« on: Yesterday at 15:34:21 »
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Right here on this forum I predicted Omikron as a coronavirus with a lot less intense symptoms and and making a lot more people illYou do realise that a more readily transmitted, but less lethal version of the virus is exactly what Darwinian evolution predicts, don't you?
I do not discuss this with anyone WHO hasn't at least watched "wallace in Borneo" and "wallace in spice islands".Goodbye then.
Darwinism cannot be right because it assumes that in each generation a tiny change in DNA either causes the young to die or keeps this “new and better” code in its offspring.No, it doesn't.
Chimpanzees also have something that only humans have.Pardon?
. Darwin never traveled,Really?
Before we offer new hypotheses to explain observations, let's learn how previous scientists developed classical model of electromagnetism which eventually led to Maxwell's equations. We can also learn the difficulties they faced, which modern students may often overlook or take for granted.Two interesting tales.
Ohm's Law: History and Biography
Biography of Coulomb and his Equation
Yes, I would show you why my personal imagination about the dark matter works perfectly OK at the spiral galaxy and how this magic answers all the open questions and meet the observation by 100%.Don't forget to include the mathematics, or nobody will pay you any attention.
The result is the over dependence on casino math to supply fudge factors for the DNA brain.Nonsense.
it gives too much credit to the DNA, for being like a brain, and not enough credit to the interactive protein grid that interfaces the DNAAll that protein was produced because it was encoded for in the DNA.
Try asking some meaningful questionsWhy?
What's the evidence for the pulse? What's the frequency and duty cycle?
Reading it repeatedly will not help.
That is just word salad.
Read it a few times and it will help you grasp the concept. It will be way over your head the first time.
Why do you keep calling it "solid"?I don't.
How can you compare a swarm of bees to liquid?Because it will flow round an obstacle - unlike a solid.
Therefore, if the bees wish to establish a fixed shape - they can do it.But they don't. So your "point" is meaningless, isn't it?
Liquid has no mind, no wish, no wings and therefore it can't set any fixed structure.And the same is true of a galaxy of stars.
That gravity can bond them in a fixed shape as M80It's still not a fixed shape is it?
Is it just to confuse the other side?I don't need to "confuse" the other side if they can't distinguish a gas from a solid.
It is known that some problems are impossible to solve- That's the incompleteness theorem.Why? Do you have any reason to think that way? Or is it just your intuition?There must be some missing key ingredients not yet thought to be related to the problem.No
It may not be provable.
There must be some missing key ingredients not yet thought to be related to the problem.is false.
I seem to have CoVidGet well soon.