BAC Posted April 8, 2009 Author Share Posted April 8, 2009 dude would sources count as sites made by sciencetist and science organizations first its proof now its sources im getting a head ache you sure ask for a lot dont you Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 dude would sources count as sites made by sciencetist and science organizations first its proof now its sources im getting a head ache you sure ask for a lot dont you First off, I would appreciate a readable sentence. I am assuming you're asking what counts as valid sources; in this case, valid sources would be peer-reviewed sources. That's not asking for a lot, considering the counter threory this thread is attempting to disprove has quite a large number of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAC Posted April 8, 2009 Author Share Posted April 8, 2009 welll we have have reall websites proveing our theory might you want to take a look i mean peer reveiwed thair science organization reveiwed would that be a source good enough for you? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 welll we have have reall websites proveing our theory might you want to take a look i mean peer reveiwed thair science organization reveiwed would that be a source good enough for you? Where are they? the sites? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAC Posted April 8, 2009 Author Share Posted April 8, 2009 here is one site about polonium halo's which you will need if you are to understand us and why your beliefs are outdated and in lack of a better word bullshit http://www.halos.com/ and why the big bang theory has its oh so many flaws this site is great for those who can admit thay were wrong in beleaveing in a theory so simplistic as the big bang theory i did when i was 16 and now i addmit i was wrong heres your proof http://www.odec.ca/projects/2004/khak4a0/public_html/problems.html Merged post follows: Consecutive posts mergedthats some great info i gave to you.i hope your not a ass and be ungrateful about it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 BAC, you're not in a mythology/crap forum, you came to a scienceforum, and as such, there are two things you need to remember: 1. We have rules. Read them. There's a largfe part about what is and isn't a theory, what is and isn't a valid link, and how to speak to other people. I suggest you go over them before you continue this conversation the way you have been in the past few posts. 2. You came to us, not the other way around. The burden of proof is on you. The current theories are proven by observation, prediction, mathematics and are supported by other interconnected physical theories. Can a new theory be found to be better than the existing ones? Of course. Will it be better? It must. For it to be better, though, it must be - at the very least - as good and as valid and as *proven* as the current one, plus the extra that would make it a BETTER theory we (and the scientific community as a whole) will accept. Trust me, as a physicist, there's nothing I would love more than a new groundbreaking theory that shatters what we know. It means that much more potential for research, grant money and *WORK* for me. A potential to discover stuff related to the new theory and a potential to win nobel prizes for following discoveries. I *want* new theories. But I am not going to just throw aside everything I know because you feel like you want to be a revolutionary. You need to work for your theory to be accepted. There's a reason resources are peer-reviewed, and yours aren't. I, too, can post a theory about the invisible pink unicorn and the color of their sneakers. I can make it very believable, too. I would even have a link or two. Would that make my invisible pink unicorns real? Hardly. You would require much more than that to accept my theory; don't be surprised we ask so much more from yours. ~moo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BAC Posted April 8, 2009 Author Share Posted April 8, 2009 well evidence and the sources have been laid out for you hope you enjoyed this intregueing discussion as much as i have we should do this again some time and next time give me some answers instead of me passing them out i didnt want you to beleave in me i just wanted to be proven wrong so i can gain some more knowledge but good luck with that dudes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mooeypoo Posted April 8, 2009 Share Posted April 8, 2009 You are wrong, and your sources are worthless because they're just sites someone posted stuff in. You are the one ignoring our points, not the other way around. If you take a look at the forum threads, you will see that we DO conduct quite interesting debates with people who offer all kinds of new theories. We do not make it our habit to participate in fruitless discussions, no matter how insistent the poster is. I recommend you go over the rules AGAIN. This thread is closed pending moderator review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts