- Joined
- Jun 15, 2014
Presenting a poster and 'presenting data' is a lie of omission. In scenario the 1st, there is no credence to the data present. Anyone can do it. In scenario the 2nd there IS credence to the data.Gene Italian Cheese,
You 949020! In your eagerness to attack me, you confused the National Research Council's Decadal Review, Astro 2010 Astro2010 Science White Papers with the NASA Conference Missions for Exoplanets 2010-2020.
Can you find any other data from the GOD=7_4 algorithm/code besides 74 degrees Fahrenheit that you have a problem with?
Did you not see the dozens of other points?
Meaningless pattern finding indicative of nothing. Besides Earth only 1 planet starts with a vowel. SIGNIFICANCE (not significant)Besides Earth, this system has 7 other planets and 4 are non-rocky gas or ice giants.That's correct.
Mmmm...nope. First off the reference to "Saturn" is the reference to the G_D Saturn. So if you get that, you gotta take the days named after Mars and Venus. Don't want days named after gods who are also planets? You don't get Saturn. It's either 2 days are named after celestial bodies or it's 5.In English, the names of the 7 days of the week include 4 that are NOT named after celestial objects74: Sun-day, Moon-day, and Saturn-day are. That's correct.
When the day's name was introduced into English and other Germanic languages, however, the name was selected as a calque of the god Saturn,
This is the whole of my objection, and why what you do is so far from science we call it 'not even wrong'. You pick and choose and change criteria (for this example we count the earth so Uranus is the 8th planet. for this example we don't so Jupiter is the 4th planet). The only criteria you follow is to make the answer 4 and 7. That's not science nor scientific.
Last edited: