"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 4 May 2008 15:51:53 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

On Sun, 4 May 2008 01:14:50 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

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.

Unsupported assertion!
WHAT EXPERIMENTS?
Just because one "CASE" happens by one particular method, does NOT
mean
yours gets the same treatment.

Whaddumean "one case"? The annals of Scence are littered
with such cases of "race ipso" discoveries. For instance:

Dalton, Law of Chemical Combination

One case. Maybe.

That's called a "precedent" in Law.

First, I see I was wrong for not immediately disagreeing with
George. Dalton did quite a bit of experimentation before
publishing his work. Also his work was done fairly early before
science was done as we do it now. Of course "precedent" applies
to law and not science (and only in certain cases, anyway).

So,...

This makes George's claims of science publication bypassing the scientific
method 0 for 7. That right, George. Zero cases. You got it wrong each
time.

Therefore, the
S.P.O.G. is not the first "purely theoretical discovery
based on existing data" in scientific history.

That's right, simply because it's definitely not any sort of "discovery"

Dirac never did any experiments,
and neither did I, I simply "theoretically explained the
existing phenomenon of God"

Here we have your admission of not following the scientific method. You
did no experiments.


[Hammond]
Neither did Einstein, moron.

Trust me - you're no Einstein. You're one hell of a lot closer to Alfred E.
Neuman.

Einstein DID make theoretical predictions that turned out true.
You haven't. You just keep bellowing crap!

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 4 May 2008 16:49:49 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:




[Michael Moroney, HECKLER]
OK, so what experiment(s) have you _proposed_ that you or others have done
that will verify or refute your hypothesis? Remember, ones done before
creation of the hypothesis count toward the creation of the hypothesis,
not the verification of it.



[Hammond]
Look asshole, it is a well known historical fact that
Einstein's theory of General Relativity had only ONE
experimental confirmation when he published it and that was
Leverrier's measurement of the advance of the perihelion of
Mercury and that was 100 YEARS OLD at the time!
The SPOG is confirmed by:

150 years of Biology research in embryology by Roux,
Conklin, Speman, Dreisch and others.

100- years of neuropsychology research by Bell-Magendie,
Sperry, McClain and others.

80 years of General Relativity research.

50 years of computer research extraction of eignvector
models Psychometry including the Eysenck-3, AVA-4, Big-5,
Brand-6, Cattell-7, Saucier-8, Cattel-13 and many others...
in fact EVERY published psychometric model in the
literature.

110 years of measurement of the Picture Fusion Frequency
(PFF) since the time of Thomas Edison and recently by Lehrl
and Fischer.

80 years of research on the Secular Trend in human growth by
the WHOI, Unicef, Red Cross and hundreds of academic
studies.

40 years of modern measurements of IQ vis. Mental Speed.

20 years of research on the Anthropic Principle in Physics.

The list goes on, and is all cited in my published papers.

ALL THIS EVIDENCE is EQUIVALENT to Leverrier's Perihelion
measurement in GR. Einstein was right about GR, and Hammond
is right about the SPOG.

Claiming ancient works support your crap MEANS NOTHING - since those people
are not around to deny your warped claims!
THAT'S why YOU have to do the experiments AS THEY APPLY TO YOUR CLAIMS.
(You've already been shown wrong several times in your distortions of the
meaning of other people's work.).
You can't.
You haven't.
You won't.

You'll just keep on bellowing the same UNSUPPORTED CRAP!

"Michael Moroney" wrote in message
...
George Hammond writes:

On Sun, 4 May 2008 16:05:15 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

Unfortunately, I suspected as much. This is not something that
you'd expect from a judge handling a minor traffic ticket case.

2 months later I gave a specially invited talk to 200
research psychologists at the XXVI INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF
PSYCHOLOGY in Montreal Canada on August 18, 1996. I sat on
the dais for 2 hours with Prof. Hans Eysenck himself (then
the world's most famous living psychologist) and we
discussed my discovery of the Structural Model of
Personality.

As a test subject, perhaps?

:-)

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 04 May 2008 10:46:52 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:



SNIP

[John Smith, atheist, raving S.P.O.G. critic]
You have no idea what I have and have not read.
Your previous behavior and posts indicate one hell of a lot of distorting
other peoples writings to fit your own insane claims ...
and they have constantly been pointed out to you.
As is your habit - you just ignored that too!

[JOHN SMITH, HECKLER]
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION

If you already knew your assertion was unsupported - why did you bother
posting it?

Note that, once again, you ignore the points of the conversation and resort
to childish name calling.

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 04 May 2008 10:38:42 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


[Hammond]
I tried to tell them I wasn't crazy, that I was a
scientist and actually had discovered the world's first
scientific proof of God... but the more I told them the less
they believed me and kept telling me to take the welfare
check and go to McDonald's and get something to eat. Finally
I just said o.k.


[JOHN SMITH, HECKLER]
Here's a hint ... the more you talked to them, the more insane they
thought
you were.
You probably won't get it anyway.


[Hammond]
2 months later I gave a specially invited talk to 200
research psychologists at the XXVI INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF
PSYCHOLOGY in Montreal Canada on August 18, 1996. I sat on
the dais for 2 hours with Prof. Hans Eysenck himself (then
the world's most famous living psychologist) and we
discussed my discovery of the Structural Model of
Personality. I received a robust ovation from the audience
and many personal complements..... obviously they don't
think I'm crazy!

Hey ......... that's the same day I saw Elvis.
What a coincidence!


[Hammond]
Why is that a cooincidence, ape****?


what is "cooincidence?

Your claim has exactly the same validity as alleged sightings of Elvis.

Unlike George Hammond's daydreams, General Relativity
and the second law of thermodynamics are falsifiable.

The Scientific method can be ( and is ) applied to them;
it's not random metaphysics.

No one ( including George himself ) knows how George's daydreams
might be different from G.R. or the 2nd law,
or how it might be falsified.

When it comes to gods, my thinking is like this:
The only lord that matters is the landlord ( including the government ).
Going up a level, every landlord finds that he's also a tenant.

It's the right of every landlord to evict on a whim.. that's just life.
The U.S. ( for example ) is the landlord of Iraq,
evicting whoever it will ( e.g. Saddam Hussain ).

John Smith wrote:
"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 4 May 2008 16:49:49 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:



[Michael Moroney, HECKLER]
OK, so what experiment(s) have you _proposed_ that you or others have done
that will verify or refute your hypothesis? Remember, ones done before
creation of the hypothesis count toward the creation of the hypothesis,
not the verification of it.



[Hammond]
Look asshole, it is a well known historical fact that
Einstein's theory of General Relativity had only ONE
experimental confirmation when he published it and that was
Leverrier's measurement of the advance of the perihelion of
Mercury and that was 100 YEARS OLD at the time!
The SPOG is confirmed by:

150 years of Biology research in embryology by Roux,
Conklin, Speman, Dreisch and others.

100- years of neuropsychology research by Bell-Magendie,
Sperry, McClain and others.

80 years of General Relativity research.

50 years of computer research extraction of eignvector
models Psychometry including the Eysenck-3, AVA-4, Big-5,
Brand-6, Cattell-7, Saucier-8, Cattel-13 and many others...
in fact EVERY published psychometric model in the
literature.

110 years of measurement of the Picture Fusion Frequency
(PFF) since the time of Thomas Edison and recently by Lehrl
and Fischer.

80 years of research on the Secular Trend in human growth by
the WHOI, Unicef, Red Cross and hundreds of academic
studies.

40 years of modern measurements of IQ vis. Mental Speed.

20 years of research on the Anthropic Principle in Physics.

The list goes on, and is all cited in my published papers.

ALL THIS EVIDENCE is EQUIVALENT to Leverrier's Perihelion
measurement in GR. Einstein was right about GR, and Hammond
is right about the SPOG.

I will have to say that that is the same kind of reasoning you
use in your "proof". So if Einstein was right, you must be right
also.

You plotted a graph with two lines that did not follow each
other and then you said that was a proof of god. There is no
connection between your graphs and any god much less any proof
of any god.




Claiming ancient works support your crap MEANS NOTHING - since those people
are not around to deny your warped claims!
THAT'S why YOU have to do the experiments AS THEY APPLY TO YOUR CLAIMS.
(You've already been shown wrong several times in your distortions of the
meaning of other people's work.).
You can't.
You haven't.
You won't.

You'll just keep on bellowing the same UNSUPPORTED CRAP!

John Smith wrote:
"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 04 May 2008 10:46:52 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


SNIP

[John Smith, atheist, raving S.P.O.G. critic]
You have no idea what I have and have not read.
Your previous behavior and posts indicate one hell of a lot of distorting
other peoples writings to fit your own insane claims ...
and they have constantly been pointed out to you.
As is your habit - you just ignored that too!

[JOHN SMITH, HECKLER]
UNSUPPORTED ASSERTION

If you already knew your assertion was unsupported - why did you bother
posting it?

Note that, once again, you ignore the points of the conversation and resort
to childish name calling.


What else can he do? He is wrong. He knows he is wrong so all he has
left is to try to bully everyone. It has not worked with anyone so
far in 14 years (he claims to have done this in 1994) and it will not
work in 1400 years.

He is good for some entertainment as we can cycle around the various
cranks. There is always a good supply of people who think that the
rules of science and logic do not apply to them.

George may also just be lonely and desperate to have anyone to talk to.
There are others that way here. Lester Zick says a lot of stupid
things just so people will reply and then he can insult them and
make claims that are about as silly as George's. Androcles is just
looking for anyone to insult but he gets mostly ignored as he is
not entertaining.

On Sun, 4 May 2008 20:31:25 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:


[Hammmond]
it is a well known historical fact that
Einstein's theory of General Relativity had only ONE
experimental confirmation when he published it and that was
Leverrier's measurement of the advance of the perihelion of
Mercury and that was 100 YEARS OLD at the time!

[Michael Moroney]
George, either you are extremely forgetful or are just trolling. You
didn't mention Einstein's famous eclipse experiment.


[Hammond]
Einstein's friend who was supposed to do the experiment
got arrested in Russia due to the war and was lucky to
escape. The eclipse experiment wasn't executed until 1921
by Eddington, 6 years AFTER Einstein's theory was published
and widely known and accepted, eddington's experiment was
just the frosting on the cake.



[snip]

I see no experiments suggested by yourself. I repeat: So what
experiment(s) have you _proposed_ that you or others have done that will
verify or refute your hypothesis?



[Hammond]
Dalton didn't need to suggest any experimentas, and
neither do I. His theory was confirmed by thousands of
published experiments, and so is the S.P.O.G.
=====================================
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
=====================================

George Hammond wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2008 16:05:15 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:


Michael Moroney, HECKLER]
Unfortunately, I suspected as much. This is not something that
you'd expect from a judge handling a minor traffic ticket case.


[Hammond]
2 months later I gave a specially invited talk to 200
research psychologists at the XXVI INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF
PSYCHOLOGY in Montreal Canada on August 18, 1996. I sat on
the dais for 2 hours with Prof. Hans Eysenck himself (then
the world's most famous living psychologist) and we
discussed my discovery of the Structural Model of
Personality. I received a robust ovation from the audience
and many personal complements..... obviously they don't
think I'm crazy!

The ability of psychologists to think is not very good. One
day when I went to my office in the physics building, there
were about 50 students standing in the hall. I opened my office
and they started to follow me in. I asked what they were doing
and they said there was a class scheduled there. I told them
that this was my office but they insisted and showed me the
schedule of classes. The class was a psychology class listed
to be in PSY1405. They all thought that PSY was psyics. None
of them could figure that out.

By the way, the story of the "minor traffic ticket" is not
believable any more than your proof. Sanity hearing perhaps
but not a traffic ticket.


=====================================
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
=====================================