The history of science is one of many more dead ends than breakthroughs.
Proving something doesn't exist is as important as proving that it does.

---

I do not fight fascists because I think I can win.
I fight them because they are fascists.
Chris Hedges

A riot is the language of the unheard. -Martin Luther King, Jr.

Chris, Martin and Robert,
Now all you guys are eating your own words. Now your all agreeing with each other that science might actually change!! Ye might not fully understand the consequences, but ye seem to be in agreement that if they don't find the Higgs boson, Hugh chunks of science will change!

Do any of ye understand why? And if you do, do you then understand that the vast majority of the things i have claimed in messages here in the last two months will all come true! Do ye understand that if they don't find a Higgs Boson that interacts with a Higgs field, then its 100% scientific and mathematical proof that black holes don't exist! Do any of you understand that?

If they don't find the Higgs then i'm right and thousands of physicists are wrong. How could i possibly know that information and be so sure about it? Because God told me!

John.

---

Both Tevatron and LHC are closing on the Higgs by narrowing the energy spectra where it could be found. I am part of this research as an Alpha tester of a BOINC project called LHC@home 2.0. If I find the Higgs boson instead of a pulsar in Einstein@home I shall let you know.
Tullio

---

Both Tevatron and LHC are closing on the Higgs by narrowing the energy spectra where it could be found. I am part of this research as an Alpha tester of a BOINC project called LHC@home 2.0. If I find the Higgs boson instead of a pulsar in Einstein@home I shall let you know.
Tullio

If you find it Tullio, come here straight away and tell us! Don't be running off to the local TV station telling them first! ....LOL

John.

If you find it Tullio, come here straight away and tell us! Don't be running off to the local TV station telling them first! ....LOL

John.

I used to publish in Il Nuovo Cimento but it does not exist any longer. Maybe Scientific Reports by Nature Publishing will accept it.
Tullio

---

I don't think we are you know Johnney!!

At the present limit of our knowledge, the best that we can come up with so far, is the Standard Model of Particle Physics. For that to be validated, the Higgs Boson particle needs to be observed and found. No doubt you will have a view why it is called the God particle.

Chris, i told you that God himself wrote his name on the front page of God's book of scientific knowledge. But its not the Higgs Boson, i promise you that!

I think the the LHC will discover many things that are new to science and Physicists, but I will be surprised if they can prove without doubt that it either exists or doesn't exist.

Chris your right in a way. Whats quite likely to happen is that they don't detect the Higgs Boson and they go looking for money to build an even bigger LHC detector with even higher energy. But even if they do build a bigger detector, they still won't find it cos its not there!

I don't see that that follows .... They do exist, we are seeing them, although we may not understand exactly what they are, how they work, or how they form. All we can observe is their apparent effects upon space around them.

Wrong Chris!!
No, what they see is stars in the centre of the Milkyway orbiting a point they call Sagittarius A*. So they assume there is something big and heavy that they can't see. But Chris, there are other forces that could make those stars orbit that point!!

You and I have already agreed elsewhere that we think a lot of the older parts of the Bible are genuine accounts in the language of the day of what was actually seen. But I'm not sure I agree with your view of this aspect of it.

Chris theologians would say they don't know who wrote the first few books of the Bible. They would say that maybe Moses wrote them. Well i would have information that would strongly suggest that God himself, God the scientist, a physical living person, wrote the book of Genesis. I don't know about the other stories in the bible.

Do your studies reveal to you why the speed of light is 186,000 miles per second? Why isn't it 200,000 or 150,000? The units are irrelevant, on a distant star they might say it is 452 yingtongs per yobba. WE know the speed varies through different mediums, such as glass and water, but assuming through a vacuum why exactly that speed?

Chris, Yes!
Today science would say the speed of light is CONSTANT at 3x10^8m/s. Chris this is wrong, wrong, wrong!! Its not constant!! Even in a vacuum its not constant! Light can travel much faster than that speed! For the time being, i'm not going to say why. But you know where i got that info. I got it in God's book of scientific knowledge!

John.

---

... Now all you guys are eating your own words. Now your all agreeing with each other that science might actually change!! ...

Not at all, we're staying consistent.

Science is a continual search for physical truth. You can also describe that as expanding the boundaries of ignorance. As you search and find out more about our world, you also gain a better understanding that there is yet more to discover.

Part of that discovery is to refine, improve, and change ideas as you get new or better information or as you gain new understanding. The scientific method is a continual test to try to find any failings with present theories and so refine or replace those theories with something more comprehensive, detailed, robust, or whatever to gain a closer approximation to reality.

Note this quote:

In science it often happens that scientists say, "You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken," and then they actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion. ~Carl Sagan, 1987

(There's also some quote about scientists being impossible for political committees because the scientists will change their minds when presented with new information!)


To claim unchanging absolutism or omnipotence so far always implies that you are dreaming some religious fantasy... And true believers believe their religion to be real.

Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

Interesting Martin!
Do you think that way Martin? If scientific evidence was presented in front of you that proved the existence of God, would you accept the evidence? And would you then pray to God for forgiveness for not trusting the Holy Bible, God's word? The book that never changed in the thousands of years since it was written? God's book that was right all along and you could not see it because you chose to "believe" the words of mortal human beings, the scientists you claim to trust so much! Would you then blame the scientists saying that they led you astray with false scientific claims? Would you be angry with the scientists that told you lies? Would you hate them and want to seek revenge when your left outside the gates of heaven? Would you hate those scientists when your left here in the hell after the nuclear, chemical and biological war that is about to happen. Would you ask those scientists for help with your radiation burns. They would tell you "Every man for himself".

Martin, habitable planets are rare!

John.

---

Is that what this is to you Johnney? Are those the reactions you want people to have once you've shown them The Way? You wish is to turn all of your followers against modern science by proclaiming to have all the answers, and taking advantage of the average human's lack of understanding of the sciences to push your own interpretations - that cannot be peer reviewed because they are from God Himself - that you'll somehow bring the world back to faith and away from finding our own truth.

This is all a ruse for New Age Christian Fundamentalism against science and science theory?

Is that what this is to you Johnney? Are those the reactions you want people to have once you've shown them The Way? You wish is to turn all of your followers against modern science by proclaiming to have all the answers, and taking advantage of the average humans lack of understanding of the sciences to push your own interpretations - that cannot be peer reviewed because they are from God Himself - that you'll somehow bring the world back to faith and away from finding our own truth.

This is all a ruse for New Age Christian Fundamentalism against science and science theory?

Ozzfan,
No, your getting me all wrong!! Thats exactly what i'm not going to do!!

As things stand right now today, science and religion conflict with each other. Everyone knows that. But what everyone does not know is that science and religion only conflict with each other because of one single thing!..... Darwin's theory of Human Evolution. And i must emphasise that i'm specifically talking about humans and not all of nature. If you remove human evolution, and replace the word "God" with the word "scientist", then science and religion don't have any conflict anymore. Its means the bible was written by scientists who said in the first chapter that they were taking away the scientific knowledge from humanity.

They (God) told "Eve" in the garden of Eden that if she ate the apple she would die. This was a scientific analogy for the scientific knowledge. And he was right. Humanity is now sitting on the brink of nuclear, chemical and biological warfare. And its only a matter of time before it happens!

But if humans did not evolve, then where did we come from?

There are several ways to state this depending on who your talking to.
Religious explanation; God put us here.
New Age explanation; Aliens put us here.
Scientific explanation; Scientists put us here.

But they all mean the same thing. And don't shoot the messenger here. No, i don't know the answer to the follow-up question of who created the scientists that created us? No, i don't have that answer but just as soon as they land in their massive mother ship that will be the first thing i will ask them!!

I'm not trying to convert anyone to Christianity or any other religion. I don't care what you believe. I'm here discussing the results of the scientific investigation that i have been carrying out for the last few years. And that investigation has returned scientific results that prove conclusively that human beings were here on Earth many thousands of years ago and they had scientific knowledge that is thousands of years ahead of the science we have today. To top that off, they wrote down that science in a book and i have the book and i'm currently translating it.

I'm not here to convert anyone. I'm just chatting about the work before it goes public because i don't have anyone else to talk to about this.

Ozzfan i'm not turning people away from science. I'm uniting science and religion which is exactly the way it was before Darwin. Before Darwin, the priests where the ones that investigated science!

John.

---

No, your getting me all wrong!! Thats exactly what i'm not going to do!!

If I am, then why are you even suggesting that people should get angry with those people who contradict your own findings for "leading them astray"?

As things stand right now today, science and religion conflict with each other. Everyone knows that.

Only because religion attempts to claim things that aren't observed by all, repeatable by all, and yet all are expected to believe.

But what everyone does not know is that science and religion only conflict with each other because of one single thing!..... Darwin's theory of Human Evolution. And i must emphasise that i'm specifically talking about humans and not all of nature.

Some religious people would argue with you on this one. An individual that I work with believes that even if we evolved, it was still a deity that created the universe, starting with the Big Bang, and simply stands back and observes everything. Sort of like a Cosmic Observer. He seems to meld religion and science together without the need to disprove Darwin at all.

The problem I have with his view is that there's no proof and no observations made that indicates this Cosmic Observer even exists.

If you remove human evolution, and replace the word "God" with the word "scientist", then science and religion don't have any conflict anymore. Its means the bible was written by scientists who said in the first chapter that they were taking away the scientific knowledge from humanity.

So much wrong with this, I don't know where to start.

Referring to God as a scientist as a means to make religion seem more "right" is a bad idea. You can't simply take what we know today and try to retrofit it (or retconing as it's called in comic books) to what was written long ago. Otherwise we can do that with any book we read and claim we know the secrets of the universe. The problem is proving the theory. What evidence does anyone have that would support the idea that this is what they intended to write long ago? And how is it that people from long ago were supposedly so advanced yet they left so many questions behind instead of leaving the answers. It defies all that we know about the natural progression of life.

They (God) told "Eve" in the garden of Eden that if she ate the apple she would die. This was a scientific analogy for the scientific knowledge. And he was right. Humanity is now sitting on the brink of nuclear, chemical and biological warfare. And its only a matter of time before it happens!

Another set of statements made that have so much wrong with them.

Why does every Christian only try to re-interpret the Bible? What makes the Bible so special that it must be filled with truth compared to any other writing in history, including those from other religious backgrounds? They take their faith in the Bible as fact, and then try to apply today's knowledge to it so that it makes more sense to them.

What evidence do you have that Eve ever existed? Why is it that you get to pick and choose what stories are meant to be parables, but then you get to claim that the people and events really did occur?

But if humans did not evolve, then where did we come from?

That's a lame question to contemplate considering we have made observations that seem to support the idea of evolution. We have made no observations of any other kind that directly conflict with the strongest supporting theory of evolution.

There are several ways to state this depending on who your talking to.
Religious explanation; God put us here.
New Age explanation; Aliens put us here.
Scientific explanation; Scientists put us here.

Wrong on the last one. No scientist claims that Scientists put us here. Most scientists think that life formed here because the conditions were right, and simple life eventually evolved into complex, intelligent life.

But they all mean the same thing. And don't shoot the messenger here. No, i don't know the answer to the follow-up question of who created the scientists that created us? No, i don't have that answer but just as soon as they land in their massive mother ship that will be the first thing i will ask them!!

I feel so sad that you will be spending your whole life waiting for something that isn't going to happen, yet you believe so much just like Linus believed in the Great Pumpkin.

Without any direct supporting evidence, all you have is your twisted interpretations from a book that "only you are able to read and understand a specific way" and because "God told you". These are the claims of someone that wants to believe in something but doesn't want to bother proving it. The only proof you're willing to give is to people on a message board - but you only want them to argue based upon what they know and not point to what other people have said.

I'm not trying to convert anyone to Christianity or any other religion. I don't care what you believe. I'm here discussing the results of the scientific investigation that i have been carrying out for the last few years. And that investigation has returned scientific results that prove conclusively that human beings were here on Earth many thousands of years ago and they had scientific knowledge that is thousands of years ahead of the science we have today. To top that off, they wrote down that science in a book and i have the book and i'm currently translating it.

I'm not here to convert anyone. I'm just chatting about the work before it goes public because i don't have anyone else to talk to about this.

Ozzfan i'm not turning people away from science. I'm uniting science and religion which is exactly the way it was before Darwin. Before Darwin, the priests where the ones that investigated science!

You're doing no such thing. You seem to be rather angry that science has finally found answers and we've gotten far enough in our evolution to no longer need the lies and beliefs in a God to explain the world around us.

You keep making wild claims about this "book", but refuse to provide any of it for review. There's also absolutely no direct observations that have been made thus far that supports the idea that people long ago possessed such advanced scientific knowledge. If there were such evidence, real scientists and archeologists would have found it by now and it would be common knowledge - not given by some guy in Ireland trying to change the world through an internet message board.

But you are trying to convince people to believe in your interpretations, and in doing so would "convert" them away from what we think we already know. So you are trying to convert people.

Before we took the scientific approach to life in general, and kept checking our facts and observations, which started long before Darwin, priests did no such thing as provide scientific knowledge. They were spiritualists that told people what they wanted to hear, and the most cozy, comforting thought was that some invisible man in the universe was watching over them and loves them, but only if they live their lives the way He wishes, all without keeping himself around and in physical form to keep us in line.

Our science and our knowledge is expanding every day. Things only move forward in general (maybe a few steps back at times), but in no way has the past ever held more advanced knowledge than we have today. It's pure hogwash.

I cannot understand why God should use hieroglyph to speak to mankind since He has so many alphabets to choose from. The alphabet is the greatest man's invention and it comes from the Middle East (Ebla).
Tullio

---

... As things stand right now today, science and religion conflict with each other. Everyone knows that. But what everyone does not know is that science and religion only conflict with each other because of one single thing!..... Darwin's theory of Human Evolution...

Try taking a look at Buddhism? No conflicts with science there.

Note that there are many religions... Note also that some religions survive and some religions fade and die. Religions themselves evolve and their myriad ideas have evolved over the last few thousand years into what we see today.


And there is the (in)famous supposed quote by Galileo: "Eppur si muove" (nevertheless, it does move). See also Wikipedia: "E pur si muove!". That was accepted about 124 years later by a certain widespread religion... Pre-ordained and infallible?...

I do wonder if there is a game of 'people control' being played out, or whether there is something more altruistic for religions to try to 'guide' people through life, or if there is more simply the case of hurt pride that "Science is [too] Humbling".


Keep searchin',
Martin

---

See new freedom: Mageia Linux
Take a look for yourself: Linux Format
The Future is what We all make IT (GPLv3)

I do wonder if there is a game of 'people control' being played out, or whether there is something more altruistic for religions to try to 'guide' people through life, or if there is more simply the case of hurt pride that "Science is [too] Humbling".

I suspect there is no money to be fleeced from a science flock compared to what can be fleeced from a cult flock.

---

It's an amazing shot to behold: For the first time scientists have imaged a pair of black holes found in a spiral galaxy very much like our own Milky Way. Equally important, this also constitutes the nearest known pair of supermassive black holes to Earth identified to date.

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2011/09/02/supermassivehole_620x350.jpg

~more~

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/09/02/scitech/main20101040.shtml?tag=cbsContent;cbsCarousel
Two huge black holes spotted "close" to Earth

It's an amazing shot to behold: For the first time scientists have imaged a pair of black holes found in a spiral galaxy very much like our own Milky Way. Equally important, this also constitutes the nearest known pair of supermassive black holes to Earth identified to date.

http://i.i.com.com/cnwk.1d/i/tim/2011/09/02/supermassivehole_620x350.jpg

~more~

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/09/02/scitech/main20101040.shtml?tag=cbsContent;cbsCarousel
Two huge black holes spotted "close" to Earth

That's excellent! Thanks for posting it!

Steve

---

Warning, addicted to SETI crunching!
Crunching as a member of GPU Users Group.
GPUUG Website

That's excellent! Thanks for posting it!

No problem, Your welcome, Steve.

Black holes are a mystery.

So much for Johnney "I drank too much" Guinness' claim that black holes really don't exist.


Thank you for posting that very interesting find, Lynn.

Your welcome, 0zzF4.

There are millions of black holes out in the universe. What purpose do they serve? I think they gather time, and when their full, they erupt into a supernova. Giving the universe back what was sucked in. Wild theory of mine. jmo

Try taking a look at Buddhism? No conflicts with science there.

Note that there are many religions... Note also that some religions survive and some religions fade and die. Religions themselves evolve and their myriad ideas have evolved over the last few thousand years into what we see today.

I'm not sure that religions evolve. It's more reasonable to think of them as changing their advertising copy to account for changes necessitated by competing products.

I do wonder if there is a game of 'people control' being played out, or whether there is something more altruistic for religions to try to 'guide' people through life

Isn't all marketing a form of "people control"? Looking back on one instance, what we see is a group of old men who saw an opportunity to codify all the various "teachings/gospels/etc." that arose after the Rabbi Jesus (remember, he was a Jew) was crucified. The same holds true for Luther who saw what he determined as a flaw in a "product", made changes, and then marketed his own product. If you follow this same reasoning through to today what you have is a religious automotive industry with different manufacturers and models you can choose from based on what style and color you like.

---