What's new

The good thing about science

Doc4

Stumpy in cold weather
Staff member
We already settled that - cheesecake isn't cake, it's pie.
But even if cheesecake WAS cake, I'd make that exception without fear that I had violated my anti-cake code of conduct! :lol:

Once you guys get the cheese-cake-isn't-cake-or-is-it? debate settled ... are thumbs "fingers"? Little Jack Horner, over there in the corner, wants to know.
 

luvmysuper

My elbows leak
Staff member
Once you guys get the cheese-cake-isn't-cake-or-is-it? debate settled ... are thumbs "fingers"? Little Jack Horner, over there in the corner, wants to know.

If a medic or a cop asks you "How many fingers am I holding up?"
$133844633671073780hand isolated.jpg
You better tell him "Five" unless you want an expensive ride.
 
Last edited:

luvmysuper

My elbows leak
Staff member
I think his point was mainly that Tyson explains the moon formation as fact when discussing it. Though the impact hypothesis has a lot holes that need to be filled to make it a theory, he doesn't even describe it as a theory, but as fact.
Maybe when we get some samples back from Venus it will change the whole picture, but right now the estimated chances that the impact object had exactly the same chemical make up as earth is about 1%.
 

ouch

Stjynnkii membörd dummpsjterd
You ever get bored and want to Google someone, Dr. Ron Mallett from the University of Connecticut. I was fascinated by his work in time travel and closed time like curves for quite awhile, but things have since gotten a wee bit quiet, so not sure where he got to in progress?

I emailed him this morning, and he already replied yesterday.





This post dedicated to August West.
 
This again?

By pulling stuff out of a hat do you mean referring to theory of Hartmann and Davis 1975 who were the first to come up with the theory of the moon formed by side swipe with another body?

Here, just for you

https://www.psi.edu/epo/moon/moon.html

This again?


Are you implying that I should stop questioning this hypothesis? I thought scientific method required constant scrutiny and questioning? this hypothesis is far from iron clad. Further questioning is undoubtedly required, but apparently NdGT doesn't deign to bend his gigantic intellect to that task and prefers to repeat info from a 40 year old publication. Where's the advancement of science there?

And thank you for the link, I'll read it in more depth later.
 
Last edited:

Alacrity59

Wanting for wisdom
Once you guys get the cheese-cake-isn't-cake-or-is-it? debate settled ... are thumbs "fingers"? Little Jack Horner, over there in the corner, wants to know.

and . . . What... is the air-speed velocity of an unladen swallow?
 
Top Bottom