Five million man: proofs of key problems

[mikkel_the_dane]

Change is good. We used to have steam engines, now we have high speed electric train. That is advancement. Religion stagnates.
...

Take 2: You are aware that what you claimed is not science. It is an appeal to emotion. And science doesn't do appeals to emotion or morality.

 

[questfortruth]

Was the paper originally written in another language and then translated to English?

It is like telling to me: "you got no style, be happy now."

 

[Altfish]

Well, religion is not science, the study of religion can be science, but religion as such do change. Or do you deny that religion changes at all?

Religion evolves into new religions and sects but change is painful

 

[questfortruth]

Gotta love how the author actually tells people that it's a "bad attitude" to try to find mistakes in his work.

Finding mistakes is not the aim of Science, but the unpleasant byproduct.
The more you look for mistakes the more fake mistakes are found: you only get what you desire to get.

 

[Altfish]

Take 2: You are aware that what you claimed is not science. It is an appeal to emotion. And science doesn't do appeals to emotion or morality.

I never said science has emotion or morals - it just follows the evidence.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Religion evolves into new religions and sects but change is painful

In my understanding it is the humans who must change our self according to the religioues teaching and not the other way around this is in my understanding why religion or spiritual practice seem to not change. Because the change happen within each person who follow the teaching.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Religion evolves into new religions and sects but change is painful

Yeah, at least sometimes so yes, sort off.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I never said science has emotion or morals - it just follows the evidence.

Change is good. We used to have steam engines, now we have high speed electric train. That is advancement. ...

Okay, so how do you know, that change is good?

 

[questfortruth]

I never said science has emotion or morals - it just follows the evidence.

No toilet paper in CERN?!

Science not only follows evidence,
the Science uses emotions and moral, because there is even toilet paper use in CERN.

 

[questfortruth]

shared the full texts

The full texts of the fool?
Science not only follows the evidence,
Science uses emotions and moral because there is even toilet paper use in CERN.

 

[Altfish]

Okay, so how do you know, that change is good?

Science isn't judgmental, what it finds is what it finds. Good or bad

 

[Altfish]

No toilet paper in CERN?!

Science not only follows evidence,
the Science uses emotions and moral, because there is even toilet paper use in CERN.

Serious???

 

[questfortruth]

Serious???

Science is moral, alternative is immorality.

 

[Left Coast]

They are not obligated to have goodwill. They are legal, it is enough.

This doesn't answer my question. Why do you think multiple independent journals, whose reviewers review papers all the time, would just all of a sudden reject yours without reading anything you said? What would the rationale be?

 

[questfortruth]

sudden reject yours without reading anything you said? What would the rationale be?

"And because mistakes and fakes shall abound, the way of truth will be evil spoken of"
Do you understand? Many so called idiots are writing spam to them.

 

[Left Coast]

"And because mistakes and fakes shall abound, the way of truth will be evil spoken of"
Do you understand? Many so called idiots are writing spam to them.

But they'd have to read some of what is submitted to know it's spam. You're suggesting they rejected yours without reading any of it at all.

 

[questfortruth]

But they'd have to read some of what is submitted to know it's spam. You're suggesting they rejected yours without reading any of it at all.

It is enough to read my name and check, that I am not a PhD using Google. Look, how editor wrote to me:

My advice is to first build up experience (and credibility) by working on less famous problems in the same area, in order to practice exposition skills, to learn basic techniques and literature, and to avoid common errors in the field.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

I repeat again: papers were rejected without review.

So what? The entire medical profession rejected Trump's suggestion of injecting people with disinfectant might be a good idea for COVID-19. They didn't need to review it -- they already knew it was daft.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

It is enough to read my name and check, that I am not a PhD using Google. Look, how editor wrote to me:

My advice is to first build up experience (and credibility) by working on less famous problems in the same area, in order to practice exposition skills, to learn basic techniques and literature, and to avoid common errors in the field.

Sounds like damned fine advice, to me.

 

[Spirit of Light]

It is enough to read my name and check, that I am not a PhD using Google. Look, how editor wrote to me:

My advice is to first build up experience (and credibility) by working on less famous problems in the same area, in order to practice exposition skills, to learn basic techniques and literature, and to avoid common errors in the field.

It does look like they have read your paper when they can give you this kind of advice. And it seems like they know what they talking about.