist. > For a real scientist the first step is, MAKE ASSUMPTIONS! McGinn doing his goober-picking again. > " > Well, back in the 80s, > I was looking for a magnetic pole at right angles > to galactic discs > because if atoms and galaxies were alike, then > there should be one. > In about 1987, the VLA saw such at our galaxy's > center. > Does your model predict such, Odd? Yes. > Oh, right, you don't have one. Yes, scientists do. Sorry you haven't bothered to look for one. Too busy living by your assumptions to do that. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 11:37 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <1b45ef4c-7989-4c03-b980-52014e5ff63a@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633817 |
On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 10:41:07 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 5/19/17 12:36 PM, john wrote: > > This is why engineers shouldn't pretend to be scientist. > > For a real scientist the first step is, MAKE ASSUMPTIONS! > > McGinn doing his goober-picking again. You engineers don't have scientific arguments. Consensus beliefs are not the solution. They are the problem. Consensus beliefs are very difficult to find and remove because people want to believe them. People want to believe what is obvious. And whole scientific institutions get created to fulfill this need. The sheepish tendency to follow the path of least resistance is the biggest obstacle to scientific advancement. If you don't want to adhere to scientific methods then go somewhere else. James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes The Real Reason Moist Air Reduces Aerodynamic Lift http://www.thunderbolts.info/forum/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=16652
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 10:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8dc20337-4381-444d-8b7a-b9dd816bda17@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633816 |
On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 10:36:13 AM UTC-7, john wrote: > JM > Odd > "On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 10:18:15 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > On 5/19/17 12:04 PM, john wrote: > > > Without cause or rationale? > > > YOU are the one not using those and supplanting > > > them with scientific "rules" that make a mockery > > > of the science that you espouse. > > > You seek not to elucidate, but to obscure > > > Shame on you > > > > Scientific rules come from observation. > > > > Here's how a scientist works, John. > > > > 1. First, be careful not to make any assumptions. > > This is why engineers shouldn't pretend to be scientist. For a real scientist the first step is, MAKE ASSUMPTIONS! > " > Well, back in the 80s, > I was looking for a magnetic pole at right angles > to galactic discs > because if atoms and galaxies were alike, then > there should be one. > In about 1987, the VLA saw such at our galaxy's > center. > Does your model predict such, Odd? > Oh, right, you don't have one. Right. This is how science proceeds. It is a search for non-obvious truth. These engineers think it is about coming to a consensus. Nitwits always assume they are living at the end of time and all the truth is known. This is the kind of absurd stupidity that results in superstitious notions like "CO2 causes global warming," and "Storms are caused by cold steam". Science is full of plainly stupid beliefs that are fervently supported by a consensus of dunces. The internet has made it worse because now these nitwits can reference each other's stupid conclusions with a few clicks of a mouse.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-20 01:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <ofo7ut$vro$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #633816 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> writes: >JM >Odd >"On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 10:18:15 AM UTC-7, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 5/19/17 12:04 PM, john wrote: >> > Without cause or rationale? >> > YOU are the one not using those and supplanting >> > them with scientific "rules" that make a mockery >> > of the science that you espouse. >> > You seek not to elucidate, but to obscure >> > Shame on you >> >> Scientific rules come from observation. >> >> Here's how a scientist works, John. >> >> 1. First, be careful not to make any assumptions. >This is why engineers shouldn't pretend to be scientist. For a real >scientist the first step is, MAKE ASSUMPTIONS! No, John, that's 100% completely incorrect. The first step for a scientist is to make observations. Then the scientists can make a hypothesis about what is going on. But it is only a hypothesis. It may or may not be correct. He cannot make any assumptions. The scientist may then try to devise tests or experiments to help support or refute the hypothesis. That is how science works. Since you appear to be an artist type, you don't think the way scientists do. I don't know why you hang around here. An artist type here is kind of like an atheist constantly attending a church and then asking why they keep talking about some dude who was executed 2000 years ago, and then asking why everyone gets mad at him when he tries to discuss Abraham Lincoln instead.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-19 20:02 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <b2a3d4b2-a268-4321-b86a-84c51a634ab1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633870 |
Odd "like an atheist constantly attending a church and then asking why they " Oh so now my theory is too pretty. First you ask me to model CH4 and before I'm done its already too pretty. Why are you?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-20 11:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <64d9ea47-bf76-4429-893a-6304dd8f7046@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633877 |
Poor John says Well, back in the 80s, I was looking for a magnetic pole at right angles to galactic discs because if atoms and galaxies were alike, then there should be one. ---------- Well, no... Back in the 80s you were simply stealing the research done by MAINSTREAM science and seeing if you could make any tenuous connection to your drug induced visions. John, you just need to listen to me from now on. Forget about BJ, need clown shoes and Loopy is some broke ass version of slumdog millionaire. I'll set you on the proper path towards ultimate illumination
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-20 11:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6cac8152-9c05-462f-b016-41fd511db05d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633916 |
HVAC " Well, no... Back in the 80s you were simply stealing the research done by MAINSTREAM science and seeing if you could make any tenuous connection to your drug induced visions. " How is using freely-available observations "stealing research", HVAC? There is already enough data 100 times over to figure out this puzzle.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-05-20 12:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <d7742450-2b95-40ad-a461-c8f5cbe3fff7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #633917 |
On Saturday, May 20, 2017 at 11:43:37 AM UTC-7, john wrote: > HVAC > " > Well, no... Back in the 80s you were simply stealing the research done by MAINSTREAM science and seeing if you could make any tenuous connection to your drug induced visions. " > How is using freely-available observations > "stealing research", HVAC? > There is already enough data 100 times over > to figure out this puzzle. HVAC seems to not have an argument. He just has an opinion. And his opinion doesn't stray too far off the path of what "everybody" believes. He is not a scientists. He is a science believer. Unfortunately the internet makes it easy for science believers to pretend they are scientists.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 7 of 11 — ← Prev page 1 … 5 6 [7] 8 9 … 11 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web