>>511424358
In today's world many people characterize themselves as being "scientists".
Only those who always carefully follow the scientific method are deserving of that title.
Scientists are distinguishable from artists, poets, musicians, and others in that they use what is known as the "scientific method".
It is not that "inspiration" or "the muse" is not valuable in science, it is but it is not the starting point of what we call science.

In the process called the scientific method a true scientist will:
>observe nature and carefully record what is seen.
>seek patterns in the observed data, put numbers on the data, fit equations to those numbers.
>generalize those equations into a word description of the process - this is a hypothesis.
>carry out experiments and/or gather independent data to see how well the hypothesis predicts future observations and results. This is called "closing the loop" on your hypothesis.
>reject, or modify the hypothesis if the experiments show it falls short of success in these predictions.
>only after the results of several experiments have been successfully predicted by the hypothesis, can it be called a theory.

If two different theories predict a given phenomenon equally well, the simpler theory is probably the best one.
this principle is called Occams Razor.
theories can never be proven to be correct, some other mechanism entirely may be the cause of the observed data.
but theories can be disproved if they fail to predict the outcomes of additional experiments.
such theories are termed to be falsified.
Sometimes the scientific method as described above is called the "empirical method".

>>510472971
Astronomers who have recently re examined Ptolemys original data soon realized that retrocalculations of the planets proved that many of Ptolemys so called observations were wrong.
The errors were gross even by the standards of ancient astronomy that there is also no longer any doubt that Ptolemy plagiarized the work of the earlier Hipparchus.
the earlier star catalogue compiled by Hipparchus conducted his observations from the island of Rhodes.
This Greek island lies five degrees of latitude north of Alexandria (where Ptolemy was).
This makes for a five degree band of southern stars that can be seen from Alexandria but not from Rhodes.
Not a single one of the 1022 stars that Ptolemy listed in his catalogue is to be found in this five degree band.
Moreover, every example given in the Almagest of how to work out spherical astronomy problems is given for a latitude the same as that of Rhodes.
all his own observations are fraudulent, so far as we can test them.
Many of the observations that he attributes to other astronomers are also fraud that he has committed.
His work is riddled with theoretical errors and with failures of comprehension.
His models of the moon and Mercury conflict violently with elementary observation and must be counted as failures.
in rejecting the earlier belief that the planets revolved around the Sun, Ptolemy was responsible for preventing the advance of astronomy for a millennium.
Ptolemy also has caused us to lose much of the genuine work in Greek astronomy and it would have been better for astronomy had the Almagest never been written.

>>22941947
Astronomers who have recently re examined Ptolemys original data soon realized that retrocalculations of the planets proved that many of Ptolemys so called observations were wrong.
The errors were gross even by the standards of ancient astronomy that there is also no longer any doubt that Ptolemy plagiarized the work of the earlier Hipparchus.
the earlier star catalogue compiled by Hipparchus conducted his observations from the island of Rhodes.
This Greek island lies five degrees of latitude north of Alexandria (where Ptolemy was).
This makes for a five degree band of southern stars that can be seen from Alexandria but not from Rhodes.
Not a single one of the 1022 stars that Ptolemy listed in his catalogue is to be found in this five degree band.
Moreover, every example given in the Almagest of how to work out spherical astronomy problems is given for a latitude the same as that of Rhodes.
all his own observations are fraudulent, so far as we can test them.
Many of the observations that he attributes to other astronomers are also fraud that he has committed.
His work is riddled with theoretical errors and with failures of comprehension.
His models of the moon and Mercury conflict violently with elementary observation and must be counted as failures.
in rejecting the earlier belief that the planets revolved around the Sun, Ptolemy was responsible for preventing the advance of astronomy for a millennium.
Ptolemy also has caused us to lose much of the genuine work in Greek astronomy and it would have been better for astronomy had the Almagest never been written.

>>509345567
Like the Saturnian deity of other nations, Quetzalcoatl was considered as the creator.
Like the Saturnian deity of other nations, Quetzalcoatl was also a civilizer.
As in the Saturnian myths of other nations, Quetzalcoatl was the original one and only god.
it is the Mesoamerican belief that when Quetzalcoatl died, his heart flew up and turned into the Morning Star, an event that is duplicated in the mythology of the Egyptian Osiris/Saturn.

also all the great gods of the Aztec pantheon, both the tribal gods and those they won over (from preceding or neighboring civilizations), have a solar aspect and are the Sun in one of its attributes.
It may thus seem understandable when Quetzalcoatl himself is identified as an aspect of the Sun.
The Codex Borgia actually reinforces this belief when it depicts Quetzalcoatl with the sign of Tonatiuh on the back of his head, since Tonatiuh had always been understood to be the Sun. And yet, the depiction in question incorporates the sign for "night" with that of Tonatiuh, thus intimating that Tonatiuh and, by inference, also Quetzalcoatl, was a sun of night.
That the sun of night was an aspect of the primeval Saturnian sun is well known.

>>507963529
Evidence from probes that have visited comets argue against their being "dusty snowballs".
They appear to be solid bodies like asteroids and minor planets in every way except for their highly elliptical orbits.
their highly eccentric orbits cause them to pass through regions of significantly different voltage within the Suns plasmasphere.
Recall that there is a weak electric field emanating outward from the Sun.
The solar plasma near the Sun is at a higher electrical potential (voltage) than is the plasma out in the far reaches of the solar system.
Because comets spend much more time in the outer (lower voltage) reaches of their orbits than they do in the near Sun (higher voltage) region, they reach voltage equilibrium with the low voltage of the Suns outer plasma.
as a comet approaches the inner range of its orbit, the voltage difference between it and the solar plasma through which it is traveling rapidly increases.
As current flows to the comet in response to this voltage difference, the well known cometary effects appear: a tail and coma plasma sheath in glow mode surrounding the comet nucleus and jets (plasma arc discharges sometimes pointed in the direction of the Sun) that produce the craters observed on comet surfaces.
it is also this electric discharge that forms the amino acids, the building blocks of protein.

I reported every nose-posting attention tranpire in this thread.
>>>/soc/

@grok what is the ffmpeg command to create a 720x1280 resolution soundless webm that's just slightly under 4 MB using an mp4 input?