Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
10-04-2014, 03:32 PM (This post was last modified: 10-04-2014 09:16 PM by WindyCityJazz.)
Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
Edit: Nevermind, I found what I was looking for after some more searching. Apparently Crothers is merely a crackpot, and part of a group of crackpots that believe in some pseudo-science called the Electric Universe theory. He uses the rejection of his claims by the scientific community as a defense of "They won't give me any acknowledgement because my claims go against the theories of people like Hawking and Einstein! They know that I'm actually right! They just don't want to admit it!" Sadly, there are people who fall for this bullshit, like the guy who tried to use Crothers' arguments as a defense against me. Glad I found out who he was though. Leaves me with another weapon in my arsenal when confronted with bogus scientific claims.

“Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool.” - Mark Twain
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2014, 09:45 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(10-04-2014 03:32 PM)WindyCityJazz Wrote:  Edit: Nevermind, I found what I was looking for after some more searching. Apparently Crothers is merely a crackpot, and part of a group of crackpots that believe in some pseudo-science called the Electric Universe theory. He uses the rejection of his claims by the scientific community as a defense of "They won't give me any acknowledgement because my claims go against the theories of people like Hawking and Einstein! They know that I'm actually right! They just don't want to admit it!" Sadly, there are people who fall for this bullshit, like the guy who tried to use Crothers' arguments as a defense against me. Glad I found out who he was though. Leaves me with another weapon in my arsenal when confronted with bogus scientific claims.

And your scientific argument is precisely what? Pick any of his arguments and provide your own explanation as to why you think he is wrong. Try these for starters:

THE RISE AND FALL OF BLACK HOLES AND BIG BANGS
http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-...bangs.html

Simple proof that black holes have no basis in General Relativity
http://viXra.org/abs/1405.0287

The Parallax Effect on Short Hair
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXF098w48fo
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-06-2014, 09:53 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(29-06-2014 09:45 AM)noblackhole Wrote:  
(10-04-2014 03:32 PM)WindyCityJazz Wrote:  Edit: Nevermind, I found what I was looking for after some more searching. Apparently Crothers is merely a crackpot, and part of a group of crackpots that believe in some pseudo-science called the Electric Universe theory. He uses the rejection of his claims by the scientific community as a defense of "They won't give me any acknowledgement because my claims go against the theories of people like Hawking and Einstein! They know that I'm actually right! They just don't want to admit it!" Sadly, there are people who fall for this bullshit, like the guy who tried to use Crothers' arguments as a defense against me. Glad I found out who he was though. Leaves me with another weapon in my arsenal when confronted with bogus scientific claims.

And your scientific argument is precisely what? Pick any of his arguments and provide your own explanation as to why you think he is wrong. Try these for starters:

THE RISE AND FALL OF BLACK HOLES AND BIG BANGS
http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-...bangs.html

Simple proof that black holes have no basis in General Relativity
http://viXra.org/abs/1405.0287

The Parallax Effect on Short Hair
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXF098w48fo

Hey Bucky another crackpot for your list.

(31-07-2014 04:37 PM)Luminon Wrote:  America is full of guns, but they're useless, because nobody has the courage to shoot an IRS agent in self-defense
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Revenant77x's post
29-06-2014, 09:57 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(29-06-2014 09:53 AM)Revenant77x Wrote:  
(29-06-2014 09:45 AM)noblackhole Wrote:  And your scientific argument is precisely what? Pick any of his arguments and provide your own explanation as to why you think he is wrong. Try these for starters:

THE RISE AND FALL OF BLACK HOLES AND BIG BANGS
http://www.principia-scientific.org/the-...bangs.html

Simple proof that black holes have no basis in General Relativity
http://viXra.org/abs/1405.0287

The Parallax Effect on Short Hair
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nXF098w48fo

Hey Bucky another crackpot for your list.

This is gonna keep me BUSY. Weeping

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein God has a plan for us. Please stop screwing it up with your prayers.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 4 users Like Bucky Ball's post
29-06-2014, 10:14 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
[Image: pot.png]
[Image: crack1.jpg]
[Image: prague-pot.jpg]

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 8 users Like DLJ's post
01-10-2014, 08:09 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
Well scientists you have a big bang coming! Why do you attack Crothers in the way that you have above? Did you read, and more importantly understand what he has written? Obviously not. As such you are in no position to say anything, you cannot possibly make any judgement.

Just to get you started I would like one of you to reply to the question "what exactly do you understand by Einstein's psuedo-tensor?" Once someone has at least demonstrated some knowledge of GR, perhaps you can discuss how it operates with the real tensor quantities specified by Einstein, and the results you get from these operations.

This forum says it is for thinking Aetheists, well lets have some real thought and not ad-hominem attacks without any basis at all, or pictures which are at least in the context of the question under discussion. The above are all banned by your own forum rules, perhaps you did not read them!

Crothers appears to me to be a very able mathematician who has followed the content of the GR papers fully, checking every line, and has found a number of errors in the MATHEMATICS. This is very embarressing for all the others of us who have assumed that the paper had been checked by someone else and found correct! The errors entirely invalidate the theory as expounded by Einstein, because if the errors are corrected somehow the therory will no longer give the results which Einstein produced and from which the rest of modern astronomy follows. This is all carefully and correctly explained in fairly simple terms in the cited Crothers papers, and to date no one has produced any evidence at all that his papers contain any error, so following the scientific process review by a great many people has validated his claims. If you can prove him incorrect you will leap to fame so it is worth your while to check carefully!Blink
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
01-10-2014, 08:23 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
Welcome to the forum, David.

You should do well here.

Consider Stone.D Laughat Yer not messing with me, are yer?

(01-10-2014 08:09 AM)David Stone Wrote:  ...
The above are all banned by your own forum rules, perhaps you did not read them!
...

A vaguely remember reading them while I re-wrote them. I must have missed the bit about damaged earthenware.

Cool

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
01-10-2014, 08:37 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(01-10-2014 08:09 AM)David Stone Wrote:  Well scientists you have a big bang coming! Why do you attack Crothers in the way that you have above? Did you read, and more importantly understand what he has written? Obviously not. As such you are in no position to say anything, you cannot possibly make any judgement.

Just to get you started I would like one of you to reply to the question "what exactly do you understand by Einstein's psuedo-tensor?" Once someone has at least demonstrated some knowledge of GR, perhaps you can discuss how it operates with the real tensor quantities specified by Einstein, and the results you get from these operations.

This forum says it is for thinking Aetheists, well lets have some real thought and not ad-hominem attacks without any basis at all, or pictures which are at least in the context of the question under discussion. The above are all banned by your own forum rules, perhaps you did not read them!

Crothers appears to me to be a very able mathematician who has followed the content of the GR papers fully, checking every line, and has found a number of errors in the MATHEMATICS. This is very embarressing for all the others of us who have assumed that the paper had been checked by someone else and found correct! The errors entirely invalidate the theory as expounded by Einstein, because if the errors are corrected somehow the therory will no longer give the results which Einstein produced and from which the rest of modern astronomy follows. This is all carefully and correctly explained in fairly simple terms in the cited Crothers papers, and to date no one has produced any evidence at all that his papers contain any error, so following the scientific process review by a great many people has validated his claims. If you can prove him incorrect you will leap to fame so it is worth your while to check carefully!Blink

"pseudo"

Proving crackpots wrong is no path to fame, but here you go.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 7 users Like Chas's post
01-10-2014, 10:14 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(01-10-2014 08:37 AM)Chas Wrote:  "pseudo"

Since you mention it...

(01-10-2014 08:09 AM)David Stone Wrote:  psuedo
Aetheists
lets
embarressing
therory
...
a number of errors Laughat

Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes DLJ's post
01-10-2014, 11:05 AM
RE: Stephen Crothers And The Rejection Of The Big Bang Theory
(01-10-2014 08:09 AM)David Stone Wrote:  Well scientists you have a big bang coming! Why do you attack Crothers in the way that you have above? Did you read, and more importantly understand what he has written? Obviously not. As such you are in no position to say anything, you cannot possibly make any judgement.

Just to get you started I would like one of you to reply to the question "what exactly do you understand by Einstein's psuedo-tensor?" Once someone has at least demonstrated some knowledge of GR, perhaps you can discuss how it operates with the real tensor quantities specified by Einstein, and the results you get from these operations.

This forum says it is for thinking Aetheists, well lets have some real thought and not ad-hominem attacks without any basis at all, or pictures which are at least in the context of the question under discussion. The above are all banned by your own forum rules, perhaps you did not read them!

Crothers appears to me to be a very able mathematician who has followed the content of the GR papers fully, checking every line, and has found a number of errors in the MATHEMATICS. This is very embarressing for all the others of us who have assumed that the paper had been checked by someone else and found correct! The errors entirely invalidate the theory as expounded by Einstein, because if the errors are corrected somehow the therory will no longer give the results which Einstein produced and from which the rest of modern astronomy follows. This is all carefully and correctly explained in fairly simple terms in the cited Crothers papers, and to date no one has produced any evidence at all that his papers contain any error, so following the scientific process review by a great many people has validated his claims. If you can prove him incorrect you will leap to fame so it is worth your while to check carefully!Blink

Oh, good, tryhard persecution complex pseudoscience.

How compelling.

I'm going to ask you a very simple question: if Crothers is so correct, why does no one take him seriously? Why is there no peer-reviewed analysis of his work? Why do competent experts ignore him?

Remember, "lol conspiracy" is not an answer.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes cjlr's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: