tools of objective investigation

"Don't post anything racist/misogynistic/pornographic, loli images, or any animated GIFs and you should be fine, haha!" The Raytownian

Moderator: xome

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

tools of objective investigation

Post by jliat » Mon Jan 29, 2018 9:22 am


User avatar
fire
Posts: 2470
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by fire » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:04 am

awesome fail, congrats

to try and relate infinity to a quantity is ignorant

infinity is a process which happens, end of story

you have mistaken Nothing with Charge

again, a common mistake, especially among those that cant, or wont, develop intelligence
broadcasting from the post-internet wasteland

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by jliat » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:15 am

fire wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:04 am
awesome fail, congrats

to try and relate infinity to a quantity is ignorant
So now you are saying that much of modern mathematics is wrong.
fire wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:04 am
infinity is a process which happens, end of story
Yes for you - you assert something - so it must be true. And your mind is closed - so you end the story.
fire wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:04 am
you have mistaken Nothing with Charge
I have not - you've now called mathematics mistaken. I can follow the diagonal argument, you seem either unable or unwilling.
fire wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:04 am
again, a common mistake, especially among those that cant, or wont, develop intelligence
Well you are the fool for posting in that case. Is there nowhere else to take your intelligence?

User avatar
fire
Posts: 2470
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by fire » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:30 am

jliat wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:15 am
So now you are saying that much of modern mathematics is wrong.
no, some is misunderstood, but more often it is used to bamboozle through modeling
jliat wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:15 am
fire wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:04 am
infinity is a process which happens, end of story
Yes for you - you assert something - so it must be true. And your mind is closed - so you end the story.
you call it an assertion because you are familiar with being bullied into thinking things, and then you grew up and started doing the asserting, and then the unanswerable questions just make you more agitated

my succinct summation stands without emotion or force
jliat wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:15 am
fire wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:04 am
you have mistaken Nothing with Charge
I have not - you've now called mathematics mistaken. I can follow the diagonal argument, you seem either unable or unwilling.
wow, did you take those meds?
jliat wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:15 am
fire wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:04 am
again, a common mistake, especially among those that cant, or wont, develop intelligence
Well you are the fool for posting in that case. Is there nowhere else to take your intelligence?
ha! i knew this was coming, i was starting to wonder if you ran my words through an egghead and found something you dont like

see here you dumb cunt, you dont have to reply to my posts

i regularly take my words to academia, they are mostly just as stupid as you, a real shame
broadcasting from the post-internet wasteland

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by jliat » Mon Jan 29, 2018 10:57 am

OK


Then give us your idea of how the sun works, and its size, distance etc.. The details...


I'm guessing you will duck this....

User avatar
fire
Posts: 2470
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by fire » Mon Jan 29, 2018 11:23 am



broadcasting from the post-internet wasteland

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by jliat » Mon Jan 29, 2018 11:29 am

"again, a common mistake, especially among those that cant, or wont, develop intelligence"

I asked for YOUR knowledge of how the sun works not some youtube videos of how others think it does..

And I don't see any denial of the thermonuclear process...
Last edited by jliat on Mon Jan 29, 2018 11:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
fire
Posts: 2470
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by fire » Mon Jan 29, 2018 11:33 am

i have already given you my thoughts on the matter, you are too ignorant to understand, i offer you the tools to begin learning
broadcasting from the post-internet wasteland

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by jliat » Mon Jan 29, 2018 11:47 am

fire wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 11:33 am
i have already given you my thoughts on the matter, you are too ignorant to understand, i offer you the tools to begin learning
No you have not given any alternative to the thermonuclear idea.. and merely posted two videos one about the surface of the sun.

So as far as you have demonstrated you've no actual intelligence of how the sun works other than some videos which do not show an alternative process.

And now you are refusing to answer... we cannot detect your theory ... as it is then nothing...

User avatar
fire
Posts: 2470
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by fire » Mon Jan 29, 2018 12:15 pm

the sun is electrically powered, the surface is a plasma discharge, what else would you like to know?
broadcasting from the post-internet wasteland

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by jliat » Tue Jan 30, 2018 12:52 am

fire wrote:
Mon Jan 29, 2018 12:15 pm
the sun is electrically powered, the surface is a plasma discharge, what else would you like to know?
edit: Dont bother - checking...

"All of these difficulties from plain physics, coupled with the fact that the alleged incoming electrons certainly appear to be not there, leave one to wonder why this is such a hot idea. Indeed, in my opinion this is the number one argument against the "electric sun" hypothesis. Electrons are not magic, and if there are interstellar electrons coming towards the sun, they cannot escape the attention of a small fleet of spacecraft which have measured electrons & protons in the solar system for the past few decades. The electrons are quite simply not there. And we know that they are not there, and that knowledge destroys the foundation of the electric sun hypothesis. "

User avatar
fire
Posts: 2470
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by fire » Tue Jan 30, 2018 6:20 am

typical bias confirmation, not surprised

tim wrote that many years ago with a limited understanding of the subject

if you were truly interested in the subject, you would know there is no dissent in the scientific literature, just the minds of individual scientists

tell you whut, i will give you a pass on this one because its so pathetic, but now you need to come up with a better debunking

seriously, i mean it, i search for debunkers all the time, get all the angles

so far not one has come with anything relevant, mostly just modeling that doesnt work or the precious "thousands of scientists over the years cant be wrong" tripe

so lets have it, a concise take down of the electric universe
broadcasting from the post-internet wasteland

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by jliat » Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:11 am

fire wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 6:20 am
typical bias confirmation, not surprised

tim wrote that many years ago with a limited understanding of the subject

if you were truly interested in the subject, you would know there is no dissent in the scientific literature, just the minds of individual scientists

tell you whut, i will give you a pass on this one because its so pathetic, but now you need to come up with a better debunking

seriously, i mean it, i search for debunkers all the time, get all the angles

so far not one has come with anything relevant, mostly just modeling that doesnt work or the precious "thousands of scientists over the years cant be wrong" tripe

so lets have it, a concise take down of the electric universe
Well that is difficult but not impossible as there are different varities. You for instance think there are no negatives and no neutrios whilst others in the EU community think differently.

But here are a few. EU states the Sun is electrical, therefore should not produce neutrions, but it does, and matches the thermnuclear model.

EU states the solar wind is poisitively charged protons, but its not, it contains electrons as well.

EU states the electrons from outside the sun power it, yet they have never been detected... and as above electrons are seen coming from the sun..

EU thinks relativity is wrong, but its had numerous experiments supporting it, transist of mercury, atomic clocks to the need to use it in Sat Nav. An EU based sat nav cant be buit. It wouldnt work.

Recent study of comets has shown EU 'theory' wrong..

I could keep going but it gets boring. EU theory has made no prediction that is verfiable, none. The standard model has.

But significantly EU "theorists" see mainstream science as a conspiricy of experts... and wants simple answers... no maths... though it accepts Newtons but not Einstein's ...

But my beef is not with EU theory, its an alternative, just as the ptolemic model is, or astrology, and certain philosophies ... my beef is rather than propose theory and testing, they rubbish others... if EU theory is right - make a better sat nav using it. Build a power station using the "electrons" flooding towards the sun.... and stop being so abusive.

If you say you dont care about others why bother them?

User avatar
fire
Posts: 2470
Joined: Tue Aug 17, 2010 2:15 pm
Location: noritual unformation

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by fire » Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:58 am

jliat wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:11 am
Well that is difficult but not impossible as there are different varities. You for instance think there are no negatives and no neutrios whilst others in the EU community think differently.
there are no real objects with negative values, any so called negative is a naming convention based on a partial understanding which leads to polarization

neutrinos(and neutrons) are measured by inference, if there is a there there it is unknown, that is the honest truth
jliat wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:11 am
But here are a few. EU states the Sun is electrical, therefore should not produce neutrions, but it does, and matches the thermnuclear model.
this lie was started by koberlein many years ago, it was never true and the widely accepted truth is that neutrinos(whatever) are coming from the sun, eu people have proposed a value for the phenomena based on a plasma discharge in the lab and have close approximation of observed events, on the other hand, the nuke bomb theory requires much more neutrinos to be observed, the fix is to go on a wild goose chase to prove that neutrinos come in flavors and can miraculously change signature to avoid detection, to date there is no confirmation of neutrino flavor, despite cleverly crafted lies designed to obtain research funding
jliat wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:11 am
EU states the solar wind is poisitively charged protons, but its not, it contains electrons as well.

EU states the electrons from outside the sun power it, yet they have never been detected... and as above electrons are seen coming from the sun..
“This is a puzzling case because we’re seeing energetic electrons where we don’t think they should be, and no model fits them,” said David Sibeck, co-author and THEMIS project scientist at NASA Goddard. “There is a gap in our knowledge, something basic is missing.”
https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/20 ... electrons/
jliat wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:11 am
EU thinks relativity is wrong, but its had numerous experiments supporting it, transist of mercury, atomic clocks to the need to use it in Sat Nav. An EU based sat nav cant be buit. It wouldnt work.
is joke, right? many people have a problem with GR, thats why its mostly just fixes and patches, statements like this expose your ignorance
jliat wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:11 am
Recent study of comets has shown EU 'theory' wrong..
no they dont, in fact recent studies actually reinforce EU theory, you are terribly out of touch, the only issue of debate right now is why oumuamua isnt flourescing
jliat wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:11 am
my beef is rather than propose theory and testing, they rubbish others...
you are quite simply full of shit, your precious eggheads have nothing but disproven models but you staunchly defend them against the onslaught of empirical knowledge

broadcasting from the post-internet wasteland

User avatar
jliat
Posts: 2672
Joined: Tue Nov 20, 2012 1:34 am
Contact:

Re: tools of objective investigation

Post by jliat » Tue Jan 30, 2018 9:06 am

fire wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:58 am

there are no real objects with negative values, any so called negative is a naming convention based on a partial understanding which leads to polarization

neutrinos(and neutrons) are measured by inference, if there is a there there it is unknown, that is the honest truth
But your fellow EU bods need negative electrons to power the sun.

And what do you mean by inference? A volt meter has a moving needle or digital readout from which we infer a voltage. But you've contradicted yourself - all measurement is electrical you claim so contradicting you above "neutrinos(and neutrons) are measured by inference"
And plenty is known about both neutrinos and neutrons. Wall Thornhill KNOWS they cause the false data in LIGO.
fire wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:58 am
this lie was started by koberlein many years ago, it was never true and the widely accepted truth is that neutrinos(whatever) are coming from the sun, eu people have proposed a value for the phenomena based on a plasma discharge in the lab and have close approximation of observed events, on the other hand, the nuke bomb theory requires much more neutrinos to be observed, the fix is to go on a wild goose chase to prove that neutrinos come in flavors and can miraculously change signature to avoid detection, to date there is no confirmation of neutrino flavor, despite cleverly crafted lies designed to obtain research funding
"The antineutrino discovered by Cowan and Reines is the antiparticle of the electron neutrino.
In 1962, Leon M. Lederman, Melvin Schwartz and Jack Steinberger showed that more than one type of neutrino exists by first detecting interactions of the muon neutrino (already hypothesised with the name neutretto),[23] which earned them the 1988 Nobel Prize in Physics.
When the third type of lepton, the tau, was discovered in 1975 at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center, it too was expected to have an associated neutrino (the tau neutrino). First evidence for this third neutrino type came from the observation of missing energy and momentum in tau decays analogous to the beta decay leading to the discovery of the electron neutrino. The first detection of tau neutrino interactions was announced in summer of 2000 by the DONUT collaboration at Fermilab; its existence had already been inferred by both theoretical consistency and experimental data from the Large Electron–Positron Collider.[24]"
fire wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:58 am
“This is a puzzling case because we’re seeing energetic electrons where we don’t think they should be, and no model fits them,” said David Sibeck, co-author and THEMIS project scientist at NASA Goddard. “There is a gap in our knowledge, something basic is missing.”
Standard practice to discredit science as it is never dogmatic. And given the EU people rant on about scientific conspiracy the openness of publishing such goes to show how they are wrong!
fire wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:58 am

is joke, right? many people have a problem with GR, thats why its mostly just fixes and patches, statements like this expose your ignorance
But your ignorance is shown by not knowing that both Special Relativity and General need to be used.. "Special Relativity predicts that we should see their clocks ticking more slowly.. Special Relativity predicts that the on-board atomic clocks on the satellites should fall behind clocks on the ground by about 7 microseconds per day...A calculation using General Relativity predicts that the clocks in each GPS satellite should get ahead of ground-based clocks by 45 microseconds per day. " and so when both are used GPS works. When they are not it doesn't. And yet again of course there are problems in science, unlike pseudo science - dogmatically correct.

"Recent study of comets has shown EU 'theory' wrong."
fire wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:58 am

no they dont, in fact recent studies actually reinforce EU theory, you are terribly out of touch, the only issue of debate right now is why oumuamua isnt flourescing
Its not a comet!
fire wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:58 am
you are quite simply full of shit,
Make up your mind you called me a cunt above!
fire wrote:
Tue Jan 30, 2018 7:58 am
your precious eggheads have nothing but disproven models but you staunchly defend them against the onslaught of empirical knowledge
No i dont defend them - and where does this empirical knowledge come from - from NOT the EU guys but from the eggheads in NASA MIT etc.... On the one hand we have open science and on the other dogma. On the one hand a science which can use technology like GPS and successfully fly spacecraft through a space which would according to EU destroy them.. and on the other proponents who call disenters cunts and full of shit.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests