Re: Sunspots hit new highs

From: Thomas Lee Elifritz (lifeform1_at_atlantic.net)
Date: 10/31/04


Date: 30 Oct 2004 20:42:11 -0700

October 30, 2004

"Tom H." <tom_reader@att.nospam*.net> wrote in message :

> Pieter makes some very good points

Since he offers no evidence, he makes his 5 initial starting crackpot
points, plus 1 point for being wrong. So, I agree, he makes 6 good
points. You want to try for more?

http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/crackpot.html
 
> Now back to science again,

It would be nice if you actually offered us some science, you know, in
the form of scholarly references, citations and internet links, but
since you don't, you only get 5 points. You lose. Pieter wins.

Thomas Lee Elifritz
http://elifritz.members.atlantic.net



Relevant Pages

  • Re: National Geographic on global warming
    ... "Thomas Lee Elifritz" wrote in message ... > But if the skeptic claims that something is true, ... > evidence supporting his claim, well, as you can plainly see, skeptics are ... You've obviously never heard of the "null hypothesis" version of science. ...
    (sci.geo.meteorology)
  • Re: Sunspots hit new highs
    ... Since he offers no evidence, he makes his 5 initial starting crackpot ... > Now back to science again, ... Thomas Lee Elifritz ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Sunspots hit new highs
    ... Since he offers no evidence, he makes his 5 initial starting crackpot ... > Now back to science again, ... Thomas Lee Elifritz ...
    (sci.geo.satellite-nav)
  • Re: Perhaps Intelligent Design "is" science
    ... people went out to look for evidence ... >What I'm saying is it seems I.D. could be considered science. ... I suspect that for every unscientific, crackpot idea that eventually ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Mars - Rio Tinto - Extremophile Evolution
    ... The concept of evidence in science seems to still evade you. ... Thomas Lee Elifritz ...
    (sci.geo.geology)