160 replies to this topic

[Total Science]

Mattshark on Jun 14 2009, 06:36 PM, said:

your the one who called Darwin and Newton mythology when both theory are based on observable facts).

What observable facts tell you that the Newtonian God, divine intervention, and miracles cause planets to orbit?

The moon is not attracted to the Earth by gravitation.  

The moon falls away from the Earth at 3.8 centimeters per year.

Edited by Total Science, 14 June 2009 - 10:41 PM.

[Mattshark]

Total Science on Jun 14 2009, 11:40 PM, said:

What observable facts tell you that the Newtonian God, divine intervention, and miracles cause planets to orbit?

The moon is not attracted to the Earth by gravitation.  

The moon falls away from the Earth at 3.8 centimeters per year.

Doesn't mean Newtonian physics don't exist. That is how science works. It develops from the original idea.

You are attracted to the Earth by gravity (well maybe not you).

[Total Science]

Mattshark on Jun 14 2009, 06:46 PM, said:

Doesn't mean Newtonian physics don't exist.

Newtonian physics is the dominant force in Meinong's Jungle.

Quote

You are attracted to the Earth by gravity (well maybe not you).

Good thing the moon isn't because it would be catastrophic.

"The implications of employing the present rate of tidal energy dissipation on a geological timescale are catastrophic. Around 1500 Ma the Moon would have been close to the Earth, with the consequence that the much larger tidal forces would have disrupted the Moon or caused the total melting of Earth's mantle and of the moon." -- George E. Williams, geologist/geophysicist, 2000

"Currently, the moon is moving away from the Earth at such a great rate, that if you extrapolate back in time — the moon would have been so close to the Earth 1.4 billion years ago that it would have been torn apart by tidal forces (Slichter, 1963)." — Dennis D. McCarthy, geoscientist, 2003

[OldTimeRadio]

Mattshark on Jun 14 2009, 04:07 PM, said:

That is ridiculous, they have no insight into the field.

Do you want the insight of a car mechanic if you needed brain surgery? Cos that is about the same level you have here.

     Matt, some of the happiest and most rewarding hours of my life were spent sitting squarely between Dr. Isaac Asimov and one of his dearest friends (mine also), a DRY CLEANER.

    They'd spend long hours discussing the latest theories and findings in genetics.

    The fact that you (apparently) would not or could not have benefitted from this exchange of information does not mean that I did not.

    P. S. Need I add that Dr. A. was there by CHOICE?

[Copasetic]

Total Science on Jun 14 2009, 07:10 PM, said:

Newtonian physics is the dominant force in Meinong's Jungle.


Good thing the moon isn't because it would be catastrophic.

"The implications of employing the present rate of tidal energy dissipation on a geological timescale are catastrophic. Around 1500 Ma the Moon would have been close to the Earth, with the consequence that the much larger tidal forces would have disrupted the Moon or caused the total melting of Earth's mantle and of the moon." -- George E. Williams, geologist/geophysicist, 2000

"Currently, the moon is moving away from the Earth at such a great rate, that if you extrapolate back in time — the moon would have been so close to the Earth 1.4 billion years ago that it would have been torn apart by tidal forces (Slichter, 1963)." — Dennis D. McCarthy, geoscientist, 2003

You are aware that the recession of the moon from earth's orbit is due the transfer of rotational momentum from the earth to the moon, correct? You are also aware that this recession is not a linear relationship, as suggested by the quotes.......


Interestingly enough, I see you are spamming this nonsense all over the internet. You should maybe have taken the adivce of members on the DM blog. Tell me does this look familiar;

Quote

Let me explain to you the Ten Commandments of the Scientific Method:

1. Thou shalt base thy conclusion on evidence.

2. Thou shalt measure objectively, not guess subjectively.

3. Thou shalt back up thy statements with evidence — claiming something is a fact does not make it so.

4. Thou shalt use large sample numbers, not large opinion numbers.

5. Thy tests shalt be blind.

6. Thy tests shalt have controls.

7. Thou shalt cite thy sources of information for full scrutiny.

8. Thy sources of information must be reliable, verifiable, and backed up by evidence.

9. Opinion(s) is NOT fact.

10. Thou shalt not bear false witness — don’t be a J.A.M.F.

[Clobhair-cean]

Total Science on Jun 15 2009, 12:22 AM, said:

No census of the natives was taken.  This is a racist myth.

No, this is a historical fact. Read the aztec accounts of the fall of Tenochtitlan, or oral Native American history. Or just look at the fact that the first European voyagers always talk about lots and lots of people and the ones coming later find no-one. Or the documented smallpox epidemics of the 18th century.

Total Science on Jun 15 2009, 12:22 AM, said:

We're talking about the 19th dynasty and you have no evidence to support your claim.

Apart from this well-sourced paper I have nothing.

Total Science on Jun 15 2009, 12:22 AM, said:

Irrelevant to the topic.

How do you think the museums kept the bugs from chewing up all those precious mummies? They used insecticides on them, which were made of tobacco.

[DieChecker]

Copasetic on Jun 14 2009, 09:22 PM, said:

You are aware that the recession of the moon from earth's orbit is due the transfer of rotational momentum from the earth to the moon, correct? You are also aware that this recession is not a linear relationship, as suggested by the quotes.......

100%  

A simple check into the physics of the Moon will derail fact-cherry pickers. If the Moon was not affected by the Earth's gravity well, then wouldn't it have flown off into deep space soon after it formed?  

[The_Spartan]

Please dont derail the topic.

The topic is not about Newtonian Model or whatever but about the possibility of Egyptian presence in the Americas.

Stick to it.

Sure, if this guy is going on picking on Newton like this, it must have been a fairly heavy apple that fell on his head (not newton's head, but the user's head)

[jaylemurph]

The Spartan on Jun 16 2009, 12:58 AM, said:

Please dont derail the topic.

The topic is not about Newtonian Model or whatever but about the possibility of Egyptian presence in the Americas.

Stick to it.

Sure, if this guy is going on picking on Newton like this, it must have been a fairly heavy apple that fell on his head (not newton's head, but the user's head)

I agree with you, but be fair. If we stayed on topic, it would become even more transparent that he a) doesn't really know what he's talking about and b) can't defend his position, at least not amongst rational people.

--Jaylemurph

edit: grammar

Edited by jaylemurph, 16 June 2009 - 04:25 PM.

[OldTimeRadio]

Clobhair-cean on Jun 15 2009, 07:39 AM, said:

How do you think the museums kept the bugs from chewing up all those precious mummies? They used insecticides on them, which were made of tobacco.

     I'm not disagreeing with you, but doesn't the fact that 3500-year-old embalmed human corpses have surely lost much of their nutritive value, even to insects, also enter into it?

[kmt_sesh]

OldTimeRadio on Jun 16 2009, 09:04 PM, said:

I'm not disagreeing with you, but doesn't the fact that 3500-year-old embalmed human corpses have surely lost much of their nutritive value, even to insects, also enter into it?

I work with the Egyptian exhibit at the Field Museum in Chicago. I can't say what precise chemicals the museum conservators use with their work, but they do occasionally enter the display cases to spray the contents--including the mummies. I'm also no entomologist, but in my time at the museum I've learned there is a wide variety of insects that would be only too happy to munch on mummies. To them the desiccated flesh is nutritional.

One of the worst things for museums is insect infestation. Nothing will damage delicate, organic relics like insects. And they work fast, the little buggers. It's a constant battle to make sure the insects stay out. Compounding the problem with mummies is moisture. That's why display cases with mummies in modern museums are carefully climate controlled. Should a mummy get moist, such as from an excess of humidity, it will quickly attract molds and fungi. At that point it can be extremely difficult to save the mummy. And to top it off, a moist mummy would be even tastier to insects.

I know many insecticides contain nicotine but didn't know they have been used on mummies. Like I said, I am not knowledgeable on the tactics of conservators, but I tried to look into it more on the Net. I couldn't find anything. The next time I come across one of these folks at the museum I'll have to ask about it. Doesn't happen very often, though--they usually come into the exhibits well after hours, of course.

[Jayhawklady]

They found the substances within the mummies, not just on the skin, etc.  They also found hashish, a Middle East chemical drug.  There are people who have found the Egyptian hieroglyphs on rocks in the Canyon.

[TheSearcher]

Jayhawklady, on 10 February 2010 - 04:03 AM, said:

They found the substances within the mummies, not just on the skin, etc.  They also found hashish, a Middle East chemical drug.  There are people who have found the Egyptian hieroglyphs on rocks in the Canyon.

And you have sources for these claims, that we can check? Because I don't know who "they" are and sorry I'm not just going to take your word for it either.

Have these alleged "Egyptian hieroglyphs" been identified by an egyptologist? And also source?

[kmt_sesh]

TheSearcher, on 10 February 2010 - 05:54 AM, said:

And you have sources for these claims, that we can check? Because I don't know who "they" are and sorry I'm not just going to take your word for it either.

Have these alleged "Egyptian hieroglyphs" been identified by an egyptologist? And also source?

What, Searcher, you doubt that Egyptians carved hieroglyphs in the Grand Canyon? My goodness, where's your "open mind" (i.e., wind tunnel)?

Man, I thought this inane thread had died a well-deserved, natural death. Necroposting has reared its ugly head again.

[TheSearcher]

kmt_sesh, on 10 February 2010 - 05:42 PM, said:

What, Searcher, you doubt that Egyptians carved hieroglyphs in the Grand Canyon? My goodness, where's your "open mind" (i.e., wind tunnel)?

Man, I thought this inane thread had died a well-deserved, natural death. Necroposting has reared its ugly head again.

I have closed my open mind with a sophisticated bollox detector, works better this way and avoid draft in wide open spaces.

I've noticed the necroposting a few times again already, someone is getting bored with the current discussions