williamchess
-
tom sarbeck posted an update in the group
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 7 months agoHow did astronomy become a religion?
A short answer is that during the USA/USSR Cold War, a few astronomers became addicted to taxpayer money. Their addiction repeated that of dam builders in the early 1900s, and of highway builders in the 1950s. A lesson is that starting taxpayer subsidies is difficult; stopping them is more difficult.
A longer…[Read more] -
-
tom sarbeck posted an update in the group
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 7 months ago[T]he singularity was the seed of the Big Bang.
So said a well-educated guy.The evidence for a singularity is as real as the evidence for a god.
-
private joined the group
Bookish atheists 8 years, 8 months ago -
Earle Sanborn posted an update in the group
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 8 months agoThe Large Hadron Collider mapped the whole human genome in 2001-2002.The upshot was there is no gene for LBGTQ- and most certainly not transgender. There is no such thing.
Just about everything we do is habitual- open doors, start cars, make coffee, go to the bathroom, etc. I’m 57 three kids, CPA, CFE a man who understands numbers, trends,…[Read more]-
“The Large Hadron Collider mapped the whole human genome in 2001-2002”.
Incorrect.
-
That’s all you have to say is “incorrect” Where is your proof it didn’t happen? Here’s proof it did
“This is the Way God Made Me”–A Scientific Examination of Homosexuality and the “Gay Gene”
by Dave Miller, Ph.D.
Brad Harrub, Ph.D.The trumpets were left at home and the parades were canceled. The press releases and campaign signs were…[Read more]
-
-
“The Large Hadron Collider mapped the whole human genome in 2001-2002” – This is so laughably incorrect I’m forced to be extra skeptical of every word I ever see you write. It’s like saying Christopher Columbus was the first elephant to fly around the world… it’s THAT wrong.
Also, why have you posted directly into the group rather than making a…[Read more]
-
-
-
Tom Sarbeck replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoWha…? You woke me to ask that?
-
PopeBeanie replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoTom Sarbeck wrote:
[…]
The EU model says electricity (lightning bolts far larger than any we know) made the craters–be they round or any other shape.
[…]But the video shows no such lightning. Why should its analogous cosmic process differ?
-
Reg the Fronkey Farmer replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoReg, this group is about science; it’s NOT about debate.
Let’s park this one Tom.
-
Tom Sarbeck replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoRreg, I did not say you should not debate.
I did say, but not clearly, that I will let the evidence prevail.
-
Reg the Fronkey Farmer replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoJust like me Tom you have rights but your ideas don’t. Telling me I should not debate an idea in a forum is suspicious. It is not name calling. I have read most of the pdf. I cannot see the value of the EU hypothesis.
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoWhen someone tells me that their idea, … is not open for debate I am immediately suspicious. It is not debate that they want to stifle, it is dissent.
…calls to not allow debate (in a Forum that demands evidence and reason in its title!) smacks of quackery rather than dissent.
-
Reg the Fronkey Farmer replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoPlease point out where I engaged in name calling or ad hominem.
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoReg, I will ignore the name calling in that post and briefly answer two points in it.
It is only through peer review and open debate that we arrive at a theory that has any scientific merit.
1) Currently there are no EUers among the peers.
2) peer review + open debate. Without evidence?Einstein’s ideas on Gravity and Electromagnetism are a…
-
Reg the Fronkey Farmer replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoScience without debate is not science. It is only through peer review and open debate that we arrive at a theory that has any scientific merit. When someone tells me that their idea, be it religious, scientific or political, is not open for debate I am immediately suspicious. It is not debate that they want to stifle, it is dissent.
This…[Read more]
-
Tom Sarbeck replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoReg, this group is about science; it’s NOT about debate.
-
Tom Sarbeck replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoNice video, Beanie. But, prepare yourself for the real shocker–and “shocker” isn’t a pun.
The EU model says electricity (lightning bolts far larger than any we know) made the craters–be they round or any other shape.
There is reason for the name “Electric Universe”.
-
PopeBeanie replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoA couple primary issues top my list about EU, but I have to admit, it took me a couple of fricken hours to discover evidence against the first one, which is their argument supposedly “debunking” the now, well-known physics of how circular craters are created from angled impacts.
I.e., when a projectile hits (say) a planet or moon at hypervelocity…[Read more]
-
Reg the Fronkey Farmer replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoMy debunking of some of the statements is not meant to be a proof of or evidence for the merits of BB theory. It is a critic of the claims made in the pdf you linked. It ignores the proofs for Relativity and makes other statements that are false. I will debunk more of them later and you can then tell me where I am wrong.
-
tom sarbeck replied to the topic EU? in the forum
Science — the kind that requires evidence and reason. 8 years, 9 months agoReg, in 436 words you debunked nothing. Bangers have produced evidence for nothing.
…[modern physicists] put Inflation before the Big Bang.
By putting Inflation before the Big Bang, they moved what contradicts the laws of physics, is untested and untestable, to where it can never be tested.
- Load More
