Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 25 of 25

Thread: Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice

  1. #21
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ballarat Australia
    Posts
    5,838
    In this article it has been claimed by the astronomers Stefan Gillessen, Reinhard Genzel, and Frank Eisenhaur of the Max Planck Institute for Extraterrestrial Physics, in Germany, that there is a black hole at Sagittarius A*.

    I wrote to the trio of astronomers, challenging them on their claim for a black hole. Gillessen, spokesman for the trio, replied in two subsequent emails, and admitted the following:

    1) that not only did he and his co-authors not find a black hole at Sagittarius A*, but that nobody has ever found a black hole, despite the many claims made by astrophysical scientists for black holes being found all over the place;

    2) that although the astrophysical community routinely claims that the alleged black hole has an escape velocity equal to that of light in vacuum, the notion of black holes having an escape velocity is meaningless - because black holes have no escape velocity;

    3) that the alleged infinitely dense point-mass singularity at the heart of a black hole is nonsense;

    4) that he and his co-authors were, until my communication, entirely ignorant of the fact that the so-called "Schwarzschild solution" is not Schwarzschild's solution, and that Schwarzschild's actual solution does not pedict black holes.

    Notwithstanding these admissions, Gillessen, Genzel and Eisenhaur published a paper claiming a black hole at Sagittarius A*, and black holes elsewhere.

    Gillessen and his co-authors have now resorted to a veil of silence in the face of the scientific facts, which completely invalidate all claims for the existence of black holes and for their prediction by General Relativity. Since these admissions by professional astronomers are of great significance, and since he and his co-authors have failed to acknowledge the facts publicly in a true and honest scientific fashion, and since they have by their silence implicity condoned the suppression of the truth, I make the Gillessen et al communications public. The transcript of the communications are here.

  2. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    20,923
    "Human behaviour iz important -- but it aint science."

    You just told me that you paid no attention to anything I wrote to you with that one sentence.

    As I tried to explain, it isn't the subject of study which defines what is or isn't Science. Psychological Science is the STUDY of mental life.

    The SUBJECT of Scientific study can be anything, and everything.

    You tend to make these broad sweeping statements, Max, throwing out everything including terms and definitions. OF course, psychology is the subject of scientific study. The only way you can insist that is isn't is to prove that no one is studying it, which isn't true, of course.

    It reminds me of our other terminal disagreement, about what is or isn't a Nobel Prize. You expect your view of the subject, which references the past view, which has changed, to cancel out the current view of those who determine who gets one and who doesn't.

    That of course is not the current reality of what is a Nobel Prize. It is now rewarded for a number of studies, and accomplishments. Not the views of a dead man.

  3. #23
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ballarat Australia
    Posts
    5,838
    Gayle.
    I woz pointing out that science in mainstream physics iz dogma -- the 10 or 11 laws of scientifyk enquiry are not followed -- high-priests control the gates -- einstein the bigbang blackmatter blackenergy blackflow cosmogony and the standardmodel rule.

    For sure psychology iz (shood be) very important -- and for sure there iz some good science being dunn.
    [IDEA] What we need iz a psyientyfyk study into dogma in science.

    One good thing about psyience -- it aint got any dogma yet (that i know of) -- and no high-priests and gatekeepers. No, hang on a sec, i woz reading only last month that Noam Chomsky iz a high-priest and gatekeeper -- i kan send u the details of the problems he haz caused -- sociology here, anyhow one of the ologys.

    So, anyhow, there iz little chance of there being good science in psychology etc -- az the earlyest (Dutch) stuff i posted pointed out.

    And there aint never been aint and aint never gonna be a Nobel Prize for Krappynomix.
    mac.

    History
    Alfred Nobel had the unpleasant surprise of reading his own obituary, titled The merchant of death is dead, in a French newspaper.
    Alfred Nobel ( listen (help·info)) was born on 21 October 1833 in Stockholm, Sweden, into a family of engineers.[5] He was a chemist, engineer, and inventor. In 1894, Nobel purchased the Bofors iron and steel mill, which he made into a major armaments manufacturer. Nobel also invented ballistite, a precursor to many smokeless military explosives, especially the British smokeless powder cordite. Nobel was even involved in a patent infringement lawsuit over cordite. Nobel amassed a fortune during his lifetime, with most of his wealth from his 355 inventions, of which dynamite is the most famous.[6]

    In 1888, Nobel was astonished to read his own obituary, titled The merchant of death is dead, in a French newspaper. As it was Alfred's brother Ludvig who had died, the obituary was eight years premature. The article disconcerted Nobel and made him apprehensive about how he would be remembered. This inspired him to change his will.[7] On 10 December 1896, Alfred Nobel died in his villa in San Remo, Italy, from a cerebral haemorrhage. He was 63 years old.[8]

    Nobel wrote several wills during his lifetime. The last was written over a year before he died, signed at the Swedish–Norwegian Club in Paris on 27 November 1895.[9][10] To widespread astonishment, Nobel's last will specified that his fortune be used to create a series of prizes for those who confer the "greatest benefit on mankind" in physics, chemistry, peace, physiology or medicine, and literature.[11] Nobel bequeathed 94% of his total assets, 31 million SEK (c. US$186 million, €150 million in 2008), to establish the five Nobel Prizes.[12] Because of scepticism surrounding the will, it was not until 26 April 1897 that it was approved by the Storting in Norway.[13] The executors of Nobel's will, Ragnar Sohlman and Rudolf Lilljequist, formed the Nobel Foundation to take care of Nobel's fortune and organise the award of prizes.[14]

    Nobel's instructions named a Norwegian Nobel Committee to award the Peace Prize, the members of whom were appointed shortly after the will was approved in April 1897. Soon thereafter, the other prize-awarding organisations were designated or established. These were the Karolinska Institutet on 7 June, the Swedish Academy on 9 June, and the Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences on 11 June.[15] The Nobel Foundation reached an agreement on guidelines for how the prizes should be awarded; and, in 1900, the Nobel Foundation's newly created statutes were promulgated by King Oscar II.[11] In 1905, the personal union between Sweden and Norway was dissolved. Thereafter, Norway's Nobel Committee was responsible for awarding the Nobel Peace Prize and the Swedish institutions retained responsibility for the other prizes.[13]

    Prize in Economic Sciences
    Main article: Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences
    In 1968, Sveriges Riksbank celebrated its 300th anniversary by donating a large sum of money to the Nobel Foundation to be used to set up a prize in honor of Nobel. The following year, the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences was awarded for the first time. The Royal Swedish Academy of Sciences became responsible for selecting laureates. The first laureates for the Economics Prize were Jan Tinbergen and Ragnar Frisch "for having developed and applied dynamic models for the analysis of economic processes."[40][41]
    Although not a Nobel Prize,
    it is intimately identified with the other awards; the laureates are announced with the Nobel Prize recipients, and the Prize in Economic Sciences is presented at the Swedish Nobel Prize Award Ceremony.[42] The Board of the Nobel Foundation decided that after this addition, it would allow no further new prizes.[43]
    Last edited by cushioncrawler; 04-25-2013 at 06:48 PM.

  4. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Ballarat Australia
    Posts
    5,838
    That of course is not the current reality of what is a Nobel Prize.
    It is now rewarded for a number of studies, and accomplishments.
    Not the views of a dead man.

    Lemmesee.
    Nobel died in 1896.
    The Foundling Farters are interesting -- they were all born in the same year, 1916 -- the lastest died in 1836.
    Muhammed died in 632.
    Jesus Christ of the The Holey Bible never existed -- scholars estimate that He woznt born in 6BC and didnt die in 33AD.

    So, the Foundling Farters views died longer ago than Nobel's views, but not az long ago az Muhammed's views.
    And Jesus's views were born in about 200BC to 325AD -- and up to praps 1700AD -- and havnt yet died.
    mac.
    Last edited by cushioncrawler; 04-25-2013 at 07:13 PM.

  5. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Maryland
    Posts
    20,923
    Quote Originally Posted by cushioncrawler View Post
    That of course is not the current reality of what is a Nobel Prize.
    It is now rewarded for a number of studies, and accomplishments.
    Not the views of a dead man.

    Lemmesee.
    Nobel died in 1896.
    The Foundling Farters are interesting -- they were all born in the same year, 1916 -- the lastest died in 1836.
    Muhammed died in 632.
    Jesus Christ of the The Holey Bible never existed -- scholars estimate that He woznt born in 6BC and didnt die in 33AD.

    So, the Foundling Farters views died longer ago than Nobel's views, but not az long ago az Muhammed's views.
    And Jesus's views were born in about 200BC to 325AD -- and up to praps 1700AD -- and havnt yet died.
    mac.
    Max, WTF does Jesus, the Founding Fathers, or Muhammed, have to do with this subject?

    Let's make a deal, OK?

    When you and I have our debates, don't bring up religion, or any of the famous Gods. I don't find any of that stuff worthy of my attention in anny debate on any subject whatsoever.

    Also, If some people are being rewarded NOBEL prizes, then they are NOBEL prizes, period.

    If they weren't NOBEL prizes, the organization would sue the claimants for saying they had been awarded NOBEL prizes. They were and are, Nobel Prizes, awarded by that Foundation, or representatives of the Foundation, period.

    Another favor.

    Lets try to use current information in these discussions. You remind me of the Republicans, draggin' up a boatload of BS from over a hundred years ago, that has nothing to do with modern realities.

    Nothing at all, whatsoever, is ever meaningful, nor relevant to me, if it involves references to Religious teachings and dogma.

    Did you know the word gossip, is a root word for Gospel?

    I don't believe anything that came from the mouths of a bunch of racist, misogynistic, mentally disturbed men, who blamed Eve for everything wrong that they say Adam did! Particularly when they are so called men dressed up in long dresses, LOL.

    I can see right now today, what religious men dressed up like women, while degrading and oppressing women, are all about.

    Nothing could make me have any respect whatsoever, for men like that.

    Using them in your arguments, is just a waste of time for both of us because I'm not readng that religious BS, since my brain shuts right down when organized religion is brought into any discussion. I already went through my studies on all of that before I ever grew up! I was raised a Catholic. I went to Catholic schools, and belonged to both an Irish/American & Italian/American family, chock full of Catholics on both sides. The last thing I want included into any reasonable dicussion or debate, is anything that is culled from organized religion. OK?

    Would you use a damn Ox and a plow to plant a field today, or a damn tractor!

    Take care friend.

    I hope our next debate will be a bit more "ON TIME" if you know what I mean.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •