"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Apr 2008 09:33:45 +0100, "marc"
wrote:

"John Smith" wrote in message
news:fqWPj.11363$aq4.9829@trnddc02...


Odd that you cannot seem to comprehend the contradictive stupidity of
your
own stance.

Language does not posses adequate functionality to articulate what Hammond
cannot comprehend.

Marc


It's retrodictive stupidity, not contradictive stupidity.


"Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1) - Cite This Source - Share This
con·tra·dic·tive Audio Help /?k?ntr?'d?kt?v/ Pronunciation Key - Show
Spelled Pronunciation[kon-truh-dik-tiv] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA
Pronunciation
-adjective tending or inclined to contradict; involving contradiction;
contradictory.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1620-30; contradict + -ive]

-Related forms
con·tra·dic·tive·ly, adverb
con·tra·dic·tive·ness, noun "


****************************
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/retrodictive
"No results found for retrodictive."

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:44:02 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

[Hammond]
Simple: You come into existence, and when you come into
existence anything you see "exists".
3 across is HAMMOND.
=====================================
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 in message
...
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:44:02 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an
object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

[Hammond]
Simple: You come into existence, and when you come into
existence anything you see "exists".
3 across is HAMMOND.

The clue was - "Biggest asshole in all the news groups".

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:44:02 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an
object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

[Hammond]
Simple: You come into existence, and when you come into
existence anything you see "exists".

That doesn't explain anything.It just looks like you don't understand the
question.
If the universe doesn't already exist, there's nothing to see.

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:40:47 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:44:02 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
om...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an
object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

[Hammond]
Simple: You come into existence, and when you come into
existence anything you see "exists".

That doesn't explain anything


[Hammond]
Horse****, it answers your question directly.



It just looks like you don't understand the question.
If the universe doesn't already exist, there's nothing to see.

[
[Hammond]
No... YOU don't understand the question, or the answer.
It's SIMPLE:

1. If Man does not exist, then nothing exists.
2. When Man came into existence 200k yrs ago Time and the
Universe came into existence simultaneously
including it's 13 billion year evolutionary history.


If you're too stupid to understand that, that's YOUR
problem, not mine!
=====================================
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 25, 9:59*am, George Hammond wrote:

1. *If Man does not exist, then nothing exists.

My dog seems to have a different opinion.

I wonder if you will propose to test this hypothesis?

hmmmm...

2. *When Man came into existence 200k yrs ago Time and the
* * * Universe came into existence simultaneously
* * * including it's 13 billion year evolutionary history.

Man has not come into existence yet. What we see is a simulation of
what will happen if man comes into existence. The simulation provides
everything so that we think man already came into existence.

And they lived happily ever after they came into existence...

Mike

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 10:40:47 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 02:44:02 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
m...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 12:46:25 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
news:rn8t04pl2u7i9bhgnkofvl16j26jihkmko@4ax. com...
On Wed, 23 Apr 2008 01:09:01 +0100, "Andy F."
wrote:


[Andy F.]
There's a human opinion based on sensory perception that the
universe
has
been around for billions of years.

[Hammond]
There is overwhelming evidence based on scientific
deduction that *IF* a person existed a billion years ago,
then he would have indeed observed the Universe to exist. I
throughly agree with that and anybody who doesn't is
certifiably either crazy or incompetent.

[Andy F.]
This means the universe existed before
humans did.


[Hammond]
WRONG, DEAD WRONG ANDY.

1) The "existence", of anything, depends entirely on the
sensory perception of Man. There IS NO definition
of the word "existence" that is independent of the
action of a HUMAN observer.
Proof: If all men died tomorrow at 9am, there
would no longer be any way to ascertain at 9:01am
if ANYTHING whatsoever "existed". The word
"existence" has no meaning whatsoever
without the existence of human beings.

2) But what your statement above says, is that
circumstantial evidence indicates (indeed
conclusively) that *IF* a human observer existed
a billion years ago, then he "would have" observed
that the Universe "existed". And I thoroughly
agree with that statement.

An event has to happen BEFORE it can be observed.The light from an
object
has to travel to your eyes before you can see it.
If the object is close by, this takes a few billionths of a
second.When
you
look at the sun, you're seeing what was there 8 minutes ago.And if you
look
through a powerful telescope, you can observe events which hapened
millions
of years ago.

[Hammond]
Idiocy, the Universe didn't "exist" until the human race
arrived to "make" it exist by seeing it. Makes no
difference that the light took 13 billion years to get here,
it didn't "exist" until the human race arrived to see it.


3) However, in point of fact, no such human observer
did exist a billion years ago, therefore, by paragraph
1 above, the Universe actually did *NOT* "exist"
a billion years ago.... even though it "would have"
if anybody was around to see it.

[Andy F.]
So it's not possible for humans to have created the universe.


[Hammond]
Wrong again.
The above proof demonstrates conclusively that Man
"caused" the Universe to come into "existence" since ONLY A
HUMAN can confirm that anything "exists".
In short, "existence" is a PROPERTY of the human mind. No
people, no existence, of anything!

But a human can't confirm that something exists until after it
exists.Which
would make it logically impossible for anything to come into
existence.

[Hammond]
Idiot..... nothing existed until Humans arrived to "make" it
exist by seeing it. You're an imbecile who will never rise
above moronic world games... I suggest you try crossword
puzzles. Moron.


OK. As soon as you've explained how you can 'see' something that doesn't
exist, I'll go and do the crossword.,

[Hammond]
Simple: You come into existence, and when you come into
existence anything you see "exists".

That doesn't explain anything

George doesn't ever explain anything - he just bellows more and more
ignorance ......



[Hammond]
Horse****, it answers your question directly.

see ................





It just looks like you don't understand the question.
If the universe doesn't already exist, there's nothing to see.

[
[Hammond]
No... YOU don't understand the question, or the answer.
It's SIMPLE:

1. If Man does not exist, then nothing exists.
2. When Man came into existence 200k yrs ago Time and the
Universe came into existence simultaneously
including it's 13 billion year evolutionary history.

Why?
What "time" What universe? Why this paticular universe?
Why this particular planet? Why this particular solar system?
Where did this "Man" come from?
Where did this "universe" come from?





If you're too stupid to understand that, that's YOUR
problem, not mine!

There is nothing stupid about not being able to understand psychotic
insanity.

On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:51:53 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


There is nothing stupid about not being able to understand psychotic
insanity.

[Hammond]
You don't think so? How else could you discover the
world's first scientific proof of God?
=====================================
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 in message
...
On Fri, 25 Apr 2008 16:51:53 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


There is nothing stupid about not being able to understand psychotic
insanity.

[Hammond]
You don't think so? How else could you discover the
world's first scientific proof of God?

You admit it?