David Lapoint , Di-Electric Universe, Plasma, Primer Fields

Discussion in 'Alternative Theories' started by river, Nov 18, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    10 minutes pad then you come to an informed conclusion about his theory ?

    It goes on for just under an hour .

    Yes pad we know all about your insulting nonsense , it happens more often than not .

    If David's theory bothers so much then don't reply further . Simple .
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    David's theory does not bother me river, because he does not have a theory, not in the scientific sense anyway: he has a hypothetical that has been already written off as unsupported fabricated nonsense.
    On replying, well at least the thread is in the right section now, so I'll certainly let you have more reign then normal. OK?
    You take it easy and have a good day.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
    rpenner likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    Oh it does bother you pad ; since you have no inclination to watch his video more than 10 minutes .

    David supports his theories on magnetic fields .

    I'll certainly won't give you any reign .

    You take it easy ; you need it .

    Have a good day

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    No it does not bother me and that's why I chose not to watch it in its entirety...Like I said, unsupported nonsense.
    Let David [whoever he is] then write up a paper for professional peer review, OK?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Thank you, but I don't really need it, as I don't make unsupported claims, based on the say so and u tube video of a nobody.
    Thank you, I will.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  8. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    It doesn't bother you , but you won't watch the full video ? Do you understand your own contradiction here pad ?

    Let me repeat ;

    It doesn't bother you , but you won't watch the full video ? Do you understand your own contradiction here pad?
     
  9. rpenner Fully Wired Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,833
    No, he doesn't. A theory is a communicable framework for describing precisely the observable behavior of a large class of related phenomena.

    • There's no framework for describing here. David has the repeated common artistic element of his bowl-shaped magnets but no way to connect that assumption to anything.
    • There's no precision because there is no math.
    • There's no emphasis on observable behavior because David would rather focus on a unevidenced ubiquity of bowl-shaped magnets.
    • There's no generalization to any large class because David's actual visual comparisons are with rare configurations of laboratory magnets and rare astrophysical phenomena.
    • There's no sense of letting phenomena of reality be the judge of the merit of David's ideas.
    • And since David's not doing science, there is nothing scientific to communicate. This is probably why river can't compare David's ideas to existing physical theories.

    David stops at weird (not communicable) parts and says isolated pairs of systems visually resemble each other while ignoring related phenomena. He then piles on baseless hypotheses upon each other without taking a breath to examine his own thinking scientifically. That's why he has only published YouTube videos and patents and not peer-reviewed articles.

    David can't even say his research with laboratory plasmas is new physics or old because there is no evidence he every attempted to model the phenomena or apparatus he obsesses over with the physics of electromagnetism which dates back to 1865 (but has had substantial changes since then, largely only relevant in the colors of the plasma but not the shape of the fields). So shoddy are the presentations, there's not enough material to get written up in a journal just dedicated to replicating physics demonstrations for physics teachers.
     
    paddoboy and Xelasnave.1947 like this.
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Repeat it as much as you like...... I'm also not bothered by the claims of the Bible, and I havn't read that all through either. So, no, no contradiction, but just perhaps you just don't want to understand?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    What...?
     
  12. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,445
    river:

    Are you going to post about the di-electric universe, plasma or primer fields in this thread?
     
  13. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    At some point , why ask ?
     
  14. James R Just this guy, you know? Staff Member

    Messages:
    31,445
    I ask because if there's not going to be any discussion of the thread topic, it would be reasonable to close the thread.
     
  15. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    I doubt that a reasonable discussion will take place . Evidence is in the responses .

    I was hoping for more intelligent discussion on the OP of this thread but none came .

    Therefore I agree to close this thread .

    Perhaps though in 48 hrs. from now , would be appreciated .

    If no intelligent discussion comes in that time , then by all means close this thread .
     
  16. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,219
    Surely, a reasonable discussion should start in the opening post, yes?

    Who exactly do you think is supposed to initiate that intelligent discussion? Think carefully.
     
    Last edited: Dec 8, 2016
  17. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    Me

    Really , thats it ? dave?

    The whole point of the thread was to have an intelligent discussion of the OP.

    You missed the point of any thread .
     
  18. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    Or perhaps you missed the point.

    Let me reiterate:
    I'm not watching more than 1 hr of a u tube video, when so much of such videos are sheer nonsensical and make outrageous claims.
    Hence my reasonable questions which you are unable to or just do not want to answer.....
    [1] Who is this guy?
    [2] What are his credentials and expertise?

    The answers of course are [1[ You don't know, other then just one more video of a woo nature, for you to be impressed by, and [2] He obviously has no credentials and is a nobody and a fraud, as others have realised.
     
  19. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    Just to rehash.......................

    http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread921117/pg21
    from the video:
    photon is concentration of energy, made up of many concentrations of energy, which are made of many concentrations of energy.....
    Translation:
    The Primer Field "Theory" is a bunch of nonsense, which is made of nonsense and supported by nonsense.

    In the last few days, I have been doing quite a bit of research on David and his theory.
    To try and answer your concerns about his identity, everything I can find suggests that he "just popped up" In 2008 when he filed for patent (www.google.com...) then only just recently (Jan, 2013) when all of this started.
    Here's my theory.
    If most, all, or even ANY of this is correct, then I can most certainly imagine a "whole bunch" of conspiracy theory type things that could possibly go on. Not one of which leave Mr. LaPoint in too good of shape at the end. (I'm guessing that the Federal Govt. saw this too.
    Because of this, I'm sure that the "David LaPoint" that we're getting to know is actually "Fredrichheimer Neussenbaum" of Suffolk, NJ

    (That was a joke!)
    Seriously though.
    Nobody just "popps up" in the world of social media anymore. It just doesn't happen.
    There's one other thing that lends credibility to all of this, (including the lack of credentials) and that is that I ALSO can not find any previous writings, publications, or even discussions related to ANY of this at all, EVER.
    Nobody has mentioned it over the years of his research, similar theory's, etc.
    AGAIN! Theory's like this do not just "come to you" without 1. Asking others questions. 2. Searching for supporting/defeating information. 3. Discussing or arguing topics related to the field with "SOMEONE"
    Since this started, David has spoken on Youtube (comments) and on F/B quite a bit. He seems to not have any real "shyness" issues. In fact, the times he has spoken, he gets right into it and even claims occasionally that he needs to quit talking and "get back to work."
    AGAIN. Sounds as if someone (???) has gone and cleaned up after him. (I. erased him, created David.
    Now. I know all of this COULD be reasons for someone to disbelieve all of this, (yea right-He's from some kind of movie! ) OR... one could even think..."Hey. perhaps the government sees some real promise to all of this and is doing what they can to protect him.
     
  20. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    The man , who he is , credentials , is more important to you pad than his ideas .

    As usual

    So much for intelligent discussion with you pad .
     
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    21,703
    The man is a quack.
    But you are right. It does not matter that you are unable to answer the questions, as I already knew that.
    Bye river: have fun!
     
  22. river

    Messages:
    11,058
    Oh I have fun pad , really .

    I enjoy different perspectives . It expands thinking , it flexes your mind .
     
  23. DaveC426913 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    9,219
    Just wondering when you were planning to start.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page