View Single Post
Old 02-07-2013, 02:53 PM   #55
orangeatheist
Champion of the Godless
 
orangeatheist's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,165
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
I sent Phil PLait an email awhile back - and asked him if he'd read McCanney's comet paper.

Plait never responded to my email -- so I think you must conclude that he never even read it.
Why conclude that? I sometimes send emails to various professionals in fields I have no expertise to ask them questions and I don't always hear back from them. I certainly don't conclude they haven't read the material. For instance, I've written to certain professors of Hebrew to ask them about the meanings of certain words in the Old Testament and I never heard back from them. I didn't conclude these men and women did not read the Bible. I simply concluded they were too busy to respond to every email they get from complete strangers or that my email hit a spam filter. Odd that your conclusion would fall into a conspiratorial cover-up. Why make such an unwarranted assumption? Plait is obviously familiar with McCanny's work as he has written about it.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
I'm sure W*gs likewise never read it. This is the sort of nonsense we have come to expect from the likes of W*gs.
W*gs is totally irrelevant to this topic. Your taking a side route just to poke a snide comment in his direction is unbecoming. Makes you look petty.

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Just be aware you are trashing a science model that's never had a fair chance to be tested. Which of course is what separates the men from the boys.
I'm sorry, I must have missed the list of scientific publications you gave where McCanney submitted his paper and was unfairly rejected. Might you point me to the post where you listed those journals and the documented evidence of unfairness?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
The model deserves a test --
That's what publishing in scientific journals gets you: tests to verify your assertions. Again, to what journals did McCanney submit his paper and what were the results of those submissions?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
because McCanney predicted that comets would be found to produce x-rays.
Had this not been thought of before? Is it crucial to McCanney's model? Does the fact comets produce x-rays confirm the entirety of McCanney's model?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
Mainstream astronomers were shocked when this was confirmed -- back around 1997 -- many years after McCanney introduced his comet model.
So where is it documented that "mainstream astronomers were shocked" when it was discovered comets emit x-rays? How was it discovered that comets emit x-rays? Who made that discovery? Where was that discovery published?

Quote:
Originally Posted by mhgaffney View Post
I've been on the road -- but I will be back soon.
Drive safely.

Last edited by orangeatheist; 02-07-2013 at 02:55 PM..
orangeatheist is offline   Reply With Quote