info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
65 views
Skip to first unread message
James McGinn
Aug 3, 2021, 9:42:52 PM8/3/21
to
The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by jimmcginn » Mon Aug 31, 2020 10:22 am
Introducing the Solving Tornadoes Podcast
The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes ... sma-ehrkj3
James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
Top
Brent72
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:51 am
Contact: Contact Brent72
Re: The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by Brent72 » Sun Sep 06, 2020 12:45 am
Thanks for the link to your podcast James. I agree with you that much of science has become a religion. Sounds like you've done a lot of breakthrough work in the area of meteorology. Have you been able to publish? Particularly your solution to the anomalies of H2O.
With respect, I would like to contest a couple of points you make however:
1. Religion is about tricking yourself into believing something (2.29)
Who's being tricked here really? I'm sure you would agree that a lot of mainstream science these days is just fundamentally wrong. For example in biology, how can life 'evolve' without the input of new information? Genetic mutations and 'natural selection' clearly result in the loss of information. The evidence for intelligent design in the natural world is there to see if you are open minded enough to follow the evidence.
Also when a man who lived about 2000 years ago claimed to be God, he got killed for it. However he came back to life and appeared to hundreds of eye witnesses, who recorded it in thousands of historical documents. If you aren't going to believe the historical records, you'd also have to throw out everything we know about ancient Greek and Roman civilisation.
2. Science has the ability to give us absolute truth (7.53)
Can you give me one example of a scientific law that holds true for all time and in all places in the universe? As you said yourself, humans are deeply delusional. We can never find the absolute truth on our own, it has to be revealed to us. (Refer point 1).
Looking at the history of science, you can see that every scientific model is subject to change. Even the so-called scientific 'constants' are not absolutely true. Many of the fathers of modern science such as Newton, recognised that the universe was orderly and that it appeared to follow 'laws' - not because it came about randomly, but because it was put in place by an intelligent designer. There is only one source of absolute truth and it comes from outside our physical realm. Science points to it, but isn't, itself, it.
Top
jimmcginn
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm
Contact: Contact jimmcginn
Re: The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by jimmcginn » Thu Sep 10, 2020 10:31 pm
Thanks for the link to your podcast James. I agree with you that much of science has become a religion. Sounds like you've done a lot of breakthrough work in the area of meteorology. Have you been able to publish?
JMcG: No. Which is understandable since one of my goals is to expose them (the academic factions of meteorology in particular and the atmospheric sciences in general) as pretending to understand what actually doesn't make sense in regards to their model of the physics of storms. As I explain in my most recent podcast, storms can't be understood until we first understand water.
Particularly your solution to the anomalies of H2O.
JMcG: I am doing a YouTube video series on this subject, the first episode of which exposes and fixes the conceptual error regarding the quantum mechanics of H2O hydrogen bonding and polarity. (In previous videos I have referred to this error as "Pauling's Omission.")
With respect, I would like to contest a couple of points you make however:
1. Religion is about tricking yourself into believing something (2.29)
Who's being tricked here really? I'm sure you would agree that a lot of mainstream science these days is just fundamentally wrong. For example in biology, how can life 'evolve' without the input of new information?
JMcG: You don't buy Darwin's argument about random variation? Have you looked into what is called, the Science of Complexity? Or chaos theory?
Genetic mutations and 'natural selection' clearly result in the loss of information.
JMcG: Doesn't replication more than makes up for any loss of information?
The evidence for intelligent design in the natural world is there to see if you are open minded enough to follow the evidence. Also when a man who lived about 2000 years ago claimed to be God, he got killed for it. However he came back to life and appeared to hundreds of eye witnesses, who recorded it in thousands of historical documents. If you aren't going to believe the historical records, you'd also have to throw out everything we know about ancient Greek and Roman civilisation.
JMcG: If it all never did happen the way it says in the bible would the value you get from it be any less?
JMcG: About My Coming Video
https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes ... deo-ej9q4s
James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
Top
Brent72
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:51 am
Contact: Contact Brent72
Re: The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by Brent72 » Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:29 pm
jimmcginn wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 10:31 pm
JMcG: You don't buy Darwin's argument about random variation? Have you looked into what is called, the Science of Complexity? Or chaos theory?
Genetic mutations and 'natural selection' clearly result in the loss of information.
JMcG: Doesn't replication more than makes up for any loss of information?
Jim I don't buy Darwin's argument about random variation. I can't find any evidence. Can you give me one example?
When it comes to mutations and replication, the evidence shows a loss of information leading to dysfunction/disorder/degradation of the original organism. This follows the second law of thermodynamics.
The 'Science of Complexity' asserts that "systems display behavioral phenomena that are completely inexplicable by any conventional analysis of the systems’ constituent parts" (Britannica).
There are many examples for this, but how do we explain it? Again let's look at the evidence. Living organisms have such a high level of complexity — at the anatomical, cellular and molecular level— that they could not function if they were any less complex or sophisticated. This is evidence of "Irreducible complexity". The only rational conclusion is that they are the products of intelligent design, not evolution.
Top
jimmcginn
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm
Contact: Contact jimmcginn
Re: The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by jimmcginn » Sun Sep 13, 2020 11:51 am
Brent72 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:29 pm
JMcG: Doesn't replication more than makes up for any loss of information?
Jim I don't buy Darwin's argument about random variation. I can't find any evidence. Can you give me one example?
JMcG: I think it has been demonstrated that radiation can cause mutation.
When it comes to mutations and replication, the evidence shows a loss of information leading to dysfunction/disorder/degradation of the original organism. This follows the second law of thermodynamics.
JMcG: Lifeforms can produce instances where entropy decreased but only at the expense of causing a NET increase in entropy. The second law of thermodynamics does not say that instances involving a decrease of entropy cannot occur. It just says that it always produces a NET increase. And lifeforms do not contradict that. (I capitalized "net" for emphasis.)
The 'Science of Complexity' asserts that "systems display behavioral phenomena that are completely inexplicable by any conventional analysis of the systems’ constituent parts" (Britannica).
JMcG: I think anytime people say something is inexplicable in principle they are speculating. There is a big difference between saying something is unexplained and inexplicable in principle. And I think Britannica is using the concept of something being unexplained interchangeably with the concept of something be inexplicable in principle, which is a very different argument. So, I reject Britannica's assertion here.
There are many examples for this, but how do we explain it? Again let's look at the evidence. Living organisms have such a high level of complexity — at the anatomical, cellular and molecular level— that they could not function if they were any less complex or sophisticated.
JMcG: If you have a limb surgically removed your complexity is reduced and you can survive and still function. So . . . ?
James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
What is Water's Role in Storms?
https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes ... rms-egaa7o
Top
Brent72
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:51 am
Contact: Contact Brent72
Re: The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by Brent72 » Tue Sep 15, 2020 6:49 am
Well Jim, to believe that the complexity we see in the natural world has all come about by chance... you've got more faith than I do!
Post by jimmcginn » Mon Aug 31, 2020 10:22 am
Introducing the Solving Tornadoes Podcast
The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes ... sma-ehrkj3
James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
Top
Brent72
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:51 am
Contact: Contact Brent72
Re: The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by Brent72 » Sun Sep 06, 2020 12:45 am
Thanks for the link to your podcast James. I agree with you that much of science has become a religion. Sounds like you've done a lot of breakthrough work in the area of meteorology. Have you been able to publish? Particularly your solution to the anomalies of H2O.
With respect, I would like to contest a couple of points you make however:
1. Religion is about tricking yourself into believing something (2.29)
Who's being tricked here really? I'm sure you would agree that a lot of mainstream science these days is just fundamentally wrong. For example in biology, how can life 'evolve' without the input of new information? Genetic mutations and 'natural selection' clearly result in the loss of information. The evidence for intelligent design in the natural world is there to see if you are open minded enough to follow the evidence.
Also when a man who lived about 2000 years ago claimed to be God, he got killed for it. However he came back to life and appeared to hundreds of eye witnesses, who recorded it in thousands of historical documents. If you aren't going to believe the historical records, you'd also have to throw out everything we know about ancient Greek and Roman civilisation.
2. Science has the ability to give us absolute truth (7.53)
Can you give me one example of a scientific law that holds true for all time and in all places in the universe? As you said yourself, humans are deeply delusional. We can never find the absolute truth on our own, it has to be revealed to us. (Refer point 1).
Looking at the history of science, you can see that every scientific model is subject to change. Even the so-called scientific 'constants' are not absolutely true. Many of the fathers of modern science such as Newton, recognised that the universe was orderly and that it appeared to follow 'laws' - not because it came about randomly, but because it was put in place by an intelligent designer. There is only one source of absolute truth and it comes from outside our physical realm. Science points to it, but isn't, itself, it.
Top
jimmcginn
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm
Contact: Contact jimmcginn
Re: The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by jimmcginn » Thu Sep 10, 2020 10:31 pm
Thanks for the link to your podcast James. I agree with you that much of science has become a religion. Sounds like you've done a lot of breakthrough work in the area of meteorology. Have you been able to publish?
JMcG: No. Which is understandable since one of my goals is to expose them (the academic factions of meteorology in particular and the atmospheric sciences in general) as pretending to understand what actually doesn't make sense in regards to their model of the physics of storms. As I explain in my most recent podcast, storms can't be understood until we first understand water.
Particularly your solution to the anomalies of H2O.
JMcG: I am doing a YouTube video series on this subject, the first episode of which exposes and fixes the conceptual error regarding the quantum mechanics of H2O hydrogen bonding and polarity. (In previous videos I have referred to this error as "Pauling's Omission.")
With respect, I would like to contest a couple of points you make however:
1. Religion is about tricking yourself into believing something (2.29)
Who's being tricked here really? I'm sure you would agree that a lot of mainstream science these days is just fundamentally wrong. For example in biology, how can life 'evolve' without the input of new information?
JMcG: You don't buy Darwin's argument about random variation? Have you looked into what is called, the Science of Complexity? Or chaos theory?
Genetic mutations and 'natural selection' clearly result in the loss of information.
JMcG: Doesn't replication more than makes up for any loss of information?
The evidence for intelligent design in the natural world is there to see if you are open minded enough to follow the evidence. Also when a man who lived about 2000 years ago claimed to be God, he got killed for it. However he came back to life and appeared to hundreds of eye witnesses, who recorded it in thousands of historical documents. If you aren't going to believe the historical records, you'd also have to throw out everything we know about ancient Greek and Roman civilisation.
JMcG: If it all never did happen the way it says in the bible would the value you get from it be any less?
JMcG: About My Coming Video
https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes ... deo-ej9q4s
James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
Top
Brent72
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:51 am
Contact: Contact Brent72
Re: The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by Brent72 » Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:29 pm
jimmcginn wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 10:31 pm
JMcG: You don't buy Darwin's argument about random variation? Have you looked into what is called, the Science of Complexity? Or chaos theory?
Genetic mutations and 'natural selection' clearly result in the loss of information.
JMcG: Doesn't replication more than makes up for any loss of information?
Jim I don't buy Darwin's argument about random variation. I can't find any evidence. Can you give me one example?
When it comes to mutations and replication, the evidence shows a loss of information leading to dysfunction/disorder/degradation of the original organism. This follows the second law of thermodynamics.
The 'Science of Complexity' asserts that "systems display behavioral phenomena that are completely inexplicable by any conventional analysis of the systems’ constituent parts" (Britannica).
There are many examples for this, but how do we explain it? Again let's look at the evidence. Living organisms have such a high level of complexity — at the anatomical, cellular and molecular level— that they could not function if they were any less complex or sophisticated. This is evidence of "Irreducible complexity". The only rational conclusion is that they are the products of intelligent design, not evolution.
Top
jimmcginn
Posts: 507
Joined: Sun May 01, 2016 6:43 pm
Contact: Contact jimmcginn
Re: The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by jimmcginn » Sun Sep 13, 2020 11:51 am
Brent72 wrote: ↑Fri Sep 11, 2020 2:29 pm
JMcG: Doesn't replication more than makes up for any loss of information?
Jim I don't buy Darwin's argument about random variation. I can't find any evidence. Can you give me one example?
JMcG: I think it has been demonstrated that radiation can cause mutation.
When it comes to mutations and replication, the evidence shows a loss of information leading to dysfunction/disorder/degradation of the original organism. This follows the second law of thermodynamics.
JMcG: Lifeforms can produce instances where entropy decreased but only at the expense of causing a NET increase in entropy. The second law of thermodynamics does not say that instances involving a decrease of entropy cannot occur. It just says that it always produces a NET increase. And lifeforms do not contradict that. (I capitalized "net" for emphasis.)
The 'Science of Complexity' asserts that "systems display behavioral phenomena that are completely inexplicable by any conventional analysis of the systems’ constituent parts" (Britannica).
JMcG: I think anytime people say something is inexplicable in principle they are speculating. There is a big difference between saying something is unexplained and inexplicable in principle. And I think Britannica is using the concept of something being unexplained interchangeably with the concept of something be inexplicable in principle, which is a very different argument. So, I reject Britannica's assertion here.
There are many examples for this, but how do we explain it? Again let's look at the evidence. Living organisms have such a high level of complexity — at the anatomical, cellular and molecular level— that they could not function if they were any less complex or sophisticated.
JMcG: If you have a limb surgically removed your complexity is reduced and you can survive and still function. So . . . ?
James McGinn / Solving Tornadoes
What is Water's Role in Storms?
https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes ... rms-egaa7o
Top
Brent72
Posts: 44
Joined: Sat Oct 26, 2019 6:51 am
Contact: Contact Brent72
Re: The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Post by Brent72 » Tue Sep 15, 2020 6:49 am
Well Jim, to believe that the complexity we see in the natural world has all come about by chance... you've got more faith than I do!
Andy Everett
Aug 3, 2021, 9:49:08 PM8/3/21
to
Paul Alsing
Aug 3, 2021, 10:00:11 PM8/3/21
to
James McGinn
Aug 3, 2021, 10:15:31 PM8/3/21
to
On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:49:08 PM UTC-7, andyev...@gmail.com wrote:
Maybe these links will help:
https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes/The-religion-that-science-has-become-and-the-realization-of-vortice-plasma-ehrkj3
and
https://thunderbolts.info/forum3/phpBB3/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=347
If these don't work let me know
James McGinn / Genius
Paul Alsing
Aug 3, 2021, 11:00:33 PM8/3/21
to
James McGinn
Aug 3, 2021, 11:07:39 PM8/3/21
to
James McGinn / Genius
Arindam Banerjee
Aug 4, 2021, 2:33:36 AM8/4/21
to
>
> James McGinn / Genius
Paul Alsing
Aug 4, 2021, 3:08:23 PM8/4/21
to
On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 8:07:39 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> I can't even imagine how frustrating it must be to be so sure your are right and so completely incapable of explaining how or why.
Sure you can, Jim, you experience this very frustration every day!
> I can't even imagine how frustrating it must be to be so sure your are right and so completely incapable of explaining how or why.
Solving Tornadoes
Aug 5, 2021, 12:16:22 AM8/5/21
to
Solving Tornadoes
Jan 25, 2022, 10:29:02 AM1/25/22
to
On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
Jim Pennino
Jan 25, 2022, 10:46:10 AM1/25/22
to
Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
BTW, there is no such word in the English language as vortice.
BTW, there is no such word in the English language as vortice.
Jim Pennino
Jan 25, 2022, 10:46:11 AM1/25/22
to
Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
<raving babble sniped leaving only the sane parts>
> On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
Hmmm, nothing left.
sergio
Jan 25, 2022, 11:37:02 AM1/25/22
to
On 1/25/2022 9:43 AM, Jim Pennino wrote:
> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> BTW, there is no such word in the English language as vortice.
>
figures, McGinn has advanced degenerating vortice in his desiccated brane
> Solving Tornadoes <solvingt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> BTW, there is no such word in the English language as vortice.
>
James McGinn
Jan 28, 2022, 9:50:34 PM1/28/22
to
On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
Jim Pennino
Jan 28, 2022, 10:46:11 PM1/28/22
to
James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
>> The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
There is no such word in the English language as vortice.
> On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
>> The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
Gaseous H2O in the atmosphere is measured 24/7/365 by spectroscopic
techniques that can unequivocally and simultaneously measure all three
phases of H2O and people around the planet have been doing this for
many decades.
That you are unable to understand the physics of spectroscopic
analysis, or any other method of constructing a hygrometer to
measure humidity, does not invalidate such measurements.
No matter how many times you stamp your feet, deny this fact,
call others liars, claim you are the only person in history to
have come to the conclusion that gaseous H2O does not exist in
the atmosphere, misread steam tables and phase diagrams, insult
others, claim the entire world is confused, call people groupies
and morons, rant about church ladies, attempt to project your
anger for your delusions being challenged, rant on and on about
the boiling point of water or declare "you got nothing", the
fact of gaseous H2O in the atmosphere and it's continuous
measurement still exists.
In the 21st century all sorts of devices are readily available
that would have been amazing and wondrous in the 15th century.
One can buy telescopes and microscopes at toy stores so even
children can see the craters on the moon, the rings of Saturn,
bacteria and flagellates.
One can also buy hygrometers for as little as $1.
<snip delusional raving>
Since hygrometers only cost about $1, you could save up for several
weeks and buy 10 of them.
Then you could line them up and shout at them...
You are a liar.
You got nothing.
You ara a confused moron.
You are a church lady of science.
Boiling point of water!!
Phase diagrams say you are wrong.
You are just a science groupie.
You don't understand any of this.
You are confused.
Only I understand this.
None of them will argue with you, call you a cage free mental
patient or tell you to read a book on science or a dictionary.
All they will do is just set there silently displaying the level
of gaseous H2O in the room or in your tent in the homeless camp
as the case may be.
James McGinn
Feb 10, 2022, 11:00:45 PM2/10/22
to
On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
James McGinn
Feb 14, 2022, 2:24:04 PM2/14/22
to
On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
James McGinn
Feb 18, 2022, 12:43:06 PM2/18/22
to
Jim Pennino
Feb 18, 2022, 1:31:12 PM2/18/22
to
James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes/The-religion-that-science-has-become-and-the-realization-of-vortice-plasma-ehrkj3
>
> The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
1. Vortice is not a word in the English language.
>
> https://anchor.fm/james-mcginn/episodes/The-religion-that-science-has-become-and-the-realization-of-vortice-plasma-ehrkj3
>
> The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
2. There is no plasma in the stratosphere that lives longer than 0.2 sec.
3. You are a delusional crackpot.
James McGinn
Mar 15, 2022, 1:36:00 AM3/15/22
to
On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
Jim Pennino
Mar 15, 2022, 12:16:16 PM3/15/22
to
James McGinn <jimmc...@gmail.com> wrote:
210 lines of raving insanity.
>> The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
210 lines of raving insanity.
>> The religion that science has become and the realization of vortice plasma
There is no such word in the English language as vortice.
<snip insane raving>
James McGinn
Apr 26, 2022, 1:55:03 PM4/26/22
to
On Tuesday, August 3, 2021 at 6:42:52 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
0 new messages