Back to the personal attacks.
If I am an idiot then point to the evidence I supplied contradicting a near miss with Venus and show me something (anything) that proves it untrue.
Greta Thunberg
- Thread starter PINKIE
- Start date
-
Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
-
- Status
Back to the personal attacks.
If I am an idiot then point to the evidence I supplied contradicting a near miss with Venus and show me something (anything) that proves it untrue.
You mean you have given your opinion. All opinions are subjective.
And this is where we are. Giving equal weight to opinion and fact.
Gravity and mass doesn't exist is an opinion.
The evidence and formula that shows the relationship between two bodies based on mass and distance is a verifiable fact.
Last edited:
I really don't think your understand what a book is. Utterly amazing I don't want to be rude but it's hard not to be faced with such nonsense from your mouth. I'm going now.
Gravity was optional when the dinosaurs were kicking their ****. They often floated around like big Baby Trump blimps.Gravity doesn't exist but it's doubled since the dinosaurs roamed the earth
This fact is definitively examined in the opus “Dinosaurs Be Doing The Floaty Float Float” by Professor Medunna Lottasmak.
He has a point. Anyone can write a book. Velikovsky's used miracles from the Hebrew Bible as proof of his theories ffs.
A book.
Words written down by an author and published.
Whether they are fact or fiction is determined by those that follow.
Which is why I expect to see evidence from subsequent research that proves one way or the other.
So far I have
A) Found none
B) Been offered none
The examples given and the precis I have read don't even stand up to the most basic scrutiny. Which is why I put forward modern sciences view of the theory in the hope one of you has evidence to support it.
Nothing except an unsupported denial of gravity and mass at a planetary level
Here's a book
The earth is flat - definitive proof
It's a book so it must be true.
I’m all for people having an opinion, it’s what makes us question our own beliefs.
If opinion is passed off as scientific fact though, whilst simultaneously trying to rubbish the tried and tested models, then expect it to be challenged.
Running off crying because it’s being challenged isn’t really an answer either.
There's so many opinions out there I tend to go with those that suit my reasoning and any given time.
One more time. I am not making claims for the book. Just because you read a book it does not mean you accept what's in it. The point here is not what I think I have no opinion either way about his theory, simply because I don't have the knowledge to have one. I HAVE read the book so I know what his theory is. I have seen the evidence HE collected. You have done none of these things and yet you still put forward opinions whereas I have read the book and do not. It's very sad if you cannot see this point. I am simply saying to you if you are interested then read the original work so that you can understand what you are talking about. I came into this discussion because I was surprised to see that Velikovsky was still something that people discussed. Looking I find that it still a subject that interests scientists as now scores of his ideas have proved to be correct. The one thing you have said that makes any sense is that books like Darwin's provoked further discussion and evidence gathering. Yes agreed, that's what happens and yes the original theory is either advanced or forgotten. The point is Velikovsky's theory has not YET been forgotten so the process of evidence gathering continues. That;' s interesting, unlike comments on here from people who have not even read the original theory that's it's all bollocks.
That is really my last attempt at explaining what should be obvious.
H
Hoddle is a god
Guest
Once again,
I'm not interested in what people's views were when we thought there were canals on Mars.
I'm interested in why HAIG sees them to be viable today.
I do not need to go back to the origin of species to look into whether evolution or creationism is right. I can look at the knowledge we have now.
If the process of evidence gathering continues then where is it?
I have seriously found zero published research to support the views put forward of a wandering Venus born of a comet.
****ing hell and he gets to vote
Yes I do. Another basic concept that appears to astound you.
You seem very threatened by this whole conversation.
Please read the ****ing book, so you can all carry on with your tragic ****ing lives!
There is no merit to a book based on mythology and fable that even the author later admitted could not be reproduced by scuence other than as a book of prophesy.
Should like Nostrodamus, some of his predictions be correct then it's worth looking at the reasoning.
This has been done, we know why Venus surface is hot but it's core has cooled and we know why all celestial bodies emit radio waves. all the predictions made that I have investigated so far are either wrong (wandering Venus, atmosphere rich in hydrocarbons) or not attributable to cause and effect ( Venus hot surface, radio emmisions from Jupiter )
If there are any other predictions I come across then I will look at the evidence for them also.
- Status