return to index page


Too Much Fun To Pass Up

we've decided to start this page simply because it seems kind of fun. Well, at first it seemed fun. Now it's just become something between sad and scary.

see this comment on Dark Matter and enjoy:

August, 2016 -- Some of science funding comes in very interesting ways, and sometimes a cartoon says it best -- enjoy the comments under it, too.

March, 2016 -- just for fun, a demonstration of femto-photographyshowing light in motion.


January, 2016 -- How astonishing! The Bible actually knows what it is talking about! A study backing the Bible's account of the waters under the crust has come out of Canada. Walt Brown is mentioned at the end of the article. We have also shown that the Flood waters were initiated from the bursting of waters from under the crust, just as the Bible says.

"The ultimate origin of water in the Earth's hydrosphere is in the deep Earth — the mantle,"


December, 2015 --Massive bursts of gamma rays have been coming from our Galaxy's center. Standard astronomy does not consider the action of electric currents and magnetic fields in a plasmoid, but rather seeks to explain it in terms of elusive dark matter. The article is called "Envisaging the invisible."

The statement is made in the article that When you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth.”

Someone involved in plasma physics has commented: "Of course, when you eliminate high-powered electric activity as impossible, you are left chasing rabbits."

December, 2015 -- the following quotes are from De Broglie's book, ‘New Perspectives in Physics’, 1962, Ch.3 p. 30/31 :

“[In concluding my brief survey of the nuclear field,] I should like to stress the danger that always threatens theorists: the temptation to consider our current knowledge as final. Almost instinctively our intellect tends to make apparently complete syntheses based on knowledge, which is – and no doubt will always remain – fragmentary. Such syntheses are often extremely valuable in guiding scientific research, but we must always be careful not to attribute to them a permanency which they lack. Instances of such ‘final’ interpretations abound in the history of science...

“Thus with every advance in our scientific knowledge new elements come up, often forcing us to recast our entire picture of physical reality. No doubt, theorists would much prefer to perfect and amend their theories rather than be obliged to scrap them continually. But this obligation is the condition and the price of all scientific progress.”

Another appropriate quote (Ch. 15 p. 205):
“Although rigorous axiomatic theories cannot be called useless, they do not generally make any great contributions to important scientific advances simply because they ignore intuition, which alone can reveal previously unknown facts.”


August, 2015 -- The Need for Venture Science -- it seems there are a number of people who are beginning to realize that there is a good part of 'standard' science as it is taught and blindly believed that put it nicely..nonsense.

July, 2015 -- Science is not done by celebrity. An Authority having a Nobel Prize is no guarantee that his or her utterances even make sense, let alone count as science or mathematics.

That quote says what needs to be said as a Nobel prizewinner in Physics "answers" an eleven-year-old boy's question: A Nobel Laureate Talking Nonsense: Brian Schmidt, a Case Study.

Why are we all so afraid of common sense?


July, 2015 -- the data, and experiments, might be important....ya think?

Very few people know that a good deal of what is taught in physics and astronomy is based purely upon theory. Data is "cherry picked" (only those data that support the theory are allowed to be considered) so that the theory in favor will not be upset. There are those, however, who really do think data are important, and they are finally speaking up. In the meantime, his adherence to data is exactly what Barry Setterfield has been ridiculed for. It gets interesting...

Today, our most ambitious science can seem at odds with the empirical methodology that has historically given the field its credibility.


April, 2015 -- the results of ignorance

Well, they know not to vote Republican because Republicans are so evil, but they know nothing about our own atmosphere. 11,000 sightings of UFO's in California? Right. What most of them are seeing are called sprites and elves in the atmosphere -- electrical activity that goes on above the clouds and is sometimes visible from the ground.


February, 2015 -- doctored data

We wish this one were fun, but it's not. Even Bill Gates has apparently believed the nonsense about global warming/climate change (being the result of human behavior). But there are a number of us who have taken a look at the data and realize that there is some giantly-funded hood-winking of people all around the world going on:

One of the first examples of these “adjustments” was exposed in 2007 by the statistician Steve McIntyre, when he discovered a paper published in 1987 by James Hansen, the scientist (later turned fanatical climate activist) who for many years ran Giss. Hansen’s original graph showed temperatures in the Arctic as having been much higher around 1940 than at any time since. But as Homewood reveals in his blog post, “Temperature adjustments transform Arctic history”, Giss has turned this upside down. Arctic temperatures from that time have been lowered so much that that they are now dwarfed by those of the past 20 years.


2/26/14 -- whoops, we're not responsible....

Patrick Moore, a Canadian ecologist and business consultant who was a member of Greenpeace from 1971-86, told members of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee environmental groups like the one he helped establish use faulty computer models and scare tactics in promoting claims man-made gases are heating up the planet.

“There is no scientific proof that human emissions of carbon dioxide (CO2) are the dominant cause of the minor warming of the Earth’s atmosphere over the past 100 years,” he said.

Even if the planet is warming up, Moore claimed it would not be calamitous for men, which he described as a “subtropical species.”


9/9/13 -- Not Even Wrong:

Theoretical physics is at a crossroads right now…In a sense we’ve entered a very deep crisis.
You may have heard of some of these models…There’ve been grand unified models, there’ve been super-symmetric models, super-string models, loop quantum gravity models… Well, nature turns out to be simpler than all of these models.

If you ask most theorists working on particle physics, they’re in a state of confusion.

The extensions of the standard model, like grand unified theories, they were supposed to simplify it. But in fact they made it more complicated. The number of parameters in the standard model is about 18. The number in grand unified theories is typically 100. In super-symmetric theories, the minimum is 120. And as you may have heard, string theory seems to predict 10 to the power of 1,000 different possible laws of physics. It’s called the multiverse. It’s the ultimate catastrophe: that theoretical physics has led to this crazy situation where the physicists are utterly confused and seem not to have any predictions at all.