Gold Bearer wrote:Let's see.
A -5 point starting credit.
I'm off to a good start.
1 point for every statement that is widely agreed on to be false.
This one is completely unfair. That like saying 1 point for every point that you make that disagrees with the established model when that's the whole point. Besides the EU now has more than a "wide" enough support for the standard model to rack up an insane amount of points.
Well, maybe you get two or three points here but this is not the biggest weight
2 points for every statement that is clearly vacuous.
Well, here you may amount to 4-6 points. Things like posting a picture of a matter stream around a sun and stating it would never be possible in the existing theories - without proof... but even these I wouldn't count.
3 points for every statement that is logically inconsistent.
And another 50, 000 here.
At least here you get not so much as there is no statement that you tried to prove.
5 points for each such statement that is adhered to despite careful correction.
And now surely brakes the world record on this index.
Here we count 4 or 5 statements that already have been disproven - let's take 20 points
5 points for using a thought experiment that contradicts the results of a widely accepted real experiment.
I haven't done that.
You did in several places. I don't count, ok
5 points for each word in all capital letters (except for those with defective keyboards).
Oh dear Mr Flesh.
0 here
5 points for each mention of "Einstien", "Hawkins" or "Feynmann".
Maybe once, but only in response to someone else doing the same. That doesn't count.
happens to everybody
10 points for each claim that quantum mechanics is fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).
No.
here you are. 10 sound points for you. You state repeatedly that the forces are working in a different strength order than stated by the repeatedly measured science and you present no evidence.
10 points for pointing out that you have gone to school, as if this were evidence of sanity.
I pointed out that I droped out. -10 points = -15
You did state you you have been in the Highscool; although I wouldn't give you points on the crackpot index for that - nearly everybody was in school.
10 points for beginning the description of your theory by saying how long you have been working on it. (10 more for emphasizing that you worked on your own.)
- 10 for emphasising that's it's not my theory and I didn't work on it at all?
Agree, you have +/- zero here
10 points for mailing your theory to someone you don't know personally and asking them not to tell anyone else about it, for fear that your ideas will be stolen.
No.
10 points for offering prize money to anyone who proves and/or finds any flaws in your theory.
No.
no. Agree for both.
10 points for each new term you invent and use without properly defining it.
No.
You did. It was the main reason I was entering the discussion, thinking "ok this is easy". You get 30 or 40 points here for using "Plasma" "Electrical Currents" and other terms in the wrong context and with wrong meaning - not once or twice but systematically to prove your theory.
10 points for each statement along the lines of "I'm not good at math, but my theory is conceptually right, so all I need is for someone to express it in terms of equations".
No.
You repeatedly state that you won't post a link, won't calculate because you're not good at math, but you like to describe your theory in your own words. The ten points are sincerely and honestly earned.
10 points for arguing that a current well-established theory is "only a theory", as if this were somehow a point against it.
Not really. I said that there are very few laws and lots of theories because you can't really prove a model right.
Here you are. 10 Points for you.
10 points for arguing that while a current well-established theory predicts phenomena correctly, it doesn't explain "why" they occur, or fails to provide a "mechanism".
No.
Yes. You state in every second post that "Gravity can't explain that" Ten points earned.
10 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Einstein, or claim that special or general relativity are fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).
I have great evidence that gr doesn't work but am a avid supporter of SR (despite so many EU supporters including the main physicist trying to argue against it, which makes me cringe), but okay, =10 points = -5
They work both very well. It's just if the scope of Quantum Mechanics and gr/sr are overlapping, Quantum Mechanics is right. No reason to dismiss the rest. 10 Points for you.
10 points for claiming that your work is on the cutting edge of a "paradigm shift".
Crap, 5 points.
Yes, 10 more.
20 points for emailing me and complaining about the crackpot index. (E.g., saying that it "suppresses original thinkers" or saying that I misspelled "Einstein" in item 8.)
:) No.
Agreed.
20 points for suggesting that you deserve a Nobel prize.
No.
Agreed.
20 points for each favorable comparison of yourself to Newton or claim that classical mechanics is fundamentally misguided (without good evidence).
No.
At every second corner you stated Newton was proved wrong. Well, not really. In the scope he was able to measure, he's right. He still is, if you build mechanical machines, like, for example, cannons, or cranes. 20 Points for you.
20 points for every use of science fiction works or myths as if they were fact.
No.
Bosnian Pyramids / Pyramids around the world connected by an invisible network. 20 Points for you.
20 points for defending yourself by bringing up (real or imagined) ridicule accorded to your past theories.
No.
ok
20 points for naming something after yourself. (E.g., talking about the "The Evans Field Equation" when your name happens to be Evans.)
No.
ok
20 points for talking about how great your theory is, but never actually explaining it.
Definitely not.
Yes. It is what everybody of us says all the time to you. You say something, post a photo, that's it. No explanation, no answer to questions. 20 points,
20 points for each use of the phrase "hidebound reactionary".
I've never even seen or heard anyone using that phrase.
agreed
20 points for each use of the phrase "self-appointed defender of the orthodoxy".
No, but I like it.
me to.
30 points for suggesting that a famous figure secretly disbelieved in a theory which he or she publicly supported. (E.g., that Feynman was a closet opponent of special relativity, as deduced by reading between the lines in his freshman physics textbooks.)
No.
maybe not, but... (skip the next four)
40 points for claiming that the "scientific establishment" is engaged in a "conspiracy" to prevent your work from gaining its well-deserved fame, or suchlike.
Oh, arse! Ah, not my work, and not really a conspiracy so much as a broken system. I think 20 points is fair. That puts me on 25.
40 well deserved points.
40 points for comparing yourself to Galileo, suggesting that a modern-day Inquisition is hard at work on your case, and so on.
No.
agreed
40 points for claiming that when your theory is finally appreciated, present-day science will be seen for the sham it truly is. (30 more points for fantasizing about show trials in which scientists who mocked your theories will be forced to recant.)
I wish but I'm not naive enough to think it will actually happen.
no, agreed.
50 points for claiming you have a revolutionary theory but giving no concrete testable predictions.
It's provided lots of testable predictions and they continue to be accurate. This is in fact the most convincing aspect of the EU model.
Not a single thing has been predicted and proven true. Some things have been "re-predicted" but a lot of theories do that. If you have the choice between 10 Theories "re-predicting" the same things, all in the same way, you decide for the most simple one. Relativity and Standard Model today. 50 points for you.
[/quote]
That makes 230 Points, more or less. Maybe there are 10 more or less.
