Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #698763 > unrolled thread
| Started by | casagiannoni@optonline.net |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-08-16 16:14 -0400 |
| Last post | 2018-08-18 15:57 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 99 — 8 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Light Speed Limit casagiannoni@optonline.net - 2018-08-16 16:14 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-16 13:33 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 15:12 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 19:47 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit casagiannoni@optonline.net - 2018-08-16 20:08 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-16 17:15 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 20:32 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-17 12:55 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-16 20:28 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit casagiannoni@optonline.net - 2018-08-17 08:00 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 05:48 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit casagiannoni@optonline.net - 2018-08-17 10:42 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 15:27 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 08:37 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 15:47 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 09:03 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 16:41 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 14:19 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 20:39 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 18:29 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 22:38 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 08:57 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 14:27 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 16:41 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 16:47 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-08-18 21:24 -0500
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 20:27 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 14:40 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 15:09 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 23:03 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 18:26 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 14:00 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 20:39 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 14:50 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 15:24 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 01:20 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 18:33 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 18:26 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 12:14 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 20:47 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 14:33 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 21:45 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 16:28 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 23:50 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 05:27 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 14:29 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 20:48 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 22:07 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 18:26 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 14:09 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 19:50 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 18:06 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 22:22 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 22:45 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit mitchrae3323@gmail.com - 2018-08-20 17:54 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-08-20 21:03 -0500
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-21 15:28 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-23 06:19 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2018-08-18 16:48 -0500
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 16:21 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 13:32 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 20:26 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 18:20 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 15:52 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 21:59 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 13:21 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 10:27 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 18:16 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 16:39 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 10:35 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 10:01 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 10:16 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 13:59 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 16:12 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 17:04 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-19 20:18 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-20 14:27 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit casagiannoni@optonline.net - 2018-08-16 19:50 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 00:59 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 06:36 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit casagiannoni@optonline.net - 2018-08-17 07:47 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 13:22 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit casagiannoni@optonline.net - 2018-08-17 10:27 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 08:10 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 15:35 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 08:51 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 14:27 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 15:19 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 13:28 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 10:45 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 13:27 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 10:18 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit casagiannoni@optonline.net - 2018-08-17 13:49 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 20:39 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit casagiannoni@optonline.net - 2018-08-17 16:47 -0400
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 20:58 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 15:12 -0700
Re: Light Speed Limit Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-08-17 22:33 +0000
Re: Light Speed Limit Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2018-08-18 15:57 -0700
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 13:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pl70s0$1883$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #698873 |
On 8/17/2018 11:47 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: >> Odd >> “Language is an instrument for communication. If you use language for other >> purposes but neglect the primacy of communication—ie, shared understanding >> of meanings—then it’s a wasted exercise. >> ” >> And if you claim that your math relates to reality, translate it into >> something intelligible- oh! Counterintuitive? Like, nuts? Stupid? A wasted exercise. >> Draw. >> Me. >> A. >> Picture. >> Of. >> Your. >> Model. >> >> Can’t? You are fooling yourself- but that’s easy since you’re a fool >> > > As I said, John blames others for his not understanding the language of > physics. His argument is that if it is not immediately clear to a layman, > then it is WRONG. And if it isn’t presented like a comic book illustration > to John, the way he’d like it, then it is WRONG. > Odd not only does not understand the language of physics (jargon and mathematics) but he also does not even understand the language we all speak. He redefines words and their meanings to nonsense and argues that it's science. John is right. Odd is a fool.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 20:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pl7b18$1pte$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #698908 |
benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> wrote: > On 8/17/2018 11:47 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Odd >>> “Language is an instrument for communication. If you use language for other >>> purposes but neglect the primacy of communication—ie, shared understanding >>> of meanings—then it’s a wasted exercise. >>> ” >>> And if you claim that your math relates to reality, translate it into >>> something intelligible- oh! Counterintuitive? Like, nuts? Stupid? A wasted exercise. >>> Draw. >>> Me. >>> A. >>> Picture. >>> Of. >>> Your. >>> Model. >>> >>> Can’t? You are fooling yourself- but that’s easy since you’re a fool >>> >> >> As I said, John blames others for his not understanding the language of >> physics. His argument is that if it is not immediately clear to a layman, >> then it is WRONG. And if it isn’t presented like a comic book illustration >> to John, the way he’d like it, then it is WRONG. >> > Odd not only does not understand the language of physics (jargon and > mathematics) but he also does not even understand the language we all > speak. He redefines words and their meanings to nonsense and argues that > it's science. John is right. Odd is a fool. > Ben, your fierce bellowing on behalf of the outliers and oddballs is so knee-jerk predictable I can set my clock by it. Well done. -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 18:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pl7hnv$49m$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #698953 |
On 8/17/2018 4:26 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> wrote: >> On 8/17/2018 11:47 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> Odd >>>> “Language is an instrument for communication. If you use language for other >>>> purposes but neglect the primacy of communication—ie, shared understanding >>>> of meanings—then it’s a wasted exercise. >>>> ” >>>> And if you claim that your math relates to reality, translate it into >>>> something intelligible- oh! Counterintuitive? Like, nuts? Stupid? A wasted exercise. >>>> Draw. >>>> Me. >>>> A. >>>> Picture. >>>> Of. >>>> Your. >>>> Model. >>>> >>>> Can’t? You are fooling yourself- but that’s easy since you’re a fool >>>> >>> >>> As I said, John blames others for his not understanding the language of >>> physics. His argument is that if it is not immediately clear to a layman, >>> then it is WRONG. And if it isn’t presented like a comic book illustration >>> to John, the way he’d like it, then it is WRONG. >>> >> Odd not only does not understand the language of physics (jargon and >> mathematics) but he also does not even understand the language we all >> speak. He redefines words and their meanings to nonsense and argues that >> it's science. John is right. Odd is a fool. >> > > Ben, your fierce bellowing on behalf of the outliers and oddballs is so > knee-jerk predictable I can set my clock by it. Well done. > Who sets their clock by outliers and oddballs? Obviously you are still a fool. It's so funny the way you unscience libs always accuse others of your own actions. The "fierce bellowing" has clearly been performed by you.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-18 15:52 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <163ecfaf-2b02-4147-81b7-a94146291769@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #698908 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 1:32:52 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: > On 8/17/2018 11:47 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > >> And if you claim that your math relates to reality, translate it into > >> something intelligible- oh! Counterintuitive? Like, nuts? Stupid? A wasted exercise. > >> Draw. > >> Me. > >> A. > >> Picture. > >> Of. > >> Your. > >> Model. > >> > >> Can’t? You are fooling yourself- but that’s easy since you’re a fool > >> > > > > As I said, John blames others for his not understanding the language of > > physics. His argument is that if it is not immediately clear to a layman, > > then it is WRONG. And if it isn’t presented like a comic book illustration > > to John, the way he’d like it, then it is WRONG. > > > Odd not only does not understand the language of physics (jargon and > mathematics) but he also does not even understand the language we all > speak. He redefines words and their meanings to nonsense and argues that > it's science. John is right. Odd is a fool. and benj is a troublemaker. He adds heat to a discussion but usually not much light. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-18 21:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <plaitj$gnc$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #699119 |
On 8/18/2018 6:52 PM, Edward Prochak wrote: > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 1:32:52 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: >> On 8/17/2018 11:47 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > >>>> And if you claim that your math relates to reality, translate it into >>>> something intelligible- oh! Counterintuitive? Like, nuts? Stupid? A wasted exercise. >>>> Draw. >>>> Me. >>>> A. >>>> Picture. >>>> Of. >>>> Your. >>>> Model. >>>> >>>> Can’t? You are fooling yourself- but that’s easy since you’re a fool >>>> >>> >>> As I said, John blames others for his not understanding the language of >>> physics. His argument is that if it is not immediately clear to a layman, >>> then it is WRONG. And if it isn’t presented like a comic book illustration >>> to John, the way he’d like it, then it is WRONG. >>> >> Odd not only does not understand the language of physics (jargon and >> mathematics) but he also does not even understand the language we all >> speak. He redefines words and their meanings to nonsense and argues that >> it's science. John is right. Odd is a fool. > > and benj is a troublemaker. > He adds heat to a discussion but usually not much light. > > Ed > How would you and Odd know this, Ed, with both your heads so firmly and fully buried in the sand? I guess you think you have light-sensitive butts?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 13:21 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pl7064$176t$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #698854 |
On 8/17/2018 8:00 AM, casagiannoni@optonline.net wrote: >>>> >>> The nature of the character of aliens, clearly puts the burden of >>> proof with those postulating their existence. There is no credible >>> evidence. >> >> Because you say so. Got it. >> > No, because aliens are clearly not part of > normal perception or experience. > >>> Rubbish. Aliens don't say anything because nobody has ever talked to >>> any, because practical travel among stars is clearly impossible. >> >> Because as God, you know all and see all and therefore only tell the >> absolute truth when you speak. I never would have guessed you were that >> powerful. >> > Nobody, including me, is God, because God is clearly impossible to any > rational being. > >>> If aliens did visit, don't you suppose they'd provide incontrivertable >>> evidence of their existance ? Well where is it ? >> >> And the way you know the purpose and what these aliens that don't exist >> will do would be? Oh that's right the same super-powers that you used to >> prove they don't exist at all. Make up you mind. > > I apolagize if I mispoke or was unclear. Aliens are very likely to > exist, but travel among the stars is clearly impossible due to the > vast distances and limited travel speeds. We have not and will not be > visited or contacted by aliens. Anyone who says something is "impossible" is clearly a moron. "impossible" can be shown ONLY if one uses their "superpowers" to examine ALL ways that something might happen and then show none of them work. That makes Casa a proven insane moron. No, Casa you do not possess "superpowers".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 10:27 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <4e1244af-2f99-4928-83c0-4960de405741@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #698811 |
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 8:28:51 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: > On 8/16/2018 8:08 PM, casagiannoni@optonline.net wrote: > >> > >> And the way you know there have been no visits is? Because you say so? > >> Here, allow me to introduce you to "kensi" and Nads. That is their > >> journalist "science" as well. > >> > >> There is considerable testimony and evidence that aliens have visited > >> and are regularly visiting, but that governments are keeping it secret. > >> > >> So how do they get here? The way they say they do it is like this: > >> C is the speed of light. Light consists of waves propagating in the > >> aether. c is the speed of those waves and since it is an aether property > >> there is little chance of something propagating (as waves) faster. > >> > > The nature of the character of aliens, clearly puts the burden of > > proof with those postulating their existence. There is no credible > > evidence. > > Because you say so. Got it. NO, because the rules of logic show it is imposible to prove the negative. You believe in alien visitation, so you need to supply the proof. > > > How did they get here ? Simple answer is they didn't, because that > > would require spped many times light speed, which is ridiculous. > > So travel faster than light is "impossible"? Use the short form "I'm a > moron". Faster than light travel is at best speculation. <benj's excuse for not being able to prove FTL travel: "the corner store sold out on tachyon emitters."> [] > > If aliens did visit, don't you suppose they'd provide incontrivertable > > evidence of their existance ? Well where is it ? > > And the way you know the purpose and what these aliens that don't exist > will do would be? Oh that's right the same super-powers that you used to > prove they don't exist at all. Make up you mind. Again you ask for prove they have not visited. That is not how logic works. Benj, you've been listening to john too long! Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 18:16 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pl7hfe$49m$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #698904 |
On 8/17/2018 1:27 PM, Edward Prochak wrote: > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 8:28:51 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: >> On 8/16/2018 8:08 PM, casagiannoni@optonline.net wrote: >>>> >>>> And the way you know there have been no visits is? Because you say so? >>>> Here, allow me to introduce you to "kensi" and Nads. That is their >>>> journalist "science" as well. >>>> >>>> There is considerable testimony and evidence that aliens have visited >>>> and are regularly visiting, but that governments are keeping it secret. >>>> >>>> So how do they get here? The way they say they do it is like this: >>>> C is the speed of light. Light consists of waves propagating in the >>>> aether. c is the speed of those waves and since it is an aether property >>>> there is little chance of something propagating (as waves) faster. >>>> >>> The nature of the character of aliens, clearly puts the burden of >>> proof with those postulating their existence. There is no credible >>> evidence. >> >> Because you say so. Got it. > > NO, because the rules of logic show it is imposible > to prove the negative. You believe in alien visitation, > so you need to supply the proof. cute move! Yo go from saying you used your superpowers to prove alien visits and FTL travel as "impossible" to saying that I'm the moron who is sayings are impossible. Nobody is supposed to notice your pivot. By the way you are still saying things are "impossible" because that's how dumb you are. Proving a negative is NOT impossible! You simply need to use your superpowers to examine all the ways something could be true and then note that none of them work. It's pretty clear that you do not believe your superpowers are "impossible". >> >>> How did they get here ? Simple answer is they didn't, because that >>> would require spped many times light speed, which is ridiculous. >> >> So travel faster than light is "impossible"? Use the short form "I'm a >> moron". > > Faster than light travel is at best speculation. Wait. Last post it was "impossible". HAve you grown smart since then? > <benj's excuse for not being able to prove FTL travel: > "the corner store sold out on tachyon emitters."> Star Trek science is REAL. Don't take my word for it. Odd will confirm the truth of this. > [] >>> If aliens did visit, don't you suppose they'd provide incontrivertable >>> evidence of their existance ? Well where is it ? >> >> And the way you know the purpose and what these aliens that don't exist >> will do would be? Oh that's right the same super-powers that you used to >> prove they don't exist at all. Make up you mind. > > Again you ask for prove they have not visited. That is not how > logic works. Benj, you've been listening to john too long! Since you possess the superpowers, I"m asking that you use them to locate the proof aliens have not visited. Should be easy for you, right?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-18 16:39 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <6818e973-eefb-4425-9dfa-77a3b23eac11@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #698987 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 6:16:20 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: > On 8/17/2018 1:27 PM, Edward Prochak wrote: > > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 8:28:51 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: > >> On 8/16/2018 8:08 PM, casagiannoni@optonline.net wrote: > >>>> > >>>> And the way you know there have been no visits is? Because you say so? > >>>> Here, allow me to introduce you to "kensi" and Nads. That is their > >>>> journalist "science" as well. > >>>> > >>>> There is considerable testimony and evidence that aliens have visited > >>>> and are regularly visiting, but that governments are keeping it secret. > >>>> > >>>> So how do they get here? The way they say they do it is like this: > >>>> C is the speed of light. Light consists of waves propagating in the > >>>> aether. c is the speed of those waves and since it is an aether property > >>>> there is little chance of something propagating (as waves) faster. > >>>> > >>> The nature of the character of aliens, clearly puts the burden of > >>> proof with those postulating their existence. There is no credible > >>> evidence. > >> > >> Because you say so. Got it. > > > > NO, because the rules of logic show it is imposible > > to prove the negative. You believe in alien visitation, > > so you need to supply the proof. > > cute move! Yo go from saying you used your superpowers to prove alien > visits and FTL travel as "impossible" to saying that I'm the moron who > is sayings are impossible. Nobody is supposed to notice your pivot. No pivot. Same point throughout: NO credible evidence. > > By the way you are still saying things are "impossible" because that's > how dumb you are. Proving a negative is NOT impossible! You simply need > to use your superpowers to examine all the ways something could be true > and then note that none of them work. It's pretty clear that you do not > believe your superpowers are "impossible". > Where did I say impossible. I am totally open to the possible existence of Extraterrestrials. I just haven't seen anything to show they have visited Earth. > >> > >>> How did they get here ? Simple answer is they didn't, because that > >>> would require spped many times light speed, which is ridiculous. > >> > >> So travel faster than light is "impossible"? Use the short form "I'm a > >> moron". > > > > Faster than light travel is at best speculation. > > Wait. Last post it was "impossible". HAve you grown smart since then? You are getting me and casagiannoni mixed up. And even casagiannoni only implied it is impossible. > > > > <benj's excuse for not being able to prove FTL travel: > > "the corner store sold out on tachyon emitters."> > > Star Trek science is REAL. Don't take my word for it. Odd will confirm > the truth of this. New network H&I shows Star Trek 6 nights a week. I love watching they historical records! > > > [] > >>> If aliens did visit, don't you suppose they'd provide incontrivertable > >>> evidence of their existance ? Well where is it ? > >> > >> And the way you know the purpose and what these aliens that don't exist > >> will do would be? Oh that's right the same super-powers that you used to > >> prove they don't exist at all. Make up you mind. > > > > Again you ask for prove they have not visited. That is not how > > logic works. Benj, you've been listening to john too long! > > Since you possess the superpowers, I"m asking that you use them to > locate the proof aliens have not visited. Should be easy for you, right? Now look who is pivoting! You know the negative cannot be proven (except proof by contradiction, but only in mathematics!) And again I point out only that there is no credible evidence that ETs have visited earth. Such speculation can be mildly entertaining for a teenager. But hardly serious science. Enjoy, ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "reber G=emc^2" <herbertglazier0@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-19 10:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <e94a61cf-14ee-44d7-9f1c-6b34bafabfb3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #699125 |
On Saturday, August 18, 2018 at 4:39:24 PM UTC-7, Edward Prochak wrote: > On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 6:16:20 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: > > On 8/17/2018 1:27 PM, Edward Prochak wrote: > > > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 8:28:51 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: > > >> On 8/16/2018 8:08 PM, casagiannoni@optonline.net wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> And the way you know there have been no visits is? Because you say so? > > >>>> Here, allow me to introduce you to "kensi" and Nads. That is their > > >>>> journalist "science" as well. > > >>>> > > >>>> There is considerable testimony and evidence that aliens have visited > > >>>> and are regularly visiting, but that governments are keeping it secret. > > >>>> > > >>>> So how do they get here? The way they say they do it is like this: > > >>>> C is the speed of light. Light consists of waves propagating in the > > >>>> aether. c is the speed of those waves and since it is an aether property > > >>>> there is little chance of something propagating (as waves) faster. > > >>>> > > >>> The nature of the character of aliens, clearly puts the burden of > > >>> proof with those postulating their existence. There is no credible > > >>> evidence. > > >> > > >> Because you say so. Got it. > > > > > > NO, because the rules of logic show it is imposible > > > to prove the negative. You believe in alien visitation, > > > so you need to supply the proof. > > > > cute move! Yo go from saying you used your superpowers to prove alien > > visits and FTL travel as "impossible" to saying that I'm the moron who > > is sayings are impossible. Nobody is supposed to notice your pivot. > > No pivot. Same point throughout: NO credible evidence. > > > > > By the way you are still saying things are "impossible" because that's > > how dumb you are. Proving a negative is NOT impossible! You simply need > > to use your superpowers to examine all the ways something could be true > > and then note that none of them work. It's pretty clear that you do not > > believe your superpowers are "impossible". > > > > Where did I say impossible. I am totally open to > the possible existence of Extraterrestrials. I just > haven't seen anything to show they have visited Earth. > > > >> > > >>> How did they get here ? Simple answer is they didn't, because that > > >>> would require spped many times light speed, which is ridiculous. > > >> > > >> So travel faster than light is "impossible"? Use the short form "I'm a > > >> moron". > > > > > > Faster than light travel is at best speculation. > > > > Wait. Last post it was "impossible". HAve you grown smart since then? > > You are getting me and casagiannoni mixed up. > And even casagiannoni only implied it is impossible. > > > > > > > <benj's excuse for not being able to prove FTL travel: > > > "the corner store sold out on tachyon emitters."> > > > > Star Trek science is REAL. Don't take my word for it. Odd will confirm > > the truth of this. > > New network H&I shows Star Trek 6 nights a week. > I love watching they historical records! > > > > > > [] > > >>> If aliens did visit, don't you suppose they'd provide incontrivertable > > >>> evidence of their existance ? Well where is it ? > > >> > > >> And the way you know the purpose and what these aliens that don't exist > > >> will do would be? Oh that's right the same super-powers that you used to > > >> prove they don't exist at all. Make up you mind. > > > > > > Again you ask for prove they have not visited. That is not how > > > logic works. Benj, you've been listening to john too long! > > > > Since you possess the superpowers, I"m asking that you use them to > > locate the proof aliens have not visited. Should be easy for you, right? > > Now look who is pivoting! You know the negative cannot be proven > (except proof by contradiction, but only in mathematics!) > > And again I point out only that there is no credible evidence > that ETs have visited earth. Such speculation can be mildly > entertaining for a teenager. But hardly serious science. > > Enjoy, > ed We talk to each other from one end of Earth to the other at the speed of light.That is fast enough for me.Bert
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 10:01 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <67c73aa3-b904-40da-9f70-7c1fd9482d8c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #698800 |
On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 7:47:18 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: > On 8/16/2018 6:12 PM, Edward Prochak wrote: [] > > (Not that I think aliens ever visited.) > > Maybe you should look at the evidence (unless you are part of the > coverup, of course) I have viewed some of the evidence and it is completely underwhelming. It is either: vague physical evidence that is easily explained as human artifacts or at best (for alien believers) is not clear at all. or verbal testimony of vague descriptions, often conflicting with others supposedly seeing the same "beings". And of course the grand coverup, the last refuge of conspiracy theorist of all types (aliens, bigfoot, JFK, ESP, auras, crystals, free energy, ......) that for aliens has supposedly been going on for 70 years or more with no leaks. Other life is likely out there, but visited earth? No, I don't see any convincing evidence for aliens visiting earth. now evidence of how gullible humans can be is in rampant abundance! Just consider the number of kooks and trolls that visit here! Enjoy, ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 10:16 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <983b9627-c7cd-4142-aa6f-018198d50f15@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #698891 |
ed “Other life is likely out there, but visited earth? No, I don't see any convincing evidence for aliens visiting earth. ” Because you won’t look.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 13:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pl72ej$1b0g$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #698891 |
On 8/17/2018 1:01 PM, Edward Prochak wrote: > On Thursday, August 16, 2018 at 7:47:18 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: >> On 8/16/2018 6:12 PM, Edward Prochak wrote: > [] >>> (Not that I think aliens ever visited.) >> >> Maybe you should look at the evidence (unless you are part of the >> coverup, of course) > > I have viewed some of the evidence and it is completely > underwhelming. It is either: > vague physical evidence that is easily explained as human > artifacts or at best (for alien believers) is not clear at all. > or > verbal testimony of vague descriptions, often conflicting > with others supposedly seeing the same "beings". Testimony is how we decide court cases. It seems to work if not quite perfect. And in court usually there isn't a government with virtually unlimited money and people trying to obstruct justice (there are exceptions, natch) > And of course the grand coverup, the last refuge of > conspiracy theorist of all types (aliens, bigfoot, > JFK, ESP, auras, crystals, free energy, ......) > that for aliens has supposedly been going on for > 70 years or more with no leaks. So clearly you are defending the grand metaparadigm as ultimate truth as evidences by your trotting out a list of "forbidden topics" in an attempt to stiffle all reasonable discussion. > Other life is likely out there, but visited earth? > No, I don't see any convincing evidence for aliens > visiting earth. A crashed aerodyne is pretty hard to deny and takes a big effort to cover up. Ever seen a UFO. Do you say they do not exist? Proof is right in your pocket (cellphone) > now evidence of how gullible humans can be is in > rampant abundance! Just consider the number of > kooks and trolls that visit here! Accusations of insanity are always the techniques of the cover-up. I can get all the accusations of insanity I want just by saying I don't believe there is any credible evidence Trump colluded with Russia. It's all the same propaganda technique. > Enjoy, > ed >
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-18 16:12 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <0984c78a-6343-4024-8998-10b7e4588e98@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #698930 |
On Friday, August 17, 2018 at 1:59:53 PM UTC-4, benj wrote: > On 8/17/2018 1:01 PM, Edward Prochak wrote: > > And of course the grand coverup, the last refuge of > > conspiracy theorist of all types (aliens, bigfoot, > > JFK, ESP, auras, crystals, free energy, ......) > > that for aliens has supposedly been going on for > > 70 years or more with no leaks. > > So clearly you are defending the grand metaparadigm as ultimate truth as > evidences by your trotting out a list of "forbidden topics" in an > attempt to stiffle all reasonable discussion. No, just expressing my view. Why are you so defensive? > > > Other life is likely out there, but visited earth? > > No, I don't see any convincing evidence for aliens > > visiting earth. > > A crashed aerodyne is pretty hard to deny and takes a big effort to > cover up. Ever seen a UFO. Do you say they do not exist? Proof is right > in your pocket (cellphone) UFO's clearly exist. In the same words but clearer: Unidentified Flying Objects clearly exist. By Occam's razor, the explanation that humans developed transistors and the following technology all on our own is clearly better than some government coverup of a crashed Extraterrestrial ship and government "leaks" of new technology. > > > now evidence of how gullible humans can be is in > > rampant abundance! Just consider the number of > > kooks and trolls that visit here! > > Accusations of insanity are always the techniques of the cover-up. > I can get all the accusations of insanity I want just by saying I don't > believe there is any credible evidence Trump colluded with Russia. > It's all the same propaganda technique. Did I ever once tell a kook or troll to shut up? For some, I have tried to get them to talk through their issues. Others I ignore. OTOH, I will step in when I think someone is just being a bully. So, give me facts if you have them. But hearsay and shoddy research are not evidence. Even in court. Ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-18 17:04 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <ad7c3c7e-b8e8-450d-a4f8-d79ed2af19b3@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #699123 |
Ed “Where did I say impossible. I am totally open to the possible existence of Extraterrestrials. I just haven't seen anything to show they have visited Earth. ” You aren’t open at all. You refuse to look.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-19 20:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <281bf7e5-c64b-4274-bc4b-79c84620517c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #699130 |
On Saturday, August 18, 2018 at 8:05:00 PM UTC-4, john wrote: > Ed > “Where did I say impossible. I am totally open to > the possible existence of Extraterrestrials. I just > haven't seen anything to show they have visited Earth. > ” > You aren’t open at all. You refuse to look. Rrriiight! <sarcasm> Your skills in logic are devastating. <\sarcasm> LOL ed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-20 14:27 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <plf162$bjr$5@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #699285 |
On 8/19/2018 11:18 PM, Edward Prochak wrote: > On Saturday, August 18, 2018 at 8:05:00 PM UTC-4, john wrote: >> Ed >> “Where did I say impossible. I am totally open to >> the possible existence of Extraterrestrials. I just >> haven't seen anything to show they have visited Earth. >> ” >> You aren’t open at all. You refuse to look. > > Rrriiight! > <sarcasm> > Your skills in logic are devastating. > <\sarcasm> > > LOL > ed > Ed it's hard to examine forensic evidence when your butt is in the air and your head buried in the sand with Odd's.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | casagiannoni@optonline.net |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-16 19:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <fm2cndlobg8pl9dihpqfe1ik413qifl3mj@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #698790 |
> >Evidence this is the only universe? >remember lack of evidence is not evidence of absence. > The universe is everything. If God exists ( unlikely ) then it's a thing, and therefore included as part of EVERYTHING . >And if God is outside the universe....? > See above. > >Oh we have gotten subatomic particles WELL past 99% of c. >Macroscopic objects, not so much, though there are stars >observed orbiting the galactic Black Hole moving close to >the speed of light. > These particles, if they have mass, then their energy would tend toward infinity as speeds approach light speed. >A fair sophomore year argument against alien visitation. >(Not that I think aliens ever visited.) > >Sorry but Speculation is not fantasy. >Though it is an easy mistake to make. > It is when considering worm holes. No such breach in the continuum is possible. No concrete proposal for worm holes exists, with explanation of mechanisms, etc.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 00:59 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pl56kp$cah$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #698802 |
<casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote: >> >> Evidence this is the only universe? >> remember lack of evidence is not evidence of absence. >> > The universe is everything. If God exists ( unlikely ) then it's a > thing, and therefore included as part of EVERYTHING . Semantic arguments are useless. > >> And if God is outside the universe....? >> > See above. >> >> Oh we have gotten subatomic particles WELL past 99% of c. >> Macroscopic objects, not so much, though there are stars >> observed orbiting the galactic Black Hole moving close to >> the speed of light. >> > These particles, if they have mass, then their energy would tend > toward infinity as speeds approach light speed. > >> A fair sophomore year argument against alien visitation. >> (Not that I think aliens ever visited.) >> >> Sorry but Speculation is not fantasy. >> Though it is an easy mistake to make. >> > It is when considering worm holes. No such breach in the continuum is > possible. No concrete proposal for worm holes exists, with explanation > of mechanisms, etc. > What constitutes “concrete”? -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-17 06:36 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <pl68f7$1rp7$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #698816 |
On 8/16/2018 8:59 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > <casagiannoni@optonline.net> wrote: >>> >>> Evidence this is the only universe? >>> remember lack of evidence is not evidence of absence. >>> >> The universe is everything. If God exists ( unlikely ) then it's a >> thing, and therefore included as part of EVERYTHING . > > Semantic arguments are useless. But Odd, semantic arguments is what your "science" is all about. Right? >>> And if God is outside the universe....? >>> >> See above. >>> >>> Oh we have gotten subatomic particles WELL past 99% of c. >>> Macroscopic objects, not so much, though there are stars >>> observed orbiting the galactic Black Hole moving close to >>> the speed of light. >>> >> These particles, if they have mass, then their energy would tend >> toward infinity as speeds approach light speed. >> >>> A fair sophomore year argument against alien visitation. >>> (Not that I think aliens ever visited.) >>> >>> Sorry but Speculation is not fantasy. >>> Though it is an easy mistake to make. >>> >> It is when considering worm holes. No such breach in the continuum is >> possible. No concrete proposal for worm holes exists, with explanation >> of mechanisms, etc. >> > > What constitutes “concrete”? Explain to Casa that the only proof needed in science that wormholes exist is that physicists in books say that they do.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 4 of 5 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 [4] 5 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web