50 Top Astronauts, Scientists Slam NASA For Promoting Man-Made Climate Change

[Brass]

Quote from Trader666:

Here's an example. Remember when I told you his latest book was nothing more than speculation but you "thought" otherwise simply because your science "god" wrote it?

<iframe width="640" height="360" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Dg_95wZZFr4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

You don't even know what yhou're talking about. Here's your thing:

http://szezeng.blogspot.ca/2010/10/roger-penrose-and-others-rebuke-stephen.html

I actually read Hawking's The Grand Design. Did you? I can tell you that Hawking qualifies "M-Theory" for what it is. He is careful rather than careless in his positions. He builds on that which is known and reaches beyond to where more study is required, and he says so himself.

And it's interesting that all the theists are now stepping in (check the link) trying for a "gotcha" where none exists. But then, they spend their whole lives dwelling on the non-existent, don't they?

You want to take apart a "theory" actually accepted as fact by most of you guys here? How about this one:

 

[Trader666]

That's actually true. He's not a science "god" among his peers and more of a media creation like Obama.

Quote from Lucrum:

Personally I think all the fuss over Hawkings has more to do with sympathy over his physical condition than his great scientific mind.

 

[Trader666]

No, you're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about. Do you really "think" that link invalidates what Penrose said? Do you even know who Penrose is? Take your uninformed, pathetic attempt at obfuscation and stick it. You're a total joke.

I have read it and if you really did and understand it, explain Hawking's reasoning for his claim that the universe spontaneously created itself from nothing. Come on jackass.

Quote from Brass:

You don't even know what yhou're talking about. Here's your thing:

http://szezeng.blogspot.ca/2010/10/roger-penrose-and-others-rebuke-stephen.html

I actually read Hawking's The Grand Design. Did you? I can tell you that Hawking qualifies "M-Theory" for what it is. He is careful rather than careless in his positions. He builds on that which is known and reaches beyond to where more study is required, and he says so himself.

And it's interesting that all the theists are now stepping in (check the link) trying for a "gotcha" where none exists. But then, they spend their whole lives dwelling on the non-existent, don't they?

 

[Brass]

Quote from Trader666:

No, you're the one who doesn't know what he's talking about. Do you really "think" that posting that link invalidates what Penrose said? Do you even know who Penrose is?

I have read it and if you really did and understand it, explain Hawking's reasoning for why the universe spontaneously created itself from nothing. Come on jackass.

I know who Penrose is. His comments are beside the point. He's incongruously and inexplicably fighting a straw man, to the delight of the two religious bookends beside him. If you actually read Hawking's book then you would know this. As for explaining Hawking, I don't presume to be able to do so better than the man himself.

Now run along and go look for another great mind to disparage.

 

[Trader666]

Bullshit. You know as little about Penrose as you do about Hawking's book because his comments are NOT beside the point.

Had you actually read and understood Hawking's book, you'd be conversant on his reasoning which you're not. So yet again you've exposed yourself as an ignoranus and a fraud.

Crawl back into the sewer where you belong.

Quote from Brass:

I know who Penrose is. His comments are beside the point. He's fighting a straw man. If you actually read Hawking's book then you would know this. As for explaining Hawking, I don't presume to be able to do so better than the man himself.

Now run along and go look for another great mind to disparage.

 

[Arnie]

Quote from ChkitOut:

actually most of hawkings theories are ridiculed in the scientific community.

Too many lap dances.

Hawking spends his days contemplating the mysteries of the universe, despite being completely disabled by a form of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, commonly known as Lou Gehrig’s Disease.

But at night — it seems Hawking also has an interest in more earthly and earthy matters. Cambridge University has admitted the 70-year-old has visited a well known swingers’ sex club in California. There is, however, disagreement over how many times he’s been there.

The admission came in response to a story that emerged last week, when a U.S. website reported that Professor Hawking dropped in at the club, with a full entourage of nurses and assistants in tow. It’s reported he paid several young dancers to perform privately for him. Nude of course.

 

[Brass]

Quote from Trader666:

...

I read Hawking's book. You clearly didn't. And why would you? You disparage him at every turn.

 

[Trader666]

Please... you've clearly shown that you didn't. And now you're trying to lie your way out of it. How pathetic but typical

Keep digging, loser.

Quote from Brass:

I read Hawking's book. You clearly didn't. And why would you? You disparage him.

 

[Brass]

Quote from Trader666:

Please... you've clearly shown that you didn't. And now you're trying to lie your way out of it. How pathetic but typical

Keep digging, loser.

I bet you don't even have the book, let alone that you read it. What's the first and last word on page 129 of the paperback version of the book? Respond immediately, or be a liar by default.

The clock is ticking.

 

[jem]

So you read the book huh brass... lets see if you understood it. Penrose said M theory is a collection of theories.

1. What does hawking says about gravity and the production of universes.
How does that happen according to Hawking.

Please address... the top down theory of cosmology and if there is observational evidence for it and how many scientists in the community support such speculation.

In absence of proof of top down, what else is there?

Then let us know if you think Penrose was correct in his criticism.