Quote:
Originally Posted by anyman  ok, teach...i'm officially impressed
you bad man, bad 2d'bone
saw this many moons ago on sciagog (just don't post there much anymore; i was there when it started in spring of '98 and stayed on for years, but it got way too lame...only one left from that era is mike kremer...good guy, but denser than he oughta be for as smart as he sometimes lets on...amaranth came a couple a years later but aside from the occasional nice turn of phrase and not too bad poetry, pretty lame and whiney...dano came on earlier than amaranth by a year or so and while he made some sense on occasion, he was mostly a braindead, kneejerk, troll that rarely had an original thought...there's more but we'll leave it there for now :-) anyway, saw this there and liked it and wanted to let you know but never got around to it till now
your irreverence is over the top but enjoyable for that very reason
and most of all, think your idea (on how the pyramids may have been built) has merit, is pretty sound; i likes it
you could learn how to spell but at least you cop to it
anyway, on the serious side, keep it comin, you on the right track...or at least one that is reasonable and possible if not the one in fact
now, when it comes to astrophysics...methinks you need to sit back and rest your neck a little :-) but i'm guessin you were either kiddin or didn't flesh out your thoughts there as well as you did on pyramid construction (which may yet need work but as you say, the jist is there and doable
btw -- old and wise is not as wise as he oughta be...metal was worked in egypt (they would very likely have had iron, but certainly some metals and maybe alloys)...they defintely were not limited to wood alone (albeit you very nicely point out that wood alone could do the job)
don't worry about the fairys and wannabes that can't see the potential of your thoughts
and you do think well (sometimes and on some level(s) :-)
einstein was a postman...that never finished school (forget about university when he published SR in 1905/6?)
the guy that just solved a 50yo math problem was unrecognized, unsung, and largely ignored (except by a fella that was willing to give him a job teaching math at one of the israeli universities a few years ago)...his work will likely have massive ramifications in future applications
robert hooke didn't formally attend school but having access to considerable material managed to educate himself...he made contributions to many branches of science (in the early days of modern science)...he too was often dismissed early on and had a now infamous ongoing row with newton, which led to considerably soiling his reputation at the time, although he is now somewhat more recognized for his genius (hardly the recognition he should have, but...)
anyway, the point is, i don't know or care about your *pedigree,* but i like the way you think and do things
carry on, guy...oh ye of the grand pubahness...you left billo(?) in the dust :-) |
Still, knowledge is more important than imagination.
And science without experimental data from observable phenomena is unworthy.
Certification is not needed to discover something important in science as long as your discovery is presented following the requirements of the scientific method.
And the scientific method cries loud for testing. No testing or observation denies to any calculation made (in this case the building of a pyramid) the possibility of being considered as sound science. It is considered "theorical science" without validation, or is simply a hypothesis.
Currently, some so called "theories of science" are no more than hypothesis, like the "expanding space" as an example. This idea has not a single observation made or a similar event to be compared with in order to declare that space is expanding.
To say that space expands because such is what "another theory implies" is not accepted by the scientific method, and the scientific method rules." The expanding space is no more than a mere assumption.
On the other hand, applying the scientific method in the theory of how the pyramids were built, I saw a TV special about it, the guys used real stones and wood sticks and ropes and other tools to prove their theory. Such theorical idea of them with its correspondent application of it, is what we call science. They were partially successful, and such is a good beginning.
Linear Mode
Main
Extras
