Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Noonan
Fair enough the alternate science I propose is rejected because I do not know quantum science.
|
You also do not seem to understand Newtonian physics, special relativity, and general relativity as well.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Noonan
Fair enough prophesy [sic] is rejected because I am no prophet even if a new mineral manganese silicate has just been discovered in a comet as predicted.
|
Wow, that Nostradamus guy sure gets around!
Manganese minerals in a comet! Who'd'a thunk it? But seriously, prophecy and Nostradamus are not admissible as evidence in the court of science. Please do not do this again.
One of the things pounded into me in high school English (that actually stuck!) was the difference between "prophecy" the noun and "prophesy" the verb. I could prophesy that you will never learn this difference; on the other hand my record of prophecy is not very good.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Noonan
Fair enough science must be right even if the mathematics proving ...
|
I don't understand this part of the rant either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Noonan
All things fair enough. What about one little physical detail? A micro black hole is supposed to be exothermic, right. And we talk of a micro black hole, why?
With the beams fully illuminated the capacity is to generate over 600,000 micro black holes a week.
|
Reference please? Where do you get this figure?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Noonan
One small detail like getting exothermic wrong and the core of the earth freezes. No big deal right? Wrong! [Speculation based on false analogies snipped!]
|
And what makes you think we are so completely wrong about micro black holes? References please, and no prophetic quatrains.