Skywise wrote:


BTW, where does the matter come from?

(Your grammar's fucken awful.)

What matter? If you do not think the Earth is expanding, or has, it
is a non-question. However, since it is expanding, there is a source,
and since there is a source, it is the box we try to fit the Universe
into that needs to change. It is that simple.

Have rock solid evidence for expansion, and the lack of a mechanism
does not negate it.

Where did I say "THE any old matter"?

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 03:50:01 GMT, Skywise <into@oblivion.nothing.com
wrote:

J. Taylor <nchiwana@embarqmail.NOSPAM.com> wrote in
news:uavr04pvo1kjdgdjcjsih3ggj69jj3nt0n@4ax.com:

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:43:18 GMT, Skywise <into@oblivion.nothing.com
wrote:

BTW, where does the matter come from?

Failure to answer the question for the umpteenth time noted.

Failure to understand there is no question until expansion is accepted
as a fact, noted. Then the evidence used to determine expansion can
be used to point the way to how it is done.

But you would know this is you had a clue about logical process, which
you do not.

When you publish two to four papers per year, as Florian, for at least
the last five years, in leading scientific journals,

Citations, please?

It is a matter of public record, that is how I know and your not
knowing this just shows your lack of ability to find common
information let alone things like the mysteries of the Universe.

Ahhh...the well known "appeal to authority" fallacy.

You are an idiot.

An appeal to authority is based on it is right because such said so,
whereas logic is the PROCESS by which something is known.

Ad hominem of a sexual nature noted (again). Can't you come up
with anything new?

Just call them the way I see them. And you are still jerking off!

P.S. Where does the matter come from?

Let's see if you learned anything. How would you go about answering
that question??

J. Taylor <nchiwana@embarqmail.NOSPAM.com> wrote in
news:b6fu04pp8teu3ima0o085qsn5apci914p5@4ax.com:

What matter? If you do not think the Earth is expanding, or has, it
is a non-question. However, since it is expanding, there is a source,
and since there is a source, it is the box we try to fit the Universe
into that needs to change. It is that simple.

Nice word salad. Can I have Thousand Island on the side please?

J. Taylor <nchiwana@embarqmail.NOSPAM.com> wrote in
news:mrjv049slapr0s7n88tbfsgnpnjqqd314a@4ax.com:

Have rock solid evidence for expansion, and the lack of a mechanism
does not negate it.

Do you even have a guess as to the mechanism?

J. Taylor <nchiwana@embarqmail.NOSPAM.com> wrote in
news:gceu04pf4jjvqe9cevbovkhu8vcbnma6bf@4ax.com:

On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 03:50:01 GMT, Skywise <into@oblivion.nothing.com
wrote:

J. Taylor <nchiwana@embarqmail.NOSPAM.com> wrote in
news:uavr04pvo1kjdgdjcjsih3ggj69jj3nt0n@4ax.com:

On Tue, 22 Apr 2008 01:43:18 GMT, Skywise <into@oblivion.nothing.com
wrote:

BTW, where does the matter come from?

Failure to answer the question for the umpteenth time noted.

Failure to understand there is no question until expansion is accepted
as a fact, noted. Then the evidence used to determine expansion can
be used to point the way to how it is done.

But you would know this is you had a clue about logical process, which
you do not.

Dude, where the heck do you get this notion that you can't question
a premis without accepting it as fact?

Again, I have walked on the Moon. You cannot question this unless
you first accept it as fact.

Do you accept as fact that I have walked on the Moon?

Do you see how illogical you are being?

When you publish two to four papers per year, as Florian, for at least
the last five years, in leading scientific journals,

Citations, please?

It is a matter of public record, that is how I know and your not
knowing this just shows your lack of ability to find common
information let alone things like the mysteries of the Universe.

Fine. It's a matter of public record. Then please point me
to those records. If there is published material I would think
you'd be tripping over yourself to tell me where to find it.

That you don't implies that there is no public record.

Please prove me wrong.

Besides, I do not know Florian's full name so I cannot do a
search anyway. Can you at least provide that?

Ahhh...the well known "appeal to authority" fallacy.

You are an idiot.

An appeal to authority is based on it is right because such said so,
whereas logic is the PROCESS by which something is known.

"Appeal to Authority" also includes the notion that just becuase
a person is an authority they can't be wrong in their own field
and that they know anything about another field.

The "authority" is irrelevant. Only the evidence is.

Ad hominem of a sexual nature noted (again). Can't you come up
with anything new?

Just call them the way I see them. And you are still jerking off!

And all you can do is respond with the same retort!! You're like
a broken record.

P.S. Where does the matter come from?

Let's see if you learned anything. How would you go about answering
that question??

It's not my question to answer. It is yours. It is your conjecture.
The burden of proof is upon you. Therefore you need to answer it.
"If you knew anything about science you would know that", as you
are so fond of saying.

That you continually evade the question implies that you cannot
answer it.

Please prove me wrong.

Brian

That's right. You're out of the business. Meanwhile the others struggle
to find a model...

Struggling?

Hardly, there is plenty of work being done. I don't see any
struggling.

If anybody should have discovered SR before Albert E, it would've been
Lorentz.

But only Einstein challenged the invariance of time.

Poincare did the hard work?

The FACT that that subduction occurs shows you are talking through your hat.
PLONK.

Until you come up with evidence that Earth is expanding and explain the
mechanism, your premise is nothing but belief.

Stuart <bigdak...@aol.com> wrote:
If anybody should have discovered SR before Albert E, it would've been
Lorentz.

But only Einstein challenged the invariance of time.

Poincare did the hard work?

Of course he did! Poincarré got it before Einstein who largely
"inspired" his work from Poincarré's correspondence without a single
citation (no references in his 1905 paper! unbelievable!).

That's why Einstein did not get the nobel for SR. Everybody knew it was
a plagiat.

Until you come up with evidence that Earth is expanding

Look carefully at this figure:
http://nachon.free.fr/isochrons/antarctic2.png

it is not possible to make a
reconstruction around antarctica based on the aged of seafloor, if one
does not reduce the size of the globe

the Earth is expanding