• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

JEROME - Black holes do not exist

JEROME DA GNOME said:
Artist renderings and suppositions.

Neither are evidence.
Click to expand...

So observation of stars orbiting a point very quickly is not 'evidence' that there is something there.

Is this because it is being observed through a telescope instead of the naked eye? Or because it is being observed by people other than you?
 
QED as it applies to Jerome, “Questions Eternally Disregarded”; it has been tested and confirmed to equal precision.
 
JEROME DA GNOME said:
I am required to define the evidence that will force me to believe as the True Believers do!
Click to expand...
Don't be silly.

You are not required to do anything.

However, it would be nice if you could actually spend a few minutes writing up the criteria you yourself use to evaluate whether something presented is "evidence" or not ...

But wait!

Do I understand your post to mean that if you were to actually 'define evidence', then you'd end up agreeing that, contrary to what you have spend so many posts saying, you have been presented a great deal of 'evidence'?

Dude, it doesn't matter if you do admit that ... remember that not once have you committed to logical consistency ...
 
JEROME DA GNOME said:
Only if you assume that gravity is the only force which can create such an observation.
Click to expand...
Ah, wonderful! :D

See everyone! I've been saying all along that JdG doesn't care a jot about logical consistency!!

Dude, in case you don't already know, 'gravity' cannot create any observations (only photons, or electromagnetic radiation, can).
 
Assumption of gravity, “something” must be gravity? If you can explain that something, please go ahead we are all ears (or eyes in this case).
 
DeiRenDopa said:
Ah, wonderful! :D

See everyone! I've been saying all along that JdG doesn't care a jot about logical consistency!!

Dude, in case you don't already know, 'gravity' cannot create any observations (only photons, or electromagnetic radiation, can).
Click to expand...

nutri_facts.jpg
 
JEROME DA GNOME said:
[qimg]http://fstdt.com/winace/pics/nutri_facts.jpg[/qimg]
Click to expand...
Way cool, JdG, way cool! :D

Does that come with a copyright? Or can I use it anytime I like too?

ETA: I guess you've seen that I've already copied one of your posts, right?
Sophistry without answering a direct question.

Evidence of obfuscation noted.

:gnome:
Click to expand...
Kinda fits in response to this post of yours too, don't you think?
 
Last edited:
Just in case you forgot.

My question was.


The Man said:
What makes you believe that that your answer is not make-believe?
Click to expand...


And let’s not forget Upchurch’s


Upchurch said:
So, you have seen no evidence of black holes or gravity, but you accept electromagnetic forces?

What evidence was presented to you for electromagnetic forces that you found sufficent?
Click to expand...

Or do you just want to make-believe they were not asked?
 
The Man said:
What makes you believe that that your answer is not make-believe?
Click to expand...

Nothing, I was asked for an alternative. I was not asked what was the correct answer.


You do understand the difference, yes?



ETA: Unchurch's questions were Straw-men.
 
Last edited:
Upchurch said:
So....you accept gravity and reject electromagnetism?
Click to expand...
Upchurch, you are simply not paying attention .... logical consistency is not of any importance to JdD ...

So he both accepts and rejects gravity, and (or is it but? I get confused) both accepts and rejects electromagnetism ... you know the White Queen and her breakfast? (or was it the purple king with a polka dot tie?) Well, JdG can believe 6i logically inconsistent things in a single heartbeat, both before, during, and after breakfast! :p
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom