On Apr 20, 11:53 pm, George Hammond wrote:
On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 16:03:06 -0700 (PDT), Immortalist

wrote:

[Hammond]
Fact is, the "Anthropic Principle" simply says:
"observables exist because observers exist". After all, it
doesn't take rocket science to figure out that if there was
no such thing as an observer, then there would be no such
thing as observables; since the testimony of observers is
the ONLY WAY we know that the observables exist.

[Immortalist]
If a system observable is a property of the system state that can be
determined by some sequence of physical operations and if there was no
such thing as an observer, then it is not determined that there would
or would not be such things as observables even if the testimony of
observers is the ONLY WAY we know that the observables exist since
whether there is or is not someone existing doesn't determine
determinability and the possibility of abstract thought processes
whether they exist or not.

[Hammond]
Immortalist, thanks for your refreshing post. Out of 11
posts to this target article so far, you are the ONLY ONE
who has attempted to say something on topic. However, you
have COIMPLETELY missed the point!
You have FAILED to distinguish between two fundamentally
DIFFERENT cases:

CASE 1:
If I turn my back and look the other way,
does the Moon still exist?
(correct answer, YES)

CASE 2:
If the human race never existed or became
totally EXTINCT, would the Moon "exist".
(correct answer, NO)

I am talking about CASE 2, not CASE 1 for christ's sake.
The Biblical Creation, and "God", are explained by
CASE 2 and not by CASE 1. And the Anthropic Principle
applies to CASE 2, not CASE 1, for Heaven's sake!
Please get up to speed... do a little thinking before you
try and argue with me.... the best minds in Science are
convinced of the truth of the Anthropic Principle, ya know,
including Stephen Hawking and the late great John Wheeler as
well as the entire scientific community.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

Here's your scientific proof of God, Hammond: God and the Universe
are identical.

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 22:14:36 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:28:30 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

What Science DOESN'T KNOW is that the Anthropic Principle
was actually discovered thousands of years ago by Religion.

Religion never discovered anything.

Fact is, the "Anthropic Principle" simply says:
"observables exist because observers exist". After all, it
doesn't take rocket science to figure out that if there was
no such thing as an observer, then there would be no such
thing as observables

Wrong, ie. if a new species is discovered it doesn't mean that it
didn't exist before that.

; since the testimony of observers is
the ONLY WAY we know that the observables exist.

The rest wrong conclusions snipped.

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:50:51 -0400, Mani Deli
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 22:14:36 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:28:30 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

What Science DOESN'T KNOW is that the Anthropic Principle
was actually discovered thousands of years ago by Religion.

Religion never discovered anything.

[Hammond]
Horse's ass; who do you think discovered God?


Fact is, the "Anthropic Principle" simply says:
"observables exist because observers exist". After all, it
doesn't take rocket science to figure out that if there was
no such thing as an observer, then there would be no such
thing as observables

Wrong, ie. if a new species is discovered it doesn't mean that it
didn't exist before that.

[Hammond]
Horse's ass; NOTHING EXISTED before Man arrived, because
"EXISTENCE" is a HUMAN PERCEPTION.... no people, no
existence.
YOU THINK the Universe would still exist if the human race
became extinct, such a belief is sheer STUPIDITY.
If there were NO PEOPLE; how would anyone know the
Universe existed? Stupid.

=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

Sers George et all

George Hammond schrieb:

If there were NO PEOPLE; how would anyone know the
Universe existed? Stupid.

Your gawd, wouldn't it know, stupid horsearse (btw, strange nick, you
have)?

richie
--
Good, Fast, Cheap: Pick any two

On Apr 21, 7:28*am, "marc" wrote:
wrote in message

...

http://www.insolitology.com/topten/g...y/hammond.html

Also check out:

http://uncyclopedia.org/wiki/George_Hammond

ROFL! That's fanstastic. Thanks for the link!

The drivel that Hammond writes is so laughably absurd that it is virtually
impossible to distinguish between it and parody of it.

The first time I saw it, I thought it *was* parody. I think it was
George, along with the Heaven's Gate cult that showed me that the
online world might have become *too* accessible.

Acronym aficionados will appreciate that Hammond's assertion would be more
accurately represented by:

GOD = COMPLETE RELATIVISTIC ANTHROPOCENTRIC PRINCIPLE.

Heh, heh. I'm no physicist, but even *I* get that one. g

-Panama Floyd, Atlanta.
aa#2015/KoBAAWA!

George Hammond writes:

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:36:21 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 15:14:08 -0700, Uncle Al
wrote:

Hindus have 36 crores of gods - 360 million deities. How is India
doing, Georgie boy?

Idiot.

[Hammond]
The SPOG explains and PROVES why there are 30 demigods in
Hindii; because there are 30 first order eigenvectors in
Psychometric correlation matricess, worldwide .

Can't you read? Uncle Al wrote that Hinduism has 360 million deities,
not just 30.


His statement is manifestly absurd, there aren't 360
million names in the Human Language.

Uncle Al never claimed that they all had names known to Hinduism.

On the other hand there ARE 30 eigenvectors in every
comprehensive Psychometric correlation matrix, so there
CERTAINLY ARE 30 "DEMIGODS" in Religion;

The Vedic pantheon alone puts Hinduism over 30 gods. And they have names
since that seems to be important to you. So what good is your proof that
2+2=12345?

scientifically speaking.

Wrong, of course.

The SPOG fully proves the (rational) part of his
statmment (30 demigods) is correct (and they all have names
and faces)....

well I guess "he" can't count very well.

The ancient Greek and Roman religions had well over 30 gods each as well.

George Hammond wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:50:51 -0400, Mani Deli
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 22:14:36 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:28:30 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:
What Science DOESN'T KNOW is that the Anthropic Principle
was actually discovered thousands of years ago by Religion.
Religion never discovered anything.

[Hammond]
Horse's ass; who do you think discovered God?

Good point in that hundreds of religions have discovered their
gods although it looks like all of them existed before and
after that "discovery". You should be more specific when you
are specifying which god it is you believe in. Greek, Roman,
Zoroastrian, Norse etc. There are so many to choose from.


Fact is, the "Anthropic Principle" simply says:
"observables exist because observers exist". After all, it
doesn't take rocket science to figure out that if there was
no such thing as an observer, then there would be no such
thing as observables
Wrong, ie. if a new species is discovered it doesn't mean that it
didn't exist before that.

[Hammond]
Horse's ass; NOTHING EXISTED before Man arrived, because
"EXISTENCE" is a HUMAN PERCEPTION.... no people, no
existence.
You certainly feel important. The world does not care about
humans any more than it does about fleas.

YOU THINK the Universe would still exist if the human race
became extinct, such a belief is sheer STUPIDITY.
If there were NO PEOPLE; how would anyone know the
Universe existed? Stupid.

The fleas would still notice so the world would continue just
fine.

=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

In article George Hammond writes:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:50:51 -0400, Mani Deli
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 22:14:36 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:28:30 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

What Science DOESN'T KNOW is that the Anthropic Principle
was actually discovered thousands of years ago by Religion.

Religion never discovered anything.

[Hammond]
Horse's ass; who do you think discovered God?


Fact is, the "Anthropic Principle" simply says:
"observables exist because observers exist". After all, it
doesn't take rocket science to figure out that if there was
no such thing as an observer, then there would be no such
thing as observables

Wrong, ie. if a new species is discovered it doesn't mean that it
didn't exist before that.

[Hammond]
Horse's ass; NOTHING EXISTED before Man arrived, because
"EXISTENCE" is a HUMAN PERCEPTION.... no people, no
existence.
YOU THINK the Universe would still exist if the human race
became extinct, such a belief is sheer STUPIDITY.
If there were NO PEOPLE; how would anyone know the
Universe existed? Stupid.

Albert Einstein was famously incredulous that anyone
could possibly think that the Moon stops existing
when no one is looking at it.

I'm with him on this one.


-- cary


=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================

On Apr 21, 5:54 pm, none ""doug\"@(none)" wrote:
George Hammond wrote:
On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 16:50:51 -0400, Mani Deli
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 22:14:36 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:

On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 21:28:30 GMT, George Hammond
wrote:
What Science DOESN'T KNOW is that the Anthropic Principle
was actually discovered thousands of years ago by Religion.
Religion never discovered anything.

[Hammond]
Horse's ass; who do you think discovered God?

Good point in that hundreds of religions have discovered their
gods although it looks like all of them existed before and
after that "discovery". You should be more specific when you
are specifying which god it is you believe in. Greek, Roman,
Zoroastrian, Norse etc. There are so many to choose from.



Fact is, the "Anthropic Principle" simply says:
"observables exist because observers exist". After all, it
doesn't take rocket science to figure out that if there was
no such thing as an observer, then there would be no such
thing as observables
Wrong, ie. if a new species is discovered it doesn't mean that it
didn't exist before that.

[Hammond]
Horse's ass; NOTHING EXISTED before Man arrived, because
"EXISTENCE" is a HUMAN PERCEPTION.... no people, no
existence.

You certainly feel important. The world does not care about
humans any more than it does about fleas.

YOU THINK the Universe would still exist if the human race
became extinct, such a belief is sheer STUPIDITY.
If there were NO PEOPLE; how would anyone know the
Universe existed? Stupid.

The fleas would still notice so the world would continue just
fine.


If God never existed, we humans would never have been around to invent
"him"!

--
YOP...

On Mon, 21 Apr 2008 15:38:44 -0400, TMG
wrote:

George Hammond wrote:

[Hammond]
Fact is, it does. Stephen Hawking says:

" The Anthropioc Principle can be paraphrased as:
We see the Universe the way it is because we exist"
(S. Hawking, Brief History of Time, p. 128)

Do you think that quote means the same as:

"The Universe is the way it is because we exist"?

or perhaps,

"The Universe exists because we see it"?

because you seem to think Hawking's statement means one, or both, of the
above.


[Hammond]
Hawking is merely pointing out that we see the Universe as
it exists at this particular time because we happen to
ourselves exist at this particular time.
However, IMPLICIT in such a statement is the affirmation
that the Universe "exists", at ANY TIME, because man can see
it.
OBVIOUSLY when you say, "the Universe existed 10 billion
years ago" what you ACTUALLY MEAN, is: "If a human had been
present 10 billion years ago he would have affirmed that
the Universe existed". But in point of fact, humans DID NOT
exist 10 billion years ago, therefore the Universe DID NOT
"exist" 10 billion years ago.
Now you can sit there like the asshole you are and tete a
tete Philaawsefee all day long... but as you KNOW, all
Philosophical argumentation gets thrown on the ash heap of
history by any PRACTICAL SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY, and that is
what I have made; that Man actually sees a Relativistically
Curved version of true reality. That is a PRACTICAL
QUANTITATIVE DISCOVERY that makes you're "Philawsephy
bull****" irrelevant.
Therefore, the SPOG hardly rest on Philawsephy
argumentation....... it is in fact a HARD SCIENTIFIC
DISCOVERY.
Naturally you, and the rest of the ignorant clowns on
this thread are TOO IGNORANT to understand mathmatical
Relativity... so they prefer to argue Philawsephy... which
interests no one outside of Usenet certainly.
=====================================
SCIENTIFIC PROOF OF GOD WEBSITE
http://geocities.com/scientific_proof_of_god
mirror site:
http://proof-of-god.freewebsitehosting.com
GOD=G_uv (a folk song on mp3)
http://interrobang.jwgh.org/songs/hammond.mp3
=====================================