Re: God=G_uv proves 40k B.C. Creation

From: bv_schornak (nowhere_at_schornak.de)
Date: 09/14/04 

Date: Tue, 14 Sep 2004 23:15:47 +0000 (UTC)

George Hammond wrote:

>bv_schornak wrote:
>
>
>>>>This "greetings" is my way of saying good bye,
>>>>nothing else!
>>>>
>Before you say goodbye Bernie,
>

>let me point out an error in your website. You say:
>
>[Quote from Bernies website at: http://schornak.de/aspog/0000.htm ]
>
>"Opposite to his statement, both graphs in Hammond's diagram
>(see http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god/index_files/img2.gif )
>start at zero with no visible difference at the zero point. Both graphs
>diverge from each other with growing distance from the zero point.
>Reading Hammond's diagram, the "brain growth deficit" (BGD)
> - whatever that is - definitely increases with growing age."
>
>[Hammond]
>This statement is WRONG.
>The BGD is the difference between 100% and the value of the
>curve (either curve) at any point.
>Thus for the "genotypic curve" the BGD starts at 100%
>at birth, and slowly goes to 0 at adulthood.
>
>For the "Phenotypic curve" the BGD starts at 100%
>at birth, but only decreases to about 15% at adulthood.
>
>You have TOTALLY MISUNDERSTOOD what the BGD
>is, and your statement above is WRONG.
>
>Likewise, just about everything else in your A-SPoG
>website is wrong too.
>

According to [Hammond], "BGD" is the _difference_ between
genotype and phenotype, not the difference between _each_
curve and the x-axis. Since - as pointed out here as well
as in my Anti-SPoG, no one knows the true genotype curve.
Maybe you've forgotten the unanswered questions about the
DNA stuff?

Everything based on unknown data just is pure speculation
[Hammond] wants to sell us as science. "BGD" is pure spe-
culation, a unproven claim you could not back up with any
facts until now - the same applies to the other 169 false
asumptions in SPoG. It has nothing to do with sciences if
you base your conclusions on speculation instead of facts
which are confirmed by the majority of scientists.

Of course you are free to back up your claims with facts.
But you should be aware that a thesis cannot be proven by
itself. You need other - independent - scientists who are
willing to confirm each of the claims in SPoG. Otherwise,
it remains pure speculation.

SPoG would be much more convincing, if you would _try_ to
accept the things others are telling you - instead of de-
claring everyone - except yourself - as incompetent...

Greetings from Augsburg

Bernhard Schornak

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Curving An Object Ball(Part VI-Letting it All Hang Out))
    ... and none are equal to zero. ... Bob was NOT agreeing that there is any observable curve, ... very short distance of the cue ball. ... Even though bob is wrong about my method because my shot has nothing ...
    (rec.sport.billiard)
  • Re: Bobs shot 3 video
    ... I still think deviation from a straight line is zero, ... an 8 foot shot, at slow speed. ... As for whether its the draw, follow or sidespin that makes it ... curve, I still cant say for sure. ...
    (rec.sport.billiard)
  • Desired Sum of Two Curves; suggestions?
    ... I'm working on an adaptive digital filter that requires two ... The sum b+cresults in a curve that rises from zero at ...
    (sci.math)
  • Re: An Inconvenient Truth
    ... I saw the movie when I often take a nap so had a difficult ... smears out lines unnecessarily, dont show where zero is, to make them ... To capture the wide range of CO2 concentration, his graphs may be ... Much of the video footage is public domain. ...
    (soc.retirement)
  • Re: Zeroing load cell data
    ... time record-- zero load, followed by placing a known load on and leaving it ... -different- zero. ... You referred to a force/voltage curve. ... The two calibration points would be at one of the zeros, ...
    (sci.engr.control)