Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
That apparently depends on one's biases, right?
|
Yours?
Because you have presented an extremely biased case here...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
Check out Giddings & Mangano's Figure 12. (page 83) It clearly shows that depending on the choice of parameters up to 10's of thousands mBH's could be trapped by the Earth.
|
Depending on the choice of parameters
...
You seem to have taken "Choice of parameters" to a whole new level.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
No, no, no! The poll asked each physicist to assign a subjective probability that the Hawking radiation theory will prove to be false (don't forget that it's never been observed in nature). Their responses ranged from 0% to 50%; the 9% was obtained by adding all of the probabilities together, and then dividing by 15.
|
Thank you for explaining that.
I also notice that you clipped off and did not address my question as to why you did not factor in how many physicists disagree with String Theory.
Anyway- this is more bunk than before.
Ok so 15 physicists (WHO?!) were polled. They had the option of giving a percentage based answer on how likely Hawking Radiation is.
So if a particular physicist wasn't sure on the issue and gave it a 50/50- That was added up to equal 9%?!
Do you realize how ludicrous it is that you factored that into your statistics as a Real Figure?
Even More so since you didn't use another ludicrous figure to cover how probably String Theory is?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
No I'm just trying to get you to wake up and smell the coffee.
|
No, you're enjoying a doomsday Prophecy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
I'd happily farm out the task of calculating pcatastrophe.
|
Each time you do it- you come up with totally different figures too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
Unfortunately, the CERN people won't do it themselves. Why do you suppose that is???
|
Because they already know what's going on.
Why don't Apollo Astronauts pander to the likes of Bart Sibrel?! Why do you suppose that is?!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
I'll tell you why. It's because the value of Mother Earth is, for our practical purposes, infinite. They know there's no way they can come up with a defensible estimate of pcatastrophe that would be less than 10-21.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
Not when practically every scientific theory that was written in the past later turned out to be false.
|
Like what?
What SCIENTIFIC theory has been proven false?
And don't even try that Flat Earth nonsense...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
Not when articles are retracted from scientific journals at rates ranging from 1 in 1,000 to 1 in 100.
|
You attempted this claim before (Or was it Thomhgeg? Anyway...) and it's been debunked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
Not when the physicists themselves are bickering over little things like string theory and Hawking radiation.
|
Hardly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
In other words, the CERN people are smart enough to know that the LHC cannot pass muster when the tools of classical risk analysis are applied to the LHC.
|
Yes and NASA knows that if it addresses all those outlandish Hoagland claims about Mars, they won't pass the Conspiracy Scrutiny.
The Apollo astronauts won't interview with Sibrel and Percy anymore because they know that they will get exposed as frauds.
And I'm a giant Fungus disguised as a human scoping out your planet as a possible source of food for my people.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
So that's why a proper risk analysis--a.k.a. cost-benefit analysis--was never done.
|
You claim this as FACT?!
Using my example above-
So that's why NASA never addresses All the outlandish claims- those claims must be True.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
That's why the CERN people limit the discussion to esoteric physics.
|
Oh come on... How do they "limit" it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
That's why the CERN never bothered to estimate the value of Mother Earth.
|
Yeah- In US Dollars
Oh, by the way- with the Stock Market acting the way it is- I hope you have adjusted your US Dollar Value of the Earth...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
I've seen John Ellis on TV openly criticize the technique of calculating expectation (that's simply multiplying p catastrophe by the Total Value of Mother Earth). It's no wonder he hates doing that--it would mean his precious collider would be SHUT DOWN. But what does he know? He's just a physicist. A geek in other words, with a narrow education. As Celestial Mechanic has admitted, physicists are not required to take any ethics classes. Hell, even lawyers are required to take at least one ethics class. Just ask Geonuc.
So that's why the CERN people are so deathly afraid that their actual arguments might get tested in court. That's why their lawyers have used every procedural trick in the book to to ensure that the actual science is not entered into the court record where it might actually get judged. They know that if the LHC fell into the hands of a smart judge like the Honorable Richard Posner, the LHC might just get SHUT DOWN.
That's why they were in such a hurry to get the darned thing up and running. (Too much of a hurry it turns out!  ) They wanted to make it a fait accompli before some court somewhere says the LHC MUST BE SHUT DOWN! |
Ok, not only was that an Ad Hom, but you are now claiming that Ellis LACKS ETHICS AND DOESN'T CARE IF HE DESTROYS THE WORLD.
Warren Platts- You SERIOUSLY need to get a grip on reality. You're so caught up in you "cause" that you're allowing your imagination to do your thinking for you.
Look at this entire post you just made. It's the epitome of HB, CT, ATM and Hoagland type thinking through and through.
You make wild and outlandish claims and accusations. You state your assumptions as facts.
It is so filled with Logical Fallacies that I doubt I could sit here and identify them all.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warren Platts
You can only say that if you believe the techniques of modern risk analysis are bunk. I guess you're in good company. But is an actual argument why that is the case too much to ask?
|
Would you like some cheese?
Oh... Incidentally... I notice that you failed to address me as
Master.