In article , wrote:
On 20 May 2004 04:57:41 -0700, (Aleksandr
Timofeev) wrote:

I can not understand logic of the colleagues John Baez and Joseph
Lazio...

I hate to tell you braniacs this, but Joan Baez

I hate to tell you this but the _man_ in the subject line
does know about physics.

/BAH

Subtract a hundred and four for e-mail.

(John Baez) wrote in message ...
I don't normally pay much attention to Sarfatti's jokes, like
his suggestion here that I think loop quantum gravity and
string theory are "bogus pseudo-science"... as opposed to
valid, legitimate pseudo-science done by experts in white lab
coats.

But this time it's funnier than usual, since Lubos Motl has taken
Sarfatti's rant and aggressively rebutted it under the impression
that *I* wrote it!

Check it out - in this article written by "Daniel":

http://www.google.com/groups?selm=ba...ing.google.com

there's a long passage beginning with the header:

John Baez on the String and Loop Mafias
=======================================

and interspersed with moderator's notes by the sci.physics.strings
moderator Lubos Motl - who argues against it point-for-point under
the impression that *I* wrote it.

" John Baez on the String and Loop Mafias
======================================= "

I can not understand logic of the colleagues John Baez and Joseph
Lazio...

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...g .google.com

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...40glue.ucr.edu

"NONE of it was written by me except this short bit: "There is not one
whit of experimental evidence for either string theory or loop quantum
gravity, and both theories have some serious problems, so it might
seem premature for philosophers to consider their implications. It
indeed makes little sense for philosophers to spend time chasing every
short-lived fad in these fast-moving subjects. Instead, what is worthy
of reflection is that these two approaches to quantum gravity, while
disagreeing heatedly on so many issues, have so much in common. It
suggests that in our attempts to reconcile the quantum-theoretic
notions of state and process with the relativistic notions of space
and spacetime, we have a limited supply of promising ideas. It is an
open question whether these ideas will be up to the task of describing
nature. But this actually makes it more urgent, not less, for
philosophers to clarify and question these ideas and the implicit
assumptions upon which they rest." which is a passage from my paper
"Quantum Quandaries" by John Baez

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

Who can explain to me why the colleagues John Baez and Joseph Lazio
avoid arguing quantum properties of MY gravitational MODEL of The
Solar System?:

http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...&oe=ISO-8859-1

;^)))
[snip]

wrote in message
...
On 20 May 2004 04:57:41 -0700, (Aleksandr
Timofeev) wrote:

I can not understand logic of the colleagues John Baez and Joseph
Lazio...

I hate to tell you braniacs this, but Joan Baez is something of a
kook. She's got a great set of pipes and she may be a nice lady, but
she knows ****-all about physics.

You are an idiot. Go away.

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 May 2004 07:08:42 -0600, "Michael Varney"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On 20 May 2004 04:57:41 -0700, (Aleksandr
Timofeev) wrote:

I can not understand logic of the colleagues John Baez and Joseph
Lazio...

I hate to tell you braniacs this, but Joan Baez is something of a
kook. She's got a great set of pipes and she may be a nice lady, but
she knows ****-all about physics.

You are an idiot. Go away.

You're as bad as George Hammond if you think Joan knows **** about
physics.

You are an idiot. Go away.

Michael Varney wrote:

wrote in message
...

You're as bad as George Hammond if you think Joan knows **** about
physics.

You are an idiot. Go away.

Why are you telling barbara to leave alt.religion.kibology? Where would
you have her go?

-jwgh

--
"anyone who thinks he can challenge an experimentally proved axiomatic
physicis theory with 'dictionary definitions' is an oxymoron."
-- George Hammond on alt.religion.kibology 11 May 2004

"Jacob W. Haller" wrote in message
...
Michael Varney wrote:

wrote in message
...

You're as bad as George Hammond if you think Joan knows **** about
physics.

You are an idiot. Go away.

Why are you telling barbara to leave alt.religion.kibology? Where would
you have her go?

Elsewhere. Ignorant twits like her should not infest Usenet.


-jwgh

--
"anyone who thinks he can challenge an experimentally proved axiomatic
physicis theory with 'dictionary definitions' is an oxymoron."
-- George Hammond on alt.religion.kibology 11 May 2004

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 May 2004 07:47:36 -0600, "Michael Varney"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 May 2004 07:08:42 -0600, "Michael Varney"
wrote:


wrote in message
...
On 20 May 2004 04:57:41 -0700, (Aleksandr
Timofeev) wrote:

I can not understand logic of the colleagues John Baez and Joseph
Lazio...

I hate to tell you braniacs this, but Joan Baez is something of a
kook. She's got a great set of pipes and she may be a nice lady,
but
she knows ****-all about physics.

You are an idiot. Go away.

You're as bad as George Hammond if you think Joan knows **** about
physics.

You are an idiot. Go away.

So, smart guy, tell me what Joan knows about physics. I would have
thought tree hugging was more her line. You're a tree hugger, too,
right?

You are an idiot. Go away.

was heard mumbling something about...

You're as bad as George Hammond if you think Joan knows **** about
physics.

I would have to beg to differ, Joan's father was in fact, a physics
professor, and so she undoubtedly picked up quite a bit of physics
knowledge in her youth.

http://www.bobdylanroots.com/baez2.html

"The two [Joan's parents] met at Drew University in Madison, N.J., where
he discovered an interest in physics and made it his life's work. His
academic career has been highly mobile, taking him to various
universities and cities ranging from Los Angeles to Buffalo to Baghdad to
Boston and, most recently, Paris, where he is now a consultant for
UNESCO."

--
"Mogu is a tiny golem wife ... and your best friend ...
and your worst nightmare."
- Joe Bay

Mu-Pi wrote:

"Jacob W. Haller" wrote in message
...

Why are you telling barbara to leave alt.religion.kibology? Where would
you have her go?

Elsewhere. Ignorant twits like her should not infest Usenet.

Hmmm, I'm not sure where, specifically, ignorant twits should go,
though. Where are you staying?

Thanks,
jwgh

--
"anyone who thinks he can challenge an experimentally
proved axiomatic physicis theory with 'dictionary definitions'
is an oxymoron."
-- George Hammond on alt.religion.kibology 11 May 2004

wrote in message
...
On Thu, 20 May 2004 08:32:34 -0600, "Michael Varney"
wrote:
SNIP
So, smart guy, tell me what Joan knows about physics. I would have
thought tree hugging was more her line. You're a tree hugger, too,
right?

You are an idiot. Go away.

That's okay, you don't have to be ashamed. It's not like you've
confessed to being a creationist. There are valid reasons to be an
environmental activist, even if some of your colleagues go too far
with it.

What is your problem idiot. Joan Baez is not John Baez. Pull you head out
of your ****.