User talk:Dalek

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search


Archived communications.

Start a new discussion


Thread titleRepliesLast modified
You've been nominated!003:11, 2 November 2015
Been a while501:39, 23 September 2011
More detailed explanation of the "3 errors" by JimJast :)404:17, 19 April 2011
Of potential interest902:50, 8 April 2011
how222:00, 15 March 2011
yeah021:33, 15 March 2011
hi121:28, 15 March 2011
hi121:24, 15 March 2011
Beware teh kittehs!120:42, 16 February 2011
It must be asked...113:10, 4 January 2011
Pat on the back218:39, 3 January 2011
Info boxes113:57, 3 January 2011

You've been nominated! (talk) 03:11, 2 November 42015 AQD (UTC)03:11, 2 November 2015

Where'd you go?

ТyYarrr 02:48, 18 June 2011

You appear to be stuck as a bot!

TyTy01:31, 23 September 2011

Kind of LANCB without saying so when everything was getting arguementative. But I've checked the WIGOs and Saloon Bar every few days ever since. Seeing the speed of light story made me need to come and discuss it! How've you been? I seem unable to unbot myself. Can anyone help me with this?

DalekEXTERMINATE01:35, 23 September 2011

I've put up a notice, hopefully someone will see it. I've been okay, you?

TyTy01:36, 23 September 2011

Yeah, I've been good. Often thought about coming back here, knew I would eventually. Should've got in touch, sorry.

DalekEXTERMINATE01:38, 23 September 2011

Ah, no problem, it is a little less tense these days.

TyTy01:39, 23 September 2011

More detailed explanation of the "3 errors" by JimJast :)

After writing to you I felt being too brief with my descriptions so I'd appreciate if you asked me about desriptions of errors, with which you don't agree.

  1. It is not my theory: I call it "Einsteinian theory" since formally it is an extension of "Einstein's theory". If you knew Einstein's theory you would know how much of it is Einstein's (over 90%) and how much is mine (possibly less than 10%). I had an advantage over Einstein knowing his theory and thinking about it for many years before modifying it to make it perfect. Despite that I discovered a long time ago that the universe is not expanding, what he knew also, as a high school kid is able to discover it too (that little math is needed to prove it) it is just not worked on for certain reasons, I manged only recently to eliminate "Einstein's cosmological constant" from his "field equation". The "cosmological constant" turned out to be unnecessary there, which Einstein probably didn't know calling it once "the biggest blunder of my life".
  2. You don't use scientific method: was about the fact that scientific method is simple proving with negative experiments that something "never" happens which we then consider "impossible" to happen. On occasions we prove also that something is possible but this is not "scientific" part of it. It is only "technological" part of it and that's why techology and science progress together. "Scientific" part is only in dispresing superstitions and prejudieses about the real world. This is a "sure" knowledge. Since we can't prove negative we are doomed to progress in science through learning that we can't somethnig rather than we can. Though the knowledge that we can is also handy but every time something happens we can't be sure it happens the next time around (and sometimes it doesn't :). But if somehting never happens in 1,000,000,000,000 cases we may be "pretty sure" it doesno't happen the next time around neither and we start to believe that it is a "law of physics" though we can be always surprised that some "law of physics" gets broken. It shows how important it is to experimant in science. And how sure we can be that there are niether Santas nor gods and that all of them are human inventions. It of course is not everything about science and technology but enough to tell you why our contemporary science is not controlled by "scientific method". It is because of cosmology. In all other sciences scientific method is observed, in some stricter than in others, but the cosmology is a special case since so many people have special interest in manipulating it. Livelihoods of whole social classes depend on them. And it happened in cosmology that the rules of scientific method are delibertry broken. For various reasons miracles are allowed in cosmology and since they are not allowed in other sciences the scientific method is not extanded to cosmology. Since I happen to work in this, I happen to know the mechansms that were used to allow the creation of universe and following it its constant expansion. Feynman's rant against gravity physicists is a proof that the cosmology is excluded from physics. And that's why I think that my PhD will be never allowed, especially in a country with 97% of population of believers.
  3. My lack of peers: you may deduce from all the above.

You may not believe that such things happen in science but if you sent me your e-mail address I may tell you more details without necessity of agitating folks who don't care about such boring stuff.

JimJast (talk)00:02, 17 April 2011

Jesus Christ, Jast, is there any way to keep you from spreading this stuff like a cancer all over the damn wiki?

P-Foster (talk)00:05, 17 April 2011

The best way is not to ask me for explanations because I have an Aspergers Syndrom (I take any question seriously which works only when you're are interested in answers)

JimJast (talk)15:28, 17 April 2011

mmmmmmm. ass-burgers.

P-Foster (talk)21:58, 17 April 2011

They always turn out to be, don't they? ħumanUser talk:Human 04:17, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

ħumanUser talk:Human04:17, 19 April 2011

Of potential interest

Since you were one of the early pioneers in the Media Wiki name-space reserved for the conversations with other "editors" of websites utilizing mediawiki software... [1]

ТyTalk.20:21, 24 February 2011

I'd absolutely love it if we could get LQT running everywhere, for the usability and the major benefits of the system (storage space, revision delete, etc.) but I think that, for now, we're fighting something of a loosing battle. I like the idea, but I see it invoking a serious Headless Chicken Mode.

DalekEXTERMINATE20:23, 24 February 2011

Oh God. Not again.

BobSpring is sprung!20:32, 24 February 2011

Also, as of your recent userpage you may wish to add yourself to [[category:Post-Conservapedia]]

ТyTalk.20:40, 24 February 2011

Dost thy useth Skype?

ТyTalk.13:54, 5 April 2011

Most certainly. I am newtonstf - feel free to add me!

DalekEXTERMINATE19:20, 6 April 2011


ТyTalk.21:23, 6 April 2011

You need to confirm it, I believe.

ТyTalk.02:47, 8 April 2011

did you find what i wrote so fast? (talk)21:36, 15 March 2011

That link on the sidebar that says "Recent changes."

Blue (is useful)21:56, 15 March 2011

and I'm magic.

DalekEXTERMINATE22:00, 15 March 2011

i think she is but i don't know what her name is here. she said the people at this site are funny, dunno if she meant it in a good way or a bad way. :D (talk)21:33, 15 March 2011

nah man, just playful. it's my birthday and one of my friends said i should do this. btw the reply button isn't working. (talk)21:27, 15 March 2011

Is your friend an editor here..?

DalekEXTERMINATE21:28, 15 March 2011

what up dog (talk)21:23, 15 March 2011

Are you a vandal? Or just a bit odd....?

DalekEXTERMINATE21:24, 15 March 2011

Beware teh kittehs!

Eira OMTG! The Goat be Praised.20:28, 16 February 2011

Haha, thanks for that. That's my new desktop background!

DalekEXTERMINATE20:42, 16 February 2011

It must be asked...

CodyH (talk)04:28, 4 January 2011

They're AWESOME! Buying!

DalekEXTERMINATE13:10, 4 January 2011

Pat on the back

Nice janitorial work there. Although there's a bot to fix double redirects, so you don't have to do that yourself.

-- Nx / talk17:59, 3 January 2011

Ahh cool, didn't know that. How're things?

DalekEXTERMINATE18:07, 3 January 2011

Too much stuff to do, not enough time. I think I should clone myself. :)

-- Nx / talk18:39, 3 January 2011

You asked about info boxes. Since then I think I've near enough finished the navigation template thing. Take a look at {{Navsidebar/sandbox}}. This would act as a half decent base for what you want, it would keep it in line with the other templates, although perhaps infoboxes can be wider. If you look at {{Navsidebar/testcases}} you should be able to see how it goes together.

Scarlet A.pngpostate13:56, 3 January 2011

That's fantastic, thanks. I'll have a play around with them later, get used to using them. And woo, somebody used my new talk page!

DalekEXTERMINATE13:57, 3 January 2011