George Hammond wrote:
On Fri, 02 May 2008 19:46:54 -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
conclude you are a fraudulent crackpot with possibly a
charity degree in some lamebrain applied Science field, at
best.
You have not posted ONE SCIENTIFIC COMMENT to this
thread, merely an endless stream of aggravated incompetent
remarks. Get off this thread.

I did not realize that you wanted me to limit myself to
posting only one scientific comment. I tell you what,
just read the many comments in the previous posts one
at a time.


=====================================
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 2 mei, 22:13, George Hammond wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2008 10:30:34 -0700 (PDT),





" wrote:
On 2 mei, 18:21, George Hammond wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2008 06:45:55 -0700 (PDT), Roger Pearse

wrote:

[Hammond]
* *And finally, Tatian's famous DIATESSARON (c 150 - 160) is
a historically famous Gospel harmony. *In it, Tatian,
combined Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John into a single
narrative. *The historic prominence of this work from 155ad.
alone, is testimony that the 4-Gospel Canon was well known
and widely accepted by mid second century ad.

[Roger Pearse]
Perhaps.

[Hammond]
* *No perhaps about it! *The DIATESSARON was the standard
Gospel text of the Syria Christian Church for 200 years.
It's dating to 155ad is indisputable. *See:
* *http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diatessaron
where you will find:
=========BLOCK QUOTE==============
* * * *The Diatesseron is notable evidence for the authority
already enjoyed by the four gospels by the mid-second
century.
* *Twenty years after Tatian's harmony, Irenaeus expressly
proclaimed the authoritative character of the four gospels.
* *The Diatesseron became the standard text of the gospels
in the Syriac-speaking churches down to the fifth century,
when it gave way to the four separate Gospels."
======END BLOCK QUOTE==============

[Peter van Velzen, *innocent bystander]
Thanks for mentioning it. I did not know such a work existed!

[Hammond]
* *I ran across it 20 years ago, I thought Origen wrote it
around 220, but it turns out Tatian a Syrian speaking
Christian monk wrote it in 160. *It's quite famous. *Tatian
was a pupil of Justin Martyr in Rome. The guy must have been
amazingly bright to figure out that the 4-Gospel form was
"canonical". *Diatesseron means "through four" in Greek by
the way.

[Peter van Velzen, *innocent bystander]
By the way: this is not a war-zone.
Just give peace a chance :-)

[Hammond]
* *There is a war going on in the Middle East between Moslem
Jihadists and the U.S. military. The Jihadists claim the
U.S. is the "great Satan". *If so, it certainly is a
propaganda blow to Islam that a Christian U.S. Physicst has
discovered and published the world's first and only
scientific proof of God (and allah), and is heroically
defending it against all comers on Usenet.

Peter van Velzen
(born 1950)
April 2008
Amstelveen
The Netherlands

=====================================
* * *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
=====================================- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht niet weergeven -

- Tekst uit oorspronkelijk bericht weergeven -

I finally visited your website, apperantly you see yourselve as an
expert on biology psychologie and physics too.
You lost me already when you concluded that the growth of the human
body is equal to the growth of then human brain.
I do remember being taught that children had comparatively bigger
brains, and I have never heard that basketballplayers are generally
more intelligent that gymnasts. So you might add some support for this
assesment in order to convince othere then me.


I have no doubt your great discovery will never reach the newspapers.
Of course you are right in assuming dieties are created inside the
human mind. But really brain-growth and relativity?
I do not think there is a correlation there.
(Einstein seemed to have a comparetively small brain too)
If you want to convince people with more expertice than me,
you do need a major overhaul, I fear.


Back to Tatian,

He might have had no idea that the four gospels he used were to become
cannonical. The four were probably written during the first century AD
while the non canonical gospel were probably all writeen in the second
century or even later. Thus Tatian might not have them at his
disposal, or might not considered them because they were not known to
be around very long.

Unlike some lovers of conspiracy theories like to suggest, the four
were probably chosen because of there ancienity and because they were
more credible than any of the others. Not because of any ill will
towards rivaling theology (which might have existed, but may not have
effected the choice).


Peter van Velzen
April 2008
Amstelveen
The Netherlands

? "Richard Anacker" ?????? ??? ??????
...
Sers George et all

George Hammond schrieb:

SNIP AGGRAVATED ATHEISM RANT

Sprichst Du deutsch? Bist Du neu hier? Sei auf diese Person nicht boese, er
muss behandelt werden:-)



--
Tzortzakakis Dimitrios
major in electrical engineering
mechanized infantry reservist
hordad AT otenet DOT gr

"John Smith" writes:

"Michael Moroney" wrote in message
...

remember, my certified public record credentials PROVE that
i know what the scientific method is

Maybe "knew", not know. You probably haven't used the scientific method
or even thought of it for the last 40 years. You certainly didn't use
it for your SPOG crap.

George bellows about his CVs .... but when pressed about the actual JOBS he
had - he, again, ignores the topic.

I've worked at Westinghouse Research and Development Center, near
Pittsburgh.
Those in our department (Optical physics) who did NOT have a Ph.D. were
little more than lab assistants.
They do no scientific inquiry of their own, and only aided in the lab work
of another scientist.

I did that - and I only had a two year electronics degree.

One must wonder, then, how high up the "scientific ladder" George really got
after school:
Lab assistant.
Lipstick case designer?
Janitor at a college?
"You want fries with that"?

Excellent point. Hammond's CV stops cold when he flunked out of the PhD
program in the 1960s, other than his so-called "publications". He is near
retirement age now. He should have a long illustrious physics related
career under his belt. Where is it?

George Hammond writes:

On Fri, 02 May 2008 09:21:13 GMT, "John Smith"
wrote:

I am refused publication of the S.P.O.G. in any leading
journal because of it and am besieged by scientific
anti-religious hecklers smearing me night and day on Usenet.

No, you are refused publication in any leading scientific
journal because your work doesn't follow the scientific method and
quite simply, has no science in it.

At least you finally admit you never got published in any scientific
journal.

George Hammond writes:

On Thu, 1 May 2008 22:45:40 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

What experiments have you performed, that other scientists can also
perform, that would prove or disprove your work? The answer is NONE!
No experiments, no scientific method, no peer review, no "proof".

All the necessary experiments have alreaqdy been performed,
confirmed and published in 10,000 experiments over 40 years
and ALL cited in my published papers.

This is a perfect example of your lack of understanding of the Scientific
Method. All experiments and so forth before you create your hypothesis
are part of the creation of the initial hypothesis, which is the very
first step. Later on, once you device a working hypothesis, YOU create an
experiment that when performed, will have a definite outcome if your
hypothesis is true and a different outcome if it is false. If someone
else derives the experiments, then they should get the credit for the
work, not you. Then YOU (or people working with you) do the experiments.
Again, if others do that work, they get the credit. Depending on the
outcome you then go back and modify the hypothesis, derive the new
experiments and perform them until your hypothesis is either a publishable
theory or discarded as false.

Sers Tzortzakakis et all

Tzortzakakis Dimitrios schrieb:

Sprichst Du deutsch?

Nahezu perfekt ;-)

Bist Du neu hier?

Neu wohl nicht direkt, ich hatte das zweifelhafte Vergnügen mit George
schon vor einigen Monaten - ich finde, er betreibt seine Narretei mit
erstaunlicher Vehemenz :-)

Sei auf diese Person nicht boese, er
muss behandelt werden:-)

Nein, ich bin sicher nicht böse auf ihn, er tut sich eben schwer in
sozialem Verhalten

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

On Sat, 3 May 2008 07:19:03 -0700 (PDT),
" wrote:

On 2 mei, 22:13, George Hammond wrote:
On Fri, 2 May 2008 10:30:34 -0700 (PDT),



[Peter van Velzen]
I finally visited your website,


[Hammond]
Better late than never.
Now you know something, even if you don't have the
education to understand and comprehend it.


[Peter van Velzen]
You lost me already when you concluded that the growth of the human
body is equal to the growth of then human brain.


[Hammond]
We're only talking robust first order effects. We're not
interested in pedants who want to dispute 2nd order terms.
If someone says "the world is round", we're not
interested in some pedant who wants to take up everybodies
time by arguing that the Earth is actually ellipsoidal when
everybody else is already completely aware of that.
the point is that the brain grows MONOTONICALLY LARGER
because the BODY GROWS MONOTONICALLY LARGER, that is an
indisputabgle fact, and in fact mental age (mental speed)
increases LINEARLY with age due to brain growth which is why
Intelligence is divided by age up to age 18 (when growth
stops) to obtain IQ
We're not here to listen to amateur argumentative pedants
who want to argue that the world isn't round. that's simply
heckling by unqualified wannabees.



[Peter van Velzen]
I have no doubt your great discovery will never reach the newspapers.

[Hammond]
No one ios interested in the off topic opinions of amateurs
either.


[Peter van Velzen]
But really brain-growth and relativity?
I do not think there is a correlation there.

[Hammond]
"Think"... what makes you think anybody is concerned with
what an unqualified amateur "thinks"? Who do you think you
are, the Prince of Holland?

[Peter van Velzen]
Back to Tatian,

He might have had no idea that the four gospels he used were to become
cannonical.


[Hammond]
Many other authorities and the eccliastical community in
general have pointed out that the "appearance of the
Diatesseron" as the canon of the the Syriac Church is
EVIDENCE that the 4-Gospel form had preminence in
Christianity by the end of the 2nd. century.
End of argument.


Peter van Velzen
April 2008
Amstelveen
The Netherlands
=====================================
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 Sat, 3 May 2008 18:51:35 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

"John Smith" writes:

"Michael Moroney" wrote in message
...

remember, my certified public record credentials PROVE that
i know what the scientific method is

Maybe "knew", not know. You probably haven't used the scientific method
or even thought of it for the last 40 years. You certainly didn't use
it for your SPOG crap.

George bellows about his CVs .... but when pressed about the actual JOBS he
had - he, again, ignores the topic.

I've worked at Westinghouse Research and Development Center, near
Pittsburgh.
Those in our department (Optical physics) who did NOT have a Ph.D. were
little more than lab assistants.
They do no scientific inquiry of their own, and only aided in the lab work
of another scientist.

I did that - and I only had a two year electronics degree.

One must wonder, then, how high up the "scientific ladder" George really got
after school:
Lab assistant.
Lipstick case designer?
Janitor at a college?
"You want fries with that"?

Excellent point. Hammond's CV stops cold when he flunked out of the PhD
program in the 1960s, other than his so-called "publications". He is near
retirement age now. He should have a long illustrious physics related
career under his belt. Where is it?


[Hammond]
Off topic ad hominem commentary. the biographical
history of Hammond beyond my CV is irrelevant to this
discussion. Screw stalker.
=====================================
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 Sat, 3 May 2008 19:10:04 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

George Hammond writes:

On Thu, 1 May 2008 22:45:40 +0000 (UTC),
(Michael Moroney) wrote:

What experiments have you performed, that other scientists can also
perform, that would prove or disprove your work? The answer is NONE!
No experiments, no scientific method, no peer review, no "proof".

All the necessary experiments have alreaqdy been performed,
confirmed and published in 10,000 experiments over 40 years
and ALL cited in my published papers.

This is a perfect example of your lack of understanding of the Scientific
Method. All experiments and so forth before you create your hypothesis
are part of the creation of the initial hypothesis, which is the very
first step. Later on, once you device a working hypothesis, YOU create an
experiment that when performed, will have a definite outcome if your
hypothesis is true and a different outcome if it is false. If someone
else derives the experiments, then they should get the credit for the
work, not you. Then YOU (or people working with you) do the experiments.
Again, if others do that work, they get the credit. Depending on the
outcome you then go back and modify the hypothesis, derive the new
experiments and perform them until your hypothesis is either a publishable
theory or discarded as false.


[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.
=====================================
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
=====================================