Back to Home

Blackholes Forum Message

Forums: Atm · Astrophotography · Blackholes · Blackholes2 · CCD · Celestron · Domes · Education
Eyepieces · Meade · Misc. · God and Science · SETI · Software · UFO · XEphem
RSS Button

Home | Discussion Forums | Blackholes I | Post
Login

Be the first pioneers to continue the Astronomy Discussions at our new Astronomy meeting place...
The Space and Astronomy Agora
Here Is Some More "real Astronomy?" By Cosmotiger (Nicholas)

Forum List | Follow Ups | Post Message | Back to Thread Topics | In Response To
Posted by M.W.Pearson on November 16, 2002 02:47:44 UTC


At http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5681.shtml
Nicholas Bond writes: “You even make Mike look like a genius, though I'm afraid that he has you beat in the jerk category.”

To test Harv’s Hypothesis, I looked at the past week’s correspondence on this forum only. These are some of the data.

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5557.shtml
Your Predictions…This is just gibberish. You made up several of those words and phrases. Describe it in a language that somebody other than you could understand.

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5563.shtml
Don’t be deluded ...nothing you're doing here will hurt me in any way. You're only hurting yourself.

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5580.shtml
So basically Of course I don't. I don't expect that you can answer anything of practical use. Even if (and that's a big if) your theories were correct, they would be totally useless because you can't give any specific information that could be used to our advantage. There's more to science than just explanation.

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5599.shtml
I must be tough I sympathize. It must be really tough having absolutely no backing for your ideas. Let me know when you can do something useful.

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5601.shtml
Why is it...that the wackos always cluster around physics and astronomy? There are plenty of lawyers and doctors out there who are actually respected for what they do. Imagine, no self-proclaimed geniuses telling you how to do your job!

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5619.shtml
Just go away If I wanted to see advertisements, I'd watch an infomercial.
If you have a prediction (numbers and equations included), just state it. Otherwise, you're wasting everybody's time with shallow, meaningless philosophy.

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5620.shtml
WTF? Where do all these people come from?! This is worse than creationism.

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5621.shtml
I think ...you should learn more hardcore physics and astronomy before you try to theorize like that. It's one thing to have clever ideas, it's quite another to be rash. Real cleverness is both inventive and aware of its bounds.

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
If you're not careful, you could end up like Ray. You can read a couple of his messages on this board to get an idea of what I'm talking about.


http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5638.shtml
Pure Flames, Thoroughly Annoyed And Insulted Did you check out my post in the General Discussion section? Do you realize that you have virtually all of the qualities I listed? Do you realize that there are countless other lunatics who claim to have a theory for the universe? Do you actually think that you're the special one among this group?
Are you sure that wasn't your SAT score? Or perhaps the number of kilovolts required to knock sense into you?

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5640.shtml
So Where Does The CMB Come From? *NT* nt

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5643.shtml
Please explain:
1. The photoelectric effect
2. The blackbody spectrum
3. Emission lines
4. Absorption lines
5. Recombination
6. Ionization
7. Lasers
8. Compton Scattering
9. Inverse Compton Scattering
10. Electron-Positron Annihilation
11. Nuclear Physics (including fusion and fission)
12. Electron Diffraction and Interference Experiments

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5648.shtml
What are your predictions?
The problem with making these kind of hypotheses is that you don't have nearly enough experience to refute them. I'm not at all against thinking, but it's easy to get caught in a mindset if nobody is around to tell you otherwise.

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5667.shtml
If only… If only you had any idea how clueless you are. Your arrogance is almost depressing to me, because it means that humans are so stubborn and deluded that they will believe anything that gives them a feeling of importance. As for the rest of your ramblings, I'm getting really tired of refuting virtually everything you say. My main point is at the top of this post and in several others I've posted. If you can't predict anything useful, shutup. Let us do our jobs and you stick to something that you know about. I don't care if you believe in it or not, you have to learn math before you can be of any use in something like this.

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5668.shtml
Yeah Bruce You are getting sleepy....watch the meaningless drivel....Ray is right....physics are ruled by BS and lunatic farmers....equations are useless...anything Ray doesn't understand is not real....he is your new god....you must make a pilgrimage to the great lakes if you are to understand the true properties of waves.....watch the meaningless drivel....all accidents are caused by bad physics....all equations are empirical fits...the length of a post determines its truth....watch the meaningless drivel.....

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5670.shtml
Preferably Both, If You Have Time *NT* nt

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5677.shtml
Bombs…I don't need to read your work. Everything you say is either contradictory or absurd.

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5679.shtml
No, probably ignorance Since everything else he says is wrong, he's probably wrong about how he's guided as well.

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5680.shtml
One Thing He Has Done.......is to make me appreciate your ideas more. Ray has given "crackpot" an entirely new definition.

http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5681.shtml
Unfortunately I don't think that yaniru is in the same league as you. Your absurdity level much MUCH higher. You even make Mike look like a genius, though I'm afraid that he has you beat in the jerk category.

The past week’s comments by Nicholas Bond, the gentleman astronomer, include:
http://www.astronomy.net/forums/blackholes/messages/5683.shtml
Finally...a post that shows a glimmer of intelligence.

Follow Ups:

Login to Post
Additional Information
Google
 
Web www.astronomy.net
DayNightLine
About Astronomy Net | Advertise on Astronomy Net | Contact & Comments | Privacy Policy
Unless otherwise specified, web site content Copyright 1994-2019 John Huggins All Rights Reserved
Forum posts are Copyright their authors as specified in the heading above the post.
"dbHTML," "AstroGuide," "ASTRONOMY.NET" & "VA.NET"
are trademarks of John Huggins