proof for the skeptics

[John Cuthber]

Really? I know people who are not psychic (lots of them actually) and who are picses

 

Back up your claims dude.

 

All I see is poor grammar/spelling and an appeal to authority mixed with repetition

 

Its getting boring

That's hardly fair.

I also see a person who has his hat on the wrong way round and can use the word "dude", without apparent irony,to address me.

[hypervalent_iodine]

!

Moderator Note

guitaoist, start backing up your claims or you will find yourself suspended.

Also, a reminder to everyone that this is not the place for making personal remarks against other members.

[mooeypoo]

Its getting boring

You mean "it's".

 

 

 

 

 

And I agree.

 

 

[StringJunky]

You mean "it's".

 

Skitt's Law Alert: It should be "It's"...capital 'I' because it starts the sentence.

Edited March 14, 2012 by StringJunky

[zapatos]

did you know that newton HIMSELF was an astrologer. he believed

He also stuck needles in his eyes and stared at the sun to see what would happen. Maybe I'll try that tomorrow.

[doG]

You mean "it's".

Skitt's Law Alert: It should be "It's"...capital 'I' because it starts the sentence.

Is it a sentence though? There's no closing punctuation on that line or the one above, or the first one for that matter.

 

He also stuck needles in his eyes and stared at the sun to see what would happen. Maybe I'll try that tomorrow.

Don't give him any ideas zap...

Edited March 14, 2012 by doG

[mooeypoo]

Skitt's Law Alert: It should be "It's"...capital 'I' because it starts the sentence.

 

It was at the end of the sentence when I quoted it.

 

Ha.

(See, that was capitalized.)

[StringJunky]

It was at the end of the sentence when I quoted it.

 

Ha.

(See, that was capitalized.)

 

I'll let you off.

[Tres Juicy]

You mean "it's".

 

 

And I agree.

 

 

 

 

Stupid Skitts law...

 

Can I blame the broken apostrophe key on my keyboard..?

[Ophiolite]

Please dont end this thread I havent laughed so much since my granny caught her tit in the mangle.

Do you have a video of that please?

 

 

 

@guitaoist:

 

This must be very frustrating for you. You have done some reading on the subject of astrology and found it both intriguing and convincing. You see a strong match between your character and the proposed character of Pisceans. You've taken the time and trouble to convey your ideas and your enthusiasm and your conviction to a wider audience through your videos. You are pretty damn certain that the reaility of astrology has been established. You want other to understand this.

 

You join the science forum and seek to share this knowledge with others. What happens? Waves of negativity assault you. You are criticised for your writing style, for failing to write down what you've clearly said in the videos, for not providing evidence. They go on and on about evidence. And one guy even complains about being called dude. You must be pissed off by this time.

 

Well, dude, here's the deal. There is something called the scientific method and it has been incredibly effective at allowing us to gain understanding of the universe. The regular members of this forum, for the most part, have great confidence in the scientific method because they have seen what it can do. A cornerstone of that method is evidence. That's why they keep asking for it.

 

Now laypeople - people without scientific training - no matter how smart they are can have a tough time coming to terms with what evidence is. Evidence is not anecdotes. Evidence is not selective information. Evidence is not reasoned argument. Evidence is data that can be replicated that shows a statistically significant confirmation of or support of a hypothesis. You haven't provided this and until you do you will be assailled, rightly so, by doubters. And if you think they are being harsh you would not imagine how they would rip you limb from limb if they thought you did have scientific training, for your approach then would be wholly unacceptble. you are getting away with it, barely, because you are presently ignorant of the scientific method. You can change that.

Edited March 14, 2012 by Ophiolite

[ewmon]

The proof of the proof.

 

A small yet outspoken portion of society seems to think that the proof of science simply come from saying it. I blame our school science textbooks that often read along the lines of: "In 1905, Einstein discovered the theory of relativity and derived the equation E=mc² for which he received the Nobel Prize." In fact, it took many years of discovering before his work came to fruition in 1905, and it took many years of studying, experimentation and discussion before his work was validated, with the prize finally granted in 1921.

 

Schools think they can teach science without teaching the history of science (that is, a couple of case histories of discoveries and inventions). If people only knew the intensity of scientific research that has transpired and continues to transpire, we'd see almost no controversy about the moon landing hoax, Tesla's hushed up futuristic technology, 200 mpg carburetors, stolen alien technology, etc.

 

In 1978, science historian James Burke presented the documentary television series Connections that did a pretty good job of showing just how much time and research goes into discoveries.

[doG]

Schools think they can teach science without teaching the history of science (that is, a couple of case histories of discoveries and inventions).

Even worse, we do not focus on teaching skepticism. People should learn early on to question everything, not to just simply believe something because some seemingly authoritative figure said it. Well taught children would question the existence of Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy very early on.

[Phi for All]

In 1978, science historian James Burke presented the documentary television series Connections that did a pretty good job of showing just how much time and research goes into discoveries.

I loved ALL of Burke's shows, but my favorite was The Day he Universe Changed. This was where he would take a major concept in science and trace it all the way back to the small discoveries that started it. Brilliant.

[John Cuthber]

Do you have a video of that please?

 

 

 

@guitaoist:

 

This must be very frustrating for you. You have done some reading on the subject of astrology and found it both intriguing and convincing. You see a strong match between your character and the proposed character of Pisceans. You've taken the time and trouble to convey your ideas and your enthusiasm and your conviction to a wider audience through your videos. You are pretty damn certain that the reaility of astrology has been established. You want other to understand this.

 

You join the science forum and seek to share this knowledge with others. What happens? Waves of negativity assault you. You are criticised for your writing style, for failing to write down what you've clearly said in the videos, for not providing evidence. They go on and on about evidence. And one guy even complains about being called dude. You must be pissed off by this time.

 

Well, dude, here's the deal. There is something called the scientific method and it has been incredibly effective at allowing us to gain understanding of the universe. The regular members of this forum, for the most part, have great confidence in the scientific method because they have seen what it can do. A cornerstone of that method is evidence. That's why they keep asking for it.

 

Now laypeople - people without scientific training - no matter how smart they are can have a tough time coming to terms with what evidence is. Evidence is not anecdotes. Evidence is not selective information. Evidence is not reasoned argument. Evidence is data that can be replicated that shows a statistically significant confirmation of or support of a hypothesis. You haven't provided this and until you do you will be assailled, rightly so, by doubters. And if you think they are being harsh you would not imagine how they would rip you limb from limb if they thought you did have scientific training, for your approach then would be wholly unacceptble. you are getting away with it, barely, because you are presently ignorant of the scientific method. You can change that.

 

 

I'd have a lot more sympathy with him if his response to being told that he needs to find proper scientific evidence had been to ask where he could find that out, rather than posting more videos.

His total failure to actually provide real information in accord with the rules he signed up to was, quite simply, rude.

If others (such as me) responded in kind who can blame us?

[Ophiolite]

John, I am not necessarily blaming you, but rather asking you to consider the following.

 

First, and the lesser of my two points, how many people actually read the rules, digest them and make a serious effort to follow them? And look at the subset of young, internet-savvy, txt spk teens: how many of them would do that. It wasn't rude. It was careless and casual.

 

secondly, it is apparent from the style of "guitaoist" postings that he has had little or no education in science and none in critical thinking. That is unlikely to be his fault. We have two ways, then, of dealing with his behaviour. We can demand evidence and when that doesn't work, we can start to ridicule him. Result: he goes away and we congratulate ourselves on getting rid of an idiot. Alternatively we can explain in as much detail as necessary where he is going wrong and guide him towards a correct approach. Result: he may take our advice on board and we now have a convert to rational, logical thinking.

 

It's easier - and often more emotionally satisfying - to opt for the first approach, but ultimately it's not very smart.

[John Cuthber]

That's a fine point but, when we told him that he was mistaken and needed to study more, not once but many times, he chose not to even when we explained why and how.

 

That is his fault.

Edited March 15, 2012 by John Cuthber

[Ophiolite]

Yes, I concede that. I also feel that horrible liberal gulf opening up beneath my feet: "You can't blame him, it was his environment."

 

I'm not convinced that we did all that we reasonably could in trying to guide and direct him towards a more practical and useful approach. There was a hint of a smug, patronising tone within some of the posts. Please don't take that as a direct criticism. It was only a hint and I've seen the same thing in posts of my own on other threads; that's probably why I felt I saw it here.

[dimreepr]

Do you have a video of that please?

 

 

How I wish, it would have gone viral and I'd be famous...

 

 

First, and the lesser of my two points, how many people actually read the rules, digest them and make a serious effort to follow them? And look at the subset of young, internet-savvy, txt spk teens: how many of them would do that. It wasn't rude. It was careless and casual.

 

secondly, it is apparent from the style of "guitaoist" postings that he has had little or no education in science and none in critical thinking. That is unlikely to be his fault. We have two ways, then, of dealing with his behaviour. We can demand evidence and when that doesn't work, we can start to ridicule him. Result: he goes away and we congratulate ourselves on getting rid of an idiot. Alternatively we can explain in as much detail as necessary where he is going wrong and guide him towards a correct approach. Result: he may take our advice on board and we now have a convert to rational, logical thinking.

 

It's easier - and often more emotionally satisfying - to opt for the first approach, but ultimately

 

A very good point and I feel suitably chastised, however, it does seem that troll season is here and as such it's a little too easy to sometimes assume were the ones under attack.

Edited March 16, 2012 by dimreepr

[Steven Hawkins]

I think you confuse the term "others to understand" with those in your preferred circles.. Here is my point of view on this subject:

 

 

1/1508996212705581.8 = 6.62692186753095e-16<--- This is the planet Uranus.

 

Astrology is a practice that stems even before science got involved with whats termed " hidden variables" I am sure you all have heard this phrase before. They involve the planet Uranus in its precession with earth. Uranus and Earth have been entangled in their precision phases, much like particle entanglement, in where the 11th house in astrology stands for freedom and revolution among other things such as ^10 we see all over the "pre-made constants." They are merly loops and copies of scalers.

 

 

This simple formula "proves" the precession of earth since the year 1998 as per astrological pheonemena.

 

1/ 1.91 = 0.5 - pi = -2.62*1.91 = 5.0042 = 1/ -5.0042=1/-5.0042 = -0.[1998]3214100156

 

This is a 1/2 particle spin as well.

 

[h bar] 1.05509554140127e-33*0.19983214100156 = 2.10842000999416e-34

 

 

The twelve start constellation are base systems of 12 within the patterns and forms of the house system used in astrology so that:

 

299.792458/1508996214156381.5 = [1.986]70119373097e-13

 

1998-1986 = 12 as in 12 clock rather yet, MC as in the sun's apex squared, does this ring a bell???? E = earth= MC squared earth is a graviton???

 

This is also a [matrice A ^10 constant] and matrix B ^12 translation of time "sqaured"]

 

 

So that:

 

 

h 6.626e-33*299.792458 = [1.986]424826708e-30 all over again from 11 back to those bases of 10.

 

 

As you can see your self their are "physical" units revealing where time reversals are located at, you just need to know where they are, and these are those hidden vairbales spoken about in "all the functions" used in today's science community. Astrology and numerology, should not be condoned, it should be understood and respected as their suggested form and style.

 

 

Your doppler effect and lorentz transformations are mere illusion of a 30 , 60 right triangle, becuase after a 45 degree turn, time becomes fractions, there goes why classical physics, and quantum theory relate together "only" within their strucutres of math and formulas.

 

360/2 = 180

 

180/2 = 90

 

90/2 = 45<--- 45 degree angle

 

45/2 = 22.5

 

22.5/2 = 11.25

 

11.25/2 = 5.625

 

5.625/2 = 2.8125

 

2.8125/2 = 1.40625

 

1.40625/2 = 0.703125

 

 

Your plus 1 "deal" is wrong because 1 needs to be defined within the systems that measures this as in the following exmple of a mere squared number:

 

4 squared = 16 / 2 = 8 The house of Scorpio, Re-Birth And Transformation, "KARMA"

 

1 2 3 4

5 6 7 8

9 10 11 12

13 14 15 16

 

1+16 = 17

4+ 13= 17

2+15=17

3+14=17

6+11=17

7+10= 17

 

 

The reason for space time is becuase this 1 represents precession as the quantum of action in relation to time which techinicall involes the 12 start constallations within our modern day and age of time 12 hours , 12 star constellation or what have you. You should not fuss and or make fun of people over the idea of ancient wisdome versus round off computer errors, praise those whom like to share their thoughts, and further encourage them, we can teach you more than you know, But I think I will pass, and just prove science wrong for now on and have fun.....

 

 

 

So why not call someone curious versus ignorant???

Do you have a video of that please?

 

 

 

@guitaoist:

 

This must be very frustrating for you. You have done some reading on the subject of astrology and found it both intriguing and convincing. You see a strong match between your character and the proposed character of Pisceans. You've taken the time and trouble to convey your ideas and your enthusiasm and your conviction to a wider audience through your videos. You are pretty damn certain that the reaility of astrology has been established. You want other to understand this.

 

You join the science forum and seek to share this knowledge with others. What happens? Waves of negativity assault you. You are criticised for your writing style, for failing to write down what you've clearly said in the videos, for not providing evidence. They go on and on about evidence. And one guy even complains about being called dude. You must be pissed off by this time.

 

Well, dude, here's the deal. There is something called the scientific method and it has been incredibly effective at allowing us to gain understanding of the universe. The regular members of this forum, for the most part, have great confidence in the scientific method because they have seen what it can do. A cornerstone of that method is evidence. That's why they keep asking for it.

 

Now laypeople - people without scientific training - no matter how smart they are can have a tough time coming to terms with what evidence is. Evidence is not anecdotes. Evidence is not selective information. Evidence is not reasoned argument. Evidence is data that can be replicated that shows a statistically significant confirmation of or support of a hypothesis. You haven't provided this and until you do you will be assailled, rightly so, by doubters. And if you think they are being harsh you would not imagine how they would rip you limb from limb if they thought you did have scientific training, for your approach then would be wholly unacceptble. you are getting away with it, barely, because you are presently ignorant of the scientific method. You can change that.

Edited March 26, 2012 by Steven Hawkins

[mooeypoo]

!

Moderator Note

fake Steven Hawkings, if you continue to hijack threads, you will be banned.
Your thread was closed, and another exists. Do NOT flood other threads with your pet theory.

That's your last warning.

[D H]

!

Moderator Note

fake Steven Hawkings, if you continue to hijack threads ...

Is his post really off topic? Astrology, numerology, what's the difference? Neither one is science.

[mooeypoo]

Is his post really off topic? Astrology, numerology, what's the difference? Neither one is science.

 

Point taken, but we might as well be organized.

[Moontanman]

 

 

1/1508996212705581.8 = 6.62692186753095e-16<--- This is the planet Uranus.

 

 

 

 

Does this mean there is a ring around Uranus?

[Ophiolite]

@Sreven Hawkins - next time you quote a chunk of my writing in one of your posts please have the courtesy to acknowledge the source.

[Steven Hawkins]

are you accusing me of theft??????? what "chunk" are you referring to??? From what I know everyone here tells me that what I am writing is "junk", so I guess your "chunk" applies to this as well???

 

and, show me your evidence of "chunk" and be specific... I think I already know your tactics here...

 

 

@Sreven Hawkins - next time you quote a chunk of my writing in one of your posts please have the courtesy to acknowledge the source.

 

I think it is very obvious you have bias towards numerology and astrology when all they are, are mere concepts of math... I have already asked to be banned, since "tatle tellers here", feel threatened at that fact that their knowledge is under jeopardy..... This is an astrology topic as for the OP, you have no right to accuse me of falseness nor other types of assumptions in a public forum, everyone here has photos, of other famous scientist even you....... I know you feel threatened by my knowledge, so then whey not "talk" numbers instead of "mouth"!?

 

.. If you have been "looking at my other post" why then not comment there???

 

BECAUSE YOU ARE AFRAID TO DO SO, You embarrass yourself, there are others looking at this thread to, looking at all your behaviors, grow up , talk like professionals, act like professionals, and stop insulting members here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Also this thread is a good example of insults, it is filled with insults from senior members braking their own rules, which is why I am here to prove the math and science for the OP....

 

 

Seems to me you are unable, to take the challenge and prove your science is better than mine.. Which of coarse is understandable, you don't want to look bad in the public domain. And you can't anyway, its all about hidden variables..... Sorry but this is known all over the science world. Its not anyone's fault, but if you "resist change" then you are a problem in the evolution of science, its not going to stay the same for long, sorry but that is fact like it or not. Its not my rules, its "nature's rules."

 

!

Moderator Note

fake Steven Hawkings, if you continue to hijack threads, you will be banned.

Your thread was closed, and another exists. Do NOT flood other threads with your pet theory.

 

That's your last warning.

 

 

 

 

I think it is very obvious you have bias towards numerology and astrology when all they are, are mere concepts of math... I have already asked to be banned, since "tatle tellers here", feel threatened at that fact that their knowledge is under jeopardy..... This is an astrology topic as for the OP, you have no right to accuse me of falseness nor other types of assumptions in a public forum, everyone here has photos, of other famous scientist even you....... I know you feel threatened by my knowledge, so then whey not "talk" numbers instead of "mouth"!?

 

.. If you have been "looking at my other post" why then not comment there???

 

BECAUSE YOU ARE AFRAID TO DO SO, You embarrass yourself, there are others looking at this thread to, looking at all your behaviors, grow up , talk like professionals, act like professionals, and stop insulting members here!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

Also this thread is a good example of insults, it is filled with insults from senior members braking their own rules, which is why I am here to prove the math and science for the OP....

 

 

Seems to me you are unable, to take the challenge and prove your science is better than mine.. Which of coarse is understandable, you don't want to look bad in the public domain. And you can't anyway, its all about hidden variables..... Sorry but this is known all over the science world. Its not anyone's fault, but if you "resist change" then you are a problem in the evolution of science, its not going to stay the same for long, sorry but that is fact like it or not. Its not my rules, its "nature's rules."

 

!

Moderator Note

fake Steven Hawkings, if you continue to hijack threads, you will be banned.

Your thread was closed, and another exists. Do NOT flood other threads with your pet theory.

 

That's your last warning.

 

 

 

Edited March 26, 2012 by Steven Hawkins