Are all dissenting voices cranky ?

Don't shout like a street urchin...
Put all those questions properly in one single post, and they will be replied to. Ok.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Sure...Not that I believe that you will ever answer them honestly.......
[1] How can you claim logic and sensibility in anything you claim so outrightly, from your position as a lay person without any credentials as against professionals and experts, and the scientific method and peer review?
[2] If you had anything of any substance, with regards to any of the anti science rhetoric you display on this forum, why display it here?
[3] How many other forums have you been banned from for your anti science propaganda?
[4] You dispute such things as BH.s GW's, spacetime, spacetime curvature, as silly and weird, and unreal, yet you accept the existence of some infinite, omnipotent, Spaghetti monster that has supposedly created all we see. Isn't that contradictory?
[5] Why do you believe that your threads are now mostly consigned to the fringes?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oh I thought you will ask some relevant questions which befit the forum. You are on a personal trip !

PS : Mods have given you a total free hand to spew personal nonsense here.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What about your personal nonsense, The God?

 

You mean like the following nonsensical stuff I just found on one page.......

It's really quite obvious now my friend that after being totally rebuffed on many issues, you are now out to just plainly troll.

 

You bloody derail anything meaningful with your nonsense......You are a big hindrance.

 

The God, you bloody derail anything meaningful with your nonsense......You are a big hindrance.

 

You are forgetting that this thread was initiated by me.....whats your contribution ? Have you initiated any thread here which was derailed by me ? For that matter have you initiated any thread at all ?

I do not think you have any meaningful contribution on this site since the day you joined, people like you are waste and just increase the member count on such sites.

 

At least I'm not a crank.

When I do try to learn something new on a science forum, people like you call me a "kid" and make disparaging remarks about how I need to learn "basic physics and maths".

People like you are the reason I save my science content for forums that don't have such a tolerant approach to anti-science nutjobs and trolls like you.

 

Yes, you have initiated many threads on pseudoscience and unsupported dogma...nothing more, nothing less.

As long as you make stupid claims, you will be rebuffed whenever required by this forum's members.
This isn't your soap box to keep preaching your the nonsense that has been totally invalidated and shown to be in error time and time again.
If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.

 

I'm sure that others are seeing that more and more.

 

I am not anti science...neither I am anti establishment...and I am not alone in questioning few of these things. They are being questioned by many mainstream guys too..

 

1) When you chose the handle "The God" you placed a Rorschach test on your shoulder and dared the world to knock it off (to mix some metaphors). Unless your parents actually named you "The God" that was an act of provocation, coloring your interactions with people on this forum. paddoboy seems to have taken it as evidence that you are motivated by religious/magical thinking. Others seem to have taken it as evidence that you are an unreasonable and arrogant troll. Others seem to have taken it as evidence that you are angry. Some parts of your posting history can be used to prop up each of these viewpoints, so the choice of handle was not one that promoted reasonable discussion.

2) You do say anti-science things. In post #3 you wrote

“Our observation is limited to only a few hundred years as against 225 million years. ... Despite mammoth progreess in the field of astronomy, the vast work still remains to be done.”​

as if that supported some point. That seems like a vast misunderstanding of the nature of science, similar (as pointed out in post #176) to common anti-science tropes. In addition, you have taken positions against mainstream cosmology, mainstream theories including General Relativity and basic empirical descriptions of the galaxy without actually knowing the science that you rail against. That seems like anti-science.

3) You do seem anti-establishment when you don't bother to do the work to learn what the mainstream is first. You could be an arrogant autodidact completely ignorant of the depths of his ignorance or you could be a crackpot who ran off the rails some time ago or you could be under the influence of some bubble of groupthink or cult of personality, but whatever the cause you don't seem to care that most of your characterizations seem to be straw men.

4) Please don't try to equate your behavior on this forum with the behavior of the scientific mainstream. When scientists question the established theories of our time, they look at observations of real phenomena and compare them to theoretical predictions of behavior. When scientists speculate on what future theories might be held true, they feel obligated to constrain their ideas to things which describe the behavior of reality and which therefore are largely compatible with the older theoretical predictions of behavior in regimes where old theory and reality were already in fairly precise alignment.

5) In the OP you wrote:

“I am well qualified, I understand more than graduate level maths and Physics”​

which seems to have been made without evidence. Anything you can do in the future to clarify or support that statement would be appreciated.

 

Rpenner,

You are in fault finding mode......This is a classic example where you are attempting to crush me and silence me instead of responding to the points. It is quite silly that you attach so much significance to the name 'The God'.....well so be it.

Your presence has made other supporters of mainstream here look pretty silly. All these guys are trying to push parrotized mainstream view from a semi (il)literate position. The difference is visible and Paddoboy has already bowed before you..

Pt # 2 of 10 is about physicality of spacetime. Care to respond ?

 

You never have had points. You're uniformly ignorant on the topics you address and you never form a positive position for an idea. Instead, you state claims and fail to support them.

Your post #3 was a man's flailing around in an ocean of ignorance, arrogantly demanding that someone throw him a life preserver. You were tossed many but ignored them because they were not the color you were expecting.

In post #196 you claim "spacetime is not a physical thing" yet attribute all manner of observable phenomena to it's behavior, thus implicitly arguing it is physical. You contradicted yourself so badly you will have to start over.

General Relativity describes the behavior of observable phenomena by describing the geometry of four-dimensional manifold where the events of reality play out. That four-dimensional manifold is space-time.

Since physically we do have three dimensions of space (as the ancient Egyptians and Greeks knew) and do experience motion (duh) and therefore experience time, (although not in the Newtonian absolute time sense) all the GR predictions of space-time are precisely true. Until physical evidence arises of hidden extra dimensions of space or violation of the assumption that space and time form a manifold (which goes back to Descartes or perhaps ancient Greeks), it seems entirely a viable proposition that the geometry of reality is identical to the geometry of GR's space-time. The precise evidence you do mention in post #196 only supports this idea.

How then, precisely, can you assert that "spacetime is not a physical thing"? What terrible misunderstanding of physics must you have to make such a claim? Post #196 doesn't tell us, therefore doesn't give us cause to believe you have argued a point.

 

Just quickly rpenner, along with his handle, he has admitted himself to being religious and/or believing in some deity, or words to that effect, although he has also said he keeps his religious views separate from his sceince[?] views.

 

ps: Just to add, Don't get any idea that I'm some fanatical religion/deity basher because I'm definitley not. I have rarely if ever ventured into the religious forums, and only do any "bashing" to over-the-top religious zealots that see the need to denigrate science and the scientific method uneccessarily.
Just thought that may need a mention.

 

Parrotized or not, it does not mean it is incorrect, as your continued parrotizing of the crank position is most certainly incorrect.

 

Rpenner,

Focus on the point not on me, that is the violation of forum guidelines.

And by the way I have no position* on spacetime and neither I have attributed anything to it. It is supporters of mainstream only which call it real or physical or bending type or curving type etc. Why don't you straightforward explain what is spacetime...mathematical artifact or Physical entity ? Don't beat around the bush...Trust me none who are clapping for you here, knows what it is.

* for me spacetime is just maths. It has nothing to do with physical like bending etc.

 

I don't think it is ant science...It indicates lack of observational data. But of course you cannot support mainstream position with cogent argument, so discredit those who question. In fact this is the key problem with all mainstream supporters, and you are not away from it.