Search results

Duh... Never mind an original thought, it's perfectly clear you have none at all. The only thing you can do is throw insults isn't it. It's all you know of in the end, trying to desperately defend some indefensible theological bullshit or other.

The cosmological constant is unknown. If you understood anything about the subject you'd understand that much. Susskind is being no more precise than Albert Einstein who entered the factor (Lambada) in his gravitational equation for the cosmological constant. Einstein had the constant at...

…then you were responding to yourself. It's your quote, except for the word 'not' , you thick head. You can keep peeing yourself and on Jem all you like for the warm feeling you seem to enjoy. It doesn't change the fact you haven’t added a shred of substance but sound increasingly...

"Lost the argument, eh? I still don't understand why people like you care what others think. Unless....you are afraid that there may really NOT be a God." :)

Well of course Susskind provides the context you dope. Then you take what he says out of context and even change what he actually does say. So when he says " ..appears fine-tuned", you blurt "... is incredibly fine-tuned". I must say, you acting like an idiot as another idiot cheers...

....funny though, not in before pspr and pheonix showed up :D

The person not quoting Susskind or Hawking in context is you. You've not even quoted me truthfully let alone in context, preferring to lie about what is actually being said. It's clear that a fog of untruthful ignorance is the context in which you prefer to push your silly make-believe God...

Susskind called the cosmological constant the worst prediction ever. Physicists have no consensus on an actual or exact calculation of it. It is given an apparent value only. A value that, if it were slightly less, physicists say would be far more favorable to the formation of galaxies than...

You caught yourself. In your own lie. The evidence proves it.

I changed your fucking wrong quote of my quote. YOUR WRONG quote you prick, hardly in English which grunted..... "there was plenty of science saying showing life evolved from non life." This quote, which IS my quote..... "I said there is plenty of science showing how life can evolve from non...

I don't need contradict anything you say. You do a good enough job of it yourself. Already said a dozen times. If you are relying on Susskind as your authority and you then say he is speculating, then he is speculating. And logically, you've made a false appeal to authority. If he is...

Sorry to break the bad news again but your own unfounded assertions and self contradicting claims are not real science. It is also pointless to keep trolling a Susskind vid when you said ...Susskind is pure speculation . So now it's NOT that the constants have certain 'fine tuned'...

YOU started this because YOU went back to an old thread, you imbecile. A thread which confirms exactly, your lying bullshit back then , and now. That is hardly English and I didn't say it. Like the idiot you are, you can't even copy my quotes correctly, but re-write them in your version...

That 20 constants have certain values is not unbelievable. The cosmological constant itself, is the tiniest fraction from being zero. If anyone or thing intended to fine tune it, then it missed. It is calculated scientifically the universe would be even more conducive to its own...

That is what you said and have not retracted. This is your lie. This is what I've always said..... You've been lying about what I say for a long time. You are so unbelievably ridiculous , now you even give links that prove you a liar...

Good point. I can't be jesus anyhow 'cause we now know he looked like this..

The tricker part is speculating there is so called fine tuning. If your 'great minds of science' are speculating about infinite universes, they are certainly speculating about fine tuning . Neither are confirmed science. more obvious..... there is no so called fine tuning at all. Values...

http://elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=3300639&highlight=how+life+can+evolve+from+non+life#post3300639 'The statement is and always was "there is plenty of science to show how life can come from non life" Because on just about every occasion you can't even write it without...

Very good. You learned something.... you used to keep saying this. "Every few weeks he tries to pretend there is proof of life coming from non life... which of course was your lie.

Yeah I can.