Stephen Hawking

  • 254 Replies
  • 40846 Views
*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #30 on: February 08, 2015, 03:15:33 AM »
I'll take the two last posts as arguing for no reason. Nothing to see here.

*

HumanKentipede

  • 129
  • The defeat of Scepti was a sweet victory.
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #31 on: February 08, 2015, 03:44:28 AM »
Proved 10 seconds of Samuel robotham and I'll happily accept his existence.
Leatherman: Leave nothing undone.

Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #32 on: February 08, 2015, 04:19:39 AM »
I'll take the two last posts as arguing for no reason.
What?  You mean you've been made to look silly?
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #33 on: February 08, 2015, 04:26:15 AM »
I'll take the two last posts as arguing for no reason. Nothing to see here.

LOL... so once again I've totally destroyed any argument that sceptimatic tried—but failed—to mount in order to destroy [sic] Hawking's credentials and/or reputation.  I'm more than confident that 99,99% of people posting here fully accept Hawking's credibility—with sceptimatic being possibly the only exception.  Obviously he hasn't questioned as to why that should be.  Apparently—and illogically—he thinks he's the only person here who knows the "real" truth about Hawking apparently being a fraud.

You'll also notice that sceptimatic hasn't been able to substantiate—in any way—his claim that because he has a serious speech impediment Hawking doesn't even know what he's talking about or is mentally retarded.  And like a lot of ignorant people, sceptimatic conflates physical disability with mental disability.

I'm also guessing he laughs at people with MS or autism or Down syndrome—but wouldn't be game to insult them face-to-face.  Bigots are also invariably cowards.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #34 on: February 08, 2015, 04:43:56 AM »
I'll take the two last posts as arguing for no reason. Nothing to see here.

LOL... so once again I've totally destroyed any argument that sceptimatic tried—but failed—to mount in order to destroy [sic] Hawking's credentials and/or reputation.  I'm more than confident that 99,99% of people posting here fully accept Hawking's credibility—with sceptimatic being possibly the only exception.  Obviously he hasn't questioned as to why that should be.  Apparently—and illogically—he thinks he's the only person here who knows the "real" truth about Hawking apparently being a fraud.

You'll also notice that sceptimatic hasn't been able to substantiate—in any way—his claim that because he has a serious speech impediment Hawking doesn't even know what he's talking about or is mentally retarded.  And like a lot of ignorant people, sceptimatic conflates physical disability with mental disability.

I'm also guessing he laughs at people with MS or autism or Down syndrome—but wouldn't be game to insult them face-to-face.  Bigots are also invariably cowards.
Here's a suggestion. It may help you greatly if you actually learn to read what's being said rather than to make up your own bullshit about what's been said. Just a thought to help you along rather than sit and make up crap to suit your own ego.  ;D

*

Misero

  • 1261
  • Of course it's flat. It looks that way up close.
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #35 on: February 08, 2015, 06:41:32 AM »
So please explain to me how a disorder that makes you lose control of most of your muscles makes your brain turn to mush? I would think it would make you smarter, because you would constantly be thinking. And by the way, he has a clicker that he uses to cycle through letters. But let me guess, Scepti, being the unsympathetic and dimwitted person he is, he will probably say something along the lines of
Quote
Yes, and he makes those speeches using an inefficient clicker.
My response to that statement is:
the speeches are prewritten, and put into the computer. Complicated, right?
I am the worst moderator ever.

Sometimes I wonder: "Why am  I on this site?"
Then I look at threads about clouds not existing and I go back to posting and lurking. Lurk moar.

*

kman

  • 990
  • Pastafarian
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #36 on: February 08, 2015, 06:48:42 AM »
Ok. lets just assume that mr. hawking is actually secretly controlled by the members of the conspiracy.

what the hell is the point?
Quote from: Excelsior John
[USA TODAY and NPR] are probaley just a bunch of flippin wite sapremist websites you RASCIST
Quote from: modestman
i don't understand what you are saying=therfore you are liar

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #37 on: February 08, 2015, 07:06:01 AM »
Here's a suggestion. It may help you greatly if you actually learn to read what's being said rather than to make up your own bullshit about what's been said. Just a thought to help you along rather than sit and make up crap to suit your own ego.

LOL... I think this sad little comment more than proves the point I made about sceptimatic (above).

I'm now "making up my own bullshit" AND "making up crap".

Man... I've really got that skill nailed haven't I folks.    ;D

*

sokarul

  • 18689
  • Extra Racist
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #38 on: February 08, 2015, 10:11:27 AM »
I'll take the two last posts as arguing for no reason. Nothing to see here.
Because they completely destroyed you?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

?

st james

  • 105
  • a sinner saved by grace
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #39 on: February 08, 2015, 07:35:43 PM »
Ok. lets just assume that mr. hawking is actually secretly controlled by the members of the conspiracy.

what the hell is the point?

the "point" is why?
its reasonable to assume that its because he has made some world-shattering discovery abt the very nature of the Universe that would totally discombobulate the current, accepted paradigm;
FE could well be such a discovery.....along with, say, the existence of the ether (and free energy for all!) and the non-existence of gravity.....

the contention of many FE Christians is that RE and all its attendant theories (evolution, relativity, Big Bang &c) are "a magic carpet" to usher in the New World Order, headed up by the anti-christ, which is prophesised in the Book of Revelations.....

the people who are controlling Hawking are, how-ever, merely satanic puppets.....just like all the New World Order "enablers" ....they're either guided by demonic forces or totally possessed by them.....to the great detriment of humanity, in general!   :(
nisi Dominus frustra

*

kman

  • 990
  • Pastafarian
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #40 on: February 08, 2015, 07:55:04 PM »
So basically they are controlling Hawking just cus they're evil, and they do evil things?
Quote from: Excelsior John
[USA TODAY and NPR] are probaley just a bunch of flippin wite sapremist websites you RASCIST
Quote from: modestman
i don't understand what you are saying=therfore you are liar

*

Lemmiwinks

  • 2161
  • President of the Non-Conformist Zetetic Council
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #41 on: February 08, 2015, 08:56:51 PM »
Doing hood rat things is fun.
I have 13 [academic qualifications] actually. I'll leave it up to you to guess which, or simply call me a  liar. Either is fine.

Quod gratis asseritur, gratis negatur

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #42 on: February 09, 2015, 01:37:54 AM »
So please explain to me how a disorder that makes you lose control of most of your muscles makes your brain turn to mush? I would think it would make you smarter, because you would constantly be thinking. And by the way, he has a clicker that he uses to cycle through letters. But let me guess, Scepti, being the unsympathetic and dimwitted person he is, he will probably say something along the lines of
Quote
Yes, and he makes those speeches using an inefficient clicker.
My response to that statement is:
the speeches are prewritten, and put into the computer. Complicated, right?
Who mentioned his brain going to mush. Learn to read what's said and you won;t have to fiollow your peers in making shit up. Try it sometime.

As for speeches pre-written. Of course they're pre-written. The same as the questions and answers are all pre-written.
That's the whole con of it all, all carried out by those that sold their own granny for a bit of fame and fortune.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #43 on: February 09, 2015, 01:39:11 AM »
So basically they are controlling Hawking just cus they're evil, and they do evil things?
I already said I don't know what's happening. The person could be an actor. I don't rightly know.
The thing is, neither do you. You just accept what's put on your plate and gobble it up.

?

st james

  • 105
  • a sinner saved by grace
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #44 on: February 09, 2015, 06:50:06 AM »
So basically they are controlling Hawking just cus they're evil, and they do evil things?
I already said I don't know what's happening. The person could be an actor. I don't rightly know.
The thing is, neither do you. You just accept what's put on your plate and gobble it up.

any-one who gives creedence to any-thing (except, maybe, "the sport" and "the weather") that the main-stream media spews out (without first checking it out 'in depth' on the www) is either a total cretin or some sort of deranged automaton.....
i wouldn't even call them "sheeple" because even a sheep wouldn't gobble up a bunch of putrid filth....it'd have enough sense to turn tail and run!  :o
the only valid conclusion you could come to is that those sorts of people are as above or out-and-out shills working for "the Man"....or, rather, the J-Man....that big, hook-nosed devil who is the bitter enemy of God, man and Nature......   >:(
nisi Dominus frustra

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #45 on: February 09, 2015, 07:50:34 AM »
An article that highlights the profound ignorance displayed in scepti's generalizations about how ALS presents.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/stephen-hawking-als/
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #46 on: February 09, 2015, 08:26:06 AM »
1. He's either a real person who just happens to have had an ailment that kills most within 5 years and the remaining ones in about 10 years and yet his super scientific brain manages to keep him alive for over 50 years, outliving most fit people at his age of 73 despite not being able to exercise or even move his entire body, yet communicate through a cheap speak and spell like machine that just happens to turn is thoughts into words. Truth scale of 1 to 10?  0

I see a lot of problems with this.

1: Stephen Hawking is not completely paralyzed, his disease just makes him get weaker over time.

2: The machine he uses to talk does not read his mind, it uses a little button he holds in his hand and presses.  He is not completely paralyzed so he can do that.

3: He didn't survive so long because of his genius, it was because of technology advancing as fast as it does.

4: His genius is not in spite of his condition, but partially because of it because he hasn't really got anything better do do then sit and think about the universe.

Truth scale 1 to 10: 10
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #47 on: February 09, 2015, 08:38:40 AM »
How common is motor neurone disease ?


About 40-50 people develop motor neurone disease in NZ each year. The average age of onset is 55. Uncommonly, it develops in young people. (Hawking).

How long do people survive motor neurone disease ?
The average length of survival is 2-4 years. Occasionally, people live longer.

Aged 20 and now he's 73 or so. So what are we talking here? a miracle that just happened to befit an Einstein type genius?
And you don't think it's questionable?




*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #48 on: February 09, 2015, 08:49:00 AM »
I see a lot of problems with this.

1: Stephen Hawking is not completely paralyzed, his disease just makes him get weaker over time.
So I take it you must have been asleep then and have never seen him to think this. You may as well be saying to me that Mickey mouse isn't a disney mouse, he's a duck that just appears to look like a Mickey mouse.
2: The machine he uses to talk does not read his mind, it uses a little button he holds in his hand and presses.  He is not completely paralyzed so he can do that.
Yeah I agree that it doesn't read his mind, it reads his eye and cheek movements apparently. Take a close look at him when questions are fired at him. He doesn't move a muscle in his hands nor in his face and hardly moves his eyes.
3: He didn't survive so long because of his genius, it was because of technology advancing as fast as it does.
Technology advancing? There is no known cure for this and treatment even now is in its infancy. Look it up. You're scraping the barrel.
4: His genius is not in spite of his condition, but partially because of it because he hasn't really got anything better do do then sit and think about the universe.

Truth scale 1 to 10: 10
So by this thought , he has nothing better to do and just becomes a genius, knowing the universe and what not? I mean, surely he can't be reading other people's stuff because that makes them the geniuses and him the student memorising their work.
That also means that lifers are all Hawking geniuses because they have as much time on their hands with nothing much else to do.
What a desperate argument.
Truth probability of what you spewed....zilch.
« Last Edit: February 09, 2015, 08:52:40 AM by sceptimatic »

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #49 on: February 09, 2015, 08:52:11 AM »
I already said I don't know what's happening.
Uh... in case you haven't yet become aware of this sceptimatic, we already figured this out.  It's more than apparent from the vast majority of your comments on these forums.  It would also seem that you don't know what's happening with most things in the world LOL.
 
Quote
The person could be an actor. I don't rightly know.
Refer above.  Two things that you "don't know" in a single post?  Not looking good is it mate?    ;D

Quote
The thing is, neither do you. You just accept what's put on your plate and gobble it up.
Which, as the author of a dozen books, you'd never expect people to do would you—in order to earn a living?  Or accept the teachings of the people who enabled you to qualify with 13 academic credentials?  Or trust the pilots who taught you how to fly your helicopter or light plane?

I'm guessing you also expect us to "gobble up" your denpressure hypothesis without any sort of evidence too?    ;D

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #50 on: February 09, 2015, 08:53:40 AM »
I already said I don't know what's happening.
Uh... in case you haven't yet become aware of this sceptimatic, we already figured this out.  It's more than apparent from the vast majority of your comments on these forums.  It would also seem that you don't know what's happening with most things in the world LOL.
 
Quote
The person could be an actor. I don't rightly know.
Refer above.  Two things that you "don't know" in a single post?  Not looking good is it mate?    ;D

Quote
The thing is, neither do you. You just accept what's put on your plate and gobble it up.
Which, as the author of a dozen books, you'd never expect people to do would you—in order to earn a living?  Or accept the teachings of the people who enabled you to qualify with 13 academic credentials?  Or trust the pilots who taught you how to fly your helicopter or light plane?

I'm guessing you also expect us to "gobble up" your denpressure hypothesis without any sort of evidence too?    ;D
You should have saved the effort.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #51 on: February 09, 2015, 09:14:44 AM »
How common is motor neurone disease ?


About 40-50 people develop motor neurone disease in NZ each year.

What is with citing NZ stats?  First thing that came up in google for you?

Quote
The average age of onset is 55. Uncommonly, it develops in young people. (Hawking).

Yup

Quote
How long do people survive motor neurone disease ?
The average length of survival is 2-4 years. Occasionally, people live longer.

That is an average.  There are always statistical outliers.  If the 2-4 years is 1 standard deviation in the statistical data, then 33% of people live less than 2 years and more than 4. 
Quote
Aged 20 and now he's 73 or so. So what are we talking here? a miracle that just happened to befit an Einstein type genius?

Not a miracle, just unlikely.  Like winning the lottery or getting hit by lightning.

Quote
And you don't think it's questionable?

I don't particularly care that much, but if I were to question it, I would do a better job than you.

Teachers Grade: F
Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #52 on: February 09, 2015, 09:17:15 AM »
You should have saved the effort.

Why particularly?

Because you haven't yet explained denpressure, or because what I said was painfully close to the truth?

I guess I just get a bizarre Red Bull high whenever I can shoot you down in flames—and which saves me money every day LOL.


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #53 on: February 09, 2015, 09:20:04 AM »
How common is motor neurone disease ?


About 40-50 people develop motor neurone disease in NZ each year.

What is with citing NZ stats?  First thing that came up in google for you?

Quote
The average age of onset is 55. Uncommonly, it develops in young people. (Hawking).

Yup

Quote
How long do people survive motor neurone disease ?
The average length of survival is 2-4 years. Occasionally, people live longer.

That is an average.  There are always statistical outliers.  If the 2-4 years is 1 standard deviation in the statistical data, then 33% of people live less than 2 years and more than 4. 
Quote
Aged 20 and now he's 73 or so. So what are we talking here? a miracle that just happened to befit an Einstein type genius?

Not a miracle, just unlikely.  Like winning the lottery or getting hit by lightning.

Quote
And you don't think it's questionable?

I don't particularly care that much, but if I were to question it, I would do a better job than you.


Clearly not. You don't question anything, you simply accept everything as long as it is sold to you as official.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #54 on: February 09, 2015, 09:21:23 AM »
You should have saved the effort.

Why particularly?

Because you haven't yet explained denpressure, or because what I said was painfully close to the truth?

I guess I just get a bizarre Red Bull high whenever I can shoot you down in flames—and which saves me money every day LOL.
Try your best to save energy. The effort is commendable but neither use nor ornament.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #55 on: February 09, 2015, 09:33:15 AM »
Try your best to save energy. The effort is commendable but neither use nor ornament.

Well, at least you've agreed—finally—that you haven't fully explained denpressure to anybody's satisfaction on these forums.  I'm guessing you thought it'd just disappear into the sunset like the Marlboro cowboy... never to be seen or heard again LOL.

I am pleased however to see that I can still get under your skin by repeatedly reminding everybody about your failed denpressure notion.  It's probably something which you now wish you'd never made up in the first place.  I guess your denpressure is sort of like the 21st century version of "phlogiston"?

    ;D     ;D    ;D 


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #56 on: February 09, 2015, 09:40:21 AM »
Try your best to save energy. The effort is commendable but neither use nor ornament.

Well, at least you've agreed—finally—that you haven't fully explained denpressure to anybody's satisfaction on these forums.  I'm guessing you thought it'd just disappear into the sunset like the Marlboro cowboy... never to be seen or heard again LOL.

I am pleased however to see that I can still get under your skin by repeatedly reminding everybody about your failed denpressure notion.  It's probably something which you now wish you'd never made up in the first place.  I guess your denpressure is sort of like the 21st century version of "phlogiston"?

    ;D     ;D    ;D
Talk about it in the relevant topic and stop acting like a kid. You're wasting energy.

*

Rama Set

  • 6877
  • I am also an engineer
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #57 on: February 09, 2015, 09:41:52 AM »
Clearly not. You don't question anything,

Did you know in the adult world, two people can question the same thing and come to different conclusions?

Quote
you simply accept everything as long as it is sold to you as official.

Incorrect, I am currently in the process of questioning Anthropomorphic Climate Change based on evidence that temperature records have been falsified.

'sup bitch.

Aether is the  characteristic of action or inaction of charged  & noncharged particals.

*

mikeman7918

  • 5431
  • Round Earther
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #58 on: February 09, 2015, 09:43:18 AM »
Try your best to save energy. The effort is commendable but neither use nor ornament.

Well, at least you've agreed—finally—that you haven't fully explained denpressure to anybody's satisfaction on these forums.  I'm guessing you thought it'd just disappear into the sunset like the Marlboro cowboy... never to be seen or heard again LOL.

I am pleased however to see that I can still get under your skin by repeatedly reminding everybody about your failed denpressure notion.  It's probably something which you now wish you'd never made up in the first place.  I guess your denpressure is sort of like the 21st century version of "phlogiston"?

    ;D     ;D    ;D
Talk about it in the relevant topic and stop acting like a kid. You're wasting energy.

Good point, getting you to see past your imagination is pointless.
I am having a video war with Jeranism.
See the thread about it here.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 27776
Re: Stephen Hawking
« Reply #59 on: February 09, 2015, 10:00:17 AM »

Did you know in the adult world, two people can question the same thing and come to different conclusions?

Yep I do know that. The difference is, you don't question anything against mainstream science. You pretend you do but you don't.

Incorrect, I am currently in the process of questioning Anthropomorphic Climate Change based on evidence that temperature records have been falsified.


I'm sure you'll come to your conclusion when mainstream science does and happen to agree with the findings.