http://SaturnianCosmology.Org/ mirrored file
For complete access to all the files of this collection
see http://SaturnianCosmology.org/search.php
==========================================================
I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10704>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10704#p10704>by *rcglinsk
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=221>* on Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:29 pm
I was in a bad mood. It wasn't right but it made me feel a little better.
http://www.bautforum.com/questions-answ ... tions.html
rcglinsk <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=221>
*Posts:* 32
*Joined:* Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:06 pm
* E-mail <./memberlist.php?mode=email&u=221>
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10716>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10716#p10716>by *junglelord
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=80>* on Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:37 am
Well I have heard how they are at that forum.
I guess I will have to read their view of the EU.
Not sure why, but I will.
But this post says it all concerning their view of the EU.
posted by nereid at baut
Just this one, very quickly ...
It's not science, and is quite blunt about it.
There's an interesting thread in the JREF Forum's Science,
Mathematics, Medicine and Technology section, called Plasma
Cosmology - woo or not. The thread's extremely long, but in the end
the conclusion is stark: "electric universe theory"* is anti-science.
http://www.bautforum.com/questions-answ ... ons-2.html
Anti-science?
Is that like the anti-christ?
:lol:
I have yet to see any thing not based on science presented by the EU.
Its kinda maddening to even read crap like that from them. I did read
the entire three pages. I get the same all the time. If so many
scientist, (who are way smarter then me, more then I could ever be) say
its so, then I truly am an idiot.
That really burns me. That is some rebuttal. All it is, is rude. I see
so much anger against the EU theory, thats its really a interesting game
of psychology and dogma. However in the end, its just sad.
:cry:
Greetings, Cosmic Children of the Universe. Welcome to my Serenity
Circle. Please leave any bad vibes outside the Healing Vortex. If your
in the midst of a self-destructive rage spiral, it would be karmicly
irresponsible of me to let you in.
junglelord <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=80>
*Posts:* 1215
*Joined:* Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
*Location:* Canada
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10717>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10717#p10717>by *substance
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=376>* on Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:45 am
It`s absolutely pointless to try convincing these people to give EU a
try by asking them fundamental and logical questions.
They have simply made their minds! I guess for most people the fact that
"some of the smartest geniuses" have worked on this theory is enough
argument to prove that it`s right. It`s ridiculous, but that`s the sad
truth. Where we have to really focus is convincing the general person,
not interested in either kind of astronomy.
Everyone is a genius at least once a year.
The real geniuses simply have their bright ideas closer together.
– G.C. Lichtenberg
User avatar <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=376>
substance <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=376>
*Posts:* 124
*Joined:* Sat Jun 21, 2008 12:07 am
*Location:* Bulgaria
* E-mail <./memberlist.php?mode=email&u=376>
* Website
* ICQ
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10719>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10719#p10719>by *nick c
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=62>* on Sat Oct 04, 2008 10:05 am
Hello rcglinsk,
Your treading on thin ice mister ;) Am I going to be reading your name
in the "banned posters log" of BAUT in the near future?
rcglinsk wrote:What experiment do I conduct to try to disprove any
or all of that hypothesis? What apparatus would I build? What would
the experiment entail? How would I tell my results have disproved
the hypothesis?
As I read your question, you wanted to know how the BB theory could be
falsified. Some posters followed up with their opionions of how various
observations and experiments would answer, in full or in part, that
question. The reaction is curious, I detect an undercurrent in many
responses in the thread that give me the impression that they feel you
are assaulting the concept of "science" in general, equating acceptance
of the BB theory with the validity of "science." That is, the BB theory
is science, to question BB is to assault the scientific method.
Nereid wrote:"Why is physics a science? So, this discussion is,
fundamentally, about what 'science' is (in the last century or three)?"
It seems, rcglinsk, that you are asking about the extent to which
certain forms of logic are applicable, or used (or both), in modern
science or not.
The irony is, of course, that your question is the quintessential
inquiry of science...how can I conduct a test that could prove this
theory wrong?
nick c
User avatar <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=62>
nick c <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=62>
*Posts:* 150
*Joined:* Sun Mar 16, 2008 8:12 pm
*Location:* connecticut
* E-mail <./memberlist.php?mode=email&u=62>
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10756>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10756#p10756>by *junglelord
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=80>* on Sun Oct 05, 2008 2:37 pm
Here is the thread that is referenced above in the Baut forum
http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=112661
I will read it and get back to you about the anti-science of plasma
cosmology.
(edit: do not waste your time, there is no rebuttal in the link, just
internet squable)
:roll:
I will say this about charge in space.
Watching the MIT lecture series on EM and knowing what the EU has taught
me has given me several astounding
relationships that are never put into practice, dispite what they teach.
Leaving space in their infinite wisdom as being charge netural.
However the same lecture severals times notes glaring problems with this
view, but no one would see it without the EU information, because we
would never question our professor at MIT the way the information is
presented. Yet deep within the lecture series is the glaring fact that
they could be wrong. One major trump card is that theory NEVER predicted
superconductors above a set temperature, yet amazingly enough, they do
exist and they still cannot explain why.
So we have proof that theory does not all ways predict the outcome,
dispite how well the theory works in principle.
I believe its quite simple to put charge back in space. Watch the MIT
lectures and watch with the knowledge of EU.
Since my own backgroung was in electronic circuit design and analysis,
it taught me things I did not know about charge.
So it is worth watching. The one fascinating thing was watching him put
charge in a bucket. That was cool.
I will say this, that when it come to Tesla, he is left out. Sure they
mention the B field is measured in tesla's, but he never once
acknowledges who he is, or what he did. That is in my estimation the
same thing as leaving out EU. That always comes back to my own education
and my first real thread here. Maxwells equations and the Heaviside
reduction. Watching the lecture series with the knowledge of quaterions,
I know that vectoral analysis is only part of the story of EU. In
reality we are looking at 4 degrees of freedom. Of course I also now
recognize the importance of dimensional analysis and what it means to
view this math in distributed planes vs linear planes. I also love
watching the geometry of the Aether expressed in the equations. The
professor does mention that they are looking at geometry. The way EU and
APM and my thread on Tesla fill in the blanks is very compelling and I
would think almost complete.
Greetings, Cosmic Children of the Universe. Welcome to my Serenity
Circle. Please leave any bad vibes outside the Healing Vortex. If your
in the midst of a self-destructive rage spiral, it would be karmicly
irresponsible of me to let you in.
junglelord <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=80>
*Posts:* 1215
*Joined:* Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
*Location:* Canada
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10763>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10763#p10763>by *rcglinsk
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=221>* on Sun Oct 05, 2008 9:20 pm
Hi y'all,
Thanks to any and everyone who trudged through the conversation. I was
motivated by the recent court case between evolution theorists and
advocates of intelligent design. I am agnostic but I firmly support the
right of people and families to form and pursue religious traditions
through their institutions and work toward these institutions lasting
through the generations. I don't think there is any other way to support
freedom of religious expression.
I am against any government establishment of religion, as per the first
amendment. In the federal lawsuit regarding intelligent design the
principle that decided the difference between a scientific idea and a
religions one was the basic traditional notion of the scientific method.
Nick C said in response to my post:
The irony is, of course, that your question is the quintessential
inquiry of science...how can I conduct a test that could prove this
theory wrong?
One major turning point of the intelligent design trial was when an
advocate was asked "what experiment do I conduct to disprove the theory
of intelligent design?" To save some words, the reply basically
comprised, "get a beaker with the supposed building blocks of life and
sit them on a lab bench for thirty thousand years. When you see no life
evolve, you'll have your proof."
There is one person on the BAUT forum who goes by the handle of Nereid
who seems to me to be quite legitimately brilliant. But when I finally
pressed her to describe a test of the big bang theory one reply was...
Another might be the constancy of the CMB, and the apparatus you'd
build would be exact replicas of WMAP, that you'd launch every
decade for the next ten millennia.
Nereid again strikes me as very smart and honest. She even said in
regard to the idea of the big bang itself,
rcglinsk, that's not a testable hypothesis.
The thing is, if the big bang theory, the idea that once what was small
is now big, is not a testable hypothesis, it is not a scientific idea.
Rather it is a religion. Well, at least according to the principle
behind the intelligent design ruling, in my opinion.
The other thing I found just plain dumbfounding was the most common
reply to my demand for observational evidence. Several people talked
about ratios of isotopes of hydrogen, helium and lithium to other
quantities. But, and it took a bit of investigation to get this out,
they were not referring to present day observations, but rather to
estimations of what the universe was like thirteen billion years ago. I
was truly amazed. No ordinary person would call "observation" a
quantitiy that depends on the truth of the theory being evaluated. And
when I pointed this out I encountered a sort of cognitive dissonance,
like their minds would not let them recognize what was observation and
what was theory.
And might i reference another of Nick C's insights...
Your treading on thin ice mister ;) Am I going to be reading your
name in the "banned posters log" of BAUT in the near future?
Perhaps. I stopped posting on the thread when someone linked a poll to
ban me. Hilarious right?
rcglinsk <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=221>
*Posts:* 32
*Joined:* Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:06 pm
* E-mail <./memberlist.php?mode=email&u=221>
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10770>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10770#p10770>by *junglelord
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=80>* on Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:27 am
Funny, I am not laughing.
:cry:
Greetings, Cosmic Children of the Universe. Welcome to my Serenity
Circle. Please leave any bad vibes outside the Healing Vortex. If your
in the midst of a self-destructive rage spiral, it would be karmicly
irresponsible of me to let you in.
junglelord <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=80>
*Posts:* 1215
*Joined:* Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
*Location:* Canada
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10771>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10771#p10771>by *Solar
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=75>* on Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:46 am
Some of it was of pure self-aggrandizing egotism, 'We clever, we're
smarter, we're numerous'. As if that also means 'We're correct'.
Eric J Lerner slapped this light element abundance issue down long ago:
Light Element Abundances predict contradictory densities:
The Big bang theory predicts the density of ordinary matter in the
universe from the abundance of a few light elements. Yet the density
predictions made on the basis of the abundance of deuterium,
lithium-7 and helium-4 are in contradiction with each other, and
these predictions have grown worse with each new observation. The
chance that the theory is right is now less than one in one hundred
trillion. Big Bang Never Happened
Plus a few other things.
rcglinsk wrote:The thing is, if the big bang theory, the idea that
once what was small is now big, is not a testable hypothesis, it is
not a scientific idea. Rather it is a religion. Well, at least
according to the principle behind the intelligent design ruling, in
my opinion.
That's an interesting take. It's not even a religion; just an idea. An
idea that incorporates anything that would seem to support it. So it as
more than just a few free parameters
.
The Big Bang theory of the universe allows plenty of room for
variations in the details (parameters) of the actual structure and
behavior of our universe. These "free parameters" are important, but
must be determined by observations, not theory. The parameters
effect very basic aspects of our universe...
It's very unusual that there are conceptualizations that when conveyed
seem to be saying 'Our view, through this model, should be telling us
what or how the universe should be'. Or, as written above, "The
parameters effect very basic aspects of our universe..." Well they
don't. They effect one's perspective of aspects of the universe via the
application of subjective of interpretation.
Eric J Lerner addresses some of these here: Two World Systems Revisited:
A Comparison of Plasma Cosmology and the Big Bang
Wonder how a judge would rule after reading that?
"Newton gave us his ‘law of gravity,’ which describes its effect but
doesn’t explain it. “I frame no hypotheses,” he wrote." - Holoscience
User avatar <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=75>
Solar <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=75>
*Posts:* 222
*Joined:* Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10921>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10921#p10921>by *robinson
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=276>* on Fri Oct 10, 2008 11:53 am
rcglinsk has been banned for life...
Dude! What the heck did you think was going to happen?
It is easier for a king to have a lie believed, than a beggar to spread
the truth.
User avatar <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=276>
robinson <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=276>
*Posts:* 24
*Joined:* Sun May 11, 2008 11:51 am
*Location:* On the beach
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10930>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10930#p10930>by *junglelord
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=80>* on Fri Oct 10, 2008 1:49 pm
Cosmology is ran by the golden rule.
The Golden Rule, He who has the gold makes the rules.
Today, the situation is similar, although the penalties for dissent
are milder: loss of funding rather than loss of liberty or life. The
Big Bang survives not because of its scientific merits, but
overwhelmingly because it is a state-supported theory. Funds for
astronomical research and time on astronomical satellites are
allocated almost exclusively by various governmental bodies, such as
NSF and NASA in the United States. It is no secret that today, no
one who pursues research that questions the Big Bang, who develops
alternatives to the Big Bang, or, for the most part, who even
investigates evidence that contradicts the Big Bang, will receive
funding. The review committees that allocate these funds are
controlled tightly by advocates of the Big Bang theory who refuse to
fund anything that calls their work into question.
As a result, with very few exceptions, those who want to make a
career in cosmology are constrained to work within the Big Bang
framework--to do otherwise is to risk being cut off from funding,
and, if a junior researcher, from tenure.
It is beyond the scope of this review to discuss how the Big Bang
came to be state-supported theory. However, as long as such state
support continues, it will be extremely difficult for cosmology to
extricate itself from the dead-end of the Big Bang.
Greetings, Cosmic Children of the Universe. Welcome to my Serenity
Circle. Please leave any bad vibes outside the Healing Vortex. If your
in the midst of a self-destructive rage spiral, it would be karmicly
irresponsible of me to let you in.
junglelord <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=80>
*Posts:* 1215
*Joined:* Mon Mar 17, 2008 5:39 am
*Location:* Canada
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10934>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10934#p10934>by *robinson
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=276>* on Fri Oct 10, 2008 2:59 pm
New topic.
The Big Bang Theorist did something very mean to me.
:mrgreen:
It is easier for a king to have a lie believed, than a beggar to spread
the truth.
User avatar <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=276>
robinson <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=276>
*Posts:* 24
*Joined:* Sun May 11, 2008 11:51 am
*Location:* On the beach
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10939>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10939#p10939>by *Solar
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=75>* on Fri Oct 10, 2008 4:31 pm
robinson wrote:New topic.
The Big Bang Theorist did something very mean to me.
:mrgreen:
DING :!:
That forum has proven themselves remarkably consistent and in lock-step
with the earlier quote from JL.
"Newton gave us his ‘law of gravity,’ which describes its effect but
doesn’t explain it. “I frame no hypotheses,” he wrote." - Holoscience
User avatar <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=75>
Solar <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=75>
*Posts:* 222
*Joined:* Mon Mar 17, 2008 3:05 am
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10990>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10990#p10990>by *rcglinsk
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=221>* on Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:50 pm
robinson wrote:
rcglinsk has been banned for life...
Dude! What the heck did you think was going to happen?
LOL
Really though, I was kind of wrong to make fun of them on this post. I
can see why they did that. I still think they settled on the big bang
idea for no good reason, and that it is not a scientific notion because
it's non-falsifiable.
rcglinsk <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=221>
*Posts:* 32
*Joined:* Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:06 pm
* E-mail <./memberlist.php?mode=email&u=221>
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10991>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10991#p10991>by *rcglinsk
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=221>* on Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:53 pm
junglelord wrote:Cosmology is ran by the golden rule.
The Golden Rule, He who has the gold makes the rules.
Today, the situation is similar, although the penalties for
dissent are milder: loss of funding rather than loss of liberty
or life. The Big Bang survives not because of its scientific
merits, but overwhelmingly because it is a state-supported
theory. Funds for astronomical research and time on astronomical
satellites are allocated almost exclusively by various
governmental bodies, such as NSF and NASA in the United States.
It is no secret that today, no one who pursues research that
questions the Big Bang, who develops alternatives to the Big
Bang, or, for the most part, who even investigates evidence that
contradicts the Big Bang, will receive funding. The review
committees that allocate these funds are controlled tightly by
advocates of the Big Bang theory who refuse to fund anything
that calls their work into question.
As a result, with very few exceptions, those who want to make a
career in cosmology are constrained to work within the Big Bang
framework--to do otherwise is to risk being cut off from
funding, and, if a junior researcher, from tenure.
It is beyond the scope of this review to discuss how the Big
Bang came to be state-supported theory. However, as long as such
state support continues, it will be extremely difficult for
cosmology to extricate itself from the dead-end of the Big Bang.
"...Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion..."
it's just so sad.
rcglinsk <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=221>
*Posts:* 32
*Joined:* Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:06 pm
* E-mail <./memberlist.php?mode=email&u=221>
Top <#wrap>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Re: I did something very mean to some big bang theorists <#p10992>
Post <./viewtopic.php?p=10992#p10992>by *rcglinsk
<./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=221>* on Sat Oct 11, 2008 6:57 pm
By the way,
Left, right or center, I don't buy their hurt feelings. Twice I asked
them to defend general relativity against the attacks in the most recent
thunderblog. They ignored me the first time an then found this post when
I mentioned posting replies on thunderbolts. Their Hector called plasma
cosmology "anti-science" because it implied general relativity was
false. This is a religion. I'd encourage anyone who has posting
capability to relink the black hole thunderblog from the 30th and ask
for replies.
rcglinsk <./memberlist.php?mode=viewprofile&u=221>
*Posts:* 32
*Joined:* Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:06 pm
* E-mail <./memberlist.php?mode=email&u=221>