Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #639618
| Message-ID | <596278DC.4A8D@ix.netcom.com> (permalink) |
|---|---|
| Date | 2017-07-09 11:41 -0700 |
| From | The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> |
| Newsgroups | sci.physics, sci.physics.relativity, rec.arts.sf.written, alt.astronomy |
| Subject | Re: The Alvarez hypothesis |
| References | <59615B14.5490@ix.netcom.com> <E5WdnQIyt_bAevzEnZ2dnUU78c_NnZ2d@supernews.com> |
Cross-posted to 4 groups.
Mike Dworetsky wrote: > > The Starmaker wrote: > > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alvarez_hypothesis > > > > > > hypothesis: > > a proposition made as a basis for reasoning, without any assumption of > > its truth. > > But there was evidence for the idea, hard physical evidence, which is what > prompted it in the first place. "hard physical evidence"???? Then why are they still asking the question "What happent to the dinosaurs?" > > > > > > > > > a couple of spanish kooks make a joke...and you guys fall for it. > > Spanish? The surname may be Hispanic, but the Alvarezes were both > natural-born Americans. Are Nobel prize winners in Physics "kooks"? "nobel prize winners"??? You mean winner, not winners?? Let's look closely at this noble prize winner... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luis_Walter_Alvarez "Alvarez devised a set of experiments to observe K-electron capture in radioactive nuclei, predicted by the beta decay theory but *never* observed." When you devise "a set of experiments " ..."to observe" but it is "never observed", what do you call that? KOOK! That's what Kooks do. They even get famouse for doing it.... Then..."With his son, geologist Walter Alvarez, he developed the Alvarez hypothesis which proposes that the extinction event that wiped out the dinosaurs was the result of an asteroid impact." You gotta give the kid something. His son is a Total Failure! the Alvarez hypothesis is a fuckin joke! and the yokes on Yous. > > > > > > > If I was a dino 66 million years agao... > > > > and with all the advance technology I had at my disposal.. > > > > how much time do I got? > > About 5 seconds..4..3..2..1..0...bye bye! > > -- > Mike Dworetsky > > (Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply) Dworetsky??? What, you're Polish???? I know some Polish jokes...which one you wanna hear? They are have one common theme, Polish are stupid. Why is that? Did you hear about the polock that locked his keys in the car? It took him 2 hours to get his family out.
Back to sci.physics | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-08 15:22 -0700
The Alvarez hypothesis "David (Kronos Prime) Fuller" <fuller.david@hotmail.com> - 2017-07-08 16:43 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-08 20:49 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-09 09:20 +0100
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-09 11:41 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-09 12:46 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-10 09:15 +0100
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-10 20:16 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 14:35 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-11 14:57 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-12 08:25 +0100
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 06:49 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-10 09:08 +0100
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-10 20:39 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis pnalsing@gmail.com - 2017-07-10 20:45 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 06:19 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 06:59 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 14:47 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 06:31 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-12 07:00 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 07:02 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 07:06 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 08:54 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-11 14:48 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-11 17:24 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-11 23:46 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-12 08:32 +0100
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-12 12:11 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis "Mike Dworetsky" <platinum198@pants.btinternet.com> - 2017-07-13 08:35 +0100
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2017-07-13 09:06 -0700
Re: The Alvarez hypothesis Edward Prochak <edprochak@gmail.com> - 2017-07-10 06:42 -0700
csiph-web