Is Gravity About To Get Plutoed?

[Tomk80]

SOURCE PLEASE

You funny, funny man. You know facts can take a hike.

 

[seeking Christ]

Actually he's funny because that source has been all over this website for years.

 

[Tomk80]

Actually he's funny because that source has been all over this website for years.

Then it shouldn't be a problem for AV to produce it. He's infinitely capable of linking to posts he himself made on this forum. Although possibly the fact that that source is not AV might make it hard for AV to recognize it as something worth his time.

But you can always link to the source if you want. Mind you, for the source to show that the vote was rigged, it will have to show not just that not a lot of people were present, but that people who were opposed to the motions were intentionally kept out of the proceedings. The first is easy to show. The second at the very least take a bit more work, and I have yet to see a credible source actualy show it.

 

[AV1611VET]

The second at the very least take a bit more work, and I have yet to see a credible source actualy show it.

From Post #5:

Supporters of the demotion resolution violated the IAU's own bylaws by putting this resolution on the General Assembly floor without first vetting it by the proper committee as IAU rules require.

If you don't see that as a rigged vote, then I feel for you.

 

[VirOptimus]

From Post #5:

If you don't see that as a rigged vote, then I feel for you.

Lets just say that you are right and the vote was rigged.

Why did they do it? To persecute christians?

 

[AV1611VET]

Lets just say that you are right and the vote was rigged.

Why did they do it? To persecute christians?

You want my opinion? or facts?

If you want my opinion, I can give one; but if you want facts, I can't help you.

 

[VirOptimus]

You want my opinion? or facts?

If you want my opinion, I can give one; but if you want facts, I can't help you.

Opinion will be fine.

 

[AV1611VET]

Opinion will be fine.

In my opinion, scientists have to look like they're doing something every now and then.

They have to give us something once in awhile, or else they'll atrophy in the eyes of the public.

Again, just my opinion.

 

[Tomk80]

In my opinion, scientists have to look like they're doing something every now and then.

They have to give us something once in awhile, or else they'll atrophy in the eyes of the public.

Again, just my opinion.

Wow. That is completely unhinged.

I mean, it's not like I see news stories on scientific issues in the newspaper every week, and something on astronomy at least every month.

 

[AV1611VET]

I mean, it's not like I see news stories on scientific issues in the newspaper every week, and something on astronomy at least every month.

Thus my point.

 

[VirOptimus]

In my opinion, scientists have to look like they're doing something every now and then.

They have to give us something once in awhile, or else they'll atrophy in the eyes of the public.

Again, just my opinion.

Sure its opinion, but as you have yourself confessed that you refuse to study what science is all about and what scientists do and how scientific work is done, isnt that just baseless speculation?

 

[Tomk80]

Thus my point.

Your point being that since scientists, including astronomers, discover new stuff daily and this is reported on daily, they felt the need to go through an elaborate scheme to get even more attention?

This is getting weirder and weirder.

 

[AV1611VET]

Sure its opinion, but as you have yourself confessed that you refuse to study what science is all about and what scientists do and how scientific work is done, isnt that just baseless speculation?

I suppose.

But then, if scientists can speculate that Matthew didn't write Matthew, and that the prophecies in the Bible were penciled in ex post facto, yadda and so forth ... am I supposed to really care?

 

[VirOptimus]

I suppose.

But then, if scientists can speculate that Matthew didn't write Matthew, and that the prophecies in the Bible were penciled in ex post facto, yadda and so forth ... am I supposed to really care?

Well, I dont really have an opinion on who wrote Matthew as I dont really care and wouldnt debate it, but if I would want to do so I would make sure to study why they think so. What are the facts and so forth. Knowledge is a wonderful thing.

 

[AV1611VET]

Your point being that since scientists, including astronomers, discover new stuff daily and this is reported on daily, they felt the need to go through an elaborate scheme to get even more attention?

This is getting weirder and weirder.

Here ... I'll make something up ... just to show you how I perceive it to be.

Again, this is totally made up:

SCIENTISTS DISCOVER LIFE ON THE MOON!

Scientists yesterday at the Mt. Wilson-Palomar observatory think maybe they might have supposedly maybe have just might found something that kind of resembled something that looks like it may be a life form on the surface of the moon.

"It looks like it might have moved from Point A to Point B," said Dr. Whomever.

This amazing discovery, pending verification by the rest of the scientific community, will be haled as one of the greatest finds of the 21st century, and is sure to peak the interest of astrobiologists everywhere.

HOWEVER, Dr. Seiwut of NASA thinks maybe they could be wrong out there at Wilson-Palomar, and warns that further investigation might be needed before anything is set in stone.

 

[CabVet]

Again, this is totally made up:

9th commandment anybody?

 

[CabVet]

if scientists can speculate that Matthew didn't write Matthew

No, they don't, historians do that.

 

[Tomk80]

Here ... I'll make something up ... just to show you how I perceive it to be.

Again, this is totally made up:

SCIENTISTS DISCOVER LIFE ON THE MOON!

Scientists yesterday at the Mt. Wilson-Palomar observatory think maybe they might have supposedly maybe have just might found something that kind of resembled something that looks like it may be a life form on the surface of the moon.

"It looks like it might have moved from Point A to Point B," said Dr. Whomever.

This amazing discovery, pending verification by the rest of the scientific community, will be haled as one of the greatest finds of the 21st century, and is sure to peak the interest of astrobiologists everywhere.

HOWEVER, Dr. Seiwut of NASA thinks maybe they could be wrong out there at Wilson-Palomar, and warns that further investigation might be needed, before anything is set in stone.

Your point being?

Again, scientists discover new stuff every day. The output of my institute alone is enough to result in a new scientific article every day of the year, and that is just one small institute in a medium sized university.

Why would scientists go through the elaborate procedure of setting up whole procedures, meetings etc.. to gain attention, when they produce enough output daily anyway?

Do scientists at times overhype there findings? Sure. But that is not what you are claiming here. You are claiming that they deliberately set up an elaborate scheme with the demotion of Pluto to gain attention. When they could have gained almost as much attention, especially in the short-term, with the discovery of Ceres in 2005 ("Planet X"). And that is quite bizarre.

 

[AV1611VET]

Well, I dont really have an opinion on who wrote Matthew as I dont really care and wouldnt debate it, but if I would want to do so I would make sure to study why they think so.

Then you're what we would call "a cut above," in my opinion.

Most Internet scientists here just copy-and-paste something, or parrot something they've heard.

That's why they keep harping on things like the events of the Resurrection Day not being able to be placed in chronological order (and therefore contradictory), when the Scofield Reference Bible has done a masterful job on it.

I honestly think most "scientists" are not here to learn our side, but are here just to vent & ridicule; or push us around with their clipboards.

 

[Tomk80]

No, they don't, historians do that.

I do not see the distinction between historians looking for the actual basis of the gospels on the one hand, and scientists on the other. They follow the scientific method, they produce testable hypotheses, deriving from and leading to overarching theories of how the gospels arose. How are they not scientists?