"My Big TOE" - Thomas Campbell

[hackenslash]

I don't think Arxiv accepts facepalms.

[t5aylor]

No, that was no analog, and it wasn't a good analogy either. Look, I am sure ur 10 year old is a genius, I know all of mine were. But to use them as comparisons to NASA rocket scientists is a bit to narcissistic facebooky, wouldn't you agree?

[The_Metatron]

You completely missed the point that I was ridiculing your fallacious claim that Cambell must be correct because there are no published peers refuting what he claims.

I showed how ridiculous your claim is by using an example of the imaginings of a ten year old child, which have also not been refuted by published scientists.

[Pulsar]

[quote="t5aylor";p="2063821"]But to use them as comparisons to NASA rocket scientists is a bit to narcissistic facebooky, wouldn't you agree?[/quote]
Campbell isn't a rocket scientist. He worked as a risk assessment consultant for NASA. And he only has a master's degree in physics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mindhush
The guy is a complete nobody, he's not worth anyone's time.

[t5aylor]

Well what, in your mind, would make him a scientist? Einstein was a patent clerk when he wrote his best stuff. I was hoping to find someone who can criticize his work, not google his alma mater.

[newolder]

observe, hypothesise, test, repeat.

An observer is a complex structure with an internal model of its own evolution.

It's a simple method that works.

[t5aylor]

I doubt if they employ such advanced methods at NASA.

[hackenslash]

[quote="t5aylor";p="2064005"]Well what, in your mind, would make him a scientist? Einstein was a patent clerk when he wrote his best stuff. I was hoping to find someone who can criticize his work, not google his alma mater.[/quote]

I did. Which bit of 'it's unfalsifiable' is not a critique?

[hackenslash]

[quote="t5aylor";p="2064610"]I doubt if they employ such advanced methods at NASA.[/quote]

If you think those methods are advanced, no wonder you don't recognise a valid critique. Those are the rudiments of ALL scientific enquiry.

[Pulsar]

[quote="t5aylor";p="2064005"]Well what, in your mind, would make him a scientist?[/quote]
Publications in peer-reviewed journals.

[quote="t5aylor";p="2064005"]Einstein was a patent clerk when he wrote his best stuff.[/quote]
Which he published in scientific journals.

[quote="t5aylor";p="2064005"]I was hoping to find someone who can criticize his work, not google his alma mater.[/quote]
If he has something relevant to say, he should publish it in peer-reviewed journals. That's where scientific ideas are evaluated. Anything else is not worth addressing.

[t5aylor]

Lets see, darwin didnt publish in a peer reviewed journal, neithef did the patent clerk. Oops. Keep tryin tho.

[surreptitious57]

Makes no difference because evolution and general relativity are observable phenomenon
Living species are evidence of the first and Eddington determined the second back in 1919

[The_Metatron]

[quote="t5aylor";p="2066441"]Lets see, darwin didnt publish in a peer reviewed journal, neithef did the patent clerk. Oops. Keep tryin tho.[/quote]
Like hell.

Darwin published a joint paper with Wallace at the Linnean Society.

As for Einstein:

The Annus mirabilis papers (from Latin annus mīrābilis, "extraordinary year") are the papers of Albert Einstein published in the Annalen der Physik scientific journal in 1905. These four articles contributed substantially to the foundation of modern physics and changed views on space, time, mass, and energy. The annus mirabilis is often called the "miracle year" in English or Wunderjahr in German.

Annalen der Physik (English: Annals of Physics) is one of the oldest scientific journals on physics and has been published since 1799. The journal publishes original, peer-reviewed papers in the areas of experimental, theoretical, applied, and mathematical physics and related areas.

You're new to this science stuff, aren't you?

[hackenslash]

[quote="The_Metatron";p="2066459"]You're new to this science stuff, aren't you?[/quote]

[Goldenmane]

[quote="t5aylor";p="2066441"]Lets see, darwin didnt publish in a peer reviewed journal, neithef did the patent clerk. Oops. Keep tryin tho.[/quote]

Huh.

Interesting pretense you try to shop there.

I did some science once. Have you?

[newolder]

[quote="t5aylor";p="2066441"]Lets see, [/quote]
Observe - a fine start.

darwin didnt publish in a peer reviewed journal, neithef did the patent clerk.

A sentence horribilis (c.f. 1905) and fail.

Oops. Keep tryin tho.

Sure you will.

[t5aylor]

I so hoped for better, despite my experience.

[Calilasseia]

[quote="t5aylor";p="2067429"]I so hoped for better, despite my experience.[/quote]

What, you mean better than refutation of manifestly false assertions that you presented?

This is what we do here. Namely, test assertions to see if they are in accord with relevant data. A lesson we learned from all those scientists.

Oh by the way, Darwin's work on Cirripedia is still regarded as a seminal work in the field, even by modern biologists.

[pelfdaddy]

This legend that Einstein was a lowly clerk laboring in obscurity until his genius was discovered is false. He was a physicist, academically accomplished, and known to be brilliant. His problem was also his strength: he rejected appeals to authority, thus rubbing his teachers the wrong way and making his life difficult within the academic realm, while also clearing the way for his brilliance to emerge.

He did not have a network of friends like the apple-polishers had, professors refused to recommend him for teaching positions, and he took the only job he could get at the time.

[Goldenmane]

[quote="pelfdaddy";p="2067442"]This legend that Einstein was a lowly clerk laboring in obscurity until his genius was discovered is false. He was a physicist, academically accomplished, and known to be brilliant. His problem was also his strength: he rejected appeals to authority, thus rubbing his teachers the wrong way and making his life difficult within the academic realm, while also clearing the way for his brilliance to emerge.

He did not have a network of friends like the apple-polishers had, professors refused to recommend him for teaching positions, and he took the only job he could get at the time.[/quote]

Exactly. He wasn't a patent clerk because he was academically challenged, but because he wasn't inclined to slurp authority cock. He was highly academically qualified. Hell, he had to be qualified to be a fucking patent clerk.