Discussion:
UK or US?
(too old to reply)
The Starmaker
2013-11-30 20:51:49 UTC
Permalink
There appears to me..
that there are two types
of Science.

One is United Kingdom Science, and
the other is United States Science.


I'm trying to figure out
which one is superior.
x***@comcast.net
2013-12-01 04:13:42 UTC
Permalink
On Saturday, November 30, 2013 12:51:49 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote:
> There appears to me..
>
> that there are two types
>
> of Science.
>
>
>
> One is United Kingdom Science, and
>
> the other is United States Science.
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm trying to figure out
>
> which one is superior.

xxein: How would you know with your crackpot thinking?
The Starmaker
2013-12-02 06:45:43 UTC
Permalink
The Starmaker wrote:
>
> There appears to me..
> that there are two types
> of Science.
>
> One is United Kingdom Science, and
> the other is United States Science.
>
> I'm trying to figure out
> which one is superior.



The UK guys are a strange lot...youuknowwatimean?

You got the UK Hoyle guy
who came up with
the word
The Big Bang
but never believed in it.
Mike Dworetsky
2013-12-02 09:31:24 UTC
Permalink
The Starmaker wrote:
> The Starmaker wrote:
>>
>> There appears to me..
>> that there are two types
>> of Science.
>>
>> One is United Kingdom Science, and
>> the other is United States Science.
>>
>> I'm trying to figure out
>> which one is superior.
>
>
>
> The UK guys are a strange lot...youuknowwatimean?
>
> You got the UK Hoyle guy
> who came up with
> the word
> The Big Bang
> but never believed in it.

The phrase was intended to heap scorn on the idea. That was at a time when
his competing idea stood a slight chance of being right. Later observations
killed it off.

But the point was that the two models made predictions about what should be
observed. Both said we should see an expansion (a Hubble constant) but only
one said we should see a nearly uniform black body radiation of a few
Kelvins, and only one predicted the observed ratio of H and He in the
universe.

--
Mike Dworetsky

(Remove pants sp*mbl*ck to reply)
J. Clarke
2013-12-02 12:51:05 UTC
Permalink
In article <***@bt.com>, platinum198
@pants.btinternet.com says...
>
> The Starmaker wrote:
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> >>
> >> There appears to me..
> >> that there are two types
> >> of Science.
> >>
> >> One is United Kingdom Science, and
> >> the other is United States Science.
> >>
> >> I'm trying to figure out
> >> which one is superior.
> >
> >
> >
> > The UK guys are a strange lot...youuknowwatimean?
> >
> > You got the UK Hoyle guy
> > who came up with
> > the word
> > The Big Bang
> > but never believed in it.
>
> The phrase was intended to heap scorn on the idea. That was at a time when
> his competing idea stood a slight chance of being right. Later observations
> killed it off.
>
> But the point was that the two models made predictions about what should be
> observed. Both said we should see an expansion (a Hubble constant) but only
> one said we should see a nearly uniform black body radiation of a few
> Kelvins, and only one predicted the observed ratio of H and He in the
> universe.

In any case the Big Bang is not "United States science", the guy who
figured it out was a Belgian working for the Vatican. The US just found
the data that confirmed it, and that by dumb luck.
The Starmaker
2013-12-03 00:30:57 UTC
Permalink
J. Clarke wrote:
>
> In article <***@bt.com>, platinum198
> @pants.btinternet.com says...
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >>
> > >> There appears to me..
> > >> that there are two types
> > >> of Science.
> > >>
> > >> One is United Kingdom Science, and
> > >> the other is United States Science.
> > >>
> > >> I'm trying to figure out
> > >> which one is superior.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > The UK guys are a strange lot...youuknowwatimean?
> > >
> > > You got the UK Hoyle guy
> > > who came up with
> > > the word
> > > The Big Bang
> > > but never believed in it.
> >
> > The phrase was intended to heap scorn on the idea. That was at a time when
> > his competing idea stood a slight chance of being right. Later observations
> > killed it off.
> >
> > But the point was that the two models made predictions about what should be
> > observed. Both said we should see an expansion (a Hubble constant) but only
> > one said we should see a nearly uniform black body radiation of a few
> > Kelvins, and only one predicted the observed ratio of H and He in the
> > universe.
>
> In any case the Big Bang is not "United States science", the guy who
> figured it out was a Belgian working for the Vatican. The US just found
> the data that confirmed it, and that by dumb luck.


And the Belgian guy working for the Vatican got confused with Albert Eienstein's big bang...the atomic bomb.



...the Belgian guy working for the Vatican
was reading Albert Einstein's white paper...
and thought The Atomic Bomb was some
sort of Big Bang in the universe...
but it was just a bomb that made the big bang.

It's alllll soooooo confusing.

Wat a mess!


"that extremely powerful bombs of a new type may thus be constructed. A single bomb of this

type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy

the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory." ---The real Big Bang



I can understand people looking at Einstein's notes and saying to themselves...THIS IS A BIG BANG!!!!


But it had nothing to do with the universe...he just wanted to kill some Germans.


Somebody [whispered] 'a big bang' to another physicst, and they confused it with...a big bang!


Albert Einstein went crazy wondering who told them about his 'extremely powerful bombs of a new type', thinking they
knew about his atomic bomb secrets....

It's alllll soooooo confusing.


And it goes on to this day...


Am I the only one who makes any sense here?


What Well are you all drinking from?


The Starmaker
The Starmaker
2013-12-04 08:21:51 UTC
Permalink
The Starmaker wrote:
>
> J. Clarke wrote:
> >
> > In article <***@bt.com>, platinum198
> > @pants.btinternet.com says...
> > >
> > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> There appears to me..
> > > >> that there are two types
> > > >> of Science.
> > > >>
> > > >> One is United Kingdom Science, and
> > > >> the other is United States Science.
> > > >>
> > > >> I'm trying to figure out
> > > >> which one is superior.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > The UK guys are a strange lot...youuknowwatimean?
> > > >
> > > > You got the UK Hoyle guy
> > > > who came up with
> > > > the word
> > > > The Big Bang
> > > > but never believed in it.
> > >
> > > The phrase was intended to heap scorn on the idea. That was at a time when
> > > his competing idea stood a slight chance of being right. Later observations
> > > killed it off.
> > >
> > > But the point was that the two models made predictions about what should be
> > > observed. Both said we should see an expansion (a Hubble constant) but only
> > > one said we should see a nearly uniform black body radiation of a few
> > > Kelvins, and only one predicted the observed ratio of H and He in the
> > > universe.
> >
> > In any case the Big Bang is not "United States science", the guy who
> > figured it out was a Belgian working for the Vatican. The US just found
> > the data that confirmed it, and that by dumb luck.
>
> And the Belgian guy working for the Vatican got confused with Albert Eienstein's big bang...the atomic bomb.
>
> ...the Belgian guy working for the Vatican
> was reading Albert Einstein's white paper...
> and thought The Atomic Bomb was some
> sort of Big Bang in the universe...
> but it was just a bomb that made the big bang.
>
> It's alllll soooooo confusing.
>
> Wat a mess!
>
> "that extremely powerful bombs of a new type may thus be constructed. A single bomb of this
>
> type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy
>
> the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory." ---The real Big Bang
>
> I can understand people looking at Einstein's notes and saying to themselves...THIS IS A BIG BANG!!!!
>
> But it had nothing to do with the universe...he just wanted to kill some Germans.
>
> Somebody [whispered] 'a big bang' to another physicst, and they confused it with...a big bang!
>
> Albert Einstein went crazy wondering who told them about his 'extremely powerful bombs of a new type', thinking they
> knew about his atomic bomb secrets....
>
> It's alllll soooooo confusing.
>
> And it goes on to this day...
>
> Am I the only one who makes any sense here?
>
> What Well are you all drinking from?
>
> The Starmaker


I mean..
haven't you figured this out yet????

That, that ..

The origins of the big bang
The origins of the atomic bomb
are both the same?

They are both the same thing!

They both come from the same thing.

They are one and the same thing.

A large amount of energy released from a small amount of matter=TheAtomicBombisTheBigBang.


The Big Bang is the Atomic Bomb.
TheAtomicBombisTheBigBang

They are both the same thing.

They both come from the theory of relativity.

They both come from einstein.

Somewhere...somehow

yous people managed to
separate the two.

A large amount of energy released from a small amount of matter= The Atomic Bang. or...The Big Bomb.


How did History separate the two? I think it's called...Stupdity.


The Starmaker



You people made a Science out of Stupidity!
The Starmaker
2013-12-04 17:54:47 UTC
Permalink
The Starmaker wrote:
>
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > J. Clarke wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <***@bt.com>, platinum198
> > > @pants.btinternet.com says...
> > > >
> > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> There appears to me..
> > > > >> that there are two types
> > > > >> of Science.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> One is United Kingdom Science, and
> > > > >> the other is United States Science.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I'm trying to figure out
> > > > >> which one is superior.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > The UK guys are a strange lot...youuknowwatimean?
> > > > >
> > > > > You got the UK Hoyle guy
> > > > > who came up with
> > > > > the word
> > > > > The Big Bang
> > > > > but never believed in it.
> > > >
> > > > The phrase was intended to heap scorn on the idea. That was at a time when
> > > > his competing idea stood a slight chance of being right. Later observations
> > > > killed it off.
> > > >
> > > > But the point was that the two models made predictions about what should be
> > > > observed. Both said we should see an expansion (a Hubble constant) but only
> > > > one said we should see a nearly uniform black body radiation of a few
> > > > Kelvins, and only one predicted the observed ratio of H and He in the
> > > > universe.
> > >
> > > In any case the Big Bang is not "United States science", the guy who
> > > figured it out was a Belgian working for the Vatican. The US just found
> > > the data that confirmed it, and that by dumb luck.
> >
> > And the Belgian guy working for the Vatican got confused with Albert Eienstein's big bang...the atomic bomb.
> >
> > ...the Belgian guy working for the Vatican
> > was reading Albert Einstein's white paper...
> > and thought The Atomic Bomb was some
> > sort of Big Bang in the universe...
> > but it was just a bomb that made the big bang.
> >
> > It's alllll soooooo confusing.
> >
> > Wat a mess!
> >
> > "that extremely powerful bombs of a new type may thus be constructed. A single bomb of this
> >
> > type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy
> >
> > the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory." ---The real Big Bang
> >
> > I can understand people looking at Einstein's notes and saying to themselves...THIS IS A BIG BANG!!!!
> >
> > But it had nothing to do with the universe...he just wanted to kill some Germans.
> >
> > Somebody [whispered] 'a big bang' to another physicst, and they confused it with...a big bang!
> >
> > Albert Einstein went crazy wondering who told them about his 'extremely powerful bombs of a new type', thinking they
> > knew about his atomic bomb secrets....
> >
> > It's alllll soooooo confusing.
> >
> > And it goes on to this day...
> >
> > Am I the only one who makes any sense here?
> >
> > What Well are you all drinking from?
> >
> > The Starmaker
>
> I mean..
> haven't you figured this out yet????
>
> That, that ..
>
> The origins of the big bang
> The origins of the atomic bomb
> are both the same?
>
> They are both the same thing!
>
> They both come from the same thing.
>
> They are one and the same thing.
>
> A large amount of energy released from a small amount of matter=TheAtomicBombisTheBigBang.
>
> The Big Bang is the Atomic Bomb.
> TheAtomicBombisTheBigBang
>
> They are both the same thing.
>
> They both come from the theory of relativity.
>
> They both come from einstein.
>
> Somewhere...somehow
>
> yous people managed to
> separate the two.
>
> A large amount of energy released from a small amount of matter= The Atomic Bang. or...The Big Bomb.
>
> How did History separate the two? I think it's called...Stupdity.
>
> The Starmaker
>
> You people made a Science out of Stupidity!


In otherwords...somebody in the UK
stole einstein's notes
to see what
he was thinking of.

His atomic bomb notes were mistaken for
a big bang in the universe.

Einstein was thinking of a
big bang in Germany.

There was no Big Bang, just a Big Bomb.


If you want an explaination of why the universe is expanding, I'll tell you the truth.

It was not cause by a big bang, it is in fact...A Big Inhale.

Picture a balloon...inhaling...gettin bigger. This stuff is simple.



The Starmaker





And I never went to college...I bet you a million dollars you couldn't have never guess that!





i think they might even have thrown me out of high school!!
The Starmaker
2013-12-05 19:22:32 UTC
Permalink
The Starmaker wrote:
>
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > J. Clarke wrote:
> > > >
> > > > In article <***@bt.com>, platinum198
> > > > @pants.btinternet.com says...
> > > > >
> > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > > The Starmaker wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> There appears to me..
> > > > > >> that there are two types
> > > > > >> of Science.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> One is United Kingdom Science, and
> > > > > >> the other is United States Science.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I'm trying to figure out
> > > > > >> which one is superior.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The UK guys are a strange lot...youuknowwatimean?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > You got the UK Hoyle guy
> > > > > > who came up with
> > > > > > the word
> > > > > > The Big Bang
> > > > > > but never believed in it.
> > > > >
> > > > > The phrase was intended to heap scorn on the idea. That was at a time when
> > > > > his competing idea stood a slight chance of being right. Later observations
> > > > > killed it off.
> > > > >
> > > > > But the point was that the two models made predictions about what should be
> > > > > observed. Both said we should see an expansion (a Hubble constant) but only
> > > > > one said we should see a nearly uniform black body radiation of a few
> > > > > Kelvins, and only one predicted the observed ratio of H and He in the
> > > > > universe.
> > > >
> > > > In any case the Big Bang is not "United States science", the guy who
> > > > figured it out was a Belgian working for the Vatican. The US just found
> > > > the data that confirmed it, and that by dumb luck.
> > >
> > > And the Belgian guy working for the Vatican got confused with Albert Eienstein's big bang...the atomic bomb.
> > >
> > > ...the Belgian guy working for the Vatican
> > > was reading Albert Einstein's white paper...
> > > and thought The Atomic Bomb was some
> > > sort of Big Bang in the universe...
> > > but it was just a bomb that made the big bang.
> > >
> > > It's alllll soooooo confusing.
> > >
> > > Wat a mess!
> > >
> > > "that extremely powerful bombs of a new type may thus be constructed. A single bomb of this
> > >
> > > type, carried by boat and exploded in a port, might very well destroy
> > >
> > > the whole port together with some of the surrounding territory." ---The real Big Bang
> > >
> > > I can understand people looking at Einstein's notes and saying to themselves...THIS IS A BIG BANG!!!!
> > >
> > > But it had nothing to do with the universe...he just wanted to kill some Germans.
> > >
> > > Somebody [whispered] 'a big bang' to another physicst, and they confused it with...a big bang!
> > >
> > > Albert Einstein went crazy wondering who told them about his 'extremely powerful bombs of a new type', thinking they
> > > knew about his atomic bomb secrets....
> > >
> > > It's alllll soooooo confusing.
> > >
> > > And it goes on to this day...
> > >
> > > Am I the only one who makes any sense here?
> > >
> > > What Well are you all drinking from?
> > >
> > > The Starmaker
> >
> > I mean..
> > haven't you figured this out yet????
> >
> > That, that ..
> >
> > The origins of the big bang
> > The origins of the atomic bomb
> > are both the same?
> >
> > They are both the same thing!
> >
> > They both come from the same thing.
> >
> > They are one and the same thing.
> >
> > A large amount of energy released from a small amount of matter=TheAtomicBombisTheBigBang.
> >
> > The Big Bang is the Atomic Bomb.
> > TheAtomicBombisTheBigBang
> >
> > They are both the same thing.
> >
> > They both come from the theory of relativity.
> >
> > They both come from einstein.
> >
> > Somewhere...somehow
> >
> > yous people managed to
> > separate the two.
> >
> > A large amount of energy released from a small amount of matter= The Atomic Bang. or...The Big Bomb.
> >
> > How did History separate the two? I think it's called...Stupdity.
> >
> > The Starmaker
> >
> > You people made a Science out of Stupidity!
>
> In otherwords...somebody in the UK
> stole einstein's notes
> to see what
> he was thinking of.
>
> His atomic bomb notes were mistaken for
> a big bang in the universe.

Most people are not aware of this fact...(I mean *all* of yous)
that when Einstein discovered that somebody had to be reading his
atomic bomb notes and confusing it with explosions in the universe instead..
he quickly changed his theory of relativity paper to remove any indication
of a universe exploding. He fudge it.


fudge;
present or deal with (something) in a vague, noncommittal, or inadequate way, esp. so as to conceal the truth or mislead.


This is a true story.


The Starmaker
John F. Eldredge
2013-12-07 03:43:19 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 09:54:47 -0800, The Starmaker wrote:

> And I never went to college...I bet you a million dollars you couldn't
> have never guess that!

I would guess you probably never made it out of third grade.

--
John F. Eldredge -- ***@jfeldredge.com
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that.
Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."
Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
The Starmaker
2013-12-07 04:02:54 UTC
Permalink
John F. Eldredge wrote:
>
> On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 09:54:47 -0800, The Starmaker wrote:
>
> > And I never went to college...I bet you a million dollars you couldn't
> > have never guess that!
>
> I would guess you probably never made it out of third grade.


I was seven when I was in the third grade...

7 is the age one decides
what you will do
the rest of your life.

Why would I need to go any further than the third grade?
The Starmaker
2013-12-07 09:03:00 UTC
Permalink
The Starmaker wrote:
>
> John F. Eldredge wrote:
> >
> > On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 09:54:47 -0800, The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > > And I never went to college...I bet you a million dollars you couldn't
> > > have never guess that!
> >
> > I would guess you probably never made it out of third grade.
>
> I was seven when I was in the third grade...
>
> 7 is the age one decides
> what you will do
> the rest of your life.
>
> Why would I need to go any further than the third grade?



What I don't understand is...

why bother to throw in Science classes?

Why does the 'scientific communtiy' want children to learn Science?

And Math!?

A small group of people
probably with some genetic defect..
wants to shove down to children throats,
Math and Science classes.

Why do you think the majority of people hate Math?

There is a reason for it.

Math and Science belongs to a small group of people.
Keep it out of our schools!

Math is an invention, not a discovery.

You didn't find it under a rock somewhere...

Have you seen Science class in the fifth or six grade?

The teacher looks like some sort of Martian, talking Martian talk.
It's like walking into a Bible class.

Come on...there is absoutely no reason to learn how many planets there are..
or List of Elements of the Periodic Table. Useless information shoved down
children throats..the only purpose is to indoctrinate their cosmic religion.

It's Invasion of the Body Snatchers by the 'scientific community'.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuL2QwsNeM8&feature=player_detailpage#t=150
The Starmaker
2013-12-08 04:10:56 UTC
Permalink
The Starmaker wrote:
>
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > John F. Eldredge wrote:
> > >
> > > On Wed, 04 Dec 2013 09:54:47 -0800, The Starmaker wrote:
> > >
> > > > And I never went to college...I bet you a million dollars you couldn't
> > > > have never guess that!
> > >
> > > I would guess you probably never made it out of third grade.
> >
> > I was seven when I was in the third grade...
> >
> > 7 is the age one decides
> > what you will do
> > the rest of your life.
> >
> > Why would I need to go any further than the third grade?
>
> What I don't understand is...
>
> why bother to throw in Science classes?
>
> Why does the 'scientific communtiy' want children to learn Science?
>
> And Math!?
>
> A small group of people
> probably with some genetic defect..
> wants to shove down to children throats,
> Math and Science classes.
>
> Why do you think the majority of people hate Math?
>
> There is a reason for it.
>
> Math and Science belongs to a small group of people.
> Keep it out of our schools!
>
> Math is an invention, not a discovery.
>
> You didn't find it under a rock somewhere...
>
> Have you seen Science class in the fifth or six grade?
>
> The teacher looks like some sort of Martian, talking Martian talk.
> It's like walking into a Bible class.
>
> Come on...there is absoutely no reason to learn how many planets there are..
> or List of Elements of the Periodic Table. Useless information shoved down
> children throats..the only purpose is to indoctrinate their cosmic religion.
>
> It's Invasion of the Body Snatchers by the 'scientific community'.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WuL2QwsNeM8&feature=player_detailpage#t=150


Do you recall your first time in a Science class in school?

I thought it was some kind of sorcery class or witchcraft...
strange symbols, mixing chemicals...outer space!

Math class? What the hell was that all about? You had to memorize the WHOLE multitiplcation table!!!?

Science classes have only one purpose, to weed out Martians.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmMghIiOQ10


To join their ...cult.


The Starmaker


Math is just strange symbols attached to patterns.
The Starmaker
2013-12-09 17:40:33 UTC
Permalink
***@redbridge.gov.uk wrote:
>
> On Sunday, December 8, 2013 4:10:56 AM UTC, The Starmaker wrote:
>
> > Math class? What the hell was that all about? You had to memorize the WHOLE multitiplcation table!!!?
>
> Yes, I have found this pointless for several decades now.
>
> Actually, of course, it isn't.

First your right side talks, now we will hear from the left side..



>It is an idea based on the premise that a large percentage of people who go to school are too stupid to learn how to multiply.



Then why teach Math and Science to children? Only one reason...the 'scientific communtiy' are looking for the Martians among us.


Public schools need to be abolished...that will protect The Martian Children from the 'scientific community' and their cosmic religion cult.





>
> > Math is just strange symbols attached to patterns.
>
> Rather like language, some might argue.

Martian language.



The Starmaker


I was in an elevator
in a office building
and a gentlemen from the UK
was talking to me
all the way down from the top
floor to the first floor...

I didn't understand *one* word he said!

Poor chap, what is he doing in the US?
s***@gmail.com
2013-12-03 01:52:34 UTC
Permalink
On Saturday, November 30, 2013 12:51:49 PM UTC-8, The Starmaker wrote:
> There appears to me..
>
> that there are two types
>
> of Science.
>
>
>
> One is United Kingdom Science, and
>
> the other is United States Science.
>
>
>
>
>
> I'm trying to figure out
>
> which one is superior.

Go figure...

Its the one with the new science and that is not the UK.
They are a dinosaur because of Stephen Hawking.

Mitchell Raemsch
Loading...