river said: ↑
And I will judge the forum and you pad .
Not in the sciences you won't!![]()
I Should Though .
river said: ↑
And I will judge the forum and you pad .
Not in the sciences you won't!![]()
Should you? You believe you should be able to continually flout reasonable evidence in favour of your pseudscience?I Should Though .
And I will judge the forum and you pad .
Should you? You believe you should be able to continually flout reasonable evidence in favour of your pseudscience?
What you should do of course is stop trolling and accept that on most occasions you are simply wrong.
Dream along baby!!The evidence is there waiting to be revealed . Give me a lab . And Telescopes of all types ...
If I had access to ....
Dream along baby!!
It's called delusions of grandeur.![]()
Your peers will actually be the best judge of what capabilities and knowledge you have to perform any "investigation"No its called scientific investigation .
river said: ↑
No its called scientific investigation .
Your peers will actually be the best judge of what capabilities and knowledge you have to perform any "investigation"
I mean here you are, not so long ago, claiming water is poison. And who can ever forget your bold statement about the atomic war on Mars between Alien species!
You put the three stooges to shame river for the laughs you create!!!
Not at all river, not at all!pad a pathetic response .
Not at all river, not at all!
We can if you like also add to those silly thought patterns of yours, with another recent exchange....
You claimed the Moon did not rotate on its axis, because we on Earth see only one side.
Gee river, I could go on and on and on and on and show your total and complete ignorance of mainstream science.
Are you denying anything I claim you have claimed river?Charactor assassination your , signature attitude , pad .
Are you denying anything I claim you have claimed river?
And all you have claim show how ignorant you are of science...That's bad enough, then you start poopooing mainstream science without evidence and start making more silly claims....and the consequence of that was your banning from the sciences, correct?
You stop your fucking ridiculous claims, and I'll stop showing you for what you are.
And yet not once have you ever owned up to your ignorant mistakes and stupid claims river.Mistakes are made . By all of us , move on pad .
And yet not once have you ever owned up to your ignorant mistakes and stupid claims river.
Trolling trolling, trollingSuch as ...
Trolling trolling, trolling
river's bloody trolling again,
through all kinds of weather, river trolls forever,
spewing nonsense far and wide.
And the useless banter continues!Chaos theory is mathematical not physical .
Never heard that version. just this version.....
You might at least provided the music
![]()
I agree. Chaos theory is about (abstract) self-forming mathematical patterns, such as fractals, expressed in nature as regularly shaped physical objects emerging from initial chaotic conditions.Chaos theory is mathematical not physical .
"Mathematics, rightly viewed, possesses not only truth, but supreme beauty" -- Bertrand Russell, from The Study of Mathematics: Philosophical Essays
It is interesting to note that Bertrand Russell wrote this in 1907, which applies so well to fractals, about 70 years before they were discovered by the Polish-born French mathematician Benoit B. Mandelbrot in the 1970's
1. Mandelbrot's fractal geometry provides a mathematical model for many complex forms found in nature such as shapes of coast lines, mountains, galaxy clusters, and clouds. A very nice example of this is this picture where both the trees and the clouds are actual fractals:
The first minerals to form in the universe were nanocrystalline diamonds, which condensed from gases ejected when the first generation of stars exploded. Diamonds that crystallize under the extreme pressure and temperature conditions deep inside of Earth are more typically encountered by humanity. What opportunities for knowledge are lost when mineralogists categorize both the cosmic travelers and the denizens of deep Earth as being simply “diamond”?
The current system for classifying minerals—developed by James Dwight Dana in the 1850s—categorizes more than 5,400 mineral “species” based on their dominant chemical compositions and crystalline structures. This is an unambiguous, robust, and reproducible designation scheme.
Carnegie’s Robert Hazen suggests an additional classification system, which could amplify existing knowledge of how minerals evolve over time without superseding the existing designations. In American Mineralogist’s Roebling Medal Paper, Hazen argues for categories that reflect a deeper, more-modern understanding of planetary scale transformation over time.
A system grouping minerals and non-crystalline natural solids—which are not currently classified by the existing system—into what Hazen calls “natural kind clusters” would better reflect the inherent messiness of planetary evolution, he explains.
https://carnegiescience.edu/news/new-mineral-classification-system-captures-earths-complex-past-0#“For maximum efficacy, scientific classification systems must not just organize and define, but also reflect current theory, and allow it to expand and guide us to new conclusions,” Hazen says.