How many people do you know who killed themselves during the Covid hoax during 2020?

[-=SS=-]

So I guess proteins and other molecules aren't real either? We haven't directly observed them. Guess we just have to throw out the entire field of chemistry

You can run physical tests in a laboratory to get a purified sample, whether of a protein or compound. You can centrifuge, you can run spectroscopy, and many other methods to reduce down the thing you are looking at.

Where this process breaks down is at the Nano scale (the domain of viruses) and smaller, and at the other end (galactic/universal). You can't physically observe at the Nano scale except under electron microscopy which produces static, grainy imagery, and beyond that we can't see at all.

My overriding contention, at either end of the scale, is that we are divorced from reality because we can't observe or interact with these scales except through an abstract mathematical interpolation. And I believe the interpolation is wrong and demonstrably so.

For instance, we've never directly observed an electron, yet its existence is fundamental to the structure of atoms and molecules. We understand electron configuration and behavior through the effects they have, such as light emission in spectroscopy or electron density maps in crystallography.

The particle concept structure itself is rooted back in Greek philosophical thinking and while it is useful as a basis for our understanding of the physical world, it might not be accurate at all. Again we resort to mathematical descriptions through quantum physics, based around preconceived notions, but at the end of the day we have no idea what is really going on at the atomic scale and smaller.

Science exists in a particular paradigm that is centred around atomistic philosophy and gravitational/relativistic thinking. It permeates all our thinking. I do not dispute basic mechanical physics, elemental chemistry, and basic biological physiology, but at the end of the day anything beyond those simple parameters is up for debate quite frankly because it all falls outside the scope of what we can accurately deduce without resorting to mathematical speculation.

Why can't you concede this? You speak with such authority as if all these things beyond our scope are true, simply because that is where science is now and doesn't know any better, despite the fact they are all theories. You don't know any more than the scientists know that these things are true. All I'm saying is I believe they are in error and that the weight of those errors continues to grow as they cling to dogma (as you do too obviously).

You defend these things with the zeal of an ardent religious believer, as many others do. Face the truth, you don't know and your ego refuses to allow anyone to challenge that position.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

Telescopy and emissions analysis *are* physical tests

Physicists already know that most particles aren't actually 'particles' but are some sort of wave structure, the math bears that out and so do observations but I guess all of this is news to you?

I have already said that I don't know whether things such as dark matter exist but maybe you missed that. Our observations do provide confirmation of many theories and further observation provides new information which could modify our understanding in numerous different ways

Your stance appears to be that all observations that you don't understand the evidence for are wrong, which you repeat with religious zeal along with your misunderstandings of incredibly basic concepts which seems to drive your entire view of scientific inquiry and the scientific process

 

[-=SS=-]

Telescopy and emissions analysis *are* physical tests

No they aren't. What are you talking about. Physical tests involve being physically involved with the thing under examination. Merely looking at data coming from light years away is the very opposite of being physically involved, there is no testing to speak of, it is interpretation and interpolation of incoming information, it is strictly a one-way affair.

Testing something physically is a two-way process, because you are there. You can't do that with things light years away. That is observation, not testing.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

No they aren't. What are you talking about. Physical tests involve being physically involved with the thing under examination. Merely looking at data coming from light years away is the very opposite of being physically involved, there is no testing to speak of, it is interpretation and interpolation of incoming information, it is strictly a one-way affair.

Testing something physically is a two-way process, because you are there. You can't do that with things light years away. That is observation, not testing.

The methods used in telescopy and emissions analysis, though indirect, are indeed rooted in rigorous scientific testing and experimentation that takes place right here on Earth.

The science behind emissions analysis in astronomy is fundamentally based on spectroscopy, a technique used across many areas of science, including chemistry and physics. In spectroscopy, scientists study the light emitted or absorbed by substances. Each element on the periodic table emits light at specific wavelengths when excited (e.g., by heating), producing a unique spectral fingerprint. These fingerprints are catalogued through extensive laboratory experiments where conditions are controlled, and the emissions of various elements and molecules are directly observed and measured.

In the lab, scientists can excite atoms and molecules and observe their spectral lines, which serve as benchmarks. For instance, when hydrogen gas is excited, it emits light at particular wavelengths, which appear as distinct lines in a spectrum. These lines are identified in the laboratory to an extremely high degree of precision. This data then serves as a reference for identifying elements found in celestial bodies.

When astronomers capture light from stars, galaxies, or other celestial objects using telescopes, they analyze this light by splitting it into its spectrum. They compare the observed spectral lines with those previously catalogued from laboratory experiments. By matching the lines, astronomers can determine the composition, temperature, density, and motion of the object emitting the light, despite being light-years away.

While it's true that astronomers cannot physically touch or alter distant stars or galaxies, telescopy combined with spectroscopy enables a form of interaction. By observing how light interacts with matter (both emitting and absorbing), and comparing these observations with known laboratory data, scientists are conducting a form of remote testing. This method relies on the fundamental principles of physics, which are universal and do not change with distance.

Interpretation is indeed a significant component of astronomical research, but it's supported by robust, repeatable scientific methods. These interpretations are continually tested against new observations and technological advancements. For example, the redshift of galaxies was a prediction tested and confirmed by observing the shift in spectral lines compared to what is seen in laboratory conditions, leading to the understanding of the expanding universe.

While physical presence or manipulation isn't possible with celestial objects, the methods employed in astronomy are based on direct, rigorous testing carried out in laboratories here on Earth. This testing establishes a foundation that makes remote observational sciences like astronomy both reliable and scientifically rigorous.

If you think you have better methods or theories, I encourage you to get involved with your local physics department.

 

[-=SS=-]

The methods used in telescopy and emissions analysis, though indirect, are indeed rooted in rigorous scientific testing and experimentation that takes place right here on Earth.

That's not the point. You think it is rigorous and valid, but that's your belief about it. You (finally) acknowledge the indirectness of it, which is the whole damn point. It is not physical testing because we can't go there and see for ourselves, or recreate such things to run experiments on. It is all indirect, interpolation and interpretation, through a mathematical lens.

You can believe what you wish. I believe their interpretation and interpolation is wrong.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

Dude most of science is indirect, how do you not understand this? This is what I meant by you don't understand fundamentals which every undergraduate recreates in their class labs. Almost all of what we test in physics and chemistry aren't directly visible to us due to the scales involved but we still get results like advances in sensors and medicine because we understand what the signals mean based on decades and centuries of repeatable experiments. If your view were correct we wouldn't have any progress whatsoever, which is blatantly not true.

 

[-=SS=-]

Dude most of science is indirect, how do you not understand this? Almost all of what we test in physics and chemistry aren't directly visible to us due to the scales

You're deliberately misrepresenting my position.

I already stated about 'mechanical physics, elemental chemistry', that you can physically test these domains to get accurate definitions. Yes, you can't directly see the atomic structures of elements in chemical compounds, but you can physically interact with them in order to get a human scale definition. We can get a 100% pure sample of an element or compound, and run experiments against other accurately defined elements. That is elemental chemistry.

It doesn't matter if we can't see the atomic scale in elemental chemistry. It is not applicable to our scale. When it comes to astrophysics, we can't physically test these things or recreate them at our human scale, we can only observe them hazily at a distance and through the lens of mathematical interpolation. It is not the same at all.

 

[someguyontheinternet]

Astrophysics uses the same principles as chemistry and physics at smaller scales, if one doesn't work neither does the other

The fundamental connection between chemistry, biochemistry, and astrophysics lies in their reliance on basic principles of physics, particularly those related to electromagnetic interactions and the behavior of atoms and molecules. These principles are universally applicable, whether we are studying processes on Earth or phenomena occurring light-years away in space.

Both chemistry and astrophysics make extensive use of the electromagnetic spectrum, though for different applications. In chemistry, spectroscopy involves analyzing the interaction of electromagnetic radiation (light) with matter. This technique allows chemists to determine the composition, structure, and properties of molecules based on how they emit, absorb, or scatter light. Similarly, in astrophysics, the analysis of light from celestial bodies (also using spectroscopy) helps in identifying the chemical composition, temperature, and movement of stars and galaxies.

Quantum mechanics underpins both fields extensively. It describes how particles like electrons behave within atoms, a principle crucial for understanding chemical bonding and reactions in chemistry and biochemistry. In astrophysics, quantum mechanics explains the behavior of atomic and subatomic particles under extreme conditions, such as those found in stars and around black holes.

Conservation of energy, momentum, and mass are foundational in all physical sciences. These laws ensure that in any chemical reaction on Earth, and in any transformation occurring in space, the total amount of mass-energy remains constant, though forms may change. These laws allow scientists to predict the outcomes of reactions and interactions accurately, regardless of the scale at which they occur.

If the principles that apply to chemistry and biochemistry were flawed when applied at the scale of astrophysics, it would imply a fundamental error in our understanding of physics itself. Since these principles are derived from the same set of laws and tested in a variety of conditions, their successful application in astrophysics not only reinforces their validity but also enhances our confidence in their universal applicability.

Physical laws are not confined to specific conditions or scales. The laws governing the behavior of particles and forces in a lab are the same laws that govern the stars and galaxies. This universality is a cornerstone of physics and allows for the coherent understanding of the universe from subatomic particles to massive celestial bodies.

 

[MedicinalUser247]

Everythings relative nothing is absolute.

 

[helpingout]

It’s amazing that people will argue with a buffoon. A clown for the court.
You’re oppositionally opposed to anything that he is told by an institution, government, or any trusted source of information because he believes his trust is ill founded.

Therefore the jab is causing the death rates and not the completely documented pandemic of Covid illness.
The illness is fake because he does not trust the test.
He wants people to have killed themselves because they had to isolate because that would justify his not wanting to isolate.

The clearest evidence of his moronic perspectives is that he and twenty of his friends refused to get the vaccine and 15 of them died which he attributed to a government infiltration of his friend network.

He would love to believe that he is important.
He would love to believe there was a plot against his lockdown violations.
He would love to believe his friends died at the hands of government agents.
He would prefer to believe the sickness was caused by 5g.
He would prefer to believe the lockdown was unnecessary because he didn’t want to lockdown.
He believes that there are nanometals, forever chemicals, and other real horrors because scientists have detected them, but when convenient he denies the scientific observations of things that disturb his worldview that scientifc progress is a falsehood created by the state as a means of control.
So the government wants to kill him because he refuses to be controlled.
He believes everyone should have just taken vitamin c and d and everything would have been fine because he wants to believe that there is no viral infection and that our disease event was both a unstoppable bioweapon to conduct depopulation but also a complete hoax whose effects would have been mitigated with vit c and d and a dewormer for dogs. So the virus is both fake and a diabolical weapon of depopulation except when the 5g is a convenient culprit.

This is classical oppositional defiance.

His gun makes him free.
The mask enslaves him.
His friends all died because they were not vaxxed.

He is a sad and confused individual who wishes he understood the world so instead of using observational analysis and critical thinking he just pretends that being oppositional to any stated point is true intelligence.

He is enslaved to the idea that he is enslaved

He refuses to believe that his and his friends stupidity led to seventy five percent of his friend group being unalive.

Everyone I know got the jab and is still living.

I’m sorry for your friends died dude.
maybe it’s because you all ignored the health directives which protected me and my family.

Good luck in life.

 

[smokeymcpot42088]

I believe the violence to be a reflection of the amount of fear mongering, pressure, actual threats going on in the US perhaps moreso than the guys.

The shootings are a symptom of a larger societal malfunctions/problems/inequalities etc etc

 

[smokeymcpot42088]

Astrophysics uses the same principles as chemistry and physics at smaller scales, if one doesn't work neither does the other

The fundamental connection between chemistry, biochemistry, and astrophysics lies in their reliance on basic principles of physics, particularly those related to electromagnetic interactions and the behavior of atoms and molecules. These principles are universally applicable, whether we are studying processes on Earth or phenomena occurring light-years away in space.

Both chemistry and astrophysics make extensive use of the electromagnetic spectrum, though for different applications. In chemistry, spectroscopy involves analyzing the interaction of electromagnetic radiation (light) with matter. This technique allows chemists to determine the composition, structure, and properties of molecules based on how they emit, absorb, or scatter light. Similarly, in astrophysics, the analysis of light from celestial bodies (also using spectroscopy) helps in identifying the chemical composition, temperature, and movement of stars and galaxies.

Quantum mechanics underpins both fields extensively. It describes how particles like electrons behave within atoms, a principle crucial for understanding chemical bonding and reactions in chemistry and biochemistry. In astrophysics, quantum mechanics explains the behavior of atomic and subatomic particles under extreme conditions, such as those found in stars and around black holes.

Conservation of energy, momentum, and mass are foundational in all physical sciences. These laws ensure that in any chemical reaction on Earth, and in any transformation occurring in space, the total amount of mass-energy remains constant, though forms may change. These laws allow scientists to predict the outcomes of reactions and interactions accurately, regardless of the scale at which they occur.

If the principles that apply to chemistry and biochemistry were flawed when applied at the scale of astrophysics, it would imply a fundamental error in our understanding of physics itself. Since these principles are derived from the same set of laws and tested in a variety of conditions, their successful application in astrophysics not only reinforces their validity but also enhances our confidence in their universal applicability.

Physical laws are not confined to specific conditions or scales. The laws governing the behavior of particles and forces in a lab are the same laws that govern the stars and galaxies. This universality is a cornerstone of physics and allows for the coherent understanding of the universe from subatomic particles to massive celestial bodies.

Too Stupid Didn't Understand. You need not reply. You never hear anyone interrupt and announce that do you? So I did.
Too Long Didn't Read = Read first two sentences of your insane manifesto and wont continue or ^^^ that first one^^. Apply contextually.

Sorry for the interruption from the kids table lol.