[geocentrism] Re: Puzzle

  • From: "Robert Bennett" <robert.bennett@xxxxxxx>
  • To: <geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Sun, 25 Mar 2007 13:21:02 -0400

QI: Why should I give you 3 ships to sail west to India,  Cristoforo,  when
you have not studied sea navigation and theory at the great schools of
CC: I have great practical experience, your majesty, and wish to push my
explorations further.
QI: But at my MS schools you would learn of the edge of the earth and the
great sea-dragons, about which every student is taught.  Only a fool would
have a belief contrary to MS. I won?t finance this fool?s voyage!

And so America was never discovered?. what a pleasant thought.

The reality of scientific debate has surely changed from its lofty ideal of
being open to everyone.
In my on-line debate with a high-ranking MS physicist, he supported GR with
a statement re what inertial frames were like in distant star-systems.  I
pointed out that this was unfalsifiable, now and probably until the second
coming. Certainly a relevant and uncomplicated question to answer. But he
responded with a barrage of questions, principally about my academic
credentials, even who my mentor was!  Rather than answer my question, he
chose to attack the questioner?s background.
This is a puzzle most difficult to solve

Re a lack of understanding of basic physics:
I plead guilty to not understanding these basic beliefs of MS physics:
the big bang cosmology,
how galaxies coalesce from expanding gas,
the Hubble distance ? red shift law
relativity in both flavors
how spacetime is measured
how a human observation creates reality from chaos
For all these shortcomings, I give thanks to God.

I have no formal training in biology ,  but my training and understanding in
math-statistics and philosophy-logic lead me to reject evolution, the
bulwark of modern biology.

Re credentials
I have presented my GR thesis at a relativity seminar attended by Peter
Bergmann, Roger Penrose, John Wheeler, Banesh Hoffman and David Finkelstein
(for those who delight in name-dropping).  None of these opposed my thesis.
Today I realize that my thesis was mathematically sound, impressively
couched in the formalism of tensors, but proceeded from false premises, and
so is only approximately valid.

Re Paul?s puzzle


-----Original Message-----
From: geocentrism-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:geocentrism-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Dr. Neville Jones
Sent: Saturday, March 24, 2007 11:53 AM
To: geocentrism@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [geocentrism] Re: Puzzle

G'Day again Paul,

That e-mails have been "delivered" does not mean that the recipient has read
them or even opened them. This point has clearly passed you by, but
hopefully is now settled.

You state that you "don't know that [you] have any responsibility to explain
to anyone why [you] ask a reasonable question in a forum such as this, ..."
This forum is run by Steven and myself and if either or both of us consider
your question to be deliberately belittling to a respected and valuable
member of this forum, then you are required to explain yourself. If you do
not, then you will be barred from contributing further or simply thrown off.
I hope that I make myself clear on this point, too.

I also hope that this puts an end to both issues and that we can look
forward to your posting of the puzzle. Whether you decide to apologise to
Robert for the obvious insinuation you were making, I leave to your

One more thing, however. I did not find the tensor calculus of General
Relativity to be "easy" and I know of no one in my year at university who
did. Certainly Einstein himself did not find it "easy," since he hired a
professional mathematician to do it for him. You might also like to research
what Albert Einstein's Ph.D. consisted of.

Best wishes,


Paul Deema <paul_deema@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Neville J
Thanks for your immediate response to my last request re the puzzle and for
your permission.
I've been to my 'Sent' folder and extracted the three messages in question,
and from the headers I also extracted the 'From' and 'To' lines all of which
I've shown below together with your response (to which I am now responding).
If you did not receive the earliest (to ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx - address
extracted from the header of one of your messages eg From: "Dr. Neville
Jones" <ntj005@xxxxxxxxxxx>) then the second, to the open forum, I would
have thought, would have elicited a puzzled response. Since it did not, I'm
sure you can see why I deduced either preoccupation or apathy on your part.
None were returned as not delivered, so I had presumed that they were in
fact delivered.
Concerning my question to Robert B about his PhD. This is at least the third
time I've sought this information -- all requests either ignored or not
answered. I don't know that I have any responsibility to explain to anyone
why I ask a reasonable question in a forum such as this, but since I have no
ulterior motive, I did this because I wished to know if the qualification
was in any way relevant to the subject under discussion. You see there are
quite a few people in this world who obtain a PhD from a questionable
institution in an 'easy' subject, ...


New Yahoo! Mail is the ultimate force in competitive emailing. Find out more
at the Yahoo! Mail Championships
/uk.rd.yahoo.com/evt=44106/*http://mail.yahoo.net/uk/> . Plus: play games
and win prizes.

Other related posts: