Re: God=G_uv explains Anti-Relativism
From: George Hammond (research137_at_hotmail.com)
Date: 09/06/04
- Next message: Bill Dubuque: "Re: Euler's lemma ??"
- Previous message: Norm Dresner: "Re: Cantor's proof that #(Evens) = #(Naturals) is inconsistent"
- In reply to: Russell E. Rierson: "Re: God=G_uv explains Anti-Relativism"
- Next in thread: bv_schornak: "Re: God=G_uv explains Anti-Relativism"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Mon, 6 Sep 2004 16:16:28 -0400
"Russell E. Rierson" <analog57@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:c410ffa5.0409061015.7511f084@posting.google.com...
> "George Hammond" <research137@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:<9sGdndpQLdm7gqHcRVn-jQ@comcast.com>...
>
> > The danger is that you can't see the forrest for the trees.
> > You keep lecturing us in 300 line posts about the trees,
> > when everybody else is talking about the forrest.
> >
>
> Any particular tree has a fractal property, equivalent to the fractal
> property of the forest . To understand the tree IS to understand the
> forest.
>
>
> What are the flaws with this theory?
<snip... another 200 lines by a Mensa member with an IQ of 200
who knows all the answers but dosn't know what the
problem is>
[Hammond]
No one CARES if there are "any flaws in your theory"
BECAUSE:
1. The theory has no MAJOR IMPACT on the human condition.
and is therefore of no interest to the world at large.
2. The theory doesn't represent a historic scientific advance
because it has no practical application.
3. The theory you have described does not solve any specific
AGE OLD QUESTION such as "does God exist".
On the other hand, God=G_uv does have all these attributes.
So please take your Mensa 200 IQ and apply it to something
more profound than an "encyclopediaic synthesis" of all
known trivia.....
Please try to do something useful such as
comprehending what God=G_uv means!
====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
1st mirror site:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
2nd mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
new site (under construction):
http://home.comcast.net/~proof-of-god
====================================
- Next message: Bill Dubuque: "Re: Euler's lemma ??"
- Previous message: Norm Dresner: "Re: Cantor's proof that #(Evens) = #(Naturals) is inconsistent"
- In reply to: Russell E. Rierson: "Re: God=G_uv explains Anti-Relativism"
- Next in thread: bv_schornak: "Re: God=G_uv explains Anti-Relativism"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
