Is this the best discussion forum that you have ever found?

Is it just my imagination or is Sciforums the best discussion forum available?

  • Yes

    Votes: 1 25.0%

  • No

    Votes: 2 50.0%

  • Not sure..... I've really never bothered with any other forum for long????

    Votes: 1 25.0%
  • Total voters
    4
Dennis Tate said:
Yes...... I got a bit of a slap on the fingers for typing the link to my Chaim Tejman M. D. , discussion too often.....
I took that as a good sign though.....
rules are needed!
Click to expand...

it seems you have quite an interest in creationism as a founding concept.
you may find it more toward your desired theory if you generate the nature of that direction from the thread area where it founds
philosophy or religion

i enjoy this site for its ability to stay on point on scientific subjects, it has a large religious activity which doesn't bother me but i would prefer to see more activity in some science fields where there is hardly any at all, like fringe science.

i find fringe science very interesting though i have not spent much time in that mind set for some years.
covid is pushing the bounds of micro-biology fringe science which is great
the worlds scientific research into such things needs a shot in the arm

including the science of macro-operational co-operation (global combined response partnerships)
 
Is this the best discussion forum that you have ever found?
Click to expand...
I hear there's a better forum in the ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth dimensions.
I'm not saying there are no other dimensions besides the current four we know.
There's even an idea that gravity is the weakest force because it also ''moves or acts '' in an extra dimension we cannot detect directly.
Why is gravity so much weaker than the other fundamental forces? A small fridge magnet is enough to create an electromagnetic force greater than the gravitational pull exerted by planet Earth. One possibility is that we don’t feel the full effect of gravity because part of it spreads to extra dimensions. Though it may sound like science fiction, if extra dimensions exist, they could explain why the universe is expanding faster than expected, and why gravity is weaker than the other forces of nature.
Click to expand...
https://home.cern/science/physics/extra-dimensions-gravitons-and-tiny-black-holes

Theorists trying to understand this problem have found a (possible) solution requiring extra dimensions. If there were two or more extra space-time dimensions, then gravity might, in fact, be just as strong as all the other forces. It would just look weak to us because of the way its effects are diluted by the extra spatial dimensions that we cannot usually see. For this reason, scientists in many different fields are trying to track down whether these dimensions exist.
Click to expand...

https://atlas.cern/updates/briefing/continuing-search-extra-dimensions
 
Last edited:
Dywyddyr said:
Just because someone makes a comparison it doesn't mean that that comparison has any validity. (And, given the amount of sheer woo and falsehoods on that page suggests that there is, in fact, no validity whatsoever).
Click to expand...


You could be correct........
I don't know for certain... but I am not sufficiently well informed to rule out many of the theories. Surely the next five decades we will see research that at least partly validates some of those ideas?????
 
RainbowSingularity said:
it seems you have quite an interest in creationism as a founding concept.
you may find it more toward your desired theory if you generate the nature of that direction from the thread area where it founds
philosophy or religion

i enjoy this site for its ability to stay on point on scientific subjects, it has a large religious activity which doesn't bother me but i would prefer to see more activity in some science fields where there is hardly any at all, like fringe science.

i find fringe science very interesting though i have not spent much time in that mind set for some years.
covid is pushing the bounds of micro-biology fringe science which is great
the worlds scientific research into such things needs a shot in the arm

including the science of macro-operational co-operation (global combined response partnerships)
Click to expand...


Yes..... and a part of my interest in abiogenesis and the original cause of intelligence or.... INTELLIGENCE......
and life in general....links to my interest in economics and my beliefs in a Basic Minimum Income.......
that I believe can be argued for by increasing our basic VALUATION on human life... .and on all life forms......

which I believe Theistic Evolutionary Theory would tend to support?!
 
foghorn said:
I hear there's a better forum in the ninth, tenth, eleventh and twelfth dimensions.
I'm not saying there are no other dimensions besides the current four we know.
There's even an idea that gravity is the weakest force because it also ''moves or acts '' in an extra dimension we cannot detect directly.

https://home.cern/science/physics/extra-dimensions-gravitons-and-tiny-black-holes



https://atlas.cern/updates/briefing/continuing-search-extra-dimensions
Click to expand...


Awesome comment!!!!

Thank you for this....... I will have to really give this some thought though before I can even begin to process this......
this is an entirely new idea that I hadn't exactly read explained in exactly this way before in any of the articles that I have read on Theoretical Physics and GUT?!
 
Dennis Tate said:
Yes..... and a part of my interest in abiogenesis and the original cause of intelligence or.... INTELLIGENCE......
and life in general....links to my interest in economics and my beliefs in a Basic Minimum Income.......
that I believe can be argued for by increasing our basic VALUATION on human life... .and on all life forms......

which I believe Theistic Evolutionary Theory would tend to support?!
Click to expand...

The problem with Universal income , is the Federal Government controls you .
 
river said:
The problem with Universal income , is the Federal Government controls you .
Click to expand...

Which is perhaps the major reason why I am advocating using Bank of Canada policy from 1938 to 1974 to finance how it is done here in Canada........

and I have ran into information that implies that the Federal Reserve was set up with similar intentions to the origin of the Bank of Canada.
 
river said:
The problem with Universal income , is the Federal Government controls you .
Click to expand...

Ms. Betty Krawczyk did a great job of describing how the Bank of Canada was used from 1938 to 1974.........


https://bettysearlyedition.blogspot.com/2015/07/how-pierre-trudeau-turned-us-into-debt.html

(Ms.Betty Krawczyk :

The Bank of Canada was first established by Prime Minister Richard Bennet in 1935 as a private central bank, but was then nationalized by William Lyon Mackenzie King in 1938. By nationalizing the bank, Mackenzie King meant for it to belong to the people so the Canadian government could borrow funds with little or no interest for capital expenditures. The mandate of the newly nationalized Bank of Canada was to act as the banker to the government and to manage the public debt. As Mackenzie King famously said: “Once a nation parts with the control of their currency and credit, it matters not who makes that nation’s laws. Usury, once in control, will wreck any nation. Until the control of the issue of currency and credit is restored to government and recognized as its most sacred responsibility, all talk of sovereignty of parliament and of democracy is idle and futile.”

So the Bank of Canada was nationalized in 1938 and the government could now borrow money with little or no interest. And it worked. The Canadian government built freeways, public transportation systems, subway line, airports, the St. Lawrence Seaway and funded a national health care system and the Canada Pension Plan. But then Trudeau, under the influence of the international financial group called Basel’s
Committee’s Recommendations (The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision) made the decision to halt the borrowing of money from the Bank of Canada, and instead, chose to borrow from the private banks who instead of lending to the government at no interest, or low interest, introduced higher interest rates along with compound interest.

All banks know very well the magic of compound interest. And Pierre Trudeau must have known that the mounting compounded national debt would lead to Canadians eventually owing a dollar fifty for every dollar of their disposable incomes. After all, he studied economics at the London School of Economics. Surely the professors there knew about compound interest.
So Pierre Trudeau, instead of feeling blessed that Canada, unlike the US, had a nationalized central bank, signed our bank away to the private banks. Couldn’t Trudeau, such an educated man, surmise that citizens in a few years would be struggling to make car payments and meet rent and mortgages and student loans and to buy healthy food while last year’s profits for the big five (that’s Royal Bank, TD Bank, Scotiabank, Bank of Montreal and CIBC amounted to $31.7 billion?) If he did, he didn’t care. But it doesn’t have to be this way. It really doesn’t. Our Bank of
Canada is still there. Next time.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top