George Noory Sucks! - The Definitive Compendium

[Gd5150]

Always interesting when a scientist challenges the scientific status quo. Always shines a big spotlight on the wonderful open mindedness of the left who control the um education system. How dare he. Everyone knows Darwin is fact along with the Big Bang, global warming, and a geocentric universe.

Looking forward to Les Gold on Friday. Great show. Great guy. His kids are idiots.

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

Yes, I would certainly say the left is generally more open-minded than the right and evolution (not "Darwinism"), the Big Bang, and global warming are well established facts so I don't get your sarcasm.  However, it was nice to listen to an intelligent, well researched challenge to the status quo.  I was afraid George was going to give him the boot for being too cerebral.

[Mind Flayer Monk]

I was afraid George was going to give him the boot for being too cerebral.

Haha no way. He was reinforcing one of Jorch's preconceived notions.
Anyway the guest was lots of fun. But if there is intelligent design, why have there been so many extinctions in history? If you are out there designing billions of species that just die, wouldn't that be "not-so-intelligent design" or "I've had lots of shots at this, maybe this one is the right one" design? If the designer can't forsee a coming ice age, its probably not god.

[Juan]

Yes, I would certainly say the left is generally more open-minded than the right and evolution (not "Darwinism"), the Big Bang, and global warming are well established facts so I don't get your sarcasm.

There are no well-established facts in science - just current theory. And the recent arguments of the global warming (climate change) people have been just as unreasonable and belief-based as those of the creationists.

[onan]

There are no well-established facts in science - just current theory. And the recent arguments of the global warming (climate change) people have been just as unreasonable and belief-based as those of the creationists.

Science is always reconsidering it's theories. And to do so takes a great deal more discipline than believing the earth is 6000 years old. The premise that both science and anti-science are both inflexible is just wrong. Science may seem so, but the reality is science is a discipline with many years of evidence and complicated reasonings that take time to learn. For people that are too lazy or missing the fundamental knowledge to understand complicated issues isn't science's fault.




And there are thousands of scientific facts. Pick your endeavor and you will find a myriad of facts.

[PB the Deplorable]

Once some aspect of science becomes politicized, truth and honesty go out the window - as should trust. 

Religious based input on scientific issues doesn't have a great track record either.

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

There are no well-established facts in science - just current theory. And the recent arguments of the global warming (climate change) people have been just as unreasonable and belief-based as those of the creationists.

There are facts in science, just not proofs as in mathematics.  We can't prove that gravitational pull decreases with the square of distance, but we can show its proportionality is between 1/s^1.999999 and 1/s^2.000001 (I chose arbitrary powers because I don't have the actual ones on hand).  Scientific theories are based on factual observations, statistical analysis, and predictive capabilities subject to peer review.  Although open to challenge, scientific theories are factual and not simply hypothesis. 

For example, a reasonable person is not likely to successfully dispute the Big Bang when that theory has predicted the exact Cosmic Microwave Background noise, ratio of hydrogen to helium, and behaviour of sub-atomic particles in particle accelerators that have been observed since it was proposed, as well as the consistency between the age of the stars and the expansion rate we observe of distant galaxies.

[Juan]

I took your "well-established" to refer to larger theories, rather than facts that could be proved.  I accept Ohm's Law, for instance. 
Perhaps I read your post incorrectly.

As for Big Bang, it originated with the idea that everything exploded outwards from a point.  Now, physicists such as Michio Kaku are theorizing that the Big Bang was more like two dimensions (maybe not what he said, but close enough) smashing together.   That's the kind of thing I was referring to by my reference to no facts. 

[Histronic Fop]

Just a reminder that George Noory sucks.

[Agent : Orange]

As for Big Bang, it originated with the idea that everything exploded outwards from a point.  Now, physicists such as Michio Kaku are theorizing that the Big Bang was more like two dimensions (maybe not what he said, but close enough) smashing together.   That's the kind of thing I was referring to by my reference to no facts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane_cosmology

But even these theories are not arbitrary and differ in potentially testable ways from the standard cosmology. These things aren't just made up, they are the logical extension of different theoretical frameworks.

[VtaGeezer]

Meyer is one more in the parade of pseudo-scientific cherry-pickers pointing to lapses and gaps in the very complete evolutionary record to claim its wrong.  He might as well say that the Dead Sea Scrolls aren't really about Judaism because they're fragmented, have huge gaps, and the scholars of 1955, limited to microscope and film photos, got different results from the scholars of 2013 who have access to electron microscopes, age-determining technologies, and computers.  BTW, "Dr." Meyers earned his PhD in History.


I chuckled when he so seriously stated that the renowned naturalist Azaggiz (1807-1873) had issues with Darwin's research. Yep, and most of his contemporary MDs still thought washing their hands was a waste of time, and Schiaperelli was studying canals on Mars, and DNA was utterly inconceivable. 


I think that if you scratch Meyer, you'll find an evangelical fundie.  This show was a stealth religious propaganda.


The first hour was wasted on dedging up the bullshit "Flt 800 was shot down" conspiracy.  The people who produced the new video are ghouls feeding on the dead. Conspiracy crap used to be entertaining...now its become malicious and corrosive. They always put the conspiracy crap in the first hour to hook the incurious dolts who don't stay up late for Noory's std drek.

[ItsOver]

"How did the intelligent design, Steven, get intelligent?" - Jorch

Intelligence...something Noory will never get.

[PB the Deplorable]

Intelligence...something Noory will never get.

That's right up there with George pondering why the Dark Ages were dark:


"I want to go back to the dark ages and find out what the reason was. I think it was an asteroid or a meteor blocking the sun"




Hoo knoowze!

[GeorgieForPresident2216]

I took your "well-established" to refer to larger theories, rather than facts that could be proved.  I accept Ohm's Law, for instance. 
Perhaps I read your post incorrectly.

As for Big Bang, it originated with the idea that everything exploded outwards from a point.  Now, physicists such as Michio Kaku are theorizing that the Big Bang was more like two dimensions (maybe not what he said, but close enough) smashing together.   That's the kind of thing I was referring to by my reference to no facts.

I'm sorry, I edited my second post several times and it came out a little fragmented.  I think you will find the devil is in the details.  Surprisingly, whether or not the universe came from a singularity is not a deal breaker in the Big Bang Theory.  Science can not yet validate whether that happened or not.  Similarly the early epoch of inflation can not yet be validated by the scientific method.  So you are right, a lot of theoretical information presented by the scientific community is not validated and could be subject to complete revision or is outright wrong.

However, the process of expansion since a very tiny fraction of a second after the initial formation (by extrapolation.. that tiny fraction of a second could have actually been trillions of years), comprises the Big Bang Theory and I think is virtually iron clad.

Similarly while a lot of details of evolution are missing or poorly understood, my understanding is those who study it do not consider it in question.  The evidence is as strong as any can be and challenges fall short.  The guest last night sounded like a very intelligent man, but when I hear someone use Darwin as his primary reference I have to question him.  Darwin was just sticking his foot into a very large and very deep ocean.  Also, his arguments seemed to fall into the "I don't understand how this process works" category rather than actually presenting an alternative mechanism.

As for global warming, I will admit that is a closely held belief of mine but I don't know enough about the scientific evidence so I guess I can't comment on it.

I hope none of this sounded offensive to your views.  I have spent much of my life thinking about this sort of thing and wanted to clarify my thoughts.   Sorry for the long post and lack of Noory comments.

[Quick Karl]

I'm sorry, I edited my second post several times and it came out a little fragmented.  I think you will find the devil is in the details.  Surprisingly, whether or not the universe came from a singularity is not a deal breaker in the Big Bang Theory.  Science can not yet validate whether that happened or not.  Similarly the early epoch of inflation can not yet be validated by the scientific method.  So you are right, a lot of theoretical information presented by the scientific community is not validated and could be subject to complete revision or is outright wrong.

However, the process of expansion since a very tiny fraction of a second after the initial formation (by extrapolation.. that tiny fraction of a second could have actually been trillions of years), comprises the Big Bang Theory and I think is virtually iron clad.

Similarly while a lot of details of evolution are missing or poorly understood, my understanding is those who study it do not consider it in question.  The evidence is as strong as any can be and challenges fall short.  The guest last night sounded like a very intelligent man, but when I hear someone use Darwin as his primary reference I have to question him.  Darwin was just sticking his foot into a very large and very deep ocean.  Also, his arguments seemed to fall into the "I don't understand how this process works" category rather than actually presenting an alternative mechanism.

As for global warming, I will admit that is a closely held belief of mine but I don't know enough about the scientific evidence so I guess I can't comment on it.

I hope none of this sounded offensive to your views.  I have spent much of my life thinking about this sort of thing and wanted to clarify my thoughts.   Sorry for the long post and lack of Noory comments.

Where did the singularity come from?

[Mind Flayer Monk]

The guest just made a comment along the lines of how frustrating it is when you are trying to get through to someone and they aren't listening.
GN: Yes it is.




GN: I believe Jane Goodall is dead.
2-3 minutes later
GN: Producer has just informed me that Jane Goodall is alive and living in the UK.


Tommy not working tonight I see.

[Sardondi]

That's right up there with George pondering why the Dark Ages were dark: "I want to go back to the dark ages and find out what the reason was. I think it was an asteroid or a meteor blocking the sun"...

Tell me he did not - surely this is a joke, no? I...I'm not sure I can go on living knowing a man this incredibly doltish is permitted by society to draw breath.

[popple]

I hope more guests slip things in like that to see if Jorch is paying attention. They should try to one-up each other with how ridiculous they can get.

[Morgus]

Tonight Noory was wrong on guessing if celebrities were alive or dead.
He thought actor Jack Palance is still alive, but he died back in 2006.
Art Bell already did shows on that phenomena years ago where some people though some celebrity had died when they didn't, like a timeline shift.

[Mind Flayer Monk]

Fking hell, Cynthia Sue Larson has solved the Left Sock Mystery. This is where all my left socks keep disappearing to. Another dimension. Lost in the time stream.

[valdez]

...Sorry for the long post and lack of Noory comments.

Excellent post.  Like the old saying goes, "less Noory, more physics!"
 

...I'm not sure I can go on living knowing a man this incredibly doltish is permitted by society to draw breath.

Tonight's guest mentioned something about the Matrix movie; how a cat and it's odd movements indicated a glitch in the matrix (I saw the movie once years ago and don't recall any of it, except for something about an old lady, though that Keanu Reeves fella seems like a nice enough guy).  Perhaps George's success is an indication of some sort glitch in our dimension, or reality, or our semi-capitalistic market driven system.

...This is where all my left socks keep disappearing to. Another dimension. Lost in the time stream....

I thought yesterday's guest, Stephen Meyer, was cool and handled George perfectly.  He stayed on track and focused no matter what ole George did to drag things down.  I was especially impressed by something he said about how the chemistry of DNA itself had a digital coding, thus concluding that if there is a "program" there has to be a programmer.  Most of the interview was filled with stuff like that.  I would love to hear him in a debate with someone on the opposite side so that these points can be made and kicked about, and trashed, and stamped on, and somewhere along the line a glimmer of truth, or something like it, can rear it's ugly head.
     I plead guilty to judging tonight's guest, Cynthia Sue Larson, by her voice, and thinking she was going to be some airhead newage cretin in la-la land, and she kind of was like that, but she also holds a degree in physics and she talked about how weird occurrences, or "reality shifts"  may be manifestations on a larger scale of the bizarre happenings that take place in the quantum world; like those particles that come in and out of existence, and those fields of probability where everything is and isn't at the same time.  But I sensed she was a little frazzled by Noory's disjointedness (that ain't no word for sure), and his insistence on bringing everything back to his lost socks and car keys.  George, your friggin' car keys are lost.  They're gone, man.  Gone.

[ItsOver]

Tonight Noory was wrong on guessing if celebrities were alive or dead.
He thought actor Jack Palance is still alive, but he died back in 2006.
Art Bell already did shows on that phenomena years ago where some people though some celebrity had died when they didn't, like a timeline shift.

I remember Art talking about how he had a vivid memory of Nelson Mandela dying in prison.  He turned the discussion into something fascinating.  The Nooron just turns a wrong memory into another wrong turn.

[Sardondi]

...disjointedness (that ain't no word for sure)...

I think it is not only a "real word", but such an aptly chosen one that its perfection has that ultimate sense of satisfaction of the hefty custom fit in the closing of the action of the master-crafted Purdey 12-bore which His Lordship used in his most recent weekend at Balmoral....

[nooryisawesome]

Could it be a portal?



"If we all had our own solar system, we wouldn't have to worry about that."
From July 19, 2007. During a discussion on solar energy.

"I don't think there's any doubt."
"If you raised a baby and beat it and kicked it and yelled at it, it would turn out to be a mean baby?"
"I truly believe there are other solar systems out there. I really do."

[expat]

I tune out immediately I hear "We are all connected." I'd like to ask these New Age woo-woos if that means I'm connected to every cab driver in Istanbul, and the wives of every beer-swilling piss-artist in Alice Springs. Then when they say "Oh yes, of course!" I'd ask if that had any useful meaning whatsoever.

[b_dubb]

Re: arguments against intelligent design ... I like the bunny confound. Rabbits have to eat their poop to live because of how their digestive system is laid out. Why would a God design an animal like that? Also ... humans are really amazing, cerebral beings and opposable thumbs and all that. But a tiny morsel of food in the windpipe and lights out. I call that a major design flaw.

[CampsieNP]

Re: arguments against intelligent design ... I like the bunny confound. Rabbits have to eat their poop to live because of how their digestive system is laid out. Why would a God design an animal like that? Also ... humans are really amazing, cerebral beings and opposable thumbs and all that. But a tiny morsel of food in the windpipe and lights out. I call that a major design flaw.

Poop-eating Bunnies.
Clearly the best explaination against intelligent design I have heard yet. Indisputable in my opinion.
Well done, b_dubb.

[expat]

I call that a major design flaw.

Yes, and what intelligent designer would have made childbirth such a fucking pain in the... ass. Whoever fucked that up did his best to fix it by making women's pelvises unhinge a bit for the Great Event. A truly shite workaround worthy of some 14 year old learning computer programming. Back to the drawing board.

[PB the Deplorable]

That's right up there with George pondering why the Dark Ages were dark:  "I want to go back to the dark ages and find out what the reason was. I think it was an asteroid or a meteor blocking the sun"

Tell me he did not - surely this is a joke, no? I...I'm not sure I can go on living knowing a man this incredibly doltish is permitted by society to draw breath.

One evening George was pacing the room and found himself away from his cue cards during a critical point in a discussion of time travel.   

It was early on in George's tenure - when he was still trying to listen and have conversations, I think the guest laughed and offered a few other choices...

[CampsieNP]

Yes, and what intelligent designer would have made childbirth such a fucking pain in the... ass. Whoever fucked that up did his best to fix it by making women's pelvises unhinge a bit for the Great Event. A truly shite workaround worthy of some 14 year old learning computer programming. Back to the drawing board.

Well, acutally, that WAS by design. God said it was a women's punishment for having sex.