100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Crossing the Event Horizon- Grand Unified Field Theory | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
Cool pics...
What does it prove? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cool pics... What does it prove? well, if you'd watch his presentation you'd know. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I would know what?
That here is one more person who is putting their own personal twist upon actuality and claiming to have solved the problems faced by science??? The guy thinks that infinite divisibility exists... He is a kook! Anyone who believes him does not know any better. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Atlantis75
on
Sat 02/07/09 04:53 PM
|
|
I would know what? That here is one more person who is putting their own personal twist upon actuality and claiming to have solved the problems faced by science??? The guy thinks that infinite divisibility exists... He is a kook! Anyone who believes him does not know any better. He never claimed he solved the problems of science, he is just putting out a theory. and if infinite divisibility doesn't exist then where is the proof of not having infinite divisibility? Somebody show us the smallest thing ever that cannot be broken down to smaller pieces. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sat 02/07/09 05:10 PM
|
|
Everything that we think cannot be done by humans, but have witnessed the results of must have some alien source? If we "prove" it cannot be done by any known human technology or humans, then there are three other choices. 1. Advanced unknown secret human technology. (Massive conspiracy here.) 2. Advanced technology from intelligent non-humans (or aliens or other dimensional beings.) 3. God did it.  But, if you want to insist that humans are responsible for all the crop circles, then there are a lot of questions that need to be answered. Lets just assume you are right. 1. Can pranksters or vandals do hundreds of these every year all over the globe? 2. How large of an organization do you estimate is involved in making these crop circles and who funds them? 3. What kind of mathematical knowledge is required to create these designs and how are they transferred to a field of wheat? 4. Is this activity illegal? (Vandalism, trespassing) 5. What is the motivation for spending your time creating crop circle art? Do you get recognition for it? Is someone paying you for it? If so, who? And why? And if they are, they are paying for illegal activity. 6. Why would anyone want to do it in the pouring rain in the middle of the night and how did they do it without leaving their foot prints in the mud? 7. How long does it take to create a massive complicated design and how do the creators coordinate their moves? Do they communicate with cell phones in their ears? If you can't answer these questions, then you have to look for another theory. Okay here is another idea. Some multi-billionaire with his personal satellites in space has a laser beam machine or vortex creating advanced technology unknown to normal scientists and he programs it from his mansion with his computer or cell phone to send a vortex or beam to a specific field and the design is created with ease. With this idea, you have to ask who is this multi-billionaire and why is he doing this? How many billionaire's on earth have this kind of technolgy? Who owns most of the satellites in space and what do they do? This can be investigated easily. Any other ideas Creative? Or would you rather make more jokes about a flying spaghetti monster? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sat 02/07/09 05:07 PM
|
|
I would know what? That here is one more person who is putting their own personal twist upon actuality and claiming to have solved the problems faced by science??? The guy thinks that infinite divisibility exists... He is a kook! Anyone who believes him does not know any better. He never claimed he solved the problems of science, he is just putting out a theory. and if infinite divisibility doesn't exist then where is the proof of not having infinite divisibility? Somebody show us the smallest thing ever that cannot be broken down to smaller pieces. Exactly. That is why the Higgs Boson will never be found. It is black hole and it is infinitely divisible. Renowned British astrophysicist Professor Stephen Hawking this week bet $US100 that the LHC experiment would not find the Higgs boson. "I think it will be much more exciting if we don't find the Higgs. That will show something is wrong, and we need to think again," Professor Hawking said. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Infinite divisibility has only one solution. ZERO
His presentation begins with a quote that I already posted, dude. True conclusions cannot come from false premises. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sat 02/07/09 05:18 PM
|
|
Infinite divisibility has only one solution. ZERO His presentation begins with a quote that I already posted, dude. True conclusions cannot come from false premises. Zero does not actually exist. That is the flaw in our current mathematics that Abra is talking about. Our current math is flawed. There is no zero. Nothing does not exist. Infinity does.  "I think it will be much more exciting if we don't find the Higgs. That will show something is wrong, and we need to think again," Professor Hawking said. something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, something is wrong, and we need to think again, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
If we "prove" it cannot be done by any known human technology or humans, then there are three other choices. If a frog had wings his ass would not get sore... If I were black, I would not be white... Prove that humans cannot do it first, then we can effectively talk about what must follow. I already told you how it was done... prove what I said to be wrong. You can't!!! That is my point! We all know that the creature I described does not exist, but you cannot prove that the explanation I gave is not true. C'mon JB, you do this type of arguing all the time on here... Prove me wrong... Why not just attribute it to an eight legged centipede type creature? Keep in mind that this creature, whose eyes sit atop of twelve posts like a snail's does, is twelve and a half miles long and three feet across and has the ability to hide it's very existence from humans. Not only that, it can also read human's minds in such a way that it can use the thoughts of us to manufacture everything we think that we witness without us ever knowing the difference. Prove that to be wrong. Until then, recognize how weak the argument for alien crop circles is. It has no substance. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Infinite divisibility has only one solution. ZERO His presentation begins with a quote that I already posted, dude. True conclusions cannot come from false premises. If you divide something and always have left over, the equation is never zero. It's only for us it is zero, that "approcaches" zero but never becomes zero. They made this whole idea of throwing away the left over, "because it's small". In some cases - depending on the size and relevance- rounding up or down works, in a given frame and radius, like us humans in our universe, where large is an elephant and small means a pinhead, but in real science you just can't throw away anything, otherwise you're fooling yourself. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your missing the point.
"Real" science does not consider infinity nor infinite terms to be acceptable solutions, let alone premises... for anything. This includes infinite divisibility. The guy has a premise that involves infinite division, which does not exist. The guy is a kook! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your missing the point. "Real" science does not consider infinity nor infinite terms to be acceptable solutions, let alone premises... for anything. This includes infinite divisibility. The guy has a premise that involves infinite division, which does not exist. The guy is a kook! Real science? Now you sound like those born again Christians that claim that most so-called Christians aren't "real Christians. If "real science" had all the answers, they would have discovered the true nature of the universe and they wouldn't be spending billions of dollars looking for a particle that IS NOT THERE. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Prove that humans cannot do it first, then we can effectively talk about what must follow. That has already been proven. All you can prove is that a human can create a cheap knockoff of a crop circle. Upon examination of the two kinds of crop circles, you will find they are not the same. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your missing the point. "Real" science does not consider infinity nor infinite terms to be acceptable solutions, let alone premises... for anything. This includes infinite divisibility. The guy has a premise that involves infinite division, which does not exist. The guy is a kook! So you're saying "real" science does not accept the fact, that the universe is infinite? That's kinda harsh. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Polly want an answer?
I was repeating the other guy's word usage there, brightest of the cockroach murderers. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So you're saying "real" science does not accept the fact, that the universe is infinite? That's kinda harsh. Ummm... yeah, that is what I am saying. I think it is a little uninformed of you to say that the universe is, in fact, infinite. Harsh??? How? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Jeanniebean
on
Sat 02/07/09 05:47 PM
|
|
Your missing the point. "Real" science does not consider infinity nor infinite terms to be acceptable solutions, let alone premises... for anything. This includes infinite divisibility. The guy has a premise that involves infinite division, which does not exist. The guy is a kook! So you're saying "real" science does not accept the fact, that the universe is infinite? That's kinda harsh. Actually, yes. Real science does not like infinity. It does not 'work' with their equations. LOL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So you're saying "real" science does not accept the fact, that the universe is infinite? That's kinda harsh. Ummm... yeah, that is what I am saying. I think it is a little uninformed of you to say that the universe is, in fact, infinite. Harsh??? How? Because even without this guy ever coming out with this theory or ever showing up, or me ever reading about it, everything seems to confirm the infinity of the universe, unless of course, someone proves me, that there are walls around somewhere, but then I'm very curious if the universe has boundaries, just what is beyond those boundaries and what you call or how would you define that. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That has already been proven Yeah, right... that is why the entire debate is all settled now, huh? We have so much irrefutable proof that no human can make these complex crop circles that the entire mystery is now solved. Just like we have irrefutable proof that the creature I have described did. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That has already been proven Yeah, right... that is why the entire debate is all settled now, huh? We have so much irrefutable proof that no human can make these complex crop circles that the entire mystery is now solved. Just like we have irrefutable proof that the creature I have described did. I think you are the only one on this thread that can't see it. Why don't you read the scientific papers I linked to? You cannot prove a human did all of those. Plus, the only website you presented as proof is a joke, a total spoof. |
|
|
|
|
