Science and Technology news... :: View topic - New Specie of Ape-Man Discovered, Almost Human

PD · Guest

On Oct 7, 8:42 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 7, 5:45 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 1:30 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

The importance of axiomatizing physics is obvious to mathematicians.

Which is of course not so compelling to physicists.

I understand very well that prostitutes have other priorities.
[/quote]
And so why are you telling prostitutes that it>s in their best
interest to axiomatize physics?

[quote]
I am very proud of my very successful axiomatization of special
relativity. I have achieved my goal.

Then publish it. Someplace other than a personal web site.

If I want to promote everythingimportant.org by giving away my insight
for free, what is that to you? Do I advise you that you need to start
charging your colleagues for the generous way that you prostitute
yourself for their benefit?
[/quote]
You are certainly free to self-publish. Self-publication is always a
viable resort for authors who are frustrated at not being able to
publish elsewhere. You can also use a staple gun and post it up on
telephone poles next to railroad tracks, if you like.

[quote]
The creation/evolution debate has no bearing on physics. You have
posted an off-topic post on sci.physics.

The first axiom of quantum creationism is pure physics.

That doesn>t make creation/evolution a topic for physics.

A debate on the physics of [xxx]
belongs in sci.physics.
[/quote]
Sorry, but I disagree. Appending the word "physics" to any topic that
you want to promote does not make it about physics. If you were to
post a statement, "Place the physics fat-side up in a 350 degree oven,
and roast the physics for two hours, basting with the juices
regularly," to sci.physics, it would be off-topic.

[quote]
All you have is bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.
You don>t have a single particle of truth to justify your
lame accusations.

What accusations to you attribute to me?

You lie and malign incessantly. Everything you spew is from your
bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.
[/quote]
Malign, yes. There is nothing wrong with it, when it is deserved.
Sarcasm? Absolutely.
Lie? Where have I lied? Bigotry? Where is the bigotry? Pretense? Where
is the pretense?

PD

Guest

On Oct 7, 6:56 pm, Eric Gisse <jowr...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 7, 10:30 am, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 11:36 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 10:40 am, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 8:38 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 8:33 am, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

It seems that physicists would have had plenty of free time to
axiomatize everything they know about physics, considering the
stagnation of advance in physics over the last 50 or so years.

Instead, physicists have just been playing makebelieve and only
pretending that physics is advancing.

I>m sure you think that physicists have lots of free time to do what
you want them to do, according to your priorities and your agenda..

It would be in the best interest of science if physicists were to give
up prostitution and accept David Hilbert>s philosophy of physics.

Well, of course you think so. As this is your priority and your
agenda, this is not surprising. The trick is getting anyone to heed
you.

The importance of axiomatizing physics is obvious to mathematicians.http://www.everythingimportant.org/physics/Hilbert.htm

Yet you seem to be more intent on complaining about their failure to
do so, rather than just doing it yourself.

I can>t do everything by myself.

You can>t axiomatize physics? Why not?

I am very proud of my very successful axiomatization of special
relativity.

Why? Minkowski - A MATHEMATICIAN - axiomized special relativity a
century ago. You are a bit more than a day late and a dollar short.

Your presentation is confused and has no intersection with experiment
or modern physics.

I>ve been telling you this for years and you are curiously unwilling
to discuss it.

I have achieved my goal.

If being a Grade A USENET crank and a failure of a mathematician was
the goal, spot on!

It wasn>t easy to remove from
special relativity everything that is confused, unnecessary and not
amenable to experimental verification.http://www.everythingimportant.org/relativity/special.pdf

That>s because there is nothing in special relativity that falls under
that heading. On the other hand, there is *lots* in your presentation
that qualifies.

Squeeze more blood from stone, shooby.

[...]- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
How about if being a crook was your goal? I don>t think it was your
goal though. You must have always been a crook. Let me see that
thesis of yours. I>m sure I can find many instances of dishonesty
there.

Guest

On Oct 8, 8:59 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 7, 8:42 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 5:45 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 1:30 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

The importance of axiomatizing physics is obvious to mathematicians..

Which is of course not so compelling to physicists.

I understand very well that prostitutes have other priorities.

And so why are you telling prostitutes that it>s in their best
interest to axiomatize physics?

I am very proud of my very successful axiomatization of special
relativity. I have achieved my goal.

Then publish it. Someplace other than a personal web site.

If I want to promote everythingimportant.org by giving away my insight
for free, what is that to you? Do I advise you that you need to start
charging your colleagues for the generous way that you prostitute
yourself for their benefit?

You are certainly free to self-publish. Self-publication is always a
viable resort for authors who are frustrated at not being able to
publish elsewhere. You can also use a staple gun and post it up on
telephone poles next to railroad tracks, if you like.

The creation/evolution debate has no bearing on physics. You have
posted an off-topic post on sci.physics.

The first axiom of quantum creationism is pure physics.

That doesn>t make creation/evolution a topic for physics.

A debate on the physics of [xxx]
belongs in sci.physics.

Sorry, but I disagree. Appending the word "physics" to any topic that
you want to promote does not make it about physics. If you were to
post a statement, "Place the physics fat-side up in a 350 degree oven,
and roast the physics for two hours, basting with the juices
regularly," to sci.physics, it would be off-topic.

All you have is bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.
You don>t have a single particle of truth to justify your
lame accusations.

What accusations to you attribute to me?

You lie and malign incessantly. Everything you spew is from your
bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.

Malign, yes. There is nothing wrong with it, when it is deserved.
Sarcasm? Absolutely.
Lie? Where have I lied? Bigotry? Where is the bigotry? Pretense? Where
is the pretense?

PD
[/quote]
Stew PD, you have always been intellectually inferior, and what you
lacked you made up for in lying and pretense.

PD · Guest

On Oct 8, 8:05 am, strich.9...@gmail.com wrote:

[quote]
Stew PD, you have always been intellectually inferior, and what you
lacked you made up for in lying and pretense.
[/quote]
Intellectually inferior to what?
I>m not saying that I don>t have intellectual superiors, mind you. I
just wonder who you had in mind, and how you arrived at that
conclusion.
Or whether you>re just heckling for the hell of it.

PD

Guest

On Oct 8, 9:12 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 8, 8:05 am, strich.9...@gmail.com wrote:

Stew PD, you have always been intellectually inferior, and what you
lacked you made up for in lying and pretense.

Intellectually inferior to what?
I>m not saying that I don>t have intellectual superiors, mind you. I
just wonder who you had in mind, and how you arrived at that
conclusion.
Or whether you>re just heckling for the hell of it.

PD
[/quote]
At least you did not disagree with the lying and pretense.

Intellectually inferior because you cannot see things in different
angles. Like SR for example, you cannot see the aspect where it is
completely wrong. And reality, you cannot grasp what reality really
is. It does not take much to see your intellectual inferiority. Now
there is nothing wrong with that, but its combination with deceit and
pretense makes it a bad combination.

Shubee · Guest

On Oct 8, 7:59 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 7, 8:42 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 5:45 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 1:30 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

The importance of axiomatizing physics is obvious to mathematicians.

Which is of course not so compelling to physicists.

I understand very well that prostitutes have other priorities.

And so why are you telling prostitutes that it>s in their best
interest to axiomatize physics?
[/quote]
I said, "It would be in the best interest of science if physicists
were to give up prostitution and accept David Hilbert>s philosophy of
physics." Obviously, your personal choice for yourself is to continue
being a prostitute. That>s perfectly understandable. You are incapable
of defending physics myths or axiomatizing any part of physics.

[quote]A debate on the physics of http://www.everythingimportant.org/censoriousEvolutionists/
belongs in sci.physics.

Sorry, but I disagree.
[/quote]
That>s only because you believe strongly that sci.physics is to be
reserved for hypocrisy and prostitution.

[quote]All you have is bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.
You don>t have a single particle of truth to justify your
lame accusations.

What accusations to you attribute to me?

You lie and malign incessantly. Everything you spew is from your
bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.

Malign, yes. There is nothing wrong with it
[/quote]
Thanks for confessing that so honestly. Will you now stop professing
that you are a Christian? Malign means "to speak harmful untruths
about".
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/malign

Shubee

PD · Guest

On Oct 8, 9:21 am, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 8, 7:59 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 8:42 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 5:45 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 1:30 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

The importance of axiomatizing physics is obvious to mathematicians.

Which is of course not so compelling to physicists.

I understand very well that prostitutes have other priorities.

And so why are you telling prostitutes that it>s in their best
interest to axiomatize physics?

I said, "It would be in the best interest of science if physicists
were to give up prostitution and accept David Hilbert>s philosophy of
physics." Obviously, your personal choice for yourself is to continue
being a prostitute. That>s perfectly understandable. You are incapable
of defending physics myths or axiomatizing any part of physics.

A debate on the physics ofhttp://www.everythingimportant.org/censoriousEvolutionists/
belongs in sci.physics.

Sorry, but I disagree.

That>s only because you believe strongly that sci.physics is to be
reserved for hypocrisy and prostitution.

All you have is bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.
You don>t have a single particle of truth to justify your
lame accusations.

What accusations to you attribute to me?

You lie and malign incessantly. Everything you spew is from your
bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.

Malign, yes. There is nothing wrong with it

Thanks for confessing that so honestly. Will you now stop professing
that you are a Christian? Malign means "to speak harmful untruths
about".http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/malign
[/quote]
Ah, actually, I>ll confess to not knowing the definition of "malign".
I confess to speakingly mockingly to to you.
Since you have called physicists prostitutes, do you not consider that
maligning?

PD

Shubee · Guest

On Oct 8, 10:10 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 8, 9:21 am, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 8, 7:59 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 8:42 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 5:45 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 1:30 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

The importance of axiomatizing physics is obvious to mathematicians.

Which is of course not so compelling to physicists.

I understand very well that prostitutes have other priorities.

And so why are you telling prostitutes that it>s in their best
interest to axiomatize physics?

I said, "It would be in the best interest of science if physicists
were to give up prostitution and accept David Hilbert>s philosophy of
physics." Obviously, your personal choice for yourself is to continue
being a prostitute. That>s perfectly understandable. You are incapable
of defending physics myths or axiomatizing any part of physics.

A debate on the physics ofhttp://www.everythingimportant.org/censoriousEvolutionists/
belongs in sci.physics.

Sorry, but I disagree.

That>s only because you believe strongly that sci.physics is to be
reserved for hypocrisy and prostitution.

All you have is bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.
You don>t have a single particle of truth to justify your
lame accusations.

What accusations to you attribute to me?

You lie and malign incessantly. Everything you spew is from your
bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.

Malign, yes. There is nothing wrong with it

Thanks for confessing that so honestly. Will you now stop professing
that you are a Christian? Malign means "to speak harmful untruths
about". http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/malign

Ah, actually, I>ll confess to not knowing the definition of "malign".
[/quote]
Then maybe it>s possible that you only believe you know what it means
to be a true Christian but perhaps you misunderstand that also?

[quote]Since you have called physicists prostitutes, do you not consider that
maligning?
[/quote]
It is a fitting metaphor for individuals and associations that
prostitute themselves. If you want to argue that you were always a
degenerate and that you never had a conscience to violate in the first
place, then we can start there. You are still a prostitute by debasing
yourself habitually and for repeatedly rejecting all conceivable
minimal standards for civility, decency and scientific integrity.

Shubee

Guest

On Oct 8, 12:11 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 8, 10:10 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 8, 9:21 am, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 8, 7:59 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 8:42 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 5:45 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 7, 1:30 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

The importance of axiomatizing physics is obvious to mathematicians.

Which is of course not so compelling to physicists.

I understand very well that prostitutes have other priorities.

And so why are you telling prostitutes that it>s in their best
interest to axiomatize physics?

I said, "It would be in the best interest of science if physicists
were to give up prostitution and accept David Hilbert>s philosophy of
physics." Obviously, your personal choice for yourself is to continue
being a prostitute. That>s perfectly understandable. You are incapable
of defending physics myths or axiomatizing any part of physics.

A debate on the physics ofhttp://www.everythingimportant.org/censoriousEvolutionists/
belongs in sci.physics.

Sorry, but I disagree.

That>s only because you believe strongly that sci.physics is to be
reserved for hypocrisy and prostitution.

All you have is bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.
You don>t have a single particle of truth to justify your
lame accusations.

What accusations to you attribute to me?

You lie and malign incessantly. Everything you spew is from your
bigotry, ignorance, pretense and sarcasm.

Malign, yes. There is nothing wrong with it

Thanks for confessing that so honestly. Will you now stop professing
that you are a Christian? Malign means "to speak harmful untruths
about".http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/malign

Ah, actually, I>ll confess to not knowing the definition of "malign".

Then maybe it>s possible that you only believe you know what it means
to be a true Christian but perhaps you misunderstand that also?

Since you have called physicists prostitutes, do you not consider that
maligning?

It is a fitting metaphor for individuals and associations that
prostitute themselves. If you want to argue that you were always a
degenerate and that you never had a conscience to violate in the first
place, then we can start there. You are still a prostitute by debasing
yourself habitually and for repeatedly rejecting all conceivable
minimal standards for civility, decency and scientific integrity.

Shubee- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
[/quote]
I agree completely. Crooks masquerading as physicists, Eric, PD, Dirk
and their dogs Doug and Dono. They cannot see the meltdown coming to
physics.

PD · Guest

On Oct 8, 11:11 am, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 8, 10:10 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

Then maybe it>s possible that you only believe you know what it means
to be a true Christian but perhaps you misunderstand that also?

Since you have called physicists prostitutes, do you not consider that
maligning?

It is a fitting metaphor for individuals and associations that
prostitute themselves. If you want to argue that you were always a
degenerate and that you never had a conscience to violate in the first
place, then we can start there. You are still a prostitute by debasing
yourself habitually and for repeatedly rejecting all conceivable
minimal standards for civility, decency and scientific integrity.

[/quote]
I think I>ll just let your two paragraphs above speak for themselves.

PD

Shubee · Guest

On Oct 8, 1:07 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 8, 11:11 am, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 8, 10:10 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

Then maybe it>s possible that you only believe you know what it means
to be a true Christian but perhaps you misunderstand that also?

Since you have called physicists prostitutes, do you not consider that
maligning?

It is a fitting metaphor for individuals and associations that
prostitute themselves. If you want to argue that you were always a
degenerate and that you never had a conscience to violate in the first
place, then we can start there. You are still a prostitute by debasing
yourself habitually and for repeatedly rejecting all conceivable
minimal standards for civility, decency and scientific integrity.

I think I>ll just let your two paragraphs above speak for themselves.

PD
[/quote]
I disagree with you again Dr. Paul A. Draper. http://www-hep.uta.edu/hep/draper/Draper.html
I believe that we can make the foregoing clearer by examining your
bold hypocrisy in the light of Ockham>s razor. Fact 1: (and please
correct me if I>m wrong): You hypocritically profess to be a
Christian. Fact 2: If you are a transparent hypocrite in regard to the
minimal standards of Christian civility and decency, then Ockham>s
razor stipulates with great certainty that you should be considered
equally hypocritical in your lack of scientific integrity.

http://www-hep.uta.edu/hep/draper/Draper.html

Shubee

PD · Guest

On Oct 8, 6:26 pm, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 8, 1:07 pm, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 8, 11:11 am, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Oct 8, 10:10 am, PD <TheDraperFam...@gmail.com> wrote:

Then maybe it>s possible that you only believe you know what it means
to be a true Christian but perhaps you misunderstand that also?

Since you have called physicists prostitutes, do you not consider that
maligning?

It is a fitting metaphor for individuals and associations that
prostitute themselves. If you want to argue that you were always a
degenerate and that you never had a conscience to violate in the first
place, then we can start there. You are still a prostitute by debasing
yourself habitually and for repeatedly rejecting all conceivable
minimal standards for civility, decency and scientific integrity.

I think I>ll just let your two paragraphs above speak for themselves.

PD

I disagree with you again Dr. Paul A. Draper.http://www-hep.uta.edu/hep/draper/Draper.html
I believe that we can make the foregoing clearer by examining your
bold hypocrisy in the light of Ockham>s razor. Fact 1: (and please
correct me if I>m wrong): You hypocritically profess to be a
Christian. Fact 2: If you are a transparent hypocrite in regard to the
minimal standards of Christian civility and decency, then Ockham>s
razor stipulates with great certainty that you should be considered
equally hypocritical in your lack of scientific integrity.

http://www-hep.uta.edu/hep/draper/Draper.html

Shubee
[/quote]
You>re right. We>ll add this paragraph to the pile and let the three
of them speak for themselves.

PD

Shubee · Guest

On Oct 8, 2:46 pm, Marc Verhaegen <m_verhae...@skynet.be> wrote:
[quote]please stop sending this to sci.anthropology.paleo
[/quote]
What would be the nearest Latin name equivalent for Angry, Censorious
Evolutionist?

http://www.everythingimportant.org/censoriousEvolutionists/

What would be the nearest Latin name equivalent for Angry, Censorious
Creationist?

Shubee

Shubee · Guest

On Oct 2, 10:30 am, Shubee <e.Shu...@gmail.com> wrote:

[quote]What would be the nearest Latin name equivalent for Angry, Censorious
Evolutionist?

http://www.everythingimportant.org/censoriousEvolutionists/
[/quote]
Next question:

What would be the nearest Latin name equivalent for Angry, Censorious
Fundamentalist?

http://www.everythingimportant.org/censoriousFundamentalists/

Shubee


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Anthropology - Paleo Forum	Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6
Page 6 of 6