Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #552385 > unrolled thread
| Started by | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-02-11 17:08 -0600 |
| Last post | 2016-02-22 15:12 -0800 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 173 — 17 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 17:08 -0600
Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 15:28 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 19:59 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 07:16 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 14:40 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 14:01 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 00:44 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 09:49 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 08:01 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 12:47 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 12:46 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 15:35 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 00:34 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 07:27 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 05:59 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 07:30 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 10:23 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 22:46 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Dingus Dirtbag McGee" <insavad@example.com> - 2016-02-16 22:49 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 03:16 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 03:29 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 03:59 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 04:07 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 05:05 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 06:26 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 10:11 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 10:19 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 10:05 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 09:03 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 10:15 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 10:05 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-21 13:35 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 12:57 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-02-21 19:40 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 14:28 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-22 08:52 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 05:58 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 06:41 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 14:37 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-23 16:55 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:29 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:40 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:49 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 16:16 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 23:02 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 01:25 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-14 17:43 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 02:11 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 20:17 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 07:17 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 10:38 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 14:58 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 02:14 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 14:40 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 14:03 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 00:50 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 10:04 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 13:01 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 15:37 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 00:36 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 07:28 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:42 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:52 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 16:13 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 23:00 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 01:22 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 08:53 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 07:07 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 15:44 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 16:16 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 15:32 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 14:34 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 19:50 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 19:12 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 17:08 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 01:13 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 03:03 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 10:04 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 09:16 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 09:24 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 12:02 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 12:31 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 16:14 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 02:43 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 04:53 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 16:09 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 15:58 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 16:30 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 16:30 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 19:28 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 07:39 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 19:53 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-12 04:33 +0000
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-11 22:02 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-11 23:02 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-12 11:34 -0500
Re: Ben Jacoby's hallucinations rule supreme, unreproachable. benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 14:55 -0500
Better art refines prior art. john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 12:19 -0800
Re: Better art refines prior art. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 14:29 -0600
Re: Better art refines prior art. Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 14:37 -0600
Re: Better art refines prior art. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 02:47 -0800
Re: Better art refines prior art. Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 12:56 -0800
Re: Better art refines prior art. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 04:50 -0800
Re: Better art refines prior art. "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 02:42 -0800
Re: Ben Jacoby's hallucinations rule supreme, unreproachable. "hanson" <hanson@quick.net> - 2016-02-12 13:43 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-02-12 13:33 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 11:49 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 00:29 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2016-02-12 08:27 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-12 11:37 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2016-02-12 11:05 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 13:06 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2016-02-12 11:11 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 11:29 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 13:56 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2016-02-12 12:51 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 15:00 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2016-02-12 13:48 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-13 14:02 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Raymond Yohros <bat@birdband.net> - 2016-02-13 18:16 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 15:40 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 20:01 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-21 22:39 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 02:38 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 19:56 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 23:05 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-13 00:31 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> - 2016-02-13 11:56 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 02:32 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 02:27 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 22:50 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 03:24 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 02:24 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 02:18 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Fabian Russell <fb@zen.info> - 2016-02-12 10:54 +0000
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-12 07:25 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2016-02-13 11:47 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 04:54 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Mahipal <mahipal7638@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 08:30 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 15:31 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-15 00:27 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 07:21 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:51 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 11:54 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 16:19 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-14 07:26 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-14 15:50 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-17 06:45 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-17 09:12 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-18 06:38 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:23 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-20 11:42 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:28 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-20 11:45 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-20 13:49 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-16 10:34 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-18 06:05 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 06:20 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics benj <none@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:24 -0500
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 10:20 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-19 00:58 +0000
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-21 06:04 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-22 02:59 +0000
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-22 07:14 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 09:39 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-23 05:47 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2016-02-22 17:14 +0000
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-18 19:43 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics xxein1@att.net - 2016-02-21 23:34 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-22 07:32 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics Sam Wormley <swormley1@gmail.com> - 2016-02-22 09:41 -0600
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics kenseto <setoken@att.net> - 2016-02-23 05:48 -0800
Re: Gravitational waves and skeptics xxein1@att.net - 2016-02-22 15:12 -0800
Page 5 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 Next page →
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 12:02 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <na2cka$1hdq$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #553929 |
On 2/17/2016 11:24 AM, HVAC wrote: > > Ben, if you want to study ESP, go ahead. Nobody is going to stop you. No > dictator is going to say, "Ben, you are not permitted to study ESP > scientifically." > ------------- > > One wonders what caused BJ to turn away from science and embrace the world of superstition and the paranormal. > > It must have been quite traumatic. > > I wonder if perhaps he was molested as a child and somehow associated that anal raping with the sciences. > > BJ, you should talk with a mental health specialist. This anger is not good for you bro > I don't believe Ben really believes his research into ESP is being suppressed by dictators. He KNOWS he is free to work on anything he wants to work on. What rankles him is that he can't get EXTERNAL SUPPORT for that work. He can't be employed to research ESP. He can't get grant money to research ESP. He can't publish work on ESP in the journals he wants to publish in, for the visibility he wants. What I believe he is really upset about is that he is excluded from the benefits of COMMUNITY (such as salary, funded research, publication visibility) that more mainstream physicists enjoy. -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 12:31 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2afafd30-c6d6-4766-98ab-257776d4f0c6@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #553946 |
I don't believe Ben really believes his research into ESP is being suppressed by dictators. He KNOWS he is free to work on anything he wants to work on. What rankles him is that he can't get EXTERNAL SUPPORT for that work. He can't be employed to research ESP. He can't get grant money to research ESP. He can't publish work on ESP in the journals he wants to publish in, for the visibility he wants. What I believe he is really upset about is that he is excluded from the benefits of COMMUNITY (such as salary, funded research, publication visibility) that more mainstream physicists enjoy. ----------- But why do kooks, in this case BJ, never just hold *one* kooky belief? BJ has a host of paranormal beliefs. And I'm sure there are others that no one here knows about. If a kook only held one kooky belief, say ESP, I would think they could be easily dissuaded from this belief with logic and test results. That makes sense, right? But all kooks including BJ have so many odd and paranormal things they believe in, it begins to form a pattern. The non-critical thinking. The missteps in logic. The intentional closing of one's eyes to evidence. All this is far more than a difference of opinion. It is a dismissal of science. It is the embracing of superstition. It's hard for me to believe that BJ has ever been associated with the world of science. The way he thinks and the way he forms his opinions are the opposite of science
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 16:14 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <kp5xy.107084$yJ4.101266@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #554021 |
On 02/17/2016 03:31 PM, HVAC wrote:
>
> I don't believe Ben really believes his research into ESP is being
> suppressed by dictators. He KNOWS he is free to work on anything he
> wants to work on.
>
> What rankles him is that he can't get EXTERNAL SUPPORT for that work.
> He can't be employed to research ESP. He can't get grant money to
> research ESP. He can't publish work on ESP in the journals he wants
> to publish in, for the visibility he wants.
>
> What I believe he is really upset about is that he is excluded from
> the benefits of COMMUNITY (such as salary, funded research,
> publication visibility) that more mainstream physicists enjoy.
> -----------
>
> But why do kooks, in this case BJ, never just hold *one* kooky
> belief? BJ has a host of paranormal beliefs. And I'm sure there are
> others that no one here knows about. If a kook only held one kooky
> belief, say ESP, I would think they could be easily dissuaded from
> this belief with logic and test results. That makes sense, right? But
> all kooks including BJ have so many odd and paranormal things they
> believe in, it begins to form a pattern. The non-critical thinking.
> The missteps in logic. The intentional closing of one's eyes to
> evidence. All this is far more than a difference of opinion. It is a
> dismissal of science. It is the embracing of superstition. It's hard
> for me to believe that BJ has ever been associated with the world of
> science. The way he thinks and the way he forms his opinions are the
> opposite of science
>
Lies.
Everyone please note that I have given HVAC numerous references to
government work done in ESP costing millions, but he has steadfastly
refused to even acknowledge that it exists. And then like every Lib, he
accuses everyone else of refusing to look at evidence. Such is his
irrational fantasy world. (He has a short man Napoleon complex and
thinks he's "moderator" of this unmoderated group.
Interesting research though. He seems to be trying to determine if there
is anyone online ignorant enough to fall for his nonsense. I'm betting
there are. I think Odd is in love now.
===
I have given numerous references to the scientific work done on ESP,
Remote viewing and the like with many excellent books easily available
on Amazon.com. HVAC prefers not to read anything so as to remain
ignorant. I have referenced a number of Nobel prize-winning scientists
who have found significant ESP evidence. HVAC who thinks he is the
“moderator” of an unmoderated newsgroup thinks he's smarter than them. I
have referenced government projects costing millions verifying ESP
effects. In spite of FOIA proof, HVAC acts as if they do not exist. I
have listed PROOF BEYOND DOUBT of a government cover-up of UFO
information from the government's own documents. HVAC admits nothing.
So everybody, the ONLY thing that anonymous HVAC (whatever that is) has
going for "him" is the assertion that this or that person "believes" in
Ghosts, ESP, or the like. That's it. He has ONLY his "superpowers" to
tell you what another person has in their mind! No evidence, no records
of posts, nada. Of course such “superpowers” would be ESP, would they
not? Science is only about evidence. Religion and pseudoscience is about
"belief". HVAC has no science education and knows no science.
So the only question YOU must ask is are you interested in science or
strategic writer fantasy. Make your choice.
These paragraphs will be repeated every time HVAC accuses someone of
"believing" in something.
PS. My “superpowers” tell me HVAC is Gay and needs to come out.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 02:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <4ba631be-2dca-413e-876e-b7d3ec09e913@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #554021 |
On Wednesday, February 17, 2016 at 10:3 are others that no one here knows about. If a kook only held one kooky belief, say ESP, I would think they could be easily dissuaded from this belief with logic and test results. That makes sense, right? But all kooks including BJ have so many odd and paranormal things they believe in, it begins to form a pattern. The non-critical thinking. The missteps in logic. The intentional closing of one's eyes to evidence. All this is far more than a difference of opinion. It is a dismissal of science. It is the embracing of superstition. It's hard for me to believe that BJ has ever been associated with the world of science. The way he thinks and the way he forms his opinions are the opposite of science ======================== and who on earth nominated a pig anonymous dreck like you to be a patron speaker in behalf science ?? you can better represent Don Carleone !! Y.P ===============================
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-22 04:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <8de4bb16-bb97-45ef-b255-2cc1e33e4587@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #555434 |
Wally said "On Sun, 21 Feb 2016 12:57:13 -0800 (PST), john wrote: >It's called a blind alley. Please quote what you are replying to; and include an attribution. See above for examples of both. " I can't get my iPhone to do attributions, sorry. The whole "Standard Model" is a blind alley. Allowing "point particles" in the first place, full knowing that they cannot exist, gets you an automatic "F".
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 16:09 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <yk5xy.35075$JH2.25198@fx41.iad> |
| In reply to | #553946 |
On 02/17/2016 01:02 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 2/17/2016 11:24 AM, HVAC wrote:
>>
>> Ben, if you want to study ESP, go ahead. Nobody is going to stop you. No
>> dictator is going to say, "Ben, you are not permitted to study ESP
>> scientifically."
>> -------------
>>
>> One wonders what caused BJ to turn away from science and embrace the
>> world of superstition and the paranormal.
>>
>> It must have been quite traumatic.
>>
>> I wonder if perhaps he was molested as a child and somehow associated
>> that anal raping with the sciences.
>>
>> BJ, you should talk with a mental health specialist. This anger is not
>> good for you bro
>>
>
> I don't believe Ben really believes his research into ESP is being
> suppressed by dictators. He KNOWS he is free to work on anything he
> wants to work on.
So you are stooopid enough to actually believe the shit HVAC makes up?
What in hell is "my" research into ESP. I've only directed HVAC (and
you) to the myriad references on the excellent work at SRI (overlord
institute) on remote viewing. Amazon is full of it. (Heh! watch HVAC
take THAT one out of context!) It was millions of dollars with extreme
scientific protocols and with significant results. If you want to
pretent otherwise with HVAC then just keep refusing to read the
references by the people who were there. That's what HVAC does.
Ignorance is so much more "happy" than knowing.
> What rankles him is that he can't get EXTERNAL SUPPORT for that work. He
> can't be employed to research ESP. He can't get grant money to research
> ESP. He can't publish work on ESP in the journals he wants to publish
> in, for the visibility he wants.
So you and HVAC now share the same fantasy? Do you share the same
gummint office too? Wouldn't surprise me none. What makes you think I
want to do ANY ESP research? If I wanted to do that I'd be doing it. How
much money does it take to "remote view"?
> What I believe he is really upset about is that he is excluded from the
> benefits of COMMUNITY (such as salary, funded research, publication
> visibility) that more mainstream physicists enjoy.
What I'm really upset about is ignorant Libs like you, Warmley, and HVAC
pretending to know science and using the public respect for sciece as a
political football for your agendas. The blatant dishonesty and lies
(look at yours above) are the worst. There is no greater sin in science
that faked results and mouse painting.
If we are to have censorship, you three would be my first pick.
====
I have given numerous references to the scientific work done on ESP,
Remote viewing and the like with many excellent books easily available
on Amazon.com. HVAC prefers not to read anything so as to remain
ignorant. I have referenced a number of Nobel prize-winning scientists
who have found significant ESP evidence. HVAC who thinks he is the
“moderator” of an unmoderated newsgroup thinks he's smarter than them. I
have referenced government projects costing millions verifying ESP
effects. In spite of FOIA proof, HVAC acts as if they do not exist. I
have listed PROOF BEYOND DOUBT of a government cover-up of UFO
information from the government's own documents. HVAC admits nothing.
So everybody, the ONLY thing that anonymous HVAC (whatever that is) has
going for "him" is the assertion that this or that person "believes" in
Ghosts, ESP, or the like. That's it. He has ONLY his "superpowers" to
tell you what another person has in their mind! No evidence, no records
of posts, nada. Of course such “superpowers” would be ESP, would they
not? Science is only about evidence. Religion and pseudoscience is about
"belief". HVAC has no science education and knows no science.
So the only question YOU must ask is are you interested in science or
strategic writer fantasy. Make your choice.
These paragraphs will be repeated every time HVAC accuses someone of
"believing" in something.
PS. My “superpowers” tell me HVAC is Gay and needs to come out.
And I'm not angry (HVAC terms that "mad")
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 15:58 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <P95xy.107083$yJ4.70336@fx44.iad> |
| In reply to | #553929 |
On 02/17/2016 12:24 PM, HVAC wrote:
>
> Ben, if you want to study ESP, go ahead. Nobody is going to stop you. No
> dictator is going to say, "Ben, you are not permitted to study ESP
> scientifically."
> -------------
>
> One wonders what caused BJ to turn away from science and embrace the world of superstition and the paranormal.
>
> It must have been quite traumatic.
>
> I wonder if perhaps he was molested as a child and somehow associated that anal raping with the sciences.
>
> BJ, you should talk with a mental health specialist. This anger is not good for you bro
>
What imagination! I can see how you landed the job of strategic writer.
How's the great American Novel coming?
We are pros, H&V. Huff and puff all you want but we don't get angry. We
only get "effective". You do know your writing is totally irrational,
right? How many rejection notices you have so far for your screed? Does
that make you angry? How do you feel about that?
The beauty of the INTERNET is you never get a rejection notice. It all
gets "published". A few of us even respond (until we get bored with your
nonsense)
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 16:30 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <cE5xy.70479$xs7.24475@fx14.iad> |
| In reply to | #553869 |
On 02/17/2016 10:16 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 2/17/2016 9:04 AM, benj wrote:
>> What I hate are ignorant dishonest wordmeisters like yourself who know
>> know science, have no science education yet want to become
>> self-appointed dictators of everything done in science. That's why I
>> hate everything you represent, not only in science.
>
> Ben, if you want to study ESP, go ahead. Nobody is going to stop you. No
> dictator is going to say, "Ben, you are not permitted to study ESP
> scientifically."
>
> But if you then want to publish a paper on your work, then you do not
> have a native freedom to select your audience. You can't say, "It is my
> inborn right to have the readers of Physical Review A see the results of
> my work."
>
> If someone writes a novel and submits it to Simon & Schuster, and the
> editor there declines to publish the novel, that is not the act of a
> dictator.
Yes he is. Especially when the refusal covers all novels of a certain
topic or kind. Of course with a private company that is allowed and
expected. The idea is that when there is freedom different opinions will
sort of cancel out. It's called a free press.
But when governments get involved in manipulating choices, then we are
treading into areas that are political and I might mention illegal. I
know illegal doesn't bother HVAC. How about You?
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 16:30 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <na2sa1$sod$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #554041 |
On 2/17/2016 3:30 PM, benj wrote: > On 02/17/2016 10:16 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 2/17/2016 9:04 AM, benj wrote: >>> What I hate are ignorant dishonest wordmeisters like yourself who know >>> know science, have no science education yet want to become >>> self-appointed dictators of everything done in science. That's why I >>> hate everything you represent, not only in science. >> >> Ben, if you want to study ESP, go ahead. Nobody is going to stop you. No >> dictator is going to say, "Ben, you are not permitted to study ESP >> scientifically." >> >> But if you then want to publish a paper on your work, then you do not >> have a native freedom to select your audience. You can't say, "It is my >> inborn right to have the readers of Physical Review A see the results of >> my work." >> >> If someone writes a novel and submits it to Simon & Schuster, and the >> editor there declines to publish the novel, that is not the act of a >> dictator. > > Yes he is. Especially when the refusal covers all novels of a certain > topic or kind. COMPLETELY disagree, and I'm quite certain that most people disagree with you. > Of course with a private company that is allowed and > expected. Right! > The idea is that when there is freedom different opinions will > sort of cancel out. It's called a free press. Right! But of course in proportion to the interest. So a free press outlet that caters to publications about Amish life is going to be smaller than a free press outlet about rap music. > But when governments get involved in manipulating choices, then we are > treading into areas that are political and I might mention illegal. I > know illegal doesn't bother HVAC. How about You? Ben, according to you, governments are involved in EVERYTHING on one way or the other. The only way you would ever get away from that is if scientific research would be completely separated from any government involvement -- i.e. sponsored and controlled by the private sector. So now here are some interesting questions: - Will a private company invest in ESP research? If a private company decides not to be interested in sponsoring or publishing ESP research, is that censorship? (See your comment above, "Of course, with a private company that is allowed and expected.") Are you HAPPY with the balance afforded by free press, that might well produce very small private sector interest in ESP research? - Will a private company invest in general relativity research? If a private company decides not to be interested in sponsoring or publishing general relativity research, is that censorship? (See your comment above, "Of course, with a private company that is allowed and expected.") Are you HAPPY with the balance afforded by free press, that might well produce very small private sector interest in general relativity research? -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-17 19:28 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Je8xy.5470$KK.1504@fx19.iad> |
| In reply to | #554061 |
On 02/17/2016 05:30 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
> On 2/17/2016 3:30 PM, benj wrote:
>> On 02/17/2016 10:16 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>>> On 2/17/2016 9:04 AM, benj wrote:
>>>> What I hate are ignorant dishonest wordmeisters like yourself who know
>>>> know science, have no science education yet want to become
>>>> self-appointed dictators of everything done in science. That's why I
>>>> hate everything you represent, not only in science.
>>>
>>> Ben, if you want to study ESP, go ahead. Nobody is going to stop you. No
>>> dictator is going to say, "Ben, you are not permitted to study ESP
>>> scientifically."
>>>
>>> But if you then want to publish a paper on your work, then you do not
>>> have a native freedom to select your audience. You can't say, "It is my
>>> inborn right to have the readers of Physical Review A see the results of
>>> my work."
>>>
>>> If someone writes a novel and submits it to Simon & Schuster, and the
>>> editor there declines to publish the novel, that is not the act of a
>>> dictator.
>>
>> Yes he is. Especially when the refusal covers all novels of a certain
>> topic or kind.
>
> COMPLETELY disagree, and I'm quite certain that most people disagree
> with you.
So in YOUR science a nice democratic vote determines truth! Do you
understand how ignorant and irrational that is?
>> Of course with a private company that is allowed and
>> expected.
>
> Right!
>
>> The idea is that when there is freedom different opinions will
>> sort of cancel out. It's called a free press.
>
> Right! But of course in proportion to the interest. So a free press
> outlet that caters to publications about Amish life is going to be
> smaller than a free press outlet about rap music.
>
>> But when governments get involved in manipulating choices, then we are
>> treading into areas that are political and I might mention illegal. I
>> know illegal doesn't bother HVAC. How about You?
>
> Ben, according to you, governments are involved in EVERYTHING on one way
> or the other. The only way you would ever get away from that is if
> scientific research would be completely separated from any government
> involvement -- i.e. sponsored and controlled by the private sector.
Politicians -> power ; Bears -> honey!
> So now here are some interesting questions:
> - Will a private company invest in ESP research? If a private company
> decides not to be interested in sponsoring or publishing ESP research,
> is that censorship? (See your comment above, "Of course, with a private
> company that is allowed and expected.") Are you HAPPY with the balance
> afforded by free press, that might well produce very small private
> sector interest in ESP research?
I'm sure many private companies invest in ESP research. The issue is
Censorship. The issue is a controlled press and other media. The issue
is government control of any research that to them threatens their
perceived political power. This is not only illegal but destructive to
the country and to science. The press today is so far from "free" that
it is laughable for you to even suggest it. Pravda means 'truth' you know.
> - Will a private company invest in general relativity research? If a
> private company decides not to be interested in sponsoring or publishing
> general relativity research, is that censorship? (See your comment
> above, "Of course, with a private company that is allowed and
> expected.") Are you HAPPY with the balance afforded by free press, that
> might well produce very small private sector interest in general
> relativity research?
Will a private company invest in relativity research? What is the
potential payback. (Investment, boinker is putting in money to fund
something that will produce returns later. Putting a bunch of
imaginative eggheads to work with some gigantic pyramid building project
has little chance of any return.
The serious problem that you SHOULD investigate but are too unqualified
to do so, is the question of how much science the government already
knows is TRUE and for political reasons keeps secret. Even worse the
government uses tax money to fund cover-ups and media censorship to
insure that the secrets do not come out. Leaks of course do occur, but
as we all know here all you need to do is start screaming that the
leakers are KOOKS and INSANE and if they still won't shut up you tell
HVAC to kill them. Obviously you are FOR this sort of thing.
Since I'm insane, obviously nobody needs to listen to me. So why do you
keep responding to my insane trolls? HVAC is obsessed with me too. But I
think he's in love with me.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-18 07:39 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <na4hhh$1gv1$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #554084 |
On 2/17/2016 6:28 PM, benj wrote: > On 02/17/2016 05:30 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> On 2/17/2016 3:30 PM, benj wrote: >>> On 02/17/2016 10:16 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >>>> On 2/17/2016 9:04 AM, benj wrote: >>>>> What I hate are ignorant dishonest wordmeisters like yourself who know >>>>> know science, have no science education yet want to become >>>>> self-appointed dictators of everything done in science. That's why I >>>>> hate everything you represent, not only in science. >>>> >>>> Ben, if you want to study ESP, go ahead. Nobody is going to stop >>>> you. No >>>> dictator is going to say, "Ben, you are not permitted to study ESP >>>> scientifically." >>>> >>>> But if you then want to publish a paper on your work, then you do not >>>> have a native freedom to select your audience. You can't say, "It is my >>>> inborn right to have the readers of Physical Review A see the >>>> results of >>>> my work." >>>> >>>> If someone writes a novel and submits it to Simon & Schuster, and the >>>> editor there declines to publish the novel, that is not the act of a >>>> dictator. >>> >>> Yes he is. Especially when the refusal covers all novels of a certain >>> topic or kind. >> >> COMPLETELY disagree, and I'm quite certain that most people disagree >> with you. > > So in YOUR science a nice democratic vote determines truth! Do you > understand how ignorant and irrational that is? The meanings of "censorship" and "editorial control" and "moderation" are not a scientific manner. And yes, the meaning of words is a democratic thing. If you want to invent your own language because (in your mind) your definitions are scientifically true, then you go right ahead, Ben. See where it gets you. > >>> Of course with a private company that is allowed and >>> expected. >> >> Right! >> >>> The idea is that when there is freedom different opinions will >>> sort of cancel out. It's called a free press. >> >> Right! But of course in proportion to the interest. So a free press >> outlet that caters to publications about Amish life is going to be >> smaller than a free press outlet about rap music. >> >>> But when governments get involved in manipulating choices, then we are >>> treading into areas that are political and I might mention illegal. I >>> know illegal doesn't bother HVAC. How about You? >> >> Ben, according to you, governments are involved in EVERYTHING on one way >> or the other. The only way you would ever get away from that is if >> scientific research would be completely separated from any government >> involvement -- i.e. sponsored and controlled by the private sector. > > Politicians -> power ; Bears -> honey! > >> So now here are some interesting questions: >> - Will a private company invest in ESP research? If a private company >> decides not to be interested in sponsoring or publishing ESP research, >> is that censorship? (See your comment above, "Of course, with a private >> company that is allowed and expected.") Are you HAPPY with the balance >> afforded by free press, that might well produce very small private >> sector interest in ESP research? > > I'm sure many private companies invest in ESP research. Name three. > The issue is > Censorship. The issue is a controlled press and other media. As I thought. You are complaining about lack of access to audiences, starved for attention. You want to be able to publish on any subject in any publication to any audience, whether that publication is a private company or not. (Television networks, newspapers, book publishers, journal publishers are all private companies, Ben. You can check on that.) So even though you said earlier that private companies have the right to decline publication of submissions if they choose, because in the end the free market balances all that out, somehow now that isn't good enough for you. > The issue > is government control of any research that to them threatens their > perceived political power. No government agency is going to prevent anyone from doing ESP research. Even you. Others too. > This is not only illegal but destructive to > the country and to science. The press today is so far from "free" that > it is laughable for you to even suggest it. Pravda means 'truth' you know. > > >> - Will a private company invest in general relativity research? If a >> private company decides not to be interested in sponsoring or publishing >> general relativity research, is that censorship? (See your comment >> above, "Of course, with a private company that is allowed and >> expected.") Are you HAPPY with the balance afforded by free press, that >> might well produce very small private sector interest in general >> relativity research? > > Will a private company invest in relativity research? What is the > potential payback. (Investment, boinker is putting in money to fund > something that will produce returns later. Putting a bunch of > imaginative eggheads to work with some gigantic pyramid building project > has little chance of any return. > > The serious problem that you SHOULD investigate but are too unqualified > to do so, is the question of how much science the government already > knows is TRUE and for political reasons keeps secret. I'm sorry, but what? Which publishing houses have been squeezed by the government not to publish scientific research? Name the private companies that have been squashed. > Even worse the > government uses tax money to fund cover-ups and media censorship to > insure that the secrets do not come out. Leaks of course do occur, but > as we all know here all you need to do is start screaming that the > leakers are KOOKS and INSANE and if they still won't shut up you tell > HVAC to kill them. Obviously you are FOR this sort of thing. > > Since I'm insane, obviously nobody needs to listen to me. We've had this discussion. Being insane doesn't mean you'll get ignored. People gape at insane people. Your getting attention doesn't mean you're not insane. > So why do you > keep responding to my insane trolls? HVAC is obsessed with me too. But I > think he's in love with me. > > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Y.Porat" <y.y.porat@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 19:53 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <dac035ed-eea7-474f-ac2c-0b8a84154fbb@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #552389 |
On Friday, February 12, 2016 at 1:28:51 AM UTC+2, HVAC wrote: > [To Pentcho, John Sefton, Ben Jacoby and other like-minded luddites] > > A number of people on this newsgroup have claimed that the money spent > on the LHC was a monstrous waste of time because Higgs bosons would > never be found because the idea was stillborn to begin with (according > to them). > > A number of people on this newsgroup have claimed that the money spent > on the LIGO lab was a monstrous waste of time because gravitational > waves would never be found because the idea was stillborn to begin with > (according to them). > > Now, of course, the discovery of the Higgs boson is well-established, > and we now have a clear announcement that confirms observational evidence: > - that black holes not only exist, but that they merge as predicted by > the theory > - that binary pairs of black holes exist > - that gravitational waves exist, in exactly the manner predicted by the > theory > > So really, I want to see how skeptics splutter about this. How will they > respond? > --------------- > > Calling that kooky band of brothers 'stillborn luddites', is being unkind to stillborn luddites. > > They have literally nothing to validate their anti science, pro superstition paranoia, but now they are in full knee jerk mode and trying to cover their ass. > > Most people outgrow this need for attention. Some, obviously, do not ====================== imbecile gangster dreck IT IS NOT ENOUGH TO CLAIM THAT GRAVITY WAVES ARE MAKING GRAVITY!! YOU MUST TELL HOW DOES THEY DO IT ***??! y.PRAT
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 04:33 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n9jnbn$a6k$1@pcls7.std.com> |
| In reply to | #552389 |
HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> writes: >[To Pentcho, John Sefton, Ben Jacoby and other like-minded luddites] >A number of people on this newsgroup have claimed that the money spent >on the LHC was a monstrous waste of time because Higgs bosons would >never be found because the idea was stillborn to begin with (according >to them). >A number of people on this newsgroup have claimed that the money spent >on the LIGO lab was a monstrous waste of time because gravitational >waves would never be found because the idea was stillborn to begin with >(according to them). ... I don't know about the others but if he can overlook the involvement of things he hates (black holes, gravity) perhaps Sefton can get off on it since it really involves spinny things!
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 22:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <Z9ydnVyQ0ae41iDLnZ2dnUU7-R-dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #552385 |
On 11/02/2016 6:08 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > [To Pentcho, John Sefton, Ben Jacoby and other like-minded luddites] > > So really, I want to see how skeptics splutter about this. How will they > respond? > > Some possibilities: > "OK, so the Higgs boson and gravitational waves do exist after all, but > what good are they? Why did we spend all that money if they don't do > anything to improve the lives of ordinary people?" > > "Just because the observations confirm the predictions of the theory > doesn't prove that those theories are right. There could be a zillion > other, more ordinary explanations of those observations, and therefore > I'll never be convinced that quantum field theory and general relativity > are right -- never." > > "All the data are faked. It has to be the case. It's MUCH more likely > that the whole shebang is a conspiracy of faked results to protect the > reputations of everyone involved, than it is that quantum field theory > and general relativity are correct." > > "The results should be ignored and should mean nothing, because the > experiments shouldn't have been done in the first place, because there > was no believable theoretical motivation to do them. You are all foolish > to have ever looked for those experimental results, and you should > ignore all of them." > > "OK, I was wrong. The data do in fact exhibit support for quantum field > theory and general relativity. But this doesn't make me feel any better > about the theories, because they still seem nonsensical to me. And if > the theories were really right, then I should be able to make sense of > them." > > Which of these, oh skeptics of modern physics, is you? Good prediction of the upcoming excuses. Most of them will never believe in it, because they have their minds made up. Just like the Moon Landing conspiracists still won't believe it, despite all of the evidence. Yousuf Khan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-11 23:02 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <tPcvy.61523$v02.32468@fx40.iad> |
| In reply to | #552430 |
On 02/11/2016 10:02 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote:
> On 11/02/2016 6:08 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote:
>> [To Pentcho, John Sefton, Ben Jacoby and other like-minded luddites]
>>
>> So really, I want to see how skeptics splutter about this. How will they
>> respond?
>>
>> Some possibilities:
>> "OK, so the Higgs boson and gravitational waves do exist after all, but
>> what good are they? Why did we spend all that money if they don't do
>> anything to improve the lives of ordinary people?"
>>
>> "Just because the observations confirm the predictions of the theory
>> doesn't prove that those theories are right. There could be a zillion
>> other, more ordinary explanations of those observations, and therefore
>> I'll never be convinced that quantum field theory and general relativity
>> are right -- never."
>>
>> "All the data are faked. It has to be the case. It's MUCH more likely
>> that the whole shebang is a conspiracy of faked results to protect the
>> reputations of everyone involved, than it is that quantum field theory
>> and general relativity are correct."
>>
>> "The results should be ignored and should mean nothing, because the
>> experiments shouldn't have been done in the first place, because there
>> was no believable theoretical motivation to do them. You are all foolish
>> to have ever looked for those experimental results, and you should
>> ignore all of them."
>>
>> "OK, I was wrong. The data do in fact exhibit support for quantum field
>> theory and general relativity. But this doesn't make me feel any better
>> about the theories, because they still seem nonsensical to me. And if
>> the theories were really right, then I should be able to make sense of
>> them."
>>
>> Which of these, oh skeptics of modern physics, is you?
>
> Good prediction of the upcoming excuses. Most of them will never believe
> in it, because they have their minds made up. Just like the Moon Landing
> conspiracists still won't believe it, despite all of the evidence.
>
> Yousuf Khan
All WHAT evidence Khan? They found a couple tiny wrinkles supposedly due
to motion 1/1000 the diameter of a nucleus and you guys fall all over
yourselves with belief? How gullible are you?
Do you even know what a WAVE is? It obeys the wave equation. Even if
those tiny wrinkles WERE due to black holes where is the proof they are
waves? You know electric fields travel at the speed of light. Magnetic
fields travel at the speed of light. Are they waves?
The way everyone here has been trained to believe anything the official
media screams and disbelieve anything that contradicts official stories
is simply amazing. It's deevolution back to monkeys. There is FAR FAR
more solid evidence for ESP and Remote Viewing that all of the LIGO data
put together!
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Yousuf Khan <bbbl67@spammenot.yahoo.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 11:34 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <vNGdnT1mmbkBlCPLnZ2dnUU7-R2dnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #552443 |
On 11/02/2016 11:02 PM, benj wrote: > On 02/11/2016 10:02 PM, Yousuf Khan wrote: >> Good prediction of the upcoming excuses. Most of them will never believe >> in it, because they have their minds made up. Just like the Moon Landing >> conspiracists still won't believe it, despite all of the evidence. >> >> Yousuf Khan > > All WHAT evidence Khan? They found a couple tiny wrinkles supposedly due > to motion 1/1000 the diameter of a nucleus and you guys fall all over > yourselves with belief? How gullible are you? So, I guess you're going to go with a combination of these two excuses then? :D (1) "All the data are faked. It has to be the case. It's MUCH more likely that the whole shebang is a conspiracy of faked results to protect the reputations of everyone involved, than it is that quantum field theory and general relativity are correct." (2) "The results should be ignored and should mean nothing, because the experiments shouldn't have been done in the first place, because there was no believable theoretical motivation to do them. You are all foolish to have ever looked for those experimental results, and you should ignore all of them." Yousuf Khan
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <none@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 14:55 -0500 |
| Subject | Re: Ben Jacoby's hallucinations rule supreme, unreproachable. |
| Message-ID | <zMqvy.24091$SO7.300@fx13.iad> |
| In reply to | #552533 |
On 02/12/2016 01:54 PM, Jeff-Relf.Me wrote:
>
>
> Ben Jacoby's hallucinations rule supreme, unreproachable.
>
> He doesn't need logic, math or observations because
> he's smarter than _all_ physicists, including Einstein.
>
Einstein was smarter. He knew the easy way to science fame was to
plagiarize the work of others and publish it as your own.
Me. I"m not that smart.
--
___ ___ ___ ___
/\ \ /\ \ /\__\ /\ \
/::\ \ /::\ \ /::| | \:\ \
/:/\:\ \ /:/\:\ \ /:|:| | ___ /::\__\
/::\~\:\__\ /::\~\:\ \ /:/|:| |__ /\ /:/\/__/
/:/\:\ \:|__| /:/\:\ \:\__\ /:/ |:| /\__\ \:\/:/ /
\:\~\:\/:/ / \:\~\:\ \/__/ \/__|:|/:/ / \::/ /
\:\ \::/ / \:\ \:\__\ |:/:/ / \/__/
\:\/:/ / \:\ \/__/ |::/ /
\::/__/ \:\__\ /:/ /
~~ \/__/ \/__/
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 12:19 -0800 |
| Subject | Better art refines prior art. |
| Message-ID | <6cfc3abb-7007-4167-adda-43eade58e29f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #552592 |
Odd You STILL have no mechanism. Or model. "Swarming" gmafb
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 14:29 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Better art refines prior art. |
| Message-ID | <n9lfas$4uc$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #552600 |
On 2/12/2016 2:19 PM, john wrote: > Odd > You STILL have no mechanism. > Or model. Physicists do. I think you just have a disagreement with physicist over what "model" means. Model to you means something where you can see the inner workings moving, cogs and cams and paths of motion of all the pieces. That's not what a model means to a physicist. A model means a theory that allows you to calculate predictions of measurable quantities that can be compared to experiment. So when you say physicists don't have a model, what you're really saying is that they don't have YOUR kind of model. And physicists will say, "So?" > > "Swarming" gmafb > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-02-12 14:37 -0600 |
| Subject | Re: Better art refines prior art. |
| Message-ID | <n9lfpj$657$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #552602 |
On 2/12/2016 2:29 PM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > On 2/12/2016 2:19 PM, john wrote: >> Odd >> You STILL have no mechanism. >> Or model. > > Physicists do. I think you just have a disagreement with physicist over > what "model" means. Model to you means something where you can see the > inner workings moving, cogs and cams and paths of motion of all the > pieces. That's not what a model means to a physicist. A model means a > theory that allows you to calculate predictions of measurable quantities > that can be compared to experiment. > > So when you say physicists don't have a model, what you're really saying > is that they don't have YOUR kind of model. And physicists will say, "So?" As an illustration of the difference, general relativity is a model in the sense that physicists mean it. That is, with this model, you can calculate a) that black holes will form, b) that a binary system of black holes will orbit and inspiral and then coalesce, c) that there will be a very characteristic profile of gravitational waves, with frequency and amplitude increasing in a very particular way, observable when that inspiraling and coalescence happens, d) that you will be able to observe this signal at two different laboratories, at the same time except for propagation delay, with an amplitude related to the distance from the event, which in turn will be related to the observed frequency profile of the waves in a very specific way. Since the observable prediction in (c) and (d) match actual observations, this meets EVERY criterion of a model as a physicist uses that word. The fact that you mean "model" to mean something you can animate with AutoCAD is entirely irrelevant. > >> >> "Swarming" gmafb >> > > -- Odd Bodkin --- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 9 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web