2 of 3
2
Poll
Is bio dark-matter chemistry & the consequent invisible doppelganger supported by biophoton emissions secular materialism extraordinaire?
Bio dark-maater chemistry is more viable than SUSY Chemistry with many papers published on that in Physics journals. 1
Biophoton emission is well established and cannot be easily explained 0
An invisible doppelganger coupled to the visible body (spin-spin forces) is as real as any other body! 0
What electric poles (charges) are to light-matter chemistry is what magnetic poles (monopoles) are to dark-matter chemi 0
Light -matter chemistry & Dark matter chemistry? Perfect symmetry!! 0
Total Votes: 1
You must be a logged-in member to vote
Your Verdict on Bio Dark-matter Chemistry & Your Invisible non-Entropic Doppelganger” Secular or Sacred?
Posted: 03 September 2013 11:19 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  21
Joined  2013-09-01
Lausten - 03 September 2013 10:48 AM
Noetics - 03 September 2013 09:54 AM

Physicist Professor Nikolai Nijegorodov (2008) states: “in the nearest future physicists would prove, first theoretically and then experimentally that neutrino atom and neutrino molecules do exist. That would be enough evidence that life in the world of neutrino does exist”.

40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is. (30 more points for fantasizing about show trials in which scientists who mocked your theories will be forced to recant.)

If you have a theory, then you have something that is testable, something that potentially answers questions. If you have a bunch of questions, then that’s all you have. You are saying, “I don’t know, therefore non-Entropic Doppleganger”

[Noetics]
Would you explain the origin of biophotons and the difference by an order of magnitude in its emission rates across the taxa?
If you have read any of the references you will find that another testability will be pulling out monopoles from live cells ( in a petr-idish).  An experimental design also was presented. One of the European letters indicated they are working on it.
Noetics

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 September 2013 11:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1471
Joined  2009-10-21
Noetics - 03 September 2013 11:19 AM
Lausten - 03 September 2013 10:48 AM
Noetics - 03 September 2013 09:54 AM

Physicist Professor Nikolai Nijegorodov (2008) states: “in the nearest future physicists would prove, first theoretically and then experimentally that neutrino atom and neutrino molecules do exist. That would be enough evidence that life in the world of neutrino does exist”.

40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is. (30 more points for fantasizing about show trials in which scientists who mocked your theories will be forced to recant.)

If you have a theory, then you have something that is testable, something that potentially answers questions. If you have a bunch of questions, then that’s all you have. You are saying, “I don’t know, therefore non-Entropic Doppleganger”

[Noetics]
Would you explain the origin of biophotons and the difference by an order of magnitude in its emission rates across the taxa?
If you have read any of the references you will find that another testability will be pulling out monopoles from live cells ( in a petr-idish).  An experimental design also was presented. One of the European letters indicated they are working on it.
Noetics

No. When I went to biology class in college, the professor didn’t stand in front of the class and challenge us to explain things. The key words here are “they are working on it”. How does this affect me if I am not aware of it? Why do you care what I think about it?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 September 2013 12:13 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  21
Joined  2013-09-01
Lausten - 03 September 2013 11:34 AM
Noetics - 03 September 2013 11:19 AM
Lausten - 03 September 2013 10:48 AM
Noetics - 03 September 2013 09:54 AM

Physicist Professor Nikolai Nijegorodov (2008) states: “in the nearest future physicists would prove, first theoretically and then experimentally that neutrino atom and neutrino molecules do exist. That would be enough evidence that life in the world of neutrino does exist”.

40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is. (30 more points for fantasizing about show trials in which scientists who mocked your theories will be forced to recant.)

If you have a theory, then you have something that is testable, something that potentially answers questions. If you have a bunch of questions, then that’s all you have. You are saying, “I don’t know, therefore non-Entropic Doppleganger”

[Noetics]
Would you explain the origin of biophotons and the difference by an order of magnitude in its emission rates across the taxa?
If you have read any of the references you will find that another testability will be pulling out monopoles from live cells ( in a petr-idish).  An experimental design also was presented. One of the European letters indicated they are working on it.
Noetics

No. When I went to biology class in college, the professor didn’t stand in front of the class and challenge us to explain things. The key words here are “they are working on it”. How does this affect me if I am not aware of it? Why do you care what I think about it?

[Noetics]

Sorry, for the mistaken identity. Biology will not help a great deal here; physics, chemistry, philosophy/logic will. It is a physicist/engineer who is trying to pull out monopoles from live cells. Regret bothering you.
Noetics.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 03 September 2013 01:16 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1471
Joined  2009-10-21
Noetics - 03 September 2013 12:13 PM
Lausten - 03 September 2013 11:34 AM

No. When I went to biology class in college, the professor didn’t stand in front of the class and challenge us to explain things. The key words here are “they are working on it”. How does this affect me if I am not aware of it? Why do you care what I think about it?

[Noetics]

Sorry, for the mistaken identity. Biology will not help a great deal here; physics, chemistry, philosophy/logic will. It is a physicist/engineer who is trying to pull out monopoles from live cells. Regret bothering you.
Noetics.

 

Allow me to correct: No. When I went to biology, physics or chemistry class in college, the professor didn’t stand in front of the class and challenge us to explain things. The key words here are “they are working on it”. How does this affect me if I am not aware of it? Why do you care what I think about it?

Philosophy of course is a completely different animal. I would expect to be challenged with questions in a philosophy class.

So, how does this affect me if I am not aware of it? and Why do you care what I think about it?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2013 05:56 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  21
Joined  2013-09-01
Lausten - 03 September 2013 01:16 PM
Noetics - 03 September 2013 12:13 PM
Lausten - 03 September 2013 11:34 AM

No. When I went to biology class in college, the professor didn’t stand in front of the class and challenge us to explain things. The key words here are “they are working on it”. How does this affect me if I am not aware of it? Why do you care what I think about it?

[Noetics]

Sorry, for the mistaken identity. Biology will not help a great deal here; physics, chemistry, philosophy/logic will. It is a physicist/engineer who is trying to pull out monopoles from live cells. Regret bothering you.
Noetics.

 

Allow me to correct: No. When I went to biology, physics or chemistry class in college, the professor didn’t stand in front of the class and challenge us to explain things. The key words here are “they are working on it”. How does this affect me if I am not aware of it? Why do you care what I think about it?

Philosophy of course is a completely different animal. I would expect to be challenged with questions in a philosophy class.

So, how does this affect me if I am not aware of it? and Why do you care what I think about it?


[Noetics]

Normally I do not get into “individual needs & problems”, especially when I know nothing about the individual.  Coupling & decoupling (spin-spin) discussed in the references may be of interest to you. Prospect of being raised to a functional level after “decoupling” by an external energy source is another item of curiosity. “Entanglement” with the lost fermions may be an interesting possibility. Passage of a non-electric doppelganger raised to the minimum threshold of energy (E=mC^2)  through any and every material barriers may be worth exploring. Elucidation of many reliably reported anomalous phenomena such as NDE/OBE etc. may be illuminating.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2013 06:12 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1471
Joined  2009-10-21
Noetics - 04 September 2013 05:56 AM

Normally I do not get into “individual needs & problems”, especially when I know nothing about the individual.

You say that, and yet you had no problem discussing what kind of idiocy exists here and how closed the minds are here.

Noetics - 04 September 2013 05:56 AM

The willful [idiocy] one generates fear, closed-mind, irrationality, intolerance, ignorance, uselessness and is un-teachable. It has no audience outside forums such as these where its adherents can IMAGINE to exercise Marxist-like authoritarianism.

I asked why your theory is important, what usefulness does it have. It’s a legitimate question. You now have four types of responses when you can’t explain yourself, call people idiots, babble on with your endless questions, say you “don’t get into that”, and demand that people read your links. None of that is welcome behavior here, or anywhere.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2013 06:40 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  21
Joined  2013-09-01
Noetics - 04 September 2013 05:56 AM
Lausten - 03 September 2013 01:16 PM
Noetics - 03 September 2013 12:13 PM
Lausten - 03 September 2013 11:34 AM

No. When I went to biology class in college, the professor didn’t stand in front of the class and challenge us to explain things. The key words here are “they are working on it”. How does this affect me if I am not aware of it? Why do you care what I think about it?

[Noetics]

Sorry, for the mistaken identity. Biology will not help a great deal here; physics, chemistry, philosophy/logic will. It is a physicist/engineer who is trying to pull out monopoles from live cells. Regret bothering you.
Noetics.

 

Allow me to correct: No. When I went to biology, physics or chemistry class in college, the professor didn’t stand in front of the class and challenge us to explain things. The key words here are “they are working on it”. How does this affect me if I am not aware of it? Why do you care what I think about it?

Philosophy of course is a completely different animal. I would expect to be challenged with questions in a philosophy class.

So, how does this affect me if I am not aware of it? and Why do you care what I think about it?


[Noetics]

Normally I do not get into “individual needs & problems”, especially when I know nothing about the individual.  Coupling & decoupling (spin-spin) discussed in the references may be of interest to you. Prospect of being raised to a functional level after “decoupling” by an external energy source is another item of curiosity. “Entanglement” with the lost fermions may be an interesting possibility. Passage of a non-electric doppelganger raised to the minimum threshold of energy (E=mC^2)  through any and every material barriers may be worth exploring. Elucidation of many reliably reported anomalous phenomena such as NDE/OBE etc. may be illuminating.

[Noetics]

Gentleman/Gentle Lady:

This is what I read from you: ” How does this affect me if I am not aware of it?.....”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2013 06:59 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4572
Joined  2007-08-31

Why is this topic in ‘religion and secularism’?

It belongs in ‘science and technology’. Or better, in ‘Pseudoscience and The Paranormal’...

 Signature 

GdB

“The light is on, but there is nobody at home”

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2013 07:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1471
Joined  2009-10-21
Noetics - 04 September 2013 06:40 AM

[Noetics]

Gentleman/Gentle Lady:

This is what I read from you: ” How does this affect me if I am not aware of it?.....”

And #5, playing semantic games. “How does this affect me” is functionally equivalent to “why your theory is important, what usefulness does it have”. I rephrased the question for clarification and you turned it into obfuscation. Here’s an easier one, why don’t you just go away?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 04 September 2013 08:48 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  21
Joined  2013-09-01
GdB - 04 September 2013 06:59 AM

Why is this topic in ‘religion and secularism’?

It belongs in ‘science and technology’. Or better, in ‘Pseudoscience and The Paranormal’...

Is there any religion other than the “religions of atheism and humanism” (cf. SCOTUS) where some kind of a doppelganger is not implied?

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2013 08:06 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  1283
Joined  2011-03-12

Is there any religion other than the “religions of atheism and humanism”

These are NOT religions.

 Signature 

Question authority and think for yourself. Big Brother does not know best and never has.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2013 08:35 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  9301
Joined  2006-08-29
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 05 September 2013 08:06 AM

Is there any religion other than the “religions of atheism and humanism”

These are NOT religions.

Humanism is very close, though.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2013 09:03 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  21
Joined  2013-09-01
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 05 September 2013 08:06 AM

Is there any religion other than the “religions of atheism and humanism”

These are NOT religions.

[Noetics]

Though it has NO legal force, In Torcaso v. Watkins (1961), Justice Black of the US Supreme Court wrote the following opinion:  “...Among the religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others…”

However if anybody manages to bring a suit against the teaching, practice and indoctrination of Humanism and Atheism in all institutions and agencies of US Government on this score, the chances are more than 70% that it will be so decreed by SCOTUS. All religions are belief systems and so are Atheism and Secular Humanism.
[Noetics]

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2013 10:08 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 29 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2602
Joined  2012-10-27
Noetics - 05 September 2013 09:03 AM
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 05 September 2013 08:06 AM

Is there any religion other than the “religions of atheism and humanism”

These are NOT religions.

[Noetics]

Though it has NO legal force, In Torcaso v. Watkins (1961), Justice Black of the US Supreme Court wrote the following opinion:  “...Among the religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others…”

However if anybody manages to bring a suit against the teaching, practice and indoctrination of Humanism and Atheism in all institutions and agencies of US Government on this score, the chances are more than 70% that it will be so decreed by SCOTUS. All religions are belief systems and so are Atheism and Secular Humanism.
[Noetics]

Atheism is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a religion. Humanism could be seen as a quasi-religion.  Atheism cannot be taught, preached or indoctrinated in institutions and agencies of the government. Atheism cannot be taught at all.  It is simply a lack of belief in god(s). The most atheists can do on this score is to aver that atheism is an acceptable stance and that atheism and atheists should not be discriminated against for not believing in someone’s god—and that is is clearly NOT a religion.

Humanism contains moral precepts, so it’s something like a religion. Atheism does not. What is it about Humanism that you object to? Other than that it promotes rational thinking, that is. What about it gets your knickers in a twist?

Lois

Profile
 
 
Posted: 05 September 2013 10:28 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 30 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  21
Joined  2013-09-01
Lois - 05 September 2013 10:08 AM
Noetics - 05 September 2013 09:03 AM
Equal Opportunity Curmudgeon - 05 September 2013 08:06 AM

Is there any religion other than the “religions of atheism and humanism”

These are NOT religions.

[Noetics]

Though it has NO legal force, In Torcaso v. Watkins (1961), Justice Black of the US Supreme Court wrote the following opinion:  “...Among the religions in this country which do not teach what would generally be considered a belief in the existence of God are Buddhism, Taoism, Ethical Culture, Secular Humanism, and others…”

However if anybody manages to bring a suit against the teaching, practice and indoctrination of Humanism and Atheism in all institutions and agencies of US Government on this score, the chances are more than 70% that it will be so decreed by SCOTUS. All religions are belief systems and so are Atheism and Secular Humanism.
[Noetics]

Atheism is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a religion. Humanism could be seen as a quasi-religion.  Atheism cannot be taught, preached or indoctrinated in institutions and agencies of the government. Atheism cannot be taught at all.  It is simply a lack of belief in god(s). The most atheists can do on this score is to aver that atheism is an acceptable stance and that atheism and atheists should not be discriminated against for not believing in someone’s god—and that is is clearly NOT a religion.

Humanism contains moral precepts, so it’s something like a religion. Atheism does not. What is it about Humanism that you object to? Other than that it promotes rational thinking, that is. What about it gets your knickers in a twist?

Lois

Premises of Irrationality/Belief system:
1. Out of nothing dead matter arose (Death precedes life).
2.  Out of “deadness” mindless life (without any information) arose.
3.  Out of mindless life mind arose
4.  And out of life death arose.
 
Premises of Rationality/Belief system:
1. Life arise from LIFE (Life precedes death).
2. Mind arise from MIND
3. All effects have causes
4. An uncaused first cause is not an effect
Is “Caesar’s Messiah” Christianity in a nutshell?

Premises/Bethlehem Born Jesus of Nazareth
1. The Sentence of Death is universal and inevitable
2. Only the Sentencer can cancel that Sentence
3. The Sentencer did so in the Sentencer’s own way.
4.  The Sentencer took the Sentence vicariously.
5. Those who accept that cancellation will be with the Risen Sentencer.
6.  Those who willfully reject it will be where they always wanted to be -  away from the Risen Sentencer.

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 3
2