"monkfish" monkfish@nowhere wrote in message
...
John Smith wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 08:58:44 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:


SNIP AGGRAVATED ATHEIST RANT

[Hammond]
You haven't posted ONE ON TOPIC SCIENTIFIC
STATMENT since you arrived on this thread. You keep
mouthing the hand waving phrase "word salad" in
response to everything I say
Your commentary reflects aggravated naivet and little
sophistication or experience in Science.
You CLAIM to have a "PhD in Physics" but refuse to cite
your CV, your real name, or any verification. Your
commentary does not rise above the level of the average jr.
grade laboratory technician. Until you provide
verification of your educational claims, I presume you
are a FRAUD and an IMPOSTER, and typical of the
average ranting aggravated psychotic atheistic nut.
Finally, because frauds usually claim they can't
post their CV because they must remain anonymous
(which is crap); I posted a TEST QUESTION that any
COMPETENT Physics PhD should be able to
answer off the top of his head:

Physics PhD Test Question
What is the relationship between the
Dirac gamma matrices of QED and the
Christoffel Symbols of General Relativity?

You don't know the answer, and can't answer the question
(and you won't find it on Google) which proves that
you're a half baked "applied physics" jerk who can't
understand the SPOG which is based on "real Physics".
Screw psycho, go back to alt.atheism and talk to your
asshole buddies, and get off this thread. You're worthless
as a scientist and worst of all intellectually BORING!


Facts are facts - no matter what the source.
The FACT is - George Hammond is nothing more than a raving lunatic.


That's an opinion.

Supported by evidence gathered from George's insane, ranting posts.

"George Hammond" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 16:55:33 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
. ..
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 01:23:44 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:
[Hammond]
You're disputing a well known documented public fact.
Pergamon Press is one of the world's PREMIER academic
publishers as any google search will confirm.

[John Smith, rabid atheist]
The printing company has nothing to do with the validity of the
information
it prints - **** for brains!
You've been told that FACT over and over again!


[Hammond]
LIAR.....LOL LOL LOL LOL LOL
My 1994 paper was peer refviewed by 5 PROFESSORIAL RANK
REVIEWERS including the editor and was UNANIMOUSLY recommed
for publication by all 5. My 2003 paper was published by a
journal which has 10 Physicists on it's editorial review
board and the editor is a world ernouned Phd physicist
himself and recommeded the paper for publication. You don't
know what you're talking about. QUIT LYING.



[John Smith, (alleged) rabid atheist]
You edit and add "rabid atheist" to my handle .... and call me a liar?
You know nothing about my religious beliefs - asswipe!


[Hammond]
Ok..... what is your "opinion" of a religious belief in
"God"? A short answer would be appreciated. Do you believe
there is such a thing as a "scientific proof of God"?

My religious beliefs are not up for discussion.

There IS no "scientific proof of god".
That is merely the product of an insane, fraudulent, ranting, psychotic
lunatic ............. YOU!

John Smith wrote:

"monkfish" monkfish@nowhere wrote in message
John Smith wrote:

Facts are facts - no matter what the source.
The FACT is - George Hammond is nothing more than a raving lunatic.


That's an opinion.

Supported by evidence gathered from George's insane, ranting posts.


Still just an opinion.
Can you define sanity scientifically?


--
monkfish * The best way to handle spams is to ignore them. But if you must
reply to them, you should at least set the followup-to header to something
other than your own newsgroup.

John Smith wrote:

"George Hammond" wrote in message

Ok..... what is your "opinion" of a religious belief in
"God"? A short answer would be appreciated. Do you believe
there is such a thing as a "scientific proof of God"?

My religious beliefs are not up for discussion.

There IS no "scientific proof of god".
That is merely the product of an insane, fraudulent, ranting, psychotic
lunatic ............. YOU!


Whether God can be scientifically proven to exist or not
is not a scientific question.

What does it mean for God to exist?


--
monkfish * The best way to handle spams is to ignore them. But if you must
reply to them, you should at least set the followup-to header to something
other than your own newsgroup.

George Hammond wrote:
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 09:33:12 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:



SNIP AMATEUR ATHISTIC RANT

[Hammond]
Look lame brain, I don't have time to sit here and argue
amateur philosophy with an aggravated atheist and
scientific incompetent.

But you must have time to do it because you are doing it.


BECAUSE the SPOG is not based on "philosophy".... that's
just conversational material for Usenet amateurs.

It is based on philosophy but it is not based on physics.

What YOU are guilty of (if you are a physics PhD, which I
seriously doubt) is IGNORING the hard scientific discovery
that Hammond has made (and peer published); that:

Vanity press publishers are not peer reviewed. If your check
clears, the review passes.


The entire Factor Analytic structure of Psychometry
is CAUSALLY IDENTICAL to the 4x4 matrix structure of
Linearized Gravity in Relativity. CAUSALLY IDENTICAL!
Thus proving that Psychometry is governed by the same
Field Equation as General Relativity but with a
different source term, so that:

God = G_uv = A curvature of subjective spacetime

You have not even begun to prove this. You have strung
together sentences that say things but this does not come
out of them. This is a joke not a proof.

For a horse's ass of a PhD physicist (claimant) to come
in here where physics amateurs are only able to jawbone
about the elementary (and ancient!) philosophical foundation
of the phenomena, and DELIBERATELY IGNORE the stunning
scientific discovery of the CURVATURE OF REALITY that proves
"God" exists, is less than unethical and despicable, it's
very near criminal.

You are repeating yourself. You said this a few times before.
It is still not true.

Believe me, unless you can get up to speed and start
talking hard science... I have no intention of flattering an
ignorant asshole like you by sitting here and talking
amateur Philosophy with you. Unlike you, I have better
things to do.

You said this before as well. You cannot stop yourself
from replying because you really hope that someone,
somewhere will believe you. You have discovered nothing.

=====================================
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 Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:33:58 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:53:59 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:
George Hammond writes:
2. I'm a graduate physicist.
[Michael Moroney chronic heckler]
I would certainly hope you'd know what the Scientific Method is, if this
was actually true.
CURRICULUM VITAE
[Michael Moroney chronic heckler]
[snip irrelevant CV]

We're discussing the scientific method, not your CV. Do you even know
what the scientific method is?



[Hammond]
Are you ****tin me Moroney..?

CURRICULUM VITAE

GEORGE HAMMOND

B.S. Physics 1964, Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester MA, USA (Deans List)
M.S. Physics 1967, Northeastern University,
Boston MA, USA
Ph.D. Candidate and Teaching Fellow in Physics, 1967-68
Northeastern Univ. Boston MA
Note: Studied Relativity under Prof. Richard Arnowitt
at N.U. and who is presently Distinguished
Professor of Physics at TAMU

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

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

If you cannot answer the question, just say so. He asked
a question and you posted your CV. He did not ask for your
CV, he asked if you understood the scientific method. It
was, however, a rhetorical question since it is clear you
do not understand it. Hints: bluster and swearing are not
part of it. You can look up the rest.

On Thu, 01 May 2008 02:20:22 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:



[Hammond]
Ok..... what is your "opinion" of a religious belief in
"God"? A short answer would be appreciated. Do you believe
there is such a thing as a "scientific proof of God"?


[John Smith, antiSPOG activist]
My religious beliefs are not up for discussion.


[Hammond]
The religious beliefs of anyone who is irrationally
opposed to the discovery of a scientific proof of God are de
facto of interest if he is posting a tirade of ad hominem
remarks such as the following:.


[John Smith, antiSPOG activist]
There IS no "scientific proof of god".
That is merely the product of an insane, fraudulent, ranting, psychotic
lunatic ............. YOU!

=====================================
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 Wed, 30 Apr 2008 20:06:01 -0700, none ""doug\"@(none)"
wrote:



SNIP RANT


[Hammond]
You claim to be a physicist but refuse to post your CV,
your real name, or any verification.
From the low intellectual quality of your posts I
concludeare a fraudulent crackpot with possibly a charity
degree in some lamebrain Natural Science field, at best.
You have not posted ONE SCIENTIFIC COMMENT to this
thread, merely an endless stream of aggravated amateur
speculation. Get off this thread.
=====================================
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 Wed, 30 Apr 2008 22:36:22 -0400, monkfish
monkfish@nowhere wrote:

John Smith wrote:

"monkfish" monkfish@nowhere wrote in message
John Smith wrote:

Facts are facts - no matter what the source.
The FACT is - George Hammond is nothing more than a raving lunatic.


That's an opinion.

Supported by evidence gathered from George's insane, ranting posts.


[monkfish]
Still just an opinion.


[Hammond]
Bravo!


[monkfish]
Can you define sanity scientifically?


[Hammond]
Lets put it this way; the discovery and publication of a
rigorously scientific and competent scientific proof of God
is an example of "a sane acomplishment", and that's what
Hammond's SPOG is.
=====================================
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 Thu, 01 May 2008 02:17:01 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:


"George Hammond" wrote in message
.. .
On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 18:33:58 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

On Wed, 30 Apr 2008 14:53:59 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

2. I'm a graduate physicist.

[Michael Moroney chronic heckler]
I would certainly hope you'd know what the Scientific Method is, if
this
was actually true.

CURRICULUM VITAE

[Michael Moroney chronic heckler]
[snip irrelevant CV]

We're discussing the scientific method, not your CV. Do you even know
what the scientific method is?



[Hammond]
Are you ****tin me Moroney..?

CURRICULUM VITAE

GEORGE HAMMOND

B.S. Physics 1964, Worcester Polytechnic Institute
Worcester MA, USA (Deans List)
M.S. Physics 1967, Northeastern University,
Boston MA, USA
Ph.D. Candidate and Teaching Fellow in Physics, 1967-68
Northeastern Univ. Boston MA
Note: Studied Relativity under Prof. Richard Arnowitt
at N.U. and who is presently Distinguished
Professor of Physics at TAMU

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


The Noetic Journal sounds exactly like a religious fanatics bellowing -
saying science does not get into the realm of whatever THEY want to study -
so they demean science, and pretend their "expansion" IS real science.
Their "peer review", then, would be excatly like one Roman Catholic priests
judging the believes and statements of another Roman Catholic priest.

George wouldn't know a real peer reviewed scientific journal if one was
shoved up his ass.


[Hammond]
Many internationally known physicists and scientists have
published in the journal, including Rupert Sheldrake, Henry
Stapp, Karl Pribram, Richard Amoroso and others, and there
are 10 internationally known physicists on the editorial
board.
=====================================
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
=====================================