I get email

It’s from another physics and Christianity crank. I wish he’d go bug Paul Davies; I’m a biologist, not a cosmologist.

Atheists are superstitious

1. There is no rational reason to reject the Our Lord Jesus Christ since it is scientifically demonstrated He is Divine and the One and Only True God. Only unscientific minds would reject empirical scientific evidence.

2. The universe is geocentric. Every experiment designed to measure the speed of the earth through space has always returned a speed of zero just as the Bible claimed all along. Only prejudicial minds reject scientific facts. Your leading Pagan cosmology writers offer biases with no scientific proof . Unbeknownst to you is the fact that no one in all history has ever proven that the Earth moves in space. As an honest scientist Lincoln Barnett admits in his book endorsed by Einstein “…nor has any physical experiment ever proved that the Earth actually is in motion.” (Lincoln Barnet, The Universe and Dr. Einstein, p. 73.) Einstein invented his relativity mythology to counter the Michelson-Morley experiments and other innumerable successor experiments demonstrating the earth is immobile in space and at the center of the universe.

“So which is real, the Ptolemaic or the Copernican system? Although it is not uncommon for people to say that Copernicus proved Ptolemy wrong, that is not true. As in the case our normal view versus that of the goldfish, one can use either picture as a model of the universe, for our observations of the heavens can be explained by assuming either the earth or the sun to be at rest.” (The Grand Design, Stephen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow, 2010, pp. 41-42) Hawking cannot face the empirical scientific evidence that Geocentrism is scientifically proven and heliocentrism disproven. In his bias he ridiculously opts to put the two systems on the same level.

3. That the myth of Copernicanism is the foundation for modern man’s independence from God is a connection that was recognized by the editor of the world’s most prestigious scientific journal. When confronted in the late 1970s with the model of cosmology promoted by the evolutionist well-known physicist George F.R. Ellis – it promoted geocentrism – Paul C. W. Davies, the editor of Nature, was forced to reply: “His new theory seems quite consistent with our astronomical observations, even though it clashes with the thought that we are godless and making it on our own.” (P.C.W. Davies, “Cosmic Heresy?” Nature, 273:336, 1978. In the same article Davies admits: “…as we see only redshifts whichever direction we look in the sky, the only way in which this could be consistent with a gravitational explanation is if the Earth is situated at the center of an inhomogeneous Universe.” Confirming Davies’s agnosticism is a letter he wrote to Dr. Robert Sungenis on Aug. 9th, 2004, stating: “I have long argued against the notion of any sort of God who resides within time, and who preceded the universe.” Davies, however, is honest enough to admit he cannot lightly dismiss Ellis’ science and mathematics that connect the Earth with the center of the universe.

So in addition to being a friend to the Templeton Foundation, a coauthor on the arsenic life paper, and proponent of a bad cancer theory, Davies was, once upon a time, speculating about geocentrism? Somehow I’m not surprised. Here’s the “Cosmic heresy?” paper.

Hey, if Nature can publish kooky weird speculations, who am I to say Jesus ain’t science?

Science you can use!

It’s not to late to sign up to attend the 66th Annual Meeting of the American Physical Society’s Division of Fluid Dynamics meeting, where you can witness this presentation:

Abstract: E9.00003 : Urinal Dynamics

In response to harsh and repeated criticisms from our mothers and several failed relationships with women, we present the splash dynamics of a simulated human male urine stream impacting rigid and free surfaces. Our study aims to reduce undesired splashing that may result from lavatory usage. Experiments are performed at a pressure and flow rate that would be expected from healthy male subjects. (Lapides, J., Fundamentals of Urology, W.B. Saunders, Philadelphia, 1976.) For a rigid surface, the effects of stream breakup and surface impact angle on lateral and vertical droplet ejection distances are measured using high-speed photography and image processing. For free surface impact, the effects of velocity and fluid depth on droplet ejection distances are measured. Guided by our results, techniques for splash reduction are proposed.

Like, aim?

I think I have acquired some insight into the mind of our weird foster cat. She always comes racing into the bathroom when I’m trying to use it, and she peers intently at streams of water and will hop onto the toilet to stare fixedly at the vortex when it flushes. She’s just a wanna-be fluid dynamics physicist!

Good taste and the Tea Party

I was reading about the “million” veterans marching on Washington DC (it was more like a few hundred) when I saw this peculiarly decorated car and learned something new.

hitler-cancer

Surely a car door so flamboyantly and colorfully decorated could not be carrying a lie — maybe smoking doesn’t cause cancer after all. I must check this out. I looked further for more details on this spectacularly informative vehicle. By the way, it’s true that Hitler was a fanatical anti-smoker, and the Nazi government had the first effective anti-smoking campaign.

smokercar

Wow! Who is this person, “Smoker on Strike”? I must learn more about such a wise and authoritative person.

So I found her CV. It is amazing. Did you know she’s looking for work as a web designer?

She designs the most beautiful websites in the world. She says so herself.

By the way, I’m all puked out this morning, so I can safely navigate to those links and suffer barely a ripple of the dry heaves. If your stomach is more robustly occupied right now, you might not want to look.

What does a mangina look like?

I’ve kind of wondered, since I’m always getting called one — and while not really thinking hard about it, I’m aware of the homologies in male and female genitalia and mentally pictured something discrete and reasonably placed. I guess I must have low self-esteem or something, because science fiction authors imagine something grand and huge and dangerous, instead.

John Scalzi has a sketch of the Kaiju Mangina, and it is awesome and terrifying and silly. And then Howard Tayler drew the Brobot reaction, and it is perfect.

By the way, the drawing is by KB Spangler.

What if you don’t have a pineapple?

Sometimes, the British get very silly in their defense of religion. The Muslim groups got very very offended when the atheists slapped a label on a pineapple calling it “Mohammed”, and now the LSE has outright banned atheist groups, and is harassing them for wearing Jesus & Mo t-shirts.

I don’t have a pineapple, I am sad to say. I was tempted to run out and buy one. But I can do one better.

Meet Mohammed.

MO

As an added bonus, he’ll keep longer than a piece of fruit would.

Do you have a Mohammed at your house? You should get one.

“Mindy” sounds nothing like “Xena”

Have you heard about this book, Warrior Princess, by Mindy Budgor? It’s about a young California woman who spent a whole 3 months to become a mighty Warrior Princess of the Maasai. They’re discussing this blithe bit of cocksure cultural imperialism at Making Light. I rather liked this comment:

Some daft billionaire ought to sponsor scholarships for curious Masai and Amazonians who want to study the rich spiritual traditions of Ozarks auto mechanics, or take part in the initiation rites of Dakota wheat farmers.

I know about those Dakota rites. They all involve cow tipping, so there is a deep spiritual linkage with the Maasai already.