Case in point, if you get a degree in science, such a degree does not mean you are a practitioner of the art of science. It only means you have formal documentation of such studies. You need to apply such knowledge and then have it published in order to be a practitioner of the art. To the layman ignorant of science they are the ones who need formal documentation from those who speak of science due to their lack education on the topic, formal or otherwise. I find, as exhibited from the comments made here, that the ignorant are too lazy or stupid to do their own research themselves when given the opportunity to support their own words.
I do not hide behind a piece of paper or the fact that scientific journals and researchers have submitted their papers to me for review as credentials of my knowledge of science. Everyone has the means to openly contest my findings via the Final Selection Thought Experiment. However, if you lack the integrity of your convictions you will continue to revert to criticism of what you have cowardly failed to refute or have failed to understand. It all comes down to this, PUT UP OR SHUT UP!
You are the most insane human being to ever grace this board... think about that for a second.
By the way, if this will get you to leave, you have introduced
sample selection bias into your "estimates" by creating a sample that is not generalizable, nor representative. In fact, by doing this, you are no longer an experiment, as you have chosen to rely on self-reported votes to guide your results.
Hence, any estimates you create no longer tell the truth, and the experiment cannot be externally validated to any other situation.
Related Questions
Why do people label introvert people as abnormal or even insane?
How do one know that he is insane?
What are some stories about insane people?
What happens when you go insane?
Is everyone insane?
How do you know if you are insane?
What causes a person to go insane?
Insane in Spain goes madly on the plain. I think I got it. Link - ( New Window )
RE: I think the problem is that no one really knows what the findings are
Your attributing a billboard to somehow having an effect on a team.
You are incorrect. This was all about repeating what had been done before and in the process of doing so, confirm the mechanics of HOW the acts of selection come to exist and its corresponding effects. Correlation does not imply causation yet that is exactly what the scientific method uses for its validity.
So when will you contest the findings in order to support your opinions or are you just another coward like the others?
you will confuse him with equations. That is what they teach when you get degrees, but what this guy proves is that degrees are for the weak-minded Simpletons.
how sample selection bias does not impact your estimates.
Correction, science based on the existence of effects necessitates sample size for its inquiry. As the findings show, the acts of selection can ONLY come into existence when an act pairs with its potential after which we can only observe its effect. It is impossible to apply "sample selection bias" to something that cannot preexist as the evidence has shown eleven out of twelve Tempt Destiny direct selection attempts.
If objects of scale and locality are fundamental constructs of our physical reality then how can such logic be correct if it cannot answer the following question:
How much does a direct or indirect selection weigh, what are their scales, and where was the mutually exclusive selection variable you just used to read these words located when you used it?
What this means is that the logic we use to perceive reality is based on the existence of effects causing the existence of effects which says nothing about how effects come to exist. Simply put, we perceive reality ass backwards. Science and the logic it is based on is erroneous if it is not reflective of reality in its entirety. We think that Nature needs to conform to our logic when it is our own mindset that has prevented us from learning how Nature works. Turns out the world is not flat after all... just our thinking.
FatMan you are making a serious mistake to assume science is sacrosanct. Science is an art not a religion. It is necessary for science to be wrong in order to get it right. This is how discoveries are made and how we advance our knowledge of Nature.
Since my findings are based reality and not assumptions or statistical inference, you obviously know my findings are valid because you have repeatedly refuse to disprove them.
Don't confuse the messenger with the message. Nature is what it is. Who are we to argue... some sort of FatMan?
Your attributing a billboard to somehow having an effect on a team.
You are incorrect. This was all about repeating what had been done before and in the process of doing so, confirm the mechanics of HOW the acts of selection come to exist and its corresponding effects. Correlation does not imply causation yet that is exactly what the scientific method uses for its validity.
So when will you contest the findings in order to support your opinions or are you just another coward like the others?
LOL...let me ask you a simple question: Has one scientific entity (Mag, blog, think tank, radio station, Institutes, etc...etc...) ever come out in support of what you claim to have proven? Even the "nutjob-r-us" type sites would be a start. Can you show us a link where they agree with you? Now don't pull out some website associated with this scam, or the principles involved, legit outside sources only
Researchers from NASA, CERN, Los Alamos National Laboratory, NOAA, MIT, Berkely, Harvard, and far to many others to list have been reviewing my findings. Since they are absolute/complete, they are not contestable, a.k.a., the Final Selection Thought Experiment.
And to think this all came about by supporting the NY Giants Super Bowl quest.
You are mistaken to assume opinions, including my own, have anything to do with the findings. All that it would take to show that they are wrong is to conduct the thought experiment in real life and continue your existence.
People writing about these findings are already happening at ResearchGate.net. As far as elsewhere, time will tell.
way up at the top. I've directed you to that contesting several times and you predictably failed to recognize that. Kicker has contested the findings and the best you can come up with is:
You can't disprove the findings using science. Science is an rt, blah, blah, blah. Then something about sampling not mattering.
But hey, you are consistent about using the same taglines:
"And to think this all came about supporting the Giants". What came about, raging mental illness?
The findings show that energy and the two acts of selection are one and the same.
In order to contest the findings you need to continue your existence without the ability to select. If the FatMan continues to spew his ignorance with additional comments, I will know that he has NOT refuted my findings and is in effect confirming them by continuing to select to write comments.
His "theories" conflate science, nature and religion, but I think at the core he suffers from a delusion disorder (delusions of grandeur - supported by his constant appeals to authority) - if I were a gambling man, I would put most of my money down on a bipolar disorder, but with a small hedge on schizophrenia.
His attempts at creative expression, weak as they are, tilt me in favor of bipolar.
Researchers from NASA, CERN, Los Alamos National Laboratory, NOAA, MIT, Berkely, Harvard, and far to many others to list have been reviewing my findings. Since they are absolute/complete, they are not contestable, a.k.a., the Final Selection Thought Experiment.
And to think this all came about by supporting the NY Giants Super Bowl quest. Tempt Destiny Experiment Results - ( New Window )
Reviewing them is one thing, trying to claim this validates them is something completely different. You would know this if you actually have the scientific self-taught pedigree you claim.
Who has come out and said (besides your own idiotic link you keep posting that proves nothing) these results are proof of anything? Come on put your money where your mouth is, unless of course your a "coward"?
for one of you to show everyone that the findings are false. That is all it will take, just one of you brilliant individuals to show Nature how special you truly are.
You have made statements with as many nooks and crannies as a Thomas' English muffin, and as much substance as cotton candy.
I admit it. I wouldn't have the slightest idea how to go about proving or disproving such nonsense, because the statements just make no sense on their face.
I guess that means you win, but I am not sure what it is you win.
for one of you to show everyone that the findings are false. That is all it will take, just one of you brilliant individuals to show Nature how special you truly are.
Until then, eat crow.
You continue to run from the question, WHO HAS backed your findings? You throw the word "coward" around, yet it is only you who has run repeatedly when asked to supply verification. If you don't have any, just be a man and say so
RE: OK, I will admit that you are slightly clever.
You have made statements with as many nooks and crannies as a Thomas' English muffin, and as much substance as cotton candy.
I admit it. I wouldn't have the slightest idea how to go about proving or disproving such nonsense, because the statements just make no sense on their face.
I guess that means you win, but I am not sure what it is you win.
It is impossible to disprove something that has never been proven. To me that is apparently his strategy hidden within a bunch of nonsensical claims and verbage
Funny, I stopped keeping track for they are constantly increasing and since my findings are universal it crosses into particle physics - biology - economics - cosmology, etc. But since you have a hard-on about who are in agreement with my findings, I'll give one of the ones that I value since it relates directly with the first application of my findings to the field of particle physics regarding the recent Higgs boson discovery.
For the Higgs boson discovery to be valid, particle collisions must take place without a selection event first being made in order for there to be no omitted-variable bias. When CERN physicist, Adam Jacholkowski, was challenged to prove if such an event could indeed take place, he responded:
"@ Manuel You write, "...to prevent the particle beams from intersecting in order to prevent the selection events from happening. If you still have collision effects then the two acts of selection did not cause the particle collision effects and you would have proven my findings invalid." OK, but this is something we are doing routinely when the beam is lost accidentally, when testing the apparatus without beam (noise study), when collecting cosmics in our apparatus for the calibration purpose (alignment), when there is only one circulating beam in the accelerator (for beam-gas background study) etc. In all these cases we do not see any event of interest from the physics point of view that is we do not observe any kind of collisions. So what is your conclusion in this case?"
My response, "You have validated my findings". As confirmed by physicist Adam Jacholkowsk, particle collision experiments cannot take place without the selection event of two particle beams intersecting. In conclusion, by not accounting for which type of mutually exclusive selection event (direct or indirect) caused the particle collision effects, by scientific standards, a discovery cannot be made or founded on omitted-variable bias.
Bottom line, if the Tempt Destiny findings are not based on reality then it does not matter who backs them for only Nature has the final say... you know, as in the Final Selection Thought Experiment. The findings need to answer to Nature, not man.
each time you make a comment you have inadvertently supported my findings by not contesting them via the thought experiment. How special of you. Thanks!
each time you make a comment you have inadvertently supported my findings by not contesting them via the thought experiment. How special of you. Thanks!
One of the dumbest shits stated on BBI...and this place is chocked full of dumb shits. Not a single person wants your kind of crazy here, man. Just read through this entire thread or any other threads you've posted on. Not a single person had agreed with your dumb shit-based quackery...NOT.A.SINGLE.PERSON.
You have a serious mental problem, dude...seriously, seek help.
Funny, I stopped keeping track for they are constantly increasing and since my findings are universal it crosses into particle physics - biology - economics - cosmology, etc. But since you have a hard-on about who are in agreement with my findings, I'll give one of the ones that I value since it relates directly with the first application of my findings to the field of particle physics regarding the recent Higgs boson discovery.
For the Higgs boson discovery to be valid, particle collisions must take place without a selection event first being made in order for there to be no omitted-variable bias. When CERN physicist, Adam Jacholkowski, was challenged to prove if such an event could indeed take place, he responded:
"@ Manuel You write, "...to prevent the particle beams from intersecting in order to prevent the selection events from happening. If you still have collision effects then the two acts of selection did not cause the particle collision effects and you would have proven my findings invalid." OK, but this is something we are doing routinely when the beam is lost accidentally, when testing the apparatus without beam (noise study), when collecting cosmics in our apparatus for the calibration purpose (alignment), when there is only one circulating beam in the accelerator (for beam-gas background study) etc. In all these cases we do not see any event of interest from the physics point of view that is we do not observe any kind of collisions. So what is your conclusion in this case?"
My response, "You have validated my findings". As confirmed by physicist Adam Jacholkowsk, particle collision experiments cannot take place without the selection event of two particle beams intersecting. In conclusion, by not accounting for which type of mutually exclusive selection event (direct or indirect) caused the particle collision effects, by scientific standards, a discovery cannot be made or founded on omitted-variable bias.
Bottom line, if the Tempt Destiny findings are not based on reality then it does not matter who backs them for only Nature has the final say... you know, as in the Final Selection Thought Experiment. The findings need to answer to Nature, not man. Assumed Higgs Boson Discovery Proved Einstein Right - ( New Window )
If you cant keep track of all those commending you regarding this why is it so hard to actually show those in support of it?
Everytime you make claims like these without the actual verification of support, you appear to be full of shit. Throwing around grandiose claims that have nothing to support them illustrates the duplicity of what you are doing.
I hope you put your silliness away for a moment and realize that the only reason you are still on this board is because the whole board finds you amusing in a weird way. It is not often we get to view such apparent horseshit that allows us to see the mind of the delusional.
TOO FUNNY! Way to go Kicker!
Now about about putting your words in your mouth, do you have a photo for that?
Usually I have a little sympathy for sad, desperate and pathetic people.
I'm making an exception here.
The cognitive dissonance is hurting my brain, at least a little.
I do not hide behind a piece of paper or the fact that scientific journals and researchers have submitted their papers to me for review as credentials of my knowledge of science. Everyone has the means to openly contest my findings via the Final Selection Thought Experiment. However, if you lack the integrity of your convictions you will continue to revert to criticism of what you have cowardly failed to refute or have failed to understand. It all comes down to this, PUT UP OR SHUT UP!
You are the most insane human being to ever grace this board... think about that for a second.
Hence, any estimates you create no longer tell the truth, and the experiment cannot be externally validated to any other situation.
Documentation is for pussy, lemmings who wasted money getting worthless scientific degrees.
GO FOR IT!!
Related Questions
Why do people label introvert people as abnormal or even insane?
How do one know that he is insane?
What are some stories about insane people?
What happens when you go insane?
Is everyone insane?
How do you know if you are insane?
What causes a person to go insane?
Insane in Spain goes madly on the plain. I think I got it.
Link - ( New Window )
You are incorrect. This was all about repeating what had been done before and in the process of doing so, confirm the mechanics of HOW the acts of selection come to exist and its corresponding effects. Correlation does not imply causation yet that is exactly what the scientific method uses for its validity.
So when will you contest the findings in order to support your opinions or are you just another coward like the others?
The continual taglines of GO FOR IT!, the continual refusal to acknowledge the objections, the continual stance that there is "science" here.
It's like de ja vu all over again. Thanks Yogi!
So, how can you prove that the unobserveds in your experiment (the error terms) are unrelated to attributes about the samples that you have selected?
I can provide the requisite math for you if you need to see what I'm talking about.
Why does:
B(OLS) = B + (x'E)/(x'x)
So, how can you prove that the residuals (E) aren't related to your sample (X)?
Remember, to Terrance Howard, 1X1 cannot equal 1.
And cowardice.
Correction, science based on the existence of effects necessitates sample size for its inquiry. As the findings show, the acts of selection can ONLY come into existence when an act pairs with its potential after which we can only observe its effect. It is impossible to apply "sample selection bias" to something that cannot preexist as the evidence has shown eleven out of twelve Tempt Destiny direct selection attempts.
If objects of scale and locality are fundamental constructs of our physical reality then how can such logic be correct if it cannot answer the following question:
How much does a direct or indirect selection weigh, what are their scales, and where was the mutually exclusive selection variable you just used to read these words located when you used it?
What this means is that the logic we use to perceive reality is based on the existence of effects causing the existence of effects which says nothing about how effects come to exist. Simply put, we perceive reality ass backwards. Science and the logic it is based on is erroneous if it is not reflective of reality in its entirety. We think that Nature needs to conform to our logic when it is our own mindset that has prevented us from learning how Nature works. Turns out the world is not flat after all... just our thinking.
Because otherwise, your hypothesis (if there is one) would be pure hogwash (which it is).
Nothing like arrogance to thumb your nose at the entire scientific community all in the name of shitty artwork.
Since my findings are based reality and not assumptions or statistical inference, you obviously know my findings are valid because you have repeatedly refuse to disprove them.
Don't confuse the messenger with the message. Nature is what it is. Who are we to argue... some sort of FatMan?
Quote:
Your attributing a billboard to somehow having an effect on a team.
You are incorrect. This was all about repeating what had been done before and in the process of doing so, confirm the mechanics of HOW the acts of selection come to exist and its corresponding effects. Correlation does not imply causation yet that is exactly what the scientific method uses for its validity.
So when will you contest the findings in order to support your opinions or are you just another coward like the others?
LOL...let me ask you a simple question: Has one scientific entity (Mag, blog, think tank, radio station, Institutes, etc...etc...) ever come out in support of what you claim to have proven? Even the "nutjob-r-us" type sites would be a start. Can you show us a link where they agree with you? Now don't pull out some website associated with this scam, or the principles involved, legit outside sources only
temptdestiny.com/science.html
or directly at ResearchGate.net (see link below).
Researchers from NASA, CERN, Los Alamos National Laboratory, NOAA, MIT, Berkely, Harvard, and far to many others to list have been reviewing my findings. Since they are absolute/complete, they are not contestable, a.k.a., the Final Selection Thought Experiment.
And to think this all came about by supporting the NY Giants Super Bowl quest.
Tempt Destiny Experiment Results - ( New Window )
Yet, not a single person has vouched for the scam.
The messenger and the message are both complete shit, as is the artwork associated with it.
People writing about these findings are already happening at ResearchGate.net. As far as elsewhere, time will tell.
ZERO. Is that too hard to understand? ZERO.
You can't disprove the findings using science. Science is an rt, blah, blah, blah. Then something about sampling not mattering.
But hey, you are consistent about using the same taglines:
"And to think this all came about supporting the Giants". What came about, raging mental illness?
In order to contest the findings you need to continue your existence without the ability to select. If the FatMan continues to spew his ignorance with additional comments, I will know that he has NOT refuted my findings and is in effect confirming them by continuing to select to write comments.
I cannot make this any simpler.
As nonsensical as the ramblings on the website. Batshit crazy.
That's my favorite bit.
His "theories" conflate science, nature and religion, but I think at the core he suffers from a delusion disorder (delusions of grandeur - supported by his constant appeals to authority) - if I were a gambling man, I would put most of my money down on a bipolar disorder, but with a small hedge on schizophrenia.
His attempts at creative expression, weak as they are, tilt me in favor of bipolar.
Go for it!
Manny being Manny - ( New Window )
temptdestiny.com/science.html
or directly at ResearchGate.net (see link below).
Researchers from NASA, CERN, Los Alamos National Laboratory, NOAA, MIT, Berkely, Harvard, and far to many others to list have been reviewing my findings. Since they are absolute/complete, they are not contestable, a.k.a., the Final Selection Thought Experiment.
And to think this all came about by supporting the NY Giants Super Bowl quest. Tempt Destiny Experiment Results - ( New Window )
Reviewing them is one thing, trying to claim this validates them is something completely different. You would know this if you actually have the scientific self-taught pedigree you claim.
Who has come out and said (besides your own idiotic link you keep posting that proves nothing) these results are proof of anything? Come on put your money where your mouth is, unless of course your a "coward"?
Even on a website on Unexplained Mysteries which you would think would draw people willing to believe anything, he can't even win skeptics over!
Apparently, nobody understands his "science".
LOL.
Until then, eat crow.
I admit it. I wouldn't have the slightest idea how to go about proving or disproving such nonsense, because the statements just make no sense on their face.
I guess that means you win, but I am not sure what it is you win.
Until then, eat crow.
I admit it. I wouldn't have the slightest idea how to go about proving or disproving such nonsense, because the statements just make no sense on their face.
I guess that means you win, but I am not sure what it is you win.
It is impossible to disprove something that has never been proven. To me that is apparently his strategy hidden within a bunch of nonsensical claims and verbage
Funny, I stopped keeping track for they are constantly increasing and since my findings are universal it crosses into particle physics - biology - economics - cosmology, etc. But since you have a hard-on about who are in agreement with my findings, I'll give one of the ones that I value since it relates directly with the first application of my findings to the field of particle physics regarding the recent Higgs boson discovery.
For the Higgs boson discovery to be valid, particle collisions must take place without a selection event first being made in order for there to be no omitted-variable bias. When CERN physicist, Adam Jacholkowski, was challenged to prove if such an event could indeed take place, he responded:
"@ Manuel You write, "...to prevent the particle beams from intersecting in order to prevent the selection events from happening. If you still have collision effects then the two acts of selection did not cause the particle collision effects and you would have proven my findings invalid." OK, but this is something we are doing routinely when the beam is lost accidentally, when testing the apparatus without beam (noise study), when collecting cosmics in our apparatus for the calibration purpose (alignment), when there is only one circulating beam in the accelerator (for beam-gas background study) etc. In all these cases we do not see any event of interest from the physics point of view that is we do not observe any kind of collisions. So what is your conclusion in this case?"
My response, "You have validated my findings". As confirmed by physicist Adam Jacholkowsk, particle collision experiments cannot take place without the selection event of two particle beams intersecting. In conclusion, by not accounting for which type of mutually exclusive selection event (direct or indirect) caused the particle collision effects, by scientific standards, a discovery cannot be made or founded on omitted-variable bias.
Bottom line, if the Tempt Destiny findings are not based on reality then it does not matter who backs them for only Nature has the final say... you know, as in the Final Selection Thought Experiment. The findings need to answer to Nature, not man.
Assumed Higgs Boson Discovery Proved Einstein Right - ( New Window )
Let me guess, the multiole restraining orders people have put out on you confirm NATURE as well?
One of the dumbest shits stated on BBI...and this place is chocked full of dumb shits. Not a single person wants your kind of crazy here, man. Just read through this entire thread or any other threads you've posted on. Not a single person had agreed with your dumb shit-based quackery...NOT.A.SINGLE.PERSON.
You have a serious mental problem, dude...seriously, seek help.
Funny, I stopped keeping track for they are constantly increasing and since my findings are universal it crosses into particle physics - biology - economics - cosmology, etc. But since you have a hard-on about who are in agreement with my findings, I'll give one of the ones that I value since it relates directly with the first application of my findings to the field of particle physics regarding the recent Higgs boson discovery.
For the Higgs boson discovery to be valid, particle collisions must take place without a selection event first being made in order for there to be no omitted-variable bias. When CERN physicist, Adam Jacholkowski, was challenged to prove if such an event could indeed take place, he responded:
"@ Manuel You write, "...to prevent the particle beams from intersecting in order to prevent the selection events from happening. If you still have collision effects then the two acts of selection did not cause the particle collision effects and you would have proven my findings invalid." OK, but this is something we are doing routinely when the beam is lost accidentally, when testing the apparatus without beam (noise study), when collecting cosmics in our apparatus for the calibration purpose (alignment), when there is only one circulating beam in the accelerator (for beam-gas background study) etc. In all these cases we do not see any event of interest from the physics point of view that is we do not observe any kind of collisions. So what is your conclusion in this case?"
My response, "You have validated my findings". As confirmed by physicist Adam Jacholkowsk, particle collision experiments cannot take place without the selection event of two particle beams intersecting. In conclusion, by not accounting for which type of mutually exclusive selection event (direct or indirect) caused the particle collision effects, by scientific standards, a discovery cannot be made or founded on omitted-variable bias.
Bottom line, if the Tempt Destiny findings are not based on reality then it does not matter who backs them for only Nature has the final say... you know, as in the Final Selection Thought Experiment. The findings need to answer to Nature, not man. Assumed Higgs Boson Discovery Proved Einstein Right - ( New Window )
If you cant keep track of all those commending you regarding this why is it so hard to actually show those in support of it?
Everytime you make claims like these without the actual verification of support, you appear to be full of shit. Throwing around grandiose claims that have nothing to support them illustrates the duplicity of what you are doing.
I hope you put your silliness away for a moment and realize that the only reason you are still on this board is because the whole board finds you amusing in a weird way. It is not often we get to view such apparent horseshit that allows us to see the mind of the delusional.