the bible code.....hoax?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lipp [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Just figure that at least a somewhat rational mind would be able to scroll through a wiki page and get the jist of it, rather than skip everything, scroll to the conclusion to just see that someone disagrees without knowing why, and clearly knowing no better at the end of it.

---

Make your posts remembering that some teenager might look up this subject & find it in a google search. I checked this thread, and it did.

That's the only reason I bother responding, Lipp. Eco proved herself gormless ages ago on here. Posting w/her education in mind is a lost cause, IMO.

[QUOTE=IndiReloaded;383840]That was posted after Eco stuck her nose into Starbucks thread & claimed I didn't have the background I said. It wasn't even her thread. We were discussing THIS thread.

Anyway, this is still speaking to Ecos insecurity. I mean, which is it? Am I full of shit? If so, then this entire set of posts is moot, right? You are complaining about my flaunting qualifications which don't exist? QUOTE]



lol, now that's funny hahahahaha

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lipp [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Just figure that at least a somewhat rational mind would be able to scroll through a wiki page and get the jist of it, rather than skip everything, scroll to the conclusion to just see that someone disagrees without knowing why, and clearly knowing no better at the end of it.

---

lipp this was a objective discussion and I was interested in all aspects and ALL comments... not to disagree...haha, it so happened that Wikipedia’s conclusion disagreed with the almighty Indi....hahaha and that’s why I personally dismissed it, you don’t have to dismiss or agree or disagree….whatever. like indi said I didn't really care enough to continue discussing something that was irrelevant imo. c'mon lipp you wanna fight????? or have an opinion on the topic at least

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IndiReloaded [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Make your posts remembering that some teenager might look up this subject & find it in a google search. I checked this thread, and it did.

That's the only reason I bother responding, Lipp. Eco proved herself gormless ages ago on here. Posting w/her education in mind is a lost cause, IMO.

---

saving the world huh indi?..you're THAT important hahaha....you're classic indi.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ecojeanne [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

lipp this was a objective discussion and I was interested in all aspects and ALL comments... not to disagree...haha, it so happened that Wikipedia’s conclusion disagreed with the almighty Indi....hahaha and that’s why I personally dismissed it, you don’t have to dismiss or agree or disagree….whatever. like indi said I didn't really care enough to continue discussing something that was irrelevant imo. c'mon lipp you wanna fight????? or have an opinion on the topic at least

---

Just saying, if you want to disagree with someone elses point of view you'd be better off actually understanding the topic and forming a point of view with the wikipedia conclusion backing you, rather than taking the site's word for it even if its possibly out of context.

'fraid that pseudo-science and features of asian males isn't my first two themes of discussion ;) But if you enjoy it, go right ahead, just handle the criticism if you actually try to hold a proper discussion rather than a bucket of flimsy comments.

And stop calling us so serious you meanie :sad2: Now I have to go and eat a bucket of ice-cream. *sulks*

Or cheer me up with this (No, its not a boring speech, they're actually being amusing)

[ame="http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=kAjAtYqczkk&feature=related"]YouTube - McCain at the Al Smith Dinner[/ame]

[ame="http://au.youtube.com/watch?v=v5SWQJWm6Tg"]YouTube - Obama Roasts McCain at Al Smith Dinner[/ame]

Actually, Eco, that last post was very mean of me. I know I've pegged on things (lets just say I have some psych background) and I shouldn't do that. You're fine. Carry on, my bad.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IndiReloaded [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Still at it? You are a sucker for punishment, girl. I seem to remember you wanting ppl to post all the great volunteer work they did in another thread. Now you are saying ppl *shouldn't* save the world from stupid ppl like you?

Oops. Bit of a paradox for you, that.

Ah well. Here, have another post for you to microfocus on & have your last word. Don't forget all the 'hahaha's when you can't find anything clever to say.

Gosh, I DO enjoy making you look stupider than you already are, tho. Whoever called you the LF punching bag got it spot on. Its bad of me, I know, but you just seem so... eager. Do you let your BFs beat on you also? I bet you do. Your self esteem issues are not very far solved, I'm afraid. Perhaps another trip someplace? A decent US college would be my suggestion. Anyway, thanks Eco. :D

---

actually indi i have to say THIS IS FUN!....paradox i think not. I said people SHOULDN'T show off to people the volunteer work they do, just do it quietly....without expecting praise.....and you actually think you're saving the world from stupid people!!!!....those haha's are real, coz you always make me laugh...and you've done it again....hahahahahahahahahahahhaahhahahahahahahaha hahahah

Well, pity you saw what I wrote. I am truly sorry Eco. All the best hun.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ecojeanne [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

i'm not saying i personally know or have seen it mish...haha...this is what the researchers are saying. trying to force 'facts' out of me that i wouldn't have access to let alone anyone else here on LF who's not involved in the research????...:D

---

Well you are the one who posted this:

the researchers have said in response is that they now since use a more concise and so called'impossible' to manipulate methods. the odds are millions upon millions to one aparently.

One would assume you go that information from somewhere and didn't simply make it up? Did you? If you got it from somwhere, please post a link so we can all see it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ecojeanne [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

anyway i had question for you....i'm figuring that you don't believe, i can't decide whether i believe or not. but my question is would you like or prefer to believe the code or would you like or prefer for it to be a hoax?

---

This is like asking "would you like or prefer to believe the sky is blue or would you like or prefer to believe that the sky is made out of spagheti and jello?"

It has already been proven that Bible code (at least as it stands at the moment) is a hoax, the code can be applied to any piece of literature from which any meaning can be derived using the code. It's a fact. What's there to believe?

And you know, perhaps there is an alternative universe out there where the sky really is made out of spagheti and jello, but for the time being (given the choice) I'll stick with believing the sky is blue. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IndiReloaded [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

For the uninformed, scientists who make reports on their work do not hide their data. Its all available publicly & most of it is available online. Someone who did well with a BSc in a relevant field would be able to understand their work.

---

Yeh good one Indi. This so called available online research. Didn't help me much when I was writing my thesis half a year ago just to find out most of those resaearches are "pay for subscription" to access. Not much useful is available for free.

IRNOICALLY!!! The researches that were free, were the ones from major Corporations like from IBM and HP labs. And ironically, they were also very useful.

Eco is very easy to rile up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mishanya [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

Yeh good one Indi. This so called available online research. Didn't help me much when I was writing my thesis half a year ago just to find out most of those resaearches are "pay for subscription" to access. Not much useful is available for free.

IRNOICALLY!!! The researches that were free, were the ones from major Corporations like from IBM and HP labs. And ironically, they were also very useful.

---

Oh, I wish you had asked me then, Mish. Well, I don't know about comp sci, but in biomed you can get most abstracts (and a lot of papers) from sources like Medline or your local library. Tho, sometimes one will have to just compile the refs & then hit the library.

The other way to get those refs online, one many students don't think of, is to find your abstracts & then go to the researcher's website directly (you want to visit the 'corresponding author' site). Speaking from personal experience, I know that most of them have a 'publications' page that has pdfs of all of their published papers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ecojeanne [Dear Guest/Member you have to reply to see the link.click here to register]

yep this is true, the researchers have said in response is that they now since use a more concise and so called'impossible' to manipulate methods. the odds are millions upon millions to one aparently. i think it was an australian mathamatician called mckay that decoded vanilla ice song (that was funny) and he is very much against proof of the code.

this is a battle of the scientists and mathamaticians.

the most recent update 2005 is in wikipedia noted:

Adlerstein (one of the most vocal skeptics) noted that Aumann (20 year researcher of the code and winner of the nobel prize in economics) had come to the conclusion that the codes could neither be proven nor could they be disproven with the scientific methods employed to date.

these are highly regarded scientists that can't agree that the code is real or not still years later after research......it's interesting don't ya think?

---

Perhaps it's best if you don't reproduce.

what the hell?? where did this thread come from?

*Makes Charlie Boy II hit himself on the head with a baseball bat for bringing up an old thread* :emot100: