They needed a number to spread the message, and plucked that out of fresh air, like they did with alcohol units. If you google, you can find the guy that came up with it saying so. It's why it differs across the globe.
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
They needed a number to spread the message, and plucked that out of fresh air, like they did with alcohol units. If you google, you can find the guy that came up with it saying so. It's why it differs across the globe.
I agree, they are just theories. They evolve and adapt or get thrown out if they don’t stand up to scrutiny.
I don’t think science has an agenda as such, it’s just a method of trying to understand the universe in a way that can be tested and agreed upon.
As for dinosaurs, you’re never going to get proof it one in the flesh, because they don’t exist anymore (other than crocs etc) so fossil records are the best evidence we have that they did exist. Sure there’s some creative license in what colour they actually were etc. But I think that’s illustrative rather than anything else.
As for religion. I think faith is a great thing for helping people to understand their place in the world, their connection to the planet and the other people on it, and their purpose of being here. I don’t actually think it does a great job of explaining how everything was conceived and came into being. Science hasn’t got the answers either, but it works to try and understand that, and readily admits that currently it can’t.
The cycle was well known to the Greek scientists the mohamedans plagiarised that bit of their story from.
Get building an ark, your sky pixie's trying to drown you.
STFU
You only wake up when someone mentions anything to do with faith
**** off and go n dance round your fireplace butt nekid with your mum
Heathen pleb
Wrong again **** for brains. It's just one bit of bollocks after another from you. You need to create a better imaginary friend.
Imagine believing in an all powerful, all caring superbeing that keeps trying to kill you, and still expecting to be taken seriously on a science based thread.
"Why do these angry old men keep staring at me while rubbing their crotches?"
For HIAG my fellow Spurs fan
If you are interested then you need to do the work and read the stuff yourself it is far too detailed for someone to do this for you. But yes he does find evidence to support his theory that is the whole point of the book. Evidence in the way of old murals and drawings and songs and local beliefs across the world. One example, on one side of the world he found traditions that talked of the day the sun never rose and on the other side of the world traditions of the day the sun never set. He managed to coordinate this down to one day a sort of historic 9/11. The book is heavy going and it's 50 years since I read it but you can't discuss this properly unless you read it.
Nothing changes with you does it.Not exactly setting the bar very high for scientific rigour then is he ?
Wrong again **** for brains. It's just one bit of bollocks after another from you. You need to create a better imaginary friend.
Imagine believing in an all powerful, all caring superbeing that keeps trying to kill you, and still expecting to be taken seriously on a science based thread.
You must log in or register to see images
.
Another one who can't support his own belief's and is desperate to fob me off with the views of his prophet.
We have evidence of super Nova like the one that now forms the crab nebula, that for short periods become the brightest object in the sky, of volcanos creating sufficient dust to block the sun. It doesn't make it Venus. Not to mention that the formalised recognition of an exact day across the world is only a recent thing, we've had several attempts at a calendar in the intervening periods.
I'll give you my view and you tell me what evidence you can point to that disproves it.
Why would a passing object reverse rotation?
It could slow it due to gravitational pull, but to seriously change things would require an impact.
The rotation of Uranus is an example of a planet literally knocked on its side, even that blow was insufficient to change the direction of rotation.
Where was the moon in all this?
A planet getting this close would do one of three things. Send the moon off into space, hit it out send it into the earth.
Where was the earth orbiting before the encounter?
Two objects of this mass would interact and seriously alter each others orbit, for the earth to throw Venus towards the sun would require the earth to be thrown outwards. What evidence do we have of a sudden and dramatic change in the earth's orbit due to this event.
Where is the huge volcanic eruptions and lava flows?
The pull on the earth's crust would trigger a huge amount of volcanic activity, just like we see on Io today.
The only way to get this to work is to deny gravity and the devastating effect it would have from a close encounter
Another one who can't support his own belief's and is desperate to fob me off with the views of his prophet.
We have evidence of super Nova like the one that now forms the crab nebula, that for short periods become the brightest object in the sky, of volcanos creating sufficient dust to block the sun. It doesn't make it Venus. Not to mention that the formalised recognition of an exact day across the world is only a recent thing, we've had several attempts at a calendar in the intervening periods.
I'll give you my view and you tell me what evidence you can point to that disproves it.
Why would a passing object reverse rotation?
It could slow it due to gravitational pull, but to seriously change things would require an impact.
The rotation of Uranus is an example of a planet literally knocked on its side, even that blow was insufficient to change the direction of rotation.
Where was the moon in all this?
A planet getting this close would do one of three things. Send the moon off into space, hit it out send it into the earth.
Where was the earth orbiting before the encounter?
Two objects of this mass would interact and seriously alter each others orbit, for the earth to throw Venus towards the sun would require the earth to be thrown outwards. What evidence do we have of a sudden and dramatic change in the earth's orbit due to this event.
Where is the huge volcanic eruptions and lava flows?
The pull on the earth's crust would trigger a huge amount of volcanic activity, just like we see on Io today.
The only way to get this to work is to deny gravity and the devastating effect it would have from a close encounter
First of all I am not expressing a view on Velikovsky just giving you the opportunity to look at it yourself as you seem interested. I don't believe anything but you are quite happy it seems to express your views based on **** all. Good luck with that.
Listen I’m not fireing up no Chopper or anything for my Spurs bredren but I must ask this question due to my common sense nudging at me
Maybe they are not the views of their prophets but their views...people do “share” views.
Or are we suggesting that it is incumbent upon one to have their “own” views and anything resembling someone else’s views means you don’t have “your own” views.
As much as those amongst us learned in the sciences know...I know for a fact they only know and believe what they do because they have studied, done degrees at unis or read books out of interest that are the words of THEIR “prophets”
So I think it’s a bit of a weak thing to say to someone and then every time they give a response...you respond with “but that’s not what you think, that’s what someone else thought”
If you repeat what someone else has said it’s because that’s you aswell
Maybe they are not the views of their prophets but their views...people do “share” views.
Or are we suggesting that it is incumbent upon one to have their “own” views and anything resembling someone else’s views means you don’t have “your own” views.
As much as those amongst us learned in the sciences know...I know for a fact they only know and believe what they do because they have studied, done degrees at unis or read books out of interest that are the words of THEIR “prophets”
So I think it’s a bit of a weak thing to say to someone and then every time they give a response...you respond with “but that’s not what you think, that’s what someone else thought”
If you repeat what someone else has said it’s because that’s you aswell
I am supporting my view with verifiable examples. If you beleive Velikovsky to be right then you would be able to do the same.
The point here is if there is evidence that makes you or anyone else beleive he is right then it should be verifiable.
I'm not interested in reading 60 year old book, I'm interested in why you or HAIG have chosen to accept it without checking his claims with the available resources we have available today.
If there is something either of you can come up with that can be verified then I'm interested.
How can you verify anything when you cannot understand a simple post. I do not BELIEVE in Velikovsky. I have no idea whether what he has written is complete horse **** or is the work of genius. If you cannot be bothered to read the book then it really is a waste of time discussing it with you.
I knew I would regret posting on this thread.
If it is their views then I look forward to them being expressed. Then we can look at the available evidence of why they beleive it to be true.
If I express a view on science then I'm happy to provide the spring evidence and not claim it's true simply because X says so.
H
Hoddle is a god
Guest
What a shambolic ****witted post!
The YouTube stuff is merely to help those with a genuine interest in this topic ease themselves into the facts, ideas, movers and shakers, etc. The stuff put out by the Thunderbolts Project provides good summaries of the science and experimental work currently being undertaken in this field.
In fact, a very recent (this month) podcast highlighted some of the results of the SAFIRE team, which has managed to replicate many of the features found in and around the Sun, in the laboratory, using replicable principles of plasma physics,
The early pioneers of this type of work are scientists and engineers such as Birkeland, Alfen and Jurgens, and you can readily find their materials and papers out there in the scientific press. Most of this has been peer reviewed among plasma scientists.
The mathematicians who rule modern cosmology won’t peer review it, because (a) they do not understand electricity or plasma physics, (b) the experimental nature of the puts their own nonsensical and pathetic modelling techniques to utter shame, and (c) the ramifications in what EU Theory posits would put the mainstream out of lucrative jobs over night.
It is ironic that you accuse EU scientists as having no evidence when, not only is the opposite true, but it is the mainstream that has no evidence. Not one scientist has been able to produce a shred of evidence to substantiate Eddington’s Victorian model for the workings of stars. Instead, every time they have discovered an anomaly (in the Standard Model), they have hamfistedly created another model and simply tagged it onto the existing models.
There are as many models (not direct replicable experimental proof) of stars as there are types of stars. They do this in order to cling to the outdated thinking of Newton, and to perpetuate Einstein’s lies.
By contrast, EU Theory has one model that is backed up by actual scientists working in laboratories carrying out real classical science.
How can you verify anything when you cannot understand a simple post. I do not BELIEVE in Velikovsky. I have no idea whether what he has written is complete horse **** or is the work of genius. If you cannot be bothered to read the book then it really is a waste of time discussing it with you.
I knew I would regret posting on this thread.
I read your post. My point still stands, if the points he has made cannot be proven then it's science fiction. If you don't beleive his views then you are wasting yours and my time.
Why is there no evidence of this cosmic event ? No physical records of massive stress to the planet, no evidence of mass migration or extinction due to the cataclysmic effects it would have had ?
Why are there no records whatsoever from the people who would have witnessed this event given its magnitude.
According to Velivosky, they simply chose to forget it because it was so traumatic.
Okay .......
- Status