"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 03 May 2008 20:55:19 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:
[Hammond]
Screw pedant. Dalton's published thesis that historical
data PROVED his thesis that:
"All of chemistry was explained by
atoms combining to form molecules
because integral moles of reagents
were (historically) always combined
in chemical experiments"
was accepted as a PRIMA FACIE proven theory the day he
published it.... he didin't have to repeat the experiments,
they were WELL KNOWN to everybody.
Same with the SPOG, jerk.
[John Smith, irate S.P.O.G. critic]
Unsupported assertion!
WHAT EXPERIMENTS?
Just because one "CASE" happens by one particular method, does NOT mean
yours gets the same treatment.
[Hammond]
Whaddumean "one case"? The annals of Scence are littered
with such cases of "race ipso" discoveries. For instance:
Dalton, Law of Chemical Combination
Einstein, Gravity=Curvature of spacetime.
Newton, Inverse square law.
Mendel, binomial inheritance, A+B=A+2AB+B
Copernicus, Heliocentric System
Pauling, Chemical orbital bonding
Lise Meitner, Nuclear fission.
AND MANY OTHERS
All of these historic discoveries were HISTORIC
THEORETICAL DISCOVERIES based on and PROVEN the day they
were published; by EXISTING published experimental data.
The same is true of the S.P.O.G. All of the existing
data which proves the S.P.O.G. is clearly cited in the
bibliography of my peer published papers:
Bull ****!
Even if there were a MILLION such cases - that would NOT mean a DAMNED thing
in relationship tp the crap you bellow.
WHAT experiments?
You keep SAYING they are there - but there are none to be seen.
Peer reviewed publications:
Hammond G.E (1994) The Cartesian Theory, in
New Ideas In Psychology, Vol 12(2) 153-167
Pergamon Press. Online copy of peer/published
paper is posted at:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god/cart.html
Hammond G.E.(2003) A Semiclassical Proof of God
Noetic Journal, Vol 4(3) July 2003, pp 231-244(Noetic
Press)
Online copy of peer/published paper is posted at:
http://geocities.com/scientific_proo...ammond5s1.html
Once again, fo the terminally mentally retarded,
these are NOT VALID scientific peer reviewed publications - no matter how
many times you shovel the same **** claim!