ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 18th January 2015, 10:32 AM   #201
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 15,338
Originally Posted by Gord_in_Toronto View Post
You mean you actually watched the video?

You are a much, much better person than I am.
Better? Or perhaps simply more bored.

Seriously, at one point the narrator simply stopped for sufficiently long that I began checking my speaker connections.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 10:36 AM   #202
Nonpareil
The Terrible Trivium
 
Nonpareil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Nethescurial
Posts: 7,996
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Better? Or perhaps simply more bored.

Seriously, at one point the narrator simply stopped for sufficiently long that I began checking my speaker connections.
The narrator is, I assume, jeffreyw himself. The 'Tuber's username is Jeffrey Wolynski.
__________________
"The only thing you can do easily is be wrong, and that's hardly worth the effort."
- Norton Juster, The Phantom Tollbooth
Nonpareil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 10:43 AM   #203
Lennart Hyland
Muse
 
Lennart Hyland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 547
I watched the latest(?) video. And its very weird...I dont understand, he shows a chart of a star going from large to small apparently displaying different temperature scale in color aswell which seems to just loop around :S and in the end makes the claim that stars shrink into planets with water around :S Does he ever explain how that water was made? ) I dont think so..)
__________________
L.H 1919 - 1993 R.I.P

Unfortunately the 911truth movement web site does not allow any opinions contrary to their own, or I would have presented my views. David Scott - CTBUH Chairman
Lennart Hyland is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 11:30 AM   #204
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 15,338
Originally Posted by Nonpareil View Post
The narrator is, I assume, jeffreyw himself. The 'Tuber's username is Jeffrey Wolynski.
Possibly. But unless user jeffreyw definitively states so, I have no way to know whether it is the same user, narrator or proponent.

I could, I suppose, watch other videos on his channel and attempt to figure out if it is him, or just some other bloke he uploaded to his channel by means of voice, accent, colloquialisms, context and so forth, but having sat through 6 minutes and 6 seconds of nonsense, I am disinclined to expend the effort to discover which particular individual is actually speaking. It could be jeffreyw, it could be a vid jefferyw uploaded from some place else. It could be an imposter. It could be anything.

Either way, I will not be burning my bandwidth to view any further yooboob videos posted. I place far more value on retaining my brain cells.
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 12:21 PM   #205
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 12,790
I used to think that youtube videos were only for people who couldn't obtain information except through a video. That may be true for many, but youtube videos also give an opportunity for the presenter to sell something to the viewer without giving the viewer a chance to carefully think over the proposal without an insistent, often emotional, voice in their ear. A written description of a theory can be read in detail for self consistency, and the reader can stop at any point to check out the truthfulness of the "facts" presented. A video, on the other hand, allows the viewer's perspective to controlled by the presenter, and selling points can be "chatted up" whereas any uncomfortable facts can be hidden or ignored. It is easier to sell snake oil in person than in a written ad.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 12:45 PM   #206
John Jones
Penultimate Amazing
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 10,663
Originally Posted by abaddon View Post
Rejected. I refuse to follow blind links to YooBoob videos which are proof of nothing. If you have a valid theory to present on a discussion board, then present those notions on said discussion board in YOUR OWN WORDS and discuss them.

I propose a new dictum. Call it Abaddon's dictum if you will.

I guess I have endorsed Abbadon's Dictum for a long time already.
__________________
Credibility is not a boomerang. If you throw it away, it's not coming back.
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 02:03 PM   #207
jeffreyw
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 275
Stellar Metamorphosis: Stellar Classification Issues, Part II

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtcrxDwUrlA

In this video I show how Wikipedia editors take away investigative clues which would lead to discovery and insight. This specific case has to deal with the altering of the stellar classification page.

Wikipedia editors are a strange breed. They only allow for articles to be written which either:

A. Support the status quo

B. Is sourced from a status quo source

On one hand they think they are being helpful, but in some cases, they do the most damage. It is like this:

What is worse?

1. Ignorance

2. False knowledge

In this case Wikipedia editors have false knowledge and take away clues of nature in support of the status quo. Yet as I mention in the video, what happens when the star cools to below 2400 Kelvin? Nothing? It explodes? Or is the obvious being presented, the star becomes the hot gas giant.

Thus stars evolve into gas giants (planets), or just "stars age". Or better yet, stellar evolution is the process of planet formation itself.

Should we really be still questioning the obvious or are there people actually going to help with the development of this superior philosophical understanding of the stars? (This theory of course being opposed to big bang creationism and the nebular hypothesis. )
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum.

A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive.

http://vixra.org/abs/1205.0107
jeffreyw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 02:17 PM   #208
Lennart Hyland
Muse
 
Lennart Hyland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 547
That video...

So you still arent gonna respond to any posts here?
__________________
L.H 1919 - 1993 R.I.P

Unfortunately the 911truth movement web site does not allow any opinions contrary to their own, or I would have presented my views. David Scott - CTBUH Chairman
Lennart Hyland is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 02:18 PM   #209
haibut
Scholar
 
haibut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 96
Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
Should we really be still questioning the obvious or are there people actually going to help with the development of this superior philosophical understanding of the stars? (This theory of course being opposed to big bang creationism and the nebular hypothesis. )
I think I may see your problem.
haibut is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 02:27 PM   #210
Elind
Philosopher
 
Elind's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: S.E. USA. Sometimes bible country
Posts: 7,779
Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
All I have is a simple understanding
Very true; although misunderstanding would be more accurate.
Elind is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 02:43 PM   #211
Wolrab
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 3,934
The wiki editors would be satisfied if you provided evidence.
__________________
"Such reports are usually based on the sighting of something the sighters cannot explain and that they (or someone else on their behalf) explain as representing an interstellar spaceship-often by saying "But what else can it be?" as though thier own ignorance is a decisive factor." Isaac Asimov
Wolrab is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 03:45 PM   #212
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 19,076
Originally Posted by Lennart Hyland View Post
That video...

So you still arent gonna respond to any posts here?
Given past behaviour, I very much doubt it.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 03:53 PM   #213
Lennart Hyland
Muse
 
Lennart Hyland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 547
Then shouldnt this thread go the abandon all hope section?
__________________
L.H 1919 - 1993 R.I.P

Unfortunately the 911truth movement web site does not allow any opinions contrary to their own, or I would have presented my views. David Scott - CTBUH Chairman
Lennart Hyland is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 04:37 PM   #214
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,138
Originally Posted by Lennart Hyland View Post
That video...

So you still arent gonna respond to any posts here?
Not if he can help it... Score update:
  • Number of JW posts asserting Stellar Metamorphosis hypothesis: 44
  • Number of posts in which readers cite new errors in the hypothesis and/or request evidence (not counting repeated asks): 24
  • Number of posts in which JW responds to request with relevant evidence: 0
  • Number of posts in which JW insults readers for doubting or questioning hypothesis: 16
  • Number of posts in which JW proclaims martyrdom: 17
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 05:09 PM   #215
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,647
Originally Posted by Lennart Hyland View Post
Then shouldnt this thread go the abandon all hope section?
You can't abandon hope unless there was some hope in the first place to abandon.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 18th January 2015, 06:43 PM   #216
abaddon
Penultimate Amazing
 
abaddon's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 15,338
Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vtcrxDwUrlA

In this video I show how Wikipedia editors take away investigative clues which would lead to discovery and insight. This specific case has to deal with the altering of the stellar classification page.

Wikipedia editors are a strange breed. They only allow for articles to be written which either:

A. Support the status quo

B. Is sourced from a status quo source

On one hand they think they are being helpful, but in some cases, they do the most damage. It is like this:

What is worse?

1. Ignorance

2. False knowledge

In this case Wikipedia editors have false knowledge and take away clues of nature in support of the status quo. Yet as I mention in the video, what happens when the star cools to below 2400 Kelvin? Nothing? It explodes? Or is the obvious being presented, the star becomes the hot gas giant.

Thus stars evolve into gas giants (planets), or just "stars age". Or better yet, stellar evolution is the process of planet formation itself.

Should we really be still questioning the obvious or are there people actually going to help with the development of this superior philosophical understanding of the stars? (This theory of course being opposed to big bang creationism and the nebular hypothesis. )
Oh goody. Another pointless yooboob video. I will not watch that. I will recommend that nobody watch it. It will be another waste of time.

And as for Wiki, they have an outright policy of rejecting bunk on the basis that it is bunk. Do you have a problem with Wiki rejecting bunk?
__________________
Who is General Failure? And why is he reading my hard drive?
abaddon is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 05:46 AM   #217
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,622
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
I used to think that youtube videos were only for people who couldn't obtain information except through a video. That may be true for many, but youtube videos also give an opportunity for the presenter to sell something to the viewer without giving the viewer a chance to carefully think over the proposal without an insistent, often emotional, voice in their ear. A written description of a theory can be read in detail for self consistency, and the reader can stop at any point to check out the truthfulness of the "facts" presented. A video, on the other hand, allows the viewer's perspective to controlled by the presenter, and selling points can be "chatted up" whereas any uncomfortable facts can be hidden or ignored. It is easier to sell snake oil in person than in a written ad.
Jeffrey's whole strategy here of serial posting of his YouBoob videos while avoiding actually addressing anyone's questions about his "theory" seems a little gutless for a supposed ex-Marine; it's essentially an extended Gish Gallop without even the risk of reply.
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 08:48 AM   #218
jeffreyw
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 275
Martin Gardner

We should all read Martin Gardner’s ‘Science, Good, Bad and Bogus’, “today black holes are the fashionable playthings of ‘clever’ astrophysicists. Tomorrow their models may collapse to take their place alongside Phlogiston and the epicycles of Ptolemy”.

Not only that, but the words can be replaced with the phrasing left in tact.

"today stellar evolution models are the fashionable playthings of 'clever' astrophysicists. Tomorrow their models may collapse to take their place alongside Phlogiston and the epicycles of Ptolemy”.

It is already "tomorrow". The stellar evolution models and nebular hypothesis have already collapsed. The only things that prop them up are the continued compartmentalization of science along with massive group think, and the notion that "experts can't be wrong because it is what they get paid to do".

Surely those "experts" can build the ships that never sink? Like the Titanic?
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum.

A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive.

http://vixra.org/abs/1205.0107
jeffreyw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 08:59 AM   #219
jeffreyw
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 275
Epsilon Eridani, Orange Dwarf Star

Since the nebular hypothesis and 1950's stellar evolution models are obsolete, it is required to place appropriately stars in all stages of evolution.

Here I make a video which outlines where Epsilon Eridani fits and reasoning why it fits where it does, why it is the size it is, and what its future/past will be. This meaning the predictive power of stellar metamorphosis is superior to the nebular hypothesis and fusion models (which are outdated and can be ignored).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n4sviZbtAzo
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum.

A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive.

http://vixra.org/abs/1205.0107
jeffreyw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 09:13 AM   #220
Nonpareil
The Terrible Trivium
 
Nonpareil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Nethescurial
Posts: 7,996
Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
the predictive power of stellar metamorphosis is superior to the nebular hypothesis and fusion models
Making a prediction is not the same thing as making a correct prediction, Jeffrey.
__________________
"The only thing you can do easily is be wrong, and that's hardly worth the effort."
- Norton Juster, The Phantom Tollbooth
Nonpareil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 09:17 AM   #221
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 12,790
This is just an extensive advertising campaign by jeffreyw to increase the web visibility of his videos. He has as much as stated so in his posts. He does not respond to criticisms because that is not the goal of his posts. The goal is web links, and a odd belief (posted by jeffreyw more than once) that the more opposition to his theories from people who do know what they are talking about, the more proof that his theories are correct. The "They laughed at Einstein..." concept.

The problem in advertising this way on this Forum is that it also makes equally visible the many posts that dismiss his theory and that demonstrate its absurdity with facts.
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 03:54 PM   #222
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,793
Exclamation Neptune and Uranus Exist

Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
Creationists tell the truth! Go figure!
Wow, jeffreyw - the fantasy that creationists are not capable of telling lies about Neptune and Uranus.
Here are some idiots stating that gas giants cannot exist when they do and their existence is explained in astrophysics. Then there is exposure of your ignorance of astrophysics by parroting their ignorance, jeffreyw: "According to planet formation models of establishment science Neptune and Uranus do not exist." is a lie.

Last edited by Reality Check; 19th January 2015 at 03:57 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 04:00 PM   #223
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,793
Thumbs down A YouTube video's ignorance leads to a solar fanatsy

Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
Here we have a fantasy that the Sun is a perpetual energy machine based on ignorance about solar physics, jeffreyw !
The Sun is powered by fusion. That fusion will eventually stop.

The video is jeffreyw obsessing about the assumption of local thermal equilibrium in the Wikipedia article Stellar structure

Last edited by Reality Check; 19th January 2015 at 04:05 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 04:10 PM   #224
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,793
Thumbs down Stellar Classification Issues are ignored for a rant about Wikipedia

Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
In this video, jeffreyw, obsesses about the fact that Wikipedia is a collaborative effort and that citations to the scientific literature is expected in scientific articles !
Stellar classification has many changes as authors correct mistakes and clarify matters.
The first minutes are spent reading an old version of a Stellar classification table! This is the Harvard spectral classification table which was changed to contain only the main spectral types, i.e. the author removed the modern spectral types L, T, and Y after noting that descriptions of the other modern types would be needed: "Also let's keep the table to the 7 main classes, or we would also need to include C, WR, S, and others as well)"

Last edited by Reality Check; 19th January 2015 at 04:26 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 04:33 PM   #225
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,793
Thumbs down Ignorance about Martin Gardner and ‘Science, Good, Bad and Bogus’

Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
We should all read Martin Gardner’s ‘Science, Good, Bad and Bogus’,
We should all know (unlike jeffreyw) that Martin Gardner was not an astronomer and his opinion was as a mathematician.
We all know the ignorance in citing a popular science book written in 1989 (26 years ago) due to the fact that science progresses! In 1989 there could be an excuse from not knowing about the evidence for black holes. Today there is little excuse.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 04:43 PM   #226
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,793
Epsilon Eridani

Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
Since the nebular hypothesis and 1950's stellar evolution models are obsolete, it is required to place appropriately stars in all stages of evolution.
Since that is a lie about the nebular hypothesis being obsolete and a fantasy about stellar evolution models stopping in the 1950's, jeffreyw, we do not really have to view a crank video about Epsilon Eridani !
  • There is a fantasy about the Sun becoming an orange dwarf - the Sun will become a red giant and then a white dwarf.
  • Reads out the scientific definition oaf a K-Type main-sequence star and tells people to ignore much of it!
  • Repeat of the fantasy that planets are old stars.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 04:59 PM   #227
MG1962
Guest
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 17,252
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
Since that is a lie about the nebular hypothesis being obsolete and a fantasy about stellar evolution models stopping in the 1950's, jeffreyw, we do not really have to view a crank video about Epsilon Eridani !
  • There is a fantasy about the Sun becoming an orange dwarf - the Sun will become a red giant and then a white dwarf.
  • Reads out the scientific definition oaf a K-Type main-sequence star and tells people to ignore much of it!
  • Repeat of the fantasy that planets are old stars.
I really think you are wasting your time, and I think any lurkers following along in this thread have seen the true nature of the theory he has proposed. Shame really, I enjoy a good astronomy based discussion
MG1962 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 05:23 PM   #228
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,793
Originally Posted by MG1962 View Post
I really think you are wasting your time, ...
I do know that I am wasting my time trying to educate jeffreyw since his track record on other places is basically advertising his crank videos without trying to address the ignorance shown in them. The main purpose of pointing out the ignorance is that anyone who finds his videos will probably find this forum also and so be informed about how bad they are.

Of course if someone were to Google "stellar metamorphosis", the first result is Stellar metamorphosis - RationalWiki
Quote:
Stellar metamorphosis is a fringe hypothesis for star evolution. It is a crank theory that purports to explain what happens as a star cools and combines its elements into molecular compounds. It holds that the root assumption of astrophysics, namely, that stars and planets are mutually exclusive, is incorrect. Stellar metamorphosis holds that stars and planets are the same objects only in different stages of evolution. Therefore planet formation is stellar evolution itself as they are the exact same process.
RationalWiki is rather scathing abut Jeffrey Wolynski
Quote:
Jeffrey J. Wolynski is an obscure, scarcely known physics crank. Despite his exaggerated claims, he's virtually unknown to mainstream physics, and the only people who take him seriously are other wannabe physicists, conspiracy theorists, UFO nuts, Nibiru believers, Electric Universe and the alternative energy proponents.

Last edited by Reality Check; 19th January 2015 at 05:31 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 05:25 PM   #229
jeffreyw
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 275
Red Dwarf Stages of Stellar Evolution

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=npXo...ature=youtu.be

In this video I overview where red dwarfs sit in modern stellar evolution models, not the models of the 1950's where stars are proposed as unreal nuclear reactors, but as massive electrochemical/thermochemical events.

The energy needed to undergo the exothermic reactions is provided largely by pre-existing heat from initial formation, as well as gravitational potential energy. Those who understand chemistry it should be made apparent that non-spontaneous reactions required to form large amounts of molecules was present when the Earth was a much younger star.

This meaning of course Earth itself experienced many earlier stages of star evolution, and actually existed for very long periods of time as a plasmatic/gaseous object, outside the bounds of current geophysical sciences.

This also meaning that geophysics is officially tied intimately to astrophysics, as Earth itself is a star at the very end of its life, not given life as a metabolic process but of a life hosting star, or a star which possesses a magnetic field (signaling internal movement).
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum.

A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive.

http://vixra.org/abs/1205.0107

Last edited by jeffreyw; 19th January 2015 at 05:29 PM. Reason: additional statements
jeffreyw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 05:32 PM   #230
jeffreyw
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Cocoa Beach, FL
Posts: 275
emails

I have yet to receive any emails concerning help with the development of this incredible discovery.
__________________
Planets are not formed from disks, that would be in violation of the conservation of angular momentum.

A "planet" is just an ancient star. They were never mutually exclusive.

http://vixra.org/abs/1205.0107
jeffreyw is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 05:34 PM   #231
Giordano
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 12,790
Again, it is all advertising to increase the visibility of his videos, under the assumption that there is no such thing as "bad" publicity. Are people allowed to advertise here in such a blatant way even if they are not making money directly from a product?
Giordano is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 05:38 PM   #232
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,793
No one would waste their time emailing

Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
I have yet to receive any emails concerning help with the development of this incredible discovery.
Why would anyone waste their time emailing you about a bunch of obscure, non-science crank videos, jeffreyw?
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 19th January 2015, 05:50 PM   #233
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,793
Thumbs down The delusion that solar physics stopped in the 1950's

Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
In this video I overview where red dwarfs sit in modern stellar evolution models, not the models of the 1950's where stars are proposed as unreal nuclear reactors, but as massive electrochemical/thermochemical events. ...snipped more gibberish...
Oh dear - the ignorance in "unreal nuclear reactors", jeffreyw, should be obvious to you !
Nuclear reactors are fission devices. Stars are powered by fusion. There is nothing "unreal" about fusion. That is how hydrogen bombs work. There are devices no that do fusion (just not sustained long enough yet for practical power generation).

One more time with the delusion that solar physics stopped in the 1950's!

More ignorance - that stars could be powered by "electrochemical/thermochemical" means was disposed of over a century ago by actual calculations of how long actual burning of material or release of gravitational potential energy could keep the Sun alive - the maximum was 100 million years. Also see ENERGY SOURCES FOR STARS

And even more ignorance - that there are "modern stellar evolution models" that have "electrochemical/thermochemical" stars. Modern stellar evolution models use the observations of real stars to show that they are powered by fusion.

Last edited by Reality Check; 19th January 2015 at 05:52 PM.
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2015, 03:04 AM   #234
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,024
Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
I have yet to receive any emails concerning help with the development of this incredible discovery.
What discovery? So far we have heard nothing but ignorant claims at odds with the real world.
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2015, 05:50 AM   #235
turingtest
Mistral, mistral wind...
 
turingtest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,622
Originally Posted by Giordano View Post
Again, it is all advertising to increase the visibility of his videos, under the assumption that there is no such thing as "bad" publicity. Are people allowed to advertise here in such a blatant way even if they are not making money directly from a product?
Since this is a forum for discussion- something Jeffrey seems to be deliberately avoiding- I would say his posts are coming pretty close to the definition of "spamming." Of course, if he's penalized in any way for it, he will see that as persecution and censorship, and, by his reasoning, more evidence that he's right.

Not that it matters- cranks are gonna crank, it's just what they do.
__________________
I'm tired of the bombs, tired of the bullets, tired of the crazies on TV;
I'm the aviator, a dream's a dream whatever it seems
Deep Purple- "The Aviator"

Life was a short shelf that came with bookends- Stephen King
turingtest is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2015, 07:43 AM   #236
Lennart Hyland
Muse
 
Lennart Hyland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Sweden
Posts: 547
Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
I have yet to receive any emails concerning help with the development of this incredible discovery.
Hey! Almost every post in here is concerning your "discovery" but you still dont want to discuss it.
__________________
L.H 1919 - 1993 R.I.P

Unfortunately the 911truth movement web site does not allow any opinions contrary to their own, or I would have presented my views. David Scott - CTBUH Chairman
Lennart Hyland is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2015, 03:29 PM   #237
Kid Eager
Philosopher
 
Kid Eager's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 6,138
Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
I have yet to receive any emails concerning help with the development of this incredible discovery.
A few small observations regarding this statement:

1. It shows an appalling lack of situational awareness. The "why" exists in the posts in this thread. Help doesn't exist for one who can't listen.

2. You say "emails", but what about the many *posts* that have attempted to help clarify your hypothesis?

3. Does your use of the term "help" include pointing out flaws in the hypothesis, or is it only "help" when the commentary supports your hypothesis?

4. What "development" is required?

5. The phrase "incredible discovery" is inappropriate to the assertions being made. "Incredible hypothesis" is an accurate description.
__________________
What do Narwhals, Magnets and Apollo 13 have in common? Think about it....
Kid Eager is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2015, 04:22 PM   #238
ben m
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,387
Originally Posted by jeffreyw View Post
I have yet to receive any emails concerning help with the development of this incredible discovery.
Let's play an imagination game, Jeffrey.

Imagine, hypothetically, that a ill-informed amateur scientist---let's call him Bob---made what he thinks is an incredible discovery. Suppose that this idea is, in actual truth, a gigantic stupid mistake. Suppose that Bob posts his idea on the Internet.

a) What sort of replies will people make to Bob's Internet posts?
b) Will Bob receive emails offering to "help" with the "development"?

Bob notices that his theory is still unpopular. What does he do next?

Suppose (still with me?) that Bob blames the theory's unpopularity on everyone else. Everyone is stupid and blinker-wearing and there's a conspiracy, he thinks, so he continues posting his giant-mistake and getting angrier and angrier. Is that a good outcome for Bob? Did Bob's stubbornness help the world in any way?

Contrariwise, suppose (hope this isn't too confusing) that Bob listens to criticism, studies more carefully, and understands the mistakes people pointed out in his theory. He starts over and does something useful instead---maybe learning physics and writing better theories, but maybe some painting or sports or childcare or something different. Is that a good outcome for Bob? Did Bob's lack of stubbornness help the world in any way?
ben m is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2015, 05:03 PM   #239
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 19,793
Jeffrey Wolynski has a wiki page that describes the fantasy clearly without people wasting their time looking at his YouTube videos.
For example "the Earth itself is a black dwarf star" is a totally ignorant assertion:
* Black dwarf stars would be made of electron-degenerate matter. The Earth is mad up of mostly rock !
* Black dwarf stars would have masses of white dwarf stars. The estimated masses of known white dwarf stars are between 0.17 and 1.33 solar masses. This is at least 56,610 Earth masses !
Reality Check is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 20th January 2015, 09:48 PM   #240
Gord_in_Toronto
Penultimate Amazing
 
Gord_in_Toronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 18,647
Originally Posted by ben m View Post
Let's play an imagination game, Jeffrey.

Imagine, hypothetically, that a ill-informed amateur scientist---let's call him Bob---made what he thinks is an incredible discovery. Suppose that this idea is, in actual truth, a gigantic stupid mistake. Suppose that Bob posts his idea on the Internet.

a) What sort of replies will people make to Bob's Internet posts?
b) Will Bob receive emails offering to "help" with the "development"?

Bob notices that his theory is still unpopular. What does he do next?

Suppose (still with me?) that Bob blames the theory's unpopularity on everyone else. Everyone is stupid and blinker-wearing and there's a conspiracy, he thinks, so he continues posting his giant-mistake and getting angrier and angrier. Is that a good outcome for Bob? Did Bob's stubbornness help the world in any way?

Contrariwise, suppose (hope this isn't too confusing) that Bob listens to criticism, studies more carefully, and understands the mistakes people pointed out in his theory. He starts over and does something useful instead---maybe learning physics and writing better theories, but maybe some painting or sports or childcare or something different. Is that a good outcome for Bob? Did Bob's lack of stubbornness help the world in any way?
We are all Bob.
__________________
"Reality is what's left when you cease to believe." Philip K. Dick
Gord_in_Toronto is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:39 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.