The Electric/Spiritual Universe of Jesus Christ

[NicholasMarks]

Great, now maybe you can post a video which supports your 'wormwood is coming' assertion?
A point by the way which was absent from your earthquake link. Any reason?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0sx3lk3R6U

Why you can't do your own research is beyond me...but this is the first of many that is current.

[Nearly Sane]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0sx3lk3R6U

Why you can't do your own research is beyond me...but this is the first of many that is current.

could you be a lovely chap and address the earthquake question I asked?

[jjohnjil]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0sx3lk3R6U

Why you can't do your own research is beyond me...but this is the first of many that is current.

Nick

For Christ's sake grow up!  I have just watched this ridiculous youtube video and it's so obviously faked that I can't understand anyone over the age of ten thinking it's not!

There are hundreds of thousands of professional and amateur astronomers around the world, do you really think they are all (except for a few of these cranks) in some giant conspiracy to keep something like this from the general public?

He says the whole of the world's media is conspiring to keep it secret too ... are you really gullible enough to believe that.

I did think you were a sensible guy who had a few wacky ideas but if you are really trying to convince us that all these photos and painted cartoons are actual scientific data, then you are definitely in need of help!

There is no such thing as Wormwood or any of these other planets ganging up on us, Nick.  It is all someone's vivid imagination having a laugh with suckers who'll believe anything!

Please please GROW UP!

[Gordon]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0sx3lk3R6U

Why you can't do your own research is beyond me...but this is the first of many that is current.

I too had a look at this link and it is nonsensical conspiracy theory and not serious science.

That it opens with the theme tune from 'The X Files' immediately identifies it as silly, and later on we gets pics of cans of soup and bottles of water by way of a warning to stock up: I already know what a can of soup looks like!

This kind of stuff is best ignored, Nick. Brian Cox's comment, bearing in mind he is a professional scientist working in this field, seems about right: "If anyone else asks me about "Nibiru" the imaginary bullshit planet I will slap them around their irrational heads with Newton's Principia".

[NicholasMarks]

Nick

For Christ's sake grow up!  I have just watched this ridiculous youtube video and it's so obviously faked that I can't understand anyone over the age of ten thinking it's not!

There are hundreds of thousands of professional and amateur astronomers around the world, do you really think they are all (except for a few of these cranks) in some giant conspiracy to keep something like this from the general public?

He says the whole of the world's media is conspiring to keep it secret too ... are you really gullible enough to believe that.

I did think you were a sensible guy who had a few wacky ideas but if you are really trying to convince us that all these photos and painted cartoons are actual scientific data, then you are definitely in need of help!

There is no such thing as Wormwood or any of these other planets ganging up on us, Nick.  It is all someone's vivid imagination having a laugh with suckers who'll believe anything!

Please please GROW UP!

Thank you for your kind words johnjil. I did say that it is one of many and I just reached out for the first one available that seemed to contain the facts that you all need to know. My reaction was similar to yours at first but over many months I have come to realise there is substance to all of this.

It isn't so important what we initially think...you have been made aware of something that could be a huge threat and perhaps you will keep your own eyes peeled because if correct, pretty soon it will become so obvious that no one will be able to dispute it...but it will all fit in with the teaching of the last days contained in Revelation so I am perhaps easier to convince than others.

[NicholasMarks]

could you be a lovely chap and address the earthquake question I asked?

Response 173 was all I'm offering here.

[Nearly Sane]

Response 173 was all I'm offering here.

thank you dear chap for that, however it's a youtube video and doesn't do any analysis. Try thus and please lay out what you diapsagree with on its method


http://m.pnas.org/content/109/3/717.full?sid=e906ad30-c20a-41fb-b383-16aa538d39fe

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

How can you tell? If you accuse him of 'fantasies' how do you work out when they might stop and the 'dishonesties' begin?

Does it matter? For what it's worth, I'd say "fantasy" is at the "I have a pet dragon" end of the spectrum, whereas dishonesty would be, say, denying that you'd said earthquakes are on the increase. Just so I can watch my ps & qs in future though, will you be so Gradgrindian about "spick and span"? How about "hale and hearty"? 

[NicholasMarks]

I too had a look at this link and it is nonsensical conspiracy theory and not serious science.

That it opens with the theme tune from 'The X Files' immediately identifies it as silly, and later on we gets pics of cans of soup and bottles of water by way of a warning to stock up: I already know what a can of soup looks like!

This kind of stuff is best ignored, Nick. Brian Cox's comment, bearing in mind he is a professional scientist working in this field, seems about right: "If anyone else asks me about "Nibiru" the imaginary bullshit planet I will slap them around their irrational heads with Newton's Principia".

No one actually knows what gravity is. Science can calculate it expertly but they are still struggling with gravitons and like theories.  As you should now know particle physics haven’t got the answer and I haven’t reached that part of my explanation yet. Gravity throws up a number of curved balls which have to be built into the equation and clashing star systems may just high-light one of those curved balls.

Science already has the outline of what creates gravity bur they are looking at it in an unGodly way and missing the obvious.

So…Brian Cox…look and listen because not even you can dispute the facts.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sparky,

Clearly many of you strongly object to the Holy Bible...

No-one does this. What some of us actually do though is to object to the claims you make for it - a very different matter. 

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

Does it matter? For what it's worth, I'd say "fantasy" is at the "I have a pet dragon" end of the spectrum, whereas dishonesty would be, say, denying that you'd said earthquakes are on the increase. Just so I can watch my ps & qs in future though, will you be so Gradgrindian about "spick and span"? How about "hale and hearty"? 

he doesn't seem to be denying earthquakes are on the increase.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sparky,

Response 173 was all I'm offering here.

You've referred occasionally to your "research". Can we take it then that this research is actually just a few nut job You Tube videos?

[Nearly Sane]

No one actually knows what gravity is. Science can calculate it expertly but they are still struggling with gravitons and like theories.  As you should now know particle physics haven’t got the answer and I haven’t reached that part of my explanation yet. Gravity throws up a number of curved balls which have to be built into the equation and clashing star systems may just high-light one of those curved balls.

Science already has the outline of what creates gravity bur they are looking at it in an unGodly way and missing the obvious.

So…Brian Cox…look and listen because not even you can dispute the facts.

Nick, if you have an explanation of gravity, can we see the link to your published scientific papers?

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

he doesn't seem to be denying earthquakes are on the increase.

In a different thread he positively asserted that they are on the increase. I challenged him on it (several times in fact) as it's not true, and eventually he just said "you need to read the Bible" and vanished. I'll try to find the exchange, though when I looked recently for his contemptible comments about cancer all I could find was Wiggs's response to it rather than his original posts.   

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sparky,

No one actually knows what gravity is. Science can calculate it expertly but they are still struggling with gravitons and like theories.  As you should now know particle physics haven’t got the answer and I haven’t reached that part of my explanation yet. Gravity throws up a number of curved balls which have to be built into the equation and clashing star systems may just high-light one of those curved balls.

Science already has the outline of what creates gravity bur they are looking at it in an unGodly way and missing the obvious.

So…Brian Cox…look and listen because not even you can dispute the facts.

Been a while since we had a god of the gaps fallacy. Good effort.

[Sebastian Toe]

pretty soon ......

.....is that the equivalent to 'Nick doesn't know, in fact nobody does'
it might be 'soon' as in the correct meaning of 'soon',
or it might be in a few years
or a few decades
or a few millennia,
you just don't know?

[Nearly Sane]

NS,

In a different thread he positively asserted that they are on the increase. I challenged him on it (several times in fact) as it's not true, and eventually he just said "you need to read the Bible" and vanished. I'll try to find the exchange, though when I looked recently for his contemptible comments about cancer all I could find was Wiggs's response to it rather than his original posts.

that isn't denying it

[bluehillside Retd.]

NS,

that isn't denying it

Sorry - what isn't denying what? (haven't had a coffee yet, so I could be missing it)

[NicholasMarks]

thank you dear chap for that, however it's a youtube video and doesn't do any analysis. Try thus and please lay out what you diapsagree with on its method


http://m.pnas.org/content/109/3/717.full?sid=e906ad30-c20a-41fb-b383-16aa538d39fe

Iris the distributor of earthquake information presented by this YouTube video after a brief internet search appears to be a valid and scientific organisation correlating earthquake information. The publisher is John Smith who again after a brief  search appears to concentrate on earthquake information so the information presented is valid...though I don't know why I should have to defend an argument I was not involved in in the first place. Your link states in  the opening paragraph that these events appear to be increasing though compared against back-data they generally balance out. Of course they are not taking into account the nuclear bombs that are being tested or the fracking that is shaking the earth or the possible increase that the rogue invasion of a planetary system will add to that data...and there is plenty of evidence to suggest this is correct too. Even if we just stick to global warming, climate change, severe magnetic disturbances and the peculiar die-offs of many creature that seem to be affected by something very strange.

All can be justified from teachings in the Holy Bible concerning the last days but it appears that no one is interested enough to look...only condemn.

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sparky,

Iris the distributor of earthquake information presented by this YouTube video after a brief internet search appears to be a valid and scientific organisation correlating earthquake information.

Yes it does. And here's its conclusion:

"Our conclusion that the global threat of large earthquakes has not recently increased is based both on the lack of statistical evidence that regionally declustered seismicity is temporally heterogeneous on a global scale and on the implausibility of physical mechanisms proposed to explain global clustering. The estimated global rate of very large (M > 9) earthquakes is still very uncertain because only five such events have occurred since 1900. The recent elevated rate of large earthquakes has increased estimates of large earthquake danger: The empirical rate of such events is higher than before. However, there is no evidence that the rate of the underlying process has changed. In other words, there is no evidence that the risk has changed, but our estimates of the risk have changed."

Note the "not recently increased" in the first sentence.

In a fairly extended exchange we had a while back you said explicitly that the rate of earthquakes had risen, and you did so to imply that it was a portent of some kind. Are you saying:

1. That you did say that?

2. That you did not say that?

3. That you can't remember whether you said it or not?

There are no other options.   

[NicholasMarks]

Nick, if you have an explanation of gravity, can we see the link to your published scientific papers?

Of course you can't cus it doesn't exist. That doesn't mean it is wrong it means that I have to decide how I will publish it...and quite honestly I'm not too impressed with your scientific institutions...who tell you everything came from nothing.

Perhaps it might be best to slowly introduce it to those who need that knowledge most...and, of course, the righteous, who are living that science here and now.

It doesn't take too much logic to realise that our only currently known resistance to gravity is our muscular strength so that the constant down force will play havoc with the human body if that uplift counter pressure is lost and in many cases of ill health, it is. This is why it is important to upbuild within us a righteous spirit exactly how Jesus taught...then...maybe...we too will walk on water...though I don't recommend it.

[NicholasMarks]

Sparky,

Yes it does. And here's its conclusion:

"Our conclusion that the global threat of large earthquakes has not recently increased is based both on the lack of statistical evidence that regionally declustered seismicity is temporally heterogeneous on a global scale and on the implausibility of physical mechanisms proposed to explain global clustering. The estimated global rate of very large (M > 9) earthquakes is still very uncertain because only five such events have occurred since 1900. The recent elevated rate of large earthquakes has increased estimates of large earthquake danger: The empirical rate of such events is higher than before. However, there is no evidence that the rate of the underlying process has changed. In other words, there is no evidence that the risk has changed, but our estimates of the risk have changed."

Note the "not recently increased" in the first sentence.

In a fairly extended exchange we had a while back you said explicitly that the rate of earthquakes had risen, and you did so to imply that it was a portent of some kind. Are you saying:

1. That you did say that?

2. That you did not say that?

3. That you can't remember whether you said it or not?

There are no other options.

bluehillside...I have been back on this forum for a very short period...I could research the exact date for you if you like. At no time have I gone into any great detail about earthquakes with you, or anyone, until now. I will not use your terminology to describe people you have a grievance with but I strongly tell you that you are mistaken.

 

[floo]

NM apart from your own version of 'science', which isn't science, do you actually have any qualifications in real science?

[Nearly Sane]

Of course you can't cus it doesn't exist. That doesn't mean it is wrong it means that I have to decide how I will publish it...and quite honestly I'm not too impressed with your scientific institutions...who tell you everything came from nothing.

Perhaps it might be best to slowly introduce it to those who need that knowledge most...and, of course, the righteous, who are living that science here and now.

It doesn't take too much logic to realise that our only currently known resistance to gravity is our muscular strength so that the constant down force will play havoc with the human body if that uplift counter pressure is lost and in many cases of ill health, it is. This is why it is important to upbuild within us a righteous spirit exactly how Jesus taught...then...maybe...we too will walk on water...though I don't recommend it.

Nick, could you kindly provide me a link to a scientific institution that says everything came from nothing?

[bluehillside Retd.]

Sparky,

bluehillside...I have been back on this forum for a very short period...I could research the exact date for you if you like. At no time have I gone into any great detail about earthquakes with you, or anyone, until now. I will not use your terminology to describe people you have a grievance with but I strongly tell you that you are mistaken.

Never mind "going in to great detail". The question you were actually asked was this:

"In a fairly extended exchange we had a while back you said explicitly that the rate of earthquakes had risen, and you did so to imply that it was a portent of some kind. Are you saying:

1. That you did say that?

2. That you did not say that?

3. That you can't remember whether you said it or not?"

All you have to do to answer is to reply 1, 2 or 3.