Towards a Transformative Hermeneutics of Quantum Gravity (JW Speak)

by Perry 51 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • HintOfLime
    same as the old boss.

    Much better, actually.

    Unlike "Jesus" and "Jehovah" - Science exists - one can measure it's value, it's current rate of progress, and it's potential toward the betterment of mankind.

    Jesus on the other hand.. is 'invisible'. Science cures disease. Jesus doesn't. No amount of prayer seems to spare people from the next natural disaster, or the next plague. Science... at least offers us a chance.

    Tell us the truth Perry: Do you carry health insurance? If you believe in god rather then science, then why carry any insurance at all? What can medical science offer you that you would pay for it in advance that "faith" and "Jesus" don't offer?

    - Lime

  • Perry

    And then there is this whopper hoax that untold numbers of doctoral dissertations were wasted on.

    LUCY - You Got Some 'Splainin To Do!


    Parts from All Over

    The one that is in the textbooks now that is the most famous is called Lucy. How many have ever heard of Lucy before? Better known as australopithicus atherensis [sic], scientific name. Donald Johanson found Lucy at Dar [sic] Valley, Ethiopia in 1974; it was 40% of the skeleton. This is considered the most complete skeleton ever found. There is a real controversy about the knee joint. The knee joint that he found a mile and a half away from the rest of the skeleton was labeled in National Geographic as “Lucy’s Knee”, Donald never corrected them; it was not Lucy’s knee found a mile and a half away. He let the error slip through because he wanted them to think, “well maybe that is the same.” There is a long story on that; 200 feet deeper in the strata, by the way.

  • HintOfLime

    Ha ha. That's right. Try to pretend I didn't just call you out on your hypocricy. Just keep pasting crap you find on the web. Way to show you're thinking for yourself!

    You criticize science between mouthfuls of it's fruit. Meanwhile, you don't even eat your own dogs*it.


    - Lime

  • EntirelyPossible

    Perry...what an ill informed, willfully ignorant hypocritical maroon...

  • VM44

    Sturgeon's Law

    Ninety percent of everything is crud.

  • Perry

    Jan Hendrik Schön, Phd

    Jan Henrik Schön, Phd (pictured on the left), a researcher at Bell Laboratories in New Jersey, had five papers published in Nature and seven in the journal Science between 1998 and 2001, dealing with advanced aspects of electronics. The discoveries were abstruse, but he was seen by many of his peers as a rising star.

    In 2002, a committee found that he had made up his results on at least 16 occasions, resulting in the public embarrassment of his colleagues, his employer, and the editorial staffs of both the journals that accepted his results.

    Schön, who by then was still only 32, said: “I have to admit that I made various mistakes in my scientific work, which I deeply regret.” Nature also reported him as adding in a statement, “I truly believe that the reported scientific effects are real, exciting and worth working for.”

    Withdrawn journal papers:

    On October 31, 2002, Science withdrew eight papers written by Schön: [ 13 ]

    On December 20, 2002, Physical Review withdrew six papers written by Schön: [ 14 ] [ 15 ]

    On February 24, 2003, Applied Physics Letters withdrew four papers written by Schön: [ 16 ] [ 17 ] [ 18 ] [ 19 ]

    On May 2, 2003, Science withdrew another paper written by Schön: [ 20 ]

    On March 20, 2003, Advanced Materials withdrew two papers written by Schön: [ 21 ]

    • J.H. Schön, H. Meng, Z. Bao (2002). "Self-Assembled Monolayer Transistors". Advanced Materials14 (4): 323-326. doi: 10.1002/1521-4095(20020219)14:4<323::AID-ADMA323>3.0.CO;2-5 .
    • J. H. Schön, C. Kloc, J. Wildeman, G. Hadziinoannou (2001). "Gate-Induced Superconductivity in Oligophenylenevinylene Single Crystals". Advanced Materials13 (16): 1273-1274. doi: 10.1002/1521-4095(200108)13:16<1273::AID-ADMA1273>3.0.CO;2-P .

    On March 5, 2003, Nature withdrew seven papers written by Schön: [ 22 ]

    [edit] Further questionable journal articles

    The retraction notices from February 24, 2003 in Applied Physics Letters relayed concerns about seven papers written by Schön and published in the Applied Physics Letters: [ 23 ] [ 24 ] [ 25 ] [ 26 ]

    The retraction notice from March 20, 2003 in Advanced Materials mentions concerns about another paper written by Schön: [ 27 ]

    • J. H. Schön, C. Kloc, Z. Bao, B. Batlogg (2000). "Electron Transport in Fluorinated Copper-Phthalocyanine". Advanced Materials12 (20): 1539-1542. doi: 10.1002/1521-4095(200010)12:20<1539::AID-ADMA1539>3.0.CO;2-S .
  • Perry

    Hint of Lime and Entirely Possible,

    I believe that the two of you have actually stumpled upon A Methodology for the Typical Unification of Access Points and Redundancy.

  • VM44

    Jan Henrik Schön, Phd.

    Phd = Phony data?

  • HintOfLime
    I believe that the two of you have actually stumpled upon A Methodology for the Typical Unification of Access Points and Redundancy

    Wit can be a valuable tool when it's actually thought provoking... but you haven't hit it here. At best this is a.. poor attempt to dismiss those who are pointing out some serious flaws in your reasoning. I could easily dismiss you and all Christians based on the completely stupid sloagans you see on church road-way signs... but really Christianity fails on it's history, truthfulness, and real-world value.

    It is a simple question: Do you pay for health insurance? Do you pay in advance for the benefits of medical science? Do you defame it publically, but then rely on it to keep you alive and in comfort?

    - Lime

  • Perry


    You are like the psychotic who takes an ink blot test and every inkblot, no matter what shape, elicits a similar response:

    Ink Blot #1 - "God is horrible"

    Ink Blot #2 - "Christians are tards"

    Ink Blot #3 - "The Bible Lies!"

    Ink Blot #4 - "eat your own dogs*it." (Nice one Limey)

    Ink Blot #5- "I told you already! God is horrible"

    It appears to me that your identity has AGAIN gotten wrapped up with YOU ASCRIBING CERTAIN ATRIBUTES THAT BELONG TO GOD, to the wrong place. It's like you have suffered a toatal disconnect from that which is practical and self explanatory.

    Chill Out - this is a fun thread - it's nothing personal, unless you are on some psedo-science jihad. - All about the MIT students who created the computer generated software that can write total CRAP and get it published in Science Journals.

    Q: Does this fact make the average person have more faith, or less faith in "science" ?

Share this