1828 replies to this topic

[psyche101]

nopeda, on 05 June 2012 - 07:43 PM, said:

It proves that I'm right about you .

If that is considering you cannot understand the most basic principals put forth, and you avoid them with your insults trying to look tough (BTW, you look about as tough as a junket sandwich) then yes I agree, you are right in that I am in another league altogether, one day you will realise just how far you have to go to catch up!!

LOL, that challenge was just too much for you wasn't it! Wimp.

[psyche101]

nopeda, on 05 June 2012 - 07:47 PM, said:

I've no reason to accept your guess as fact. You don't even know what you think you mean by absolute speed.

It is not a guess, and you cannot dissect it let alone prove it right or wrong until you understand it. This hand waving just exposes how little you understand.

nopeda, on 05 June 2012 - 07:47 PM, said:

I think they mostly waste time and money, though they're bound to learn some things from it and maybe eventually they will be contacted. But I also believe if there are xts that have been here they're not going to respond to SETI nor are any of the other local beings who are capable of interstellar travel. We might eventually get a reply from some other poor group that's still down on our level though...maybe...

What about if they make a movie about it, Maybe then you can plagiarise their efforts and claim it as your own epiphany?

You don't understand much do you, they listen, you don't have to respond to listen. You are trying so hard to catch up that you keep tripping over yourself, slow down and give yourself a chance to understand and see how ridiculous your musings are.

[psyche101]

nopeda, on 05 June 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

Again YOU prove yourself clueless. You already provided an example of the Earth's velocity relative to Sol, but you're probably still not even aware of that.

Earth and Sol are bound, you are forgetting Keplers laws. Good God man. Read something academic, for your own sake. You are going backwards by the post.

Do you have the fortitude to answer the question, or do you not even understand you own ramblings?

Remember I asked you if two rockets were travelling side by side @ 99% of c toward the same goal, what is their velocity of the rockets relative to each other?

You don't know your own nonsense do you? You are trying to back out by creating a diversion, it's not working. You are even worse of than I thought.

[psyche101]

nopeda, on 05 June 2012 - 08:01 PM, said:

It is YOU who want me to believe I have the wrong interpretation, but you don't know whether I do or not because you have no interpretation of it yourself. You want me to think you do, but you can't make it appear that you do.

You seem to be the one desperate to be believed? I do not care if you believe me, I do not care if you jump of a bridge tomorrow, I only care about the continued assault on logic and fact. I am actually having a chuckle at you trying to get Lion, Arbitran heck anyone onside, but they are all academically leagues beyond you, and all you are doing is trying to drag everyone down to your level. You need to sire above, not drag everyone down. I cannot fathom why you think you would be successful. You track record here is a continual crash and burn. Not a person agrees with your nonsense. None.

A very wise man once said that people are entitled to their own opinions, not their own facts.

[DONTEATUS]

Auh ! Yes opinions ! THats a Fact !

[DieChecker]

Arbitran, on 06 June 2012 - 06:12 AM, said:

DieChecker, I agree with you on each point. And I do apologize if you believe that there is clear evidence of the mainstream timeline; I suspect perhaps there is. I simply have not been made aware of it, since each Egyptologist I have so far spoken with has dodged that point. I will be very interested to hear you explain it, actually, if you are willing. As I have said, I am rather agnostic about the entire issue.

Let's take one basicly accepted piece of evidence. The age of the Great Pyramid. Numerous samples have been taken of the mortar that makes up perhaps 10% of the weight of the pyramid. And in the mortar they've found bits of charcoal left from the process used in making the mortar. The C14 dating process uses that mortar/charcoal along with the decay/half-life rate of C14 to establish how long the C14 in the mortar has been decaying. The ages generated have very closely matched the supposed years of the rule of the pharoahs that supposedly had the pyramids constructed. So you have hard science in the form of the half life of C14 being used with materials directly from the pyramid in various places, and the testing done by various organizations. So you eliminate, or reduce error, by taking samples from over the entire structure, and by processing the samples in many different tests by many different people. And the numbers have all generally matched. So the chance of error to the order of thousands of years does exist, but is considered to be very small. Perhaps down to less then hundredths of one percent.

If you really, really want, probably many of the other Egypt minded people on here can furnish the actual numbers for the decay rate of C14 and how it has been proven over and over. And how many samples have been taken and who tested them and perhaps even what the standard deviation might been and if there were any outlyers. But, I think the science behind the age of the Great Pyramid at Giza at least is very well established.

Edited by DieChecker, 07 June 2012 - 01:37 AM.

[Arbitran]

DieChecker, on 07 June 2012 - 01:34 AM, said:

Let's take one basicly accepted piece of evidence. The age of the Great Pyramid. Numerous samples have been taken of the mortar that makes up perhaps 10% of the weight of the pyramid. And in the mortar they've found bits of charcoal left from the process used in making the mortar. The C14 dating process uses that mortar/charcoal along with the decay/half-life rate of C14 to establish how long the C14 in the mortar has been decaying. The ages generated have very closely matched the supposed years of the rule of the pharoahs that supposedly had the pyramids constructed. So you have hard science in the form of the half life of C14 being used with materials directly from the pyramid in various places, and the testing done by various organizations. So you eliminate, or reduce error, by taking samples from over the entire structure, and by processing the samples in many different tests by many different people. And the numbers have all generally matched. So the chance of error to the order of thousands of years does exist, but is considered to be very small. Perhaps down to less then hundredths of one percent.

If you really, really want, probably many of the other Egypt minded people on here can furnish the actual numbers for the decay rate of C14 and how it has been proven over and over. And how many samples have been taken and who tested them and perhaps even what the standard deviation might been and if there were any outlyers. But, I think the science behind the age of the Great Pyramid at Giza at least is very well established.

Very good. That is indeed very interesting evidence. I still don't necessarily accept that, for example, Khufu was responsible for the Great Pyramid. However, yes, the general dating of the Pyramid's construction seems to be rather clear.

Edited by Arbitran, 07 June 2012 - 07:35 AM.

[nopeda]

DieChecker, on 07 June 2012 - 01:34 AM, said:

I think the science behind the age of the Great Pyramid at Giza at least is very well established.

What do you think it was built for?

[nopeda]

psyche101, on 07 June 2012 - 01:05 AM, said:

all you are doing is trying to drag everyone down to your level.

I'll tell you what I'm doing. I came here hoping to learn more about the possibility that xts have had influence on Earth because something about the forum name caused me to believe that possibility might actually be discussed and considered in a realistic way in this forum.

That should seem hilarious to you too, but I didn't know before making the attempt. Now I know that there are people like yourself who are not only mentally incapable of considering the possibilities that xts have been here in realistic ways, but are maniacally opposed to seeing other people consider those possibilities as well. Of course I noticed that within the first few posts, and since then I've just been responding to people who are trying to bully me out of here. Since I've learned that you're a clueless bullsh*tter wanabee I've tried to encourage you to bullsh*t me if you are able by trying to come up with some bullsh*t about what you want people to think absolute speed is based on, etc. You can't even make an attempt to pretend that you have some clue, and all you are able to do is make personal insults against me and tell me how much everyone else hates me.

It's all you can do, and I enjoy seeing you in that desperate position. You think so very much of yourself, yet can't even make it appear that you have some idea what you're trying to talk about when asked or challenged to do so. It's especially satisfying to see a person like yourself in your pathetic position because I believe it's you specifically as well as other people like yourself who make it so this is NOT a place where people can openly disscuss the possibilities that beings from other star systems have been to this one. People like yourself, to me, are like a virus. All you care about is trying to become more popular with most people by picking on and bullying people who consider more possibilities than most people do and seem like an easy target to pick on.

[nopeda]

psyche101, on 07 June 2012 - 01:00 AM, said:

Remember I asked you if two rockets were travelling side by side @ 99% of c

Relative to what, do you have any idea?

psyche101, on 07 June 2012 - 01:00 AM, said:

toward the same goal, what is their velocity of the rockets relative to each other?

It depends on what their velocities are relative to. If you're trying to create a situation in which they're at rest relative to each other then they're not drifting appart and have no velocity relative to each other provided the 99% velocity you referred to is relative to the same thing for both vehicles. If they are drifting appart then they have the velocity of whatever the drift is relative to each other. If they're drifting toward each other then they'll have that velocity until they bang into each other or stop moving toward each other before they collide.
Now here's one for you. What is the velocity of one of your vehicles relative to another that is moving toward it at a velocity of 99% of c relative to what your vehicle's velocity is relative to?

[nopeda]

psyche101, on 07 June 2012 - 12:51 AM, said:

one day you will realise just how far you have to go to catch up!!

I keep trying to get you to try to explain what you think your supposed absolute speed is relative to. From what I recall you've said it's relative to every object in the universe as well as every point in space, which if that were true everything would be at rest. So that can't be true regardless of how you think it somehow could be even though you can't explain how. So for me to be able to begin to "catch up" with you, YOU and your cat buddy should try to figure out what you want people to think:

1. absolute speed is relative to
2. why whatever that is, is supposedly the correct thing by which to base all other velocities in the universe
3. the velocity of the Earth relative to whatever it is
4. the velocity of the sun relative to whatever it is

Unless you can answer those questions even you won't ever have any real clue what you think you're trying to talk about, much less should you expect me to "catch up" to it.

Edited by nopeda, 07 June 2012 - 05:43 PM.

[nopeda]

DieChecker, on 06 June 2012 - 05:25 AM, said:

The pyrmamids are tombs, just as the mastabas that came before and concurrently with them were. Giza was a necropolis.

If so then how can the History Channel get away with lying to people that no mummies have ever been found in any pyramids, and that the Great Pyramid shows no sign of being any sort of tomb? Unless you're the one who's lying and the History Channel is just presenting information.

[nopeda]

Sensible Logic, on 06 June 2012 - 03:20 AM, said:

people who know what they are talking about [edited for spelling]

You talked about absolute speed, but you can't say what such a thing would supposedly be relative to. If it's a stationary point in space you can't say how we could find a stationary point in space by which to judge the absolute speed of everything else.

[nopeda]

Oniomancer, on 05 June 2012 - 08:38 PM, said:

Quote

nopeda, on 05 June 2012 - 02:51 PM, said:
What does it matter how "heavy" something is if it keeps its distance from strong sources of gravity? Also, the guy never did explain what he's referring to going the speed of light relative TO.

Good God man. You're

Apparently you have no idea about either aspect.

[badeskov]

nopeda, on 07 June 2012 - 05:42 PM, said:

If so then how can the History Channel get away with lying to people that no mummies have ever been found in any pyramids, and that the Great Pyramid shows no sign of being any sort of tomb? Unless you're the one who's lying and the History Channel is just presenting information.

If you actually would pay attention then the History channel, either before or after (sometimes both) have a big, fat disclaimer essentially saying that they have no responsibility for the program shown and that it is up to the viewer herself/himself to judge the veracity of the information presented therein.

In other words, the History Channel couldn't care less because they put burden on you (where it has always been, at least for those that exercise some critical thinking for themselves) and they just want to keep the rates high so they can sell time for commercials.

Cheers,
Badeskov