On 29/03/22 17:19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 16:48:35 +0100, Tom Gardner
> <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 29/03/22 16:39, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:31:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
>>> <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 29/03/22 00:34, John Larkin wrote:
>>>>> How do you know my suggestions are worthless?
>>>>
>>>> That's been explained to you many times by several people.
>>>
>>> Claimed, not explained.
>>
>> If you think that, you need to polish your cognition skills.
>>
>>> Mostly insults.
>>
>> It sounds like you are looking for reasons not to take the
>> time and effort to understand.
>>
>>
>>> Even improbable ideas have value. They punch through your blind spots.
>>> That has been explained to you many times.
>>
>> The moon is made of green cheese. That improbable idea
>> has value until you prove to me that it isn't?
>> I think not.
>
> Moon surface samples have been collected and analyzed. We know some
> about seismic propagation in the bulk of the moon. And we can measure
> tidal effects; green cheese would radically increase orbital decay.
> That is hard experimental data that works against the cheese theory.

The moon landings were faked.

The rocks were picked up on the earth. You can even find
identical ones on the earth.

On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 18:59:32 +0100, Tom Gardner
<spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:

>On 29/03/22 17:19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 16:48:35 +0100, Tom Gardner
>> <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 29/03/22 16:39, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:31:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
>>>> <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 29/03/22 00:34, John Larkin wrote:
>>>>>> How do you know my suggestions are worthless?
>>>>>
>>>>> That's been explained to you many times by several people.
>>>>
>>>> Claimed, not explained.
>>>
>>> If you think that, you need to polish your cognition skills.
>>>
>>>> Mostly insults.
>>>
>>> It sounds like you are looking for reasons not to take the
>>> time and effort to understand.
>>>
>>>
>>>> Even improbable ideas have value. They punch through your blind spots.
>>>> That has been explained to you many times.
>>>
>>> The moon is made of green cheese. That improbable idea
>>> has value until you prove to me that it isn't?
>>> I think not.
>>
>> Moon surface samples have been collected and analyzed. We know some
>> about seismic propagation in the bulk of the moon. And we can measure
>> tidal effects; green cheese would radically increase orbital decay.
>> That is hard experimental data that works against the cheese theory.
>
>The moon landings were faked.
>
>The rocks were picked up on the earth. You can even find
>identical ones on the earth.

Feel free to believe, or disbelieve, or snark about, whatever you
like.

I'm an engineer. We build things that work or don't work at customer
sites, so we get a lot of feedback about our thinking.

I know the moon rocket was real, because I designed stuff on the S1B
booster stage.

--

If a man will begin with certainties, he shall end with doubts,
but if he will be content to begin with doubts he shall end in certainties.
Francis Bacon

On 29/03/2022 18:19, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 16:48:35 +0100, Tom Gardner
> <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 29/03/22 16:39, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>>> On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 01:31:15 +0100, Tom Gardner
>>> <spamjunk@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 29/03/22 00:34, John Larkin wrote:
>>>>> How do you know my suggestions are worthless?
>>>>
>>>> That's been explained to you many times by several people.
>>>
>>> Claimed, not explained.
>>
>> If you think that, you need to polish your cognition skills.
>>
>>> Mostly insults.
>>
>> It sounds like you are looking for reasons not to take the
>> time and effort to understand.
>>
>>
>>> Even improbable ideas have value. They punch through your blind spots.
>>> That has been explained to you many times.
>>
>> The moon is made of green cheese. That improbable idea
>> has value until you prove to me that it isn't?
>> I think not.
>
> Moon surface samples have been collected and analyzed. We know some
> about seismic propagation in the bulk of the moon. And we can measure
> tidal effects; green cheese would radically increase orbital decay.
> That is hard experimental data that works against the cheese theory.
>

Are you an astrogeologist? Or a cheesemaker? What experiments have
/you/ done here?

Tom's example is just as "valid" as your "ideas" in the realm of biology.

People who claim "anything is possible until proved otherwise" or
"nothing is impossible until you've tried it" are wrong. Just like
people who claim "there's no such thing as a silly idea" or "we don't
know the real answer, so any idea is equally valid".

> We have zero experimental data that resolves the origin of DNA-based
> life, so options remain open.
>

Options remain open, but that doesn't mean ideas can't be judged for
realism.

On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 8:54:05 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 22:18:25 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> >On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:34:47 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:

> >> How do you know my suggestions are worthless? Are you an evolutionary
> >> biologist? They don't now how life started either.

> >So, credentials in 'evolutionary biology' don't address a pertinent skill?

> Do you have such credentials?

Do class credits from a well-known developmental biologist count?
Odd question.

> >What's the point, then, of the question?

Yeah, lots of odd questions, what's the point?

> >> And what problem do you have with worthless suggestions? You would
> >> poison a brainstorming session.
> >
> >Untrue; a brainstorming session, after all, ends with evaluation.

> Not always. Sometimes there is no obvious discovery, but maybe some
> people leave with different attitudes or unresolved hunches. That
> might inspire an idea years later.

Brainstorming is a means to an end. It serves my ends to know
a broad range of ideas, but also to know the best ones.

> Brainstorming exercizes mental flexibility... if you let it.

It's a solution for groupthink deficiencies, not individual mentation.
You're degrading it into a metaphor: that's not the best use of the idea.

On Tue, 29 Mar 2022 13:05:06 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whit3rd@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Tuesday, March 29, 2022 at 8:54:05 AM UTC-7, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
>> On Mon, 28 Mar 2022 22:18:25 -0700 (PDT), whit3rd <whi...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:34:47 PM UTC-7, John Larkin wrote:
>
>> >> How do you know my suggestions are worthless? Are you an evolutionary
>> >> biologist? They don't now how life started either.
>
>> >So, credentials in 'evolutionary biology' don't address a pertinent skill?
>
>> Do you have such credentials?
>
>Do class credits from a well-known developmental biologist count?
>Odd question.
>
>> >What's the point, then, of the question?
>
>Yeah, lots of odd questions, what's the point?
>
>> >> And what problem do you have with worthless suggestions? You would
>> >> poison a brainstorming session.
>> >
>> >Untrue; a brainstorming session, after all, ends with evaluation.
>
>> Not always. Sometimes there is no obvious discovery, but maybe some
>> people leave with different attitudes or unresolved hunches. That
>> might inspire an idea years later.
>
>Brainstorming is a means to an end. It serves my ends to know
>a broad range of ideas, but also to know the best ones.
>
>> Brainstorming exercizes mental flexibility... if you let it.
>
>It's a solution for groupthink deficiencies, not individual mentation.
>You're degrading it into a metaphor: that's not the best use of the idea.

At 153 postings in the thread, mostly calling one another various
kinds of drooling idiot, the information transfer rate long since
having approached zero, I would submit that you'all have reached limit
cycle, and could as well stop.

Joe Gwinn

On Sunday, March 27, 2022 at 10:53:21 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 4:16:29 PM UTC+11, Flyguy wrote:
> > On Sunday, March 27, 2022 at 9:22:29 PM UTC-7, bill....@ieee.org wrote:
> > > On Monday, March 28, 2022 at 2:27:18 AM UTC+11, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> > > > On Sun, 27 Mar 2022 09:19:34 +0200, Piotr Wyderski <bom...@protonmail.com> wrote:
> > > > >jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
> <snip>
> > > > People keep accusing me of being a religious fundamentalist because I dare to think about anything but primordial soup and random mutation.
> > >
> > > Actually, the problem is that you read intelligent design propaganda, don't understand that it is propaganda, and recycle it as if were your own invention. You do the same with climate change denial propaganda.
> > >
> > > > Aggressive atheism shuts off thinking more than attending church on Sunday.
> > >
> > > Neither has any necessary effect on peoples willingness to think. You don't seem to be able to think for yourself at all, so your ideas on the subject are entirely worthless.
> >
> > Sloman can't resist the impulse to take personal attacks, which is clearly a defect in his personality (assuming he has one).
>
> Flyguy's enthusiasm for seeing defects in my personality saves him from making comments of any substance, which is clearly beyond him.
> >He will most likely do the same to my post.
> It's not easy to be critical of the defects in John Larkin's logic without being critical of John Larkin's enthusiasm for parading them. Flyguy has even less capacity for rational thought. I don't even have bother pointing out how stupid he is. He makes it obvious with every word he posts.
>
> --
> SNIPPERMAN, Sydney

LOL! Hey SNIPPERMAN, you PROVED MY POINT for me!!!!!!!!