|
|
Re: Stephen Hawking's science doesn't work....
Posted:
Feb 28, 2012 2:33 PM
|
|
On 2/28/2012 11:25 AM, microm2011@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Feb 27, 8:53 pm, DanielSan<danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 2/27/2012 5:19 PM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Feb 27, 2:51 pm, DanielSan<danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2/27/2012 11:55 AM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>> On Feb 26, 6:42 pm, DanielSan<danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> On 2/26/2012 6:35 PM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>>>> On Feb 26, 6:29 pm, DanielSan<danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2/26/2012 6:20 PM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>> On Feb 26, 6:05 pm, DanielSan<danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/26/2012 6:00 PM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 25, 11:53 pm, DanielSan<danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/25/2012 8:51 PM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 25, 8:47 pm, DanielSan<danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/25/2012 8:10 PM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 25, 6:21 pm, DanielSan<danielsan1...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/25/2012 5:38 PM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 7:09 pm, sbalneav<sbaln...@alburg.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12-02-24 09:02 PM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 6:59 pm, sbalneav<sbaln...@alburg.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12-02-24 08:37 PM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Feb 24, 6:28 pm, sbalneav<sbaln...@alburg.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 12-02-24 08:06 PM, microm2...@hotmail.com wrote:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> For exploding black holes...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> An equal amount of positive energy would fall in over time.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He says there is negative energy which is really nonsense.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But even if you take it serious a black hole won't decay.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There would be a form of thermal equilibrium by positive and negative
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> falling in balanced in time...
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What's this thing you have for Hawking? Did his wheelchair run
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> over your toe one time, or like what?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am aware that he is aginst me no matter if he wants it
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to look like it or not.. It is only now that I will fight.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> By posting on Usenet? How do you think that's going to stop
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> him?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He has had his time...
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Are you a supervillan?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He is a timekeeper and a dangerous authority.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> A timekeeper? Dangerous? He's an old man in a wheelchair.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Anyone who will start a war of science against religion
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is off of their rocker... religion is just as guilty of
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to the extreme unfortunately...
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Religion lost that war a long time ago. It was called
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "The Enlightenment" and "The Renaissance".
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hawking ought to leave innocent religious people alone.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, because an old man in a wheelchair expressing his
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> opinion's really bothering the religious.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He should be forced to...
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You could have an Epic Rap Battle with him:
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zn7-fVtT16k
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mitchell Raemsch- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Stalker...
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yeah, we know you are. Leave Hawking alone!- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Whose brave enough to take an objective shot at Hawking!?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> His MO is intimidation
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He can barely move anymore because of his disability. What
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "intimidation" are you referring to?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and he has been put up as an authority
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> by the world. Something Einstein would have nothing to do with.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why should I let Hawking intimidate me?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am big deal...
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mitchell Raemsch; the shared prize...with Alia Sabur- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What else but his intellectual intimidating dan?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> His intellect intimidates you? Is that because he can debate you under
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the table without so much as even thinking about it?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> He tried to pull that off with Alia Sabur but she
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wasn't going for it either...
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I haven't heard of this. Can you show it?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alia Sabur And Mitch Raemsch - God Bless America!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dan...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You're an idiot!
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yet you can't show how.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> The how is that you are going to continue to follow me around!!!
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I think everyone expects it...
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I respond to you and to whomever I please. I am no more following you
>>>>>>>>>>>> than I am anyone else. Cut the ego trip; you're not that special.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The point is why are you responding to me?
>>
>>>>>>>>>> Because you're posting to a newsgroup I read.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What have I done?
>>
>>>>>>>>>> Posted something I wanted to respond to.
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hawking's a timekeeper who started something dangerous. Period.
>>
>>>>>>>>>> Like what?
>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Right in science needs to clean it up.
>>>>>>>>>>> It is lunacy to create a war of religion and science.
>>
>>>>>>>>>> For example?
>>
>>>>>>>>> His book exemplifies it...
>>
>>>>>>>> For example?
>>
>>>>>>>>> I consider hawking as a failed scientist who is an authority
>>>>>>>>> and a timekeeper not willing to accept that science is going forward
>>>>>>>>> for the longest time. His idea that he would solve all
>>>>>>>>> of science in twenty years said twenty years ago is just hubris.
>>
>>>>>>>> You can't even cite this assertion, can you?
>>
>>>>>>>>> And of course he repeated he would solve all of science again...
>>>>>>>>> but in another twenty years...
>>
>>>>>>>> Or this.
>>
>>>>>>>>> He is the lunatic scientist that proposed we would have to solve our
>>>>>>>>> problems by way of populating what never will be. That is living on
>>>>>>>>> the Moon and beyond...
>>
>>>>>>>> We haven't done it, but that doesn't make Hawking a lunatic.
>>
>>>>>>>>>> Such as....?
>>
>>>>>>>>> Einstein said the atheists authorities were his problem by
>>>>>>>>> misrepresenting him...
>>
>>>>>>>> [citation needed]
>>
>>>>>>>>> He was right. God does not play dice with the universe.
>>
>>>>>>>> "It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions,
>>>>>>>> a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a
>>>>>>>> personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly.
>>>>>>>> If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the
>>>>>>>> unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our
>>>>>>>> science can reveal it."- Hide quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>>> - Show quoted text -
>>
>>>>>>> He believed in an impersonal God.
>>
>>>>>> He called himself an agnostic and a believer in "Spinoza's God"
>>
>>>>>>> You are one person who would represent this same problem for him.
>>
>>>>>> Yet you can't show that I would.
>>
>>>>>>> Einstein said his enemy were the atheists by misrepresenting him.
>>
>>>>>> You can't show that he said that either.
>>
>>>>>>> Einstein was not an atheist...
>>
>>>>>> Didn't say he was.
>>
>>>>> Then what is your argument?
>>
>>>> That Einstein didn't believe in a personal God.
>>
>>> And why is that important?
>>
>> You thought it was.- Hide quoted text -
>>
>> - Show quoted text -
>
> It takes two to tango...
> The point is he believed in A God.
So what? And why is that important?
|
|
