Wondering if my "Matthew Slepitza's" theory of the big bang could be correct?

@Herald,

You were explictly told that until you come up with something better than the current cosmological model, you're just trying to find gaps to stick your earth-instructions-teleporting alien/ILF/god-thingy-of-the-gaps into. Come back with some evidence.

As for the "inconsistent," "implausible" and "infeasible" parts, holy ******* shitballs, Batman. You claim some wild-ass, self-contradictory, evidence-free crap like a 45% this, 30% something that contradicts the 40% claim, 25% something that contradicts everything else you said, then argue that the 25% thing is fake, and you have the temerity to call the scientists "inconsistent," "implausible" and "infeasible"?

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/roll.gif

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

You were explictly told that until you come up with something better than the current cosmological model, you're just trying to find gaps to stick your earth-instructions-teleporting alien/ILF/god-thingy-of-the-gaps into. Come back with some evidence.

RE: the 'alien/ILF/god-thingy-of-the-gaps'
     1. I do not claim that the aliens are plausible hypothesis because of the inconsistency of the Big Bang 'theory'. What I claim is that the Big Bang is inconsistent with or without the hypothesis of the aliens.
     2. I do not claim that the aliens can explain the Infinite Temperature and the Infinite Gravity. What I claim is that the Big Bang will not be able to explain that for life ... with or without the aliens.
     3. I do not claim that the Time has been launched by the aliens. What I claim is that the Big Bang will not be able to explain how it has launched the Time (all of a sudden and out of nowhere) ... with or without the aliens.
     The inconsistency of the Big Bang 'theory' is absolute ... and it does not depend on the existence or non-existence of your favourite broken record of the aliens.

     The question here, however remains: could the Big Bang have been caused by something else than the Singularity - not that anybody seriously believes that it can be launched by the Singularity (if possible to exist at all, and if possible to operate in reverse in case of existing)?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Everybody already knows that the science is incomplete. Nobody denies it. It's why scientists still have jobs. That's old, meaningless news. Whatever wingnutty idea you propose has zero evidence and **** all for valid reasoning to support it. Come back when you have something stochastically better than the Big Bang theory to infinity.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Everybody already knows that the science is incomplete.

This is the greatest misrepresentation. You claimed that you have attended some math - what about the case of substitution for the purposes of misrepresentation, the case when one replaces a variable with a given value, with word with similar but actually much different meaning in order to distort the interpretation.
First the Big Bang 'theory' is hardly any science at all and second it is not incomplete - it is fake, and it continues to maintain forged claims based on supposititious justifications ... which is much more different. When you don't have an engine in the car, the case is not that the car 'is incomplete' - a car without engine is not a motor transportation vehicle at all.

2 Replies

@Herald,

All ya gotta do is prove your claims, homie. You haven't done that yet. You need evidence. The scientists have it; you don't. Get some, make a stronger hypothesis, post your results in a peer-reviewed journal, collect Nobel Prize. I'll wait here.

http://i1330.photobucket.com/albums/w561/hapkido1996/37_zps3ae50676.gif

1 Reply

@Herald,

Quote:

with word with similar but actually much different meaning in order to distort the interpretation

You mean like when you replaced "god" with "ILF"? That kind of distortion?

Or don't your distortions count as distortions because you BELIEVE them to be true?

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

All ya gotta do is prove your claims, homie.

I am not obliged to do anything of the kind. First these beliefs are exemplary, for the purposes of the discussion. Second, as you are hiding so thoroughly your own beliefs you have not moral and immoral right to ask somebody else to provide to you justification of his beliefs. Third without the specification of the Gaps, your claim whatever-of-the-gaps is absolutely invalid. Why should I answer to invalid claims?

1 Reply

@parados,

parados wrote:

You mean like when you replaced "god" with "ILF"? That kind of distortion?

God and ILF are connected with XOR, where do you see substitution?

parados wrote:

Or don't your distortions count as distortions because you BELIEVE them to be true?

You were told that these are exemplary beliefs. Besides that, assigning 45%/30%/25% probability does not mean believe to be true - it obviously means I don't know, and most probably the assumptions are unknowable ... as you don't know as well, no matter whether you are confessing that or not.
BTW how much % do you belief in the Big Bang, 'theory' and why?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Hmmmm... so if the assumptions are unknowable that makes it a valid theory? And yet you proposed this and have refused to take it back in spite of the number of times FBM has offered you that chance.

I'm guessing you don't see the hypocrisy in that position compared to your other position, do you?

0 Replies

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

FBM wrote:
All ya gotta do is prove your claims, homie.
I am not obliged to do anything of the kind. First these beliefs are exemplary, for the purposes of the discussion. Second, as you are hiding so thoroughly your own beliefs you have not moral and immoral right to ask somebody else to provide to you justification of his beliefs. Third without the specification of the Gaps, your claim whatever-of-the-gaps is absolutely invalid. Why should I answer to invalid claims?

Far from being "exemplary," they're loony. You make claims and refuse to support them with evidence. Hardly an example any rational person would be advised to imitate. Laughing

You make the claim, you bear the burden of proof. Offer some genuine evidence and necessary inference instead of fallacious word salads for a change.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

You make claims and refuse to support them with evidence.

So what - just like you. You are talking about some conspiracy theory of some Gaps and you cannot enumerate them.

FBM wrote:

Hardly an example any rational person would be advised to imitate.

This thread here is not about your personal problems with the aliens. If you have to say something on the assumptions - just say it or get away.

FBM wrote:

You make the claim, you bear the burden of proof.

I am not obliged to proof my beliefs to anybody, that is why they are called personal beliefs. I am not even obliged even to announce them the way they actually are ... to some retards on the net to misinterpret them and to misuse with them to infinity ... moreover that the beliefs are usually dynamic and continuously revised and amended and changed.
You are the loony with the broken record of the aliens by repeating a question that has been explicitly told that you will not be answered to the way you imagine it and the way you need it for your misinterpretations. Wretch.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Herald wrote:

So what - just like you. You are talking about some conspiracy theory of some Gaps and you cannot enumerate them.

Tu quoque fail. I've exposed your fallacies over and over and over again, and you've gone through the same routine over and over and over again:

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/lalala_1.gif

followed pages later insisting that it never happened and insisting that I repeat myself. Your strategizing has come to an end. Now, if you want to see my evidence of your fallacies, you'll have to just read the thread and stop the

Quote:

This thread here is not about your personal problems with the aliens. If you have to say something on the assumptions - just say it or get away.

Already said it about a thousand times. You don't have any evidence for your claim and everything you've ever said about it has been fraught with fallacies.

Quote:

I am not obliged to proof my beliefs to anybody, that is why they are called personal beliefs. I am not even obliged even to announce them the way they actually are ... to some retards on the net to misinterpret them and to misuse with them to infinity ... moreover that the beliefs are usually dynamic and continuously revised and amended and changed.

Nor is anybody obliged to take you seriously when you pull **** out of your ass that you can't back up. If you don't want to be ridiculed, stop posting ridiculous ideas.

Quote:

You are the loony with the broken record of the aliens by repeating a question that has been explicitly told that you will not be answered to the way you imagine it and the way you need it for your misinterpretations. Wretch.

I already know that I won't be answered in the way that I imagine it: You presenting evidence for your claims.

Now, once you disowned your alien/ILF/god-thingy claim and admitted defeat, I was willing to drop the whole issue and move along. But you keep bringing it back up. I'm still willing to drop it and move along. Why are you so insistent on discussing it further? We always wind up back at the same spot: Your lack of evidence. If you insist on sticking with the topic, I'm willing. If you're willing to drop it, I'll drop it. Up to you, homes. I'm easy.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

I've exposed your fallacies over and over and over again, and you've gone through the same routine over and over and over again.

I am not asking you about that - what you consider as 'my fallacies' - I am asking you to present the list with the Gaps (on the basis of which 'I am constructing my hypothesis'). BTW this list concerns this thread as well.

1 Reply

@Herald,

I'm not your slave or your librarian. Read the thread yourself. I've said all I needed to say to expose your fallacies. If you want to stick to the alien/ILF/god-thingy crap, just say so. If you want to move along, say so.

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

I'm not your slave or your librarian.

... or perhaps you don't have the said listing of the Gaps.

1 Reply

@Herald,

Are you reversing your earlier admission and now going back to defending your alien/ILF/god-thingy claim?

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Are you reversing your earlier admission and now going back to defending your alien/ILF/god-thingy claim?

... and are you trying to poison this thread as well - after you have poisoned with vitriol the other thread with the ID by attaching to it fake 'keywords'?

1 Reply

@Herald,

Are you going to poison this thread with numerous, persistent and repetitive logical fallacies, while offering no genuine evidence to support your largely incomprehensible claims?

1 Reply

@FBM,

FBM wrote:

Are you going to poison this thread with numerous, persistent and repetitive logical fallacies, while offering no genuine evidence to support your largely incomprehensible claims?

You were told many times that this thread here is not about your personal problems with the aliens.
... and what 'genuine evidence' do you have about the Gaps (of Science) ... on the grounds of which you are constructing all your straw-men, red herrings, broken records of the aliens, and the other logical fallacies ... when you don't even dare to enumerate them.

1 Reply

@Herald,

The expositions of your persistent, repetitive logical fallacies are in the other thread. Thread-mine yourself; I'm not your slave. Still waiting for that evidence for "the" aliens.

http://i206.photobucket.com/albums/bb192/DinahFyre/goodmorning.gif

1 Reply

Wondering if my "Matthew Slepitza's" theory of the big bang could be correct?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know