Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Fred Levine who wrote (70617)	9/23/2003 4:54:11 AM
From: zonder	Respond to of 70976

SI is not quite the first thing on my mind these days, and I was not planning on writing to anyone, but for you, I will make an exception. I do not "defend murder". Quite the contrary, I oppose an invasion that has cost thousands of civilian lives already, not to mention unnecessary deaths among the military of both sides. That you should go to this length, to sling this little mud of accusing me of "defending murder" shows just how pathetic your position is, just how you are clutching at straws, and just how well you must be aware that your "argument" does not have a leg to stand on, in fact, that you don't even have an argument except for "Saddam killed people so it's good we invaded". Any toddler can make that statement. A man of your age should be able to think in terms of the myriad ways of dealing with a situation, think of consequences of each, and come up with a better one to defend. I guess not. As for physics etc - Find the "argument" and let's see what you are referring to.

To: Fred Levine who wrote (70617)	9/23/2003 10:39:11 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 70976

Here's your "physicist" -g- Message 18465864 Click on past posts to read & remember the exchange. I watched you on the, I think, thermodynamic thread get into an argument with a physicist about movement without energy, and he became so exasperated with your intransigence that he called you a moron. Thermodynamics hardly arouses personal passion but stupid provocation predictably does. You are, of course, very wrong. On all counts. The issue was creation of matter out of nothing, not "movement without energy". The poster in question was no physicist. And he called me "goofy", not "moron" :-) And that only after it became obvious he was cornered and losing face. Basically, as proof to Creation, he asked the question "Can something appear from nothing?", to which, I replied "Actually, yes, particles are known to appear in vacuum. It is called the 'Casimir Effect'". The guy is no physicist. He thinks "singularity" is a particle, for God's sake: "I thought particles are supposed to be called singularities? Whatever." siliconinvestor.com That means a level of education in physics at about 11th grade level (in my high school, we had elementary quantum physics in our last year). Even if he had read Stephen Hawking's "A Brief History of Time", he would know far more. So, if you needed any more proof that you don't know what you are talking about, here's more. Oh and that little bit at the end saying "I know you need attention"? That was very weak. Try building an argument next time. And think twice before making up stories about my soi disant "stupid provocation" with "a physicist".