Results 1 to 20 of 20

Thread: This site makes me sick

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    2
    http://www.copernican-series.com/sss/index.html

    I stumbled across this site while looking up stuff on gravity. I can't believe someone actually wrote this stuff, believes it, and is selling books about it. It's so frustrating to me. And so I thought I'd share my frustration on the topic with the rest of you.

    He claims his "Reality Theory" disproves the whole of modern science and... God, it makes me sick just describing it. Just read it yourself if you want to discover just how stupid and ignorant a person with a little bit (very little) of knowledge can be.

    -Mike

    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: The Bad Astronomer on 2002-08-17 14:35 ]</font>

    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: lucis on 2002-08-18 23:19 ]</font>

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    6,275
    Hi, Mike,

    Welcome to the board. A couple things...

    First, this is a family-oriented board and the BA doesn't allow "explitives". I suggest you use the edit feature to soften your post's language a bit, before the BA sees it and deletes it.

    As to the site in question, well, the guy looks like a pretty typical crackpot to me. That page is full of the usual list of "dead givaways"... such as, "conventional science is wrong about [fill in the blank] and I'm the only one who knows the real story", "scientists have conspired to support the status quo and suppress the unconventional truth", and so on.

    Hey, the dope can't even manage to spell "Foreword" correctly. I don't think he's worth the effort to get upset about.

    But isn't it great the internet allows anybody to put their ideas out there for all to see -- no matter how weird?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    1,575
    I read a bit of this guy's ramblings. The thing....I...nononooticed....ZZZZZZZZZ whiisssssssss....ZZZZZZZZZZZ...whiiiissssss...hack , hack....cough, cough...

    Ahem! He tends to be a little dull, well, alot dull, well, supendously boaring. This is in addition to being wrong about most of what I read.
    I can see your point regarding this guy but I think I have some encouragement. The only thing nature abhors more than a vacuum is stupidity. For this reason I don't think you'll have to worry about him very long. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    4
    everyone is entitled to there own opinion however if you dont like the theory dont read it

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    359
    On 2002-08-20 04:23, Marvin Martian wrote:
    everyone is entitled to there own opinion however if you dont like the theory dont read it
    But we are attempting to promote good science and dispell myth. If we let sites like the one above go unchallenged, we run the risk of people starting to believe it.

    In the 1500's, the Catholic Church said that when an object was thrown or shot out of a cannon, it was given a finite amount of force. The item would travel in a straight line untill all of its impetus was used up. It would then drop straight down. It was heresy to suggest otherwise. The subsequent war against people who believed in the rules of ballistics was enough for the Catholic Church to back off the impetus thing. Why? Because the people using ballistics hit what they were aiming at.

    This kind of misinformation needs to be challenged.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Posts
    151
    There is nothing to be mad about. The way I see it we should pity this poor man. It's, after all, our JOB to prove jokes like him wrong. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]
    Oh and spelling is a very hard skill to master, it can be really hard for some people with general education problems/phobia. Iíd advise you, and every smart person out there, not to make fun of people that are unable to do everything that comes naturally to some. (BTW, among other skills I know a fair share of languages, which Iíve learned through much pain brought on by people that found my inferior language skills amusing. Not that Iím defending the guilty party or anything... [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img])

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    3,015
    On 2002-08-20 11:30, Valiant Dancer wrote:
    In the 1500's, the Catholic Church said that when an object was thrown or shot out of a cannon, it was given a finite amount of force. The item would travel in a straight line untill all of its impetus was used up. It would then drop straight down. It was heresy to suggest otherwise. The subsequent war against people who believed in the rules of ballistics was enough for the Catholic Church to back off the impetus thing. Why? Because the people using ballistics hit what they were aiming at.

    This kind of misinformation needs to be challenged.
    OK....which war was that?

  8. #8
    Guest
    On 2002-08-17 07:24, lucis wrote:
    http://www.copernican-series.com/sss/index.html

    I stumbled across this site while looking up stuff on gravity. I can't believe someone actually wrote this stuff, believes it, and is selling books about it. It's so frustrating to me. And so I thought I'd share my frustration on the topic with the rest of you.

    He claims his "Reality Theory" disproves the whole of modern science and... God, it makes me sick just describing it. Just read it yourself if you want to discover just how stupid and ignorant a person with a little bit (very little) of knowledge can be.

    -Mike

    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: The Bad Astronomer on 2002-08-17 14:35 ]</font>

    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: lucis on 2002-08-18 23:19 ]</font>
    Thank you! I Haven't laughed this hard in weeks. On the bright side of things, just imagine the average IQ of the race is sure to shoot up a few points when this "expert" dies.

  9. #9
    On 2002-08-20 11:30, Valiant Dancer wrote:
    But we are attempting to promote good science and dispell myth. If we let sites like the one above go unchallenged, we run the risk of people starting to believe it.
    Be careful in this quest, though, as trying too hard can often provide them with the publicity they crave. 'Tis best sometimes to quietly say your piece and move on.

    A case in point (sorry it's non-astro) is obvious in a CNN article ( http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/08/21/plo...eut/index.html ) about a French conspiracy theorist with a book about Sept 11. It's clearly **, but it is selling because of all the publicity it is getting from bad reviews.

    The "faithful" don't base their arguments on logic, so don't expect logic to convince them otherwise.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    359
    On 2002-08-21 15:59, GrapesOfWrath wrote:
    On 2002-08-20 11:30, Valiant Dancer wrote:
    In the 1500's, the Catholic Church said that when an object was thrown or shot out of a cannon, it was given a finite amount of force. The item would travel in a straight line untill all of its impetus was used up. It would then drop straight down. It was heresy to suggest otherwise. The subsequent war against people who believed in the rules of ballistics was enough for the Catholic Church to back off the impetus thing. Why? Because the people using ballistics hit what they were aiming at.

    This kind of misinformation needs to be challenged.
    OK....which war was that?
    During the Italian Wars (1495 - 1559).

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    1,575
    On 2002-08-20 04:23, Marvin Martian wrote:
    everyone is entitled to there own opinion however if you dont like the theory dont read it
    Dear Marv, my friendly neighbor:

    If I don't read his theory, how will I know what he thinks?! Or wheather I like it or not? [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img] [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img] If you don't read my thoughts on his theory, how will you know what I think?! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif[/img]

    If we all don't read this BBS what's the point of having the forum? Please note my signature below. [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_wink.gif[/img]

    I say: LET THE IDEAS FLOW!! [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_lol.gif[/img]

    Your friendly neighbor,

    Russ

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    3
    I sent the guy at copernican-series.com an email asking him what schools he had attended, what his degrees were and what support he had found from the scientific community.

    It will be interesting to see his response....LOL

    John


  13. #13
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    3,015
    On 2002-08-22 14:24, Valiant Dancer wrote:
    During the Italian Wars (1495 - 1559).
    Thanks, VD, I've been looking at a lot of time lines lately, since then. Did you know that Tartaglia published his ballistics book a couple years after Thomas More was beheaded?

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    147
    I suspect that the author has little understanding of basic scientific principles and has conjured up an elaborate explanation that science went wrong somewhere just because he lacks that understanding. Most of these antiscientists amply demonstate this by inacurately explaining the most basic principles. This is when they get into trouble. The following paragraph is just one example in that essay.

    "For instance, relating the red shift of stellar spectra to distance might well be a fun notion so long as one keeps in mind that the physical basis of the red shift is unknown, that it is impossible to visualize how multiple waves of light can travel together, that we have no way of knowing whether the red or blue wavelengths are the shorter wavelengths, that there is no physical evidence for a medium through which light can travel and therefore no basis to analogize light to a train whistle blowing in the wind that would therefore shift, that with no medium there is no physical basis for claiming light to be a wave and thus capable of shifting, and that, with light being an imponderable, t here's nothing to shift!"

    He presumes to claim that electromagnetic waves need a medium to travel through and that we don't know if blue or red light have the shorter wavelengths. This is only one of many of his errors.

    I'd mock him but the challenge is gone.



  15. #15
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    359
    On 2002-09-04 05:46, GrapesOfWrath wrote:
    On 2002-08-22 14:24, Valiant Dancer wrote:
    During the Italian Wars (1495 - 1559).
    Thanks, VD, I've been looking at a lot of time lines lately, since then. Did you know that Tartaglia published his ballistics book a couple years after Thomas More was beheaded?
    No. I was not aware of it. BTW, I should clarify that the cause of the Italian Wars was not the heresy of ballistics but a tangetal subject which caused the Catholic church to change its policy.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    328
    Actually, I've enjoyed the five minutes or so I've just wasted reading some of his site. He's got a very good writing style--for a raving lunatic, that is--that makes it almost a shame to catch him out on such simple things as wavelengths of different coloured light or why-for/how-come the neutron was "invented" as he styles it.

    It's good enough to make me wonder if his is a parody site, in fact, rather than the raving lunacy that it appears to be on the surface. I mean, his writing is so completely "I know what I'm talking about, and the rest of you are just clueless morons", that I really wonder if it could be real or just a pose.

    No, he's probably sincere, and sincerely confused. But it's still a thought to ponder: how, exactly, can we tell the real loonies from the posers?

    The (and which, pray tell, am I?) Curtmudgeon

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    153
    The "I'm right and the rest of you are clueless morons" writing style is common on such websites, even on this board. I've even drifted dangerously close to it myself at times.

    As to nature abhoring stupidity - well, 99.99...% of the organisms on earth couldnt write such an article. This guy outclasses bacteria - he is even better at making some of us throw up [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img].

    He peddles negative knowledge. If you believe what he says, you are actually worse off than believing nothing about the subject at all. It reduces the value of the other things ya know like a negative number reduces a positive. Makes me wonder if he has negative intelligence [img]/phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif[/img]. The "absolute value" of his intelligence may be very high, compared with an ameoba or even some of us. Trouble is, our intelligence is positive and his is negative. Just having some fun.

    <font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Cloudy on 2002-09-05 23:39 ]</font>

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    328
    Cloudy, I've long contended that "The total intelligence on the planet is a constant; the population is growing; you do the math." HBs in general make up Exhibit A.

    But I wonder if we'll ever reach a point where, despite the growing population, the total intelligence no longer remains constant but actually starts to dwindle? Then we'll really be into a major attack of what you call 'negative intelligence'.

    The ("the second best thing about space travel is that it makes it possible to go elsewhere") Curtmudgeon

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    1
    (I see this thread was old, hope nobody minds if I resurrect it)

    Hey guys, new member here. I actually came across the site in question a couple days ago, while I was doing some research on electromagnetic waves. I hit the page about determining the distances to stars and actually thought he was bringing up some good points at first, until I noticed he didn't know what the heck he was talking about. I read some of the other pages and found them even more outrageous. No such thing as protons? Electrons don't repel? Light is not an electromagnetic wave? I was so mad, I decided to search the Internet to see if anybody had any comments about this guy and I found this thread (which is funny, because I'm a huge fan of badastronomy.com but I've never ventured into the message boards!).

    By the way, I just wanted to add that from what I can gather, the Catholic Church really believed in what as the prevailing scientific opinion of the day. Of course at times they rejected new ideas, because most "established" scientists were doing the same thing. When it became a well known fact that what as believed was wrong they of course changed their opinion. Fwiw I'm not a Catholic so I don't have a dog in the race.

  20. #20
    Glom's Avatar
    Glom is offline Insert awesome title here
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    10,673
    Welcome, SNorman. Well done on finding this thread buried way down in the archives. You must have the skills of milli, our esteemed king of finding old lost posts.

Similar Threads

  1. Sick at work? Or sick of work?
    By mugaliens in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 2009-Jun-16, 08:50 PM
  2. Sick whipping sick ploy.
    By peteshimmon in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 2008-Jul-11, 08:13 PM
  3. I'm so sick of PC
    By tofu in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 136
    Last Post: 2006-Jan-26, 03:56 AM
  4. How Sick???
    By in forum Off-Topic Babbling
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 2005-Jan-04, 04:03 AM
  5. SICK
    By girl101 in forum Against the Mainstream
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 2003-Mar-31, 03:48 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
here
The forum is sponsored in-part by: