😵‍💫 Skitzocow Brad Watson / Richard Bradshaw Watson / Brad Watson_Miami - Jesus & Albert Einstein reincarnated, discoverer of GOD=7_4 Theory

[Frank Rizzo]

"Jupiter accounts for 74% of the planetary gravitational/tidal forces affecting the Sun." Couldn't source this.

I tried googling this to see what results would come up.

Shock of shocks, the only four results that showed up were Space Jesus' articles or wiki's.

 

[Johnny Bravo]

I really don't think the planets' gravity has any affect on our sun whatsoever, considering the sun is the most massive object in our solar system.

Brad please come back.

 

[WWWWolf]

He bills himself as author of the sequel/prequel to the Bible & Qur'an, which is a shrewd business move by him.

...sorry, got distracted watching this documentary about that guy who also wrote a sequel to Quran. This guy sounds just as legit.

 

[Adamska]

Err... check your post @Gene Parmesan . You state that Uranus is the 8th planet from the sun (which is incorrect), and then state it's the 7th three statements down (which is correct). Just an fyi.

To add to Galileo's contributions to Astronomy, he didn't spot any new planets; he spotted several of Jupiter's moons (nicknamed the Galilean moons), which stuffed up geocentrism. The first non-classical planet was Uranus, discovered by William Herschel like 175 or so years later.

To add in another language that outdoes English, I seem to recall Spanish has more speakers than English too.

 

[wagglyplacebo]

I really don't think the planets' gravity has any affect on our sun whatsoever, considering the sun is the most massive object in our solar system.

Brad please come back.

I'm starting to think that he is legitimately looking over ravenors case file of blasphemy to figure out what punishment he deserves. Either that or he took Franks veto seriously. but yeah please come back brad.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

Err... check your post @Gene Parmesan . You state that Uranus is the 8th planet from the sun (which is incorrect), and then state it's the 7th three statements down (which is correct). Just an fyi.

To add to Galileo's contributions to Astronomy, he didn't spot any new planets; he spotted several of Jupiter's moons (nicknamed the Galilean moons), which stuffed up geocentrism. The first non-classical planet was Uranus, discovered by William Herschel like 175 or so years later.

To add in another language that outdoes English, I seem to recall Spanish has more speakers than English too.

Thank you for catching that. I'll admit I had trouble switching in and out of contexts for when he's including earth, like Uranus is the 7th planet and when he's not, when Jupiter is the 4th planet.

I had to 'my very earthly mother' about a dozen times while reading what he wrote, so I wouldn't be surprised if I botched another one.

As far as Spanish's placement, it could be. From what I saw it has more NATIVE speakers than English, but (relatively) few secondary speakers. English has fewer native speakers, but actually has more secondary speakers than native by a large margin.

It can almost be said that if you lined up everyone who spoke English as their mother tongue and then created a line of everyone who spoke it as a second language, the second language line would almost be double the first line.

In either case, neither is the top dog.

 

[WWWWolf]

Do you like the purple font?

You should respect the ways and manners of those who came before you.

In the future, please use big text with green colour. Also introduce lots of typos to your text, and add "Untitled Document" every so often. Skeleton pictures are optional.

 

[MurcDusen]

"Jupiter accounts for 74% of the planetary gravitational/tidal forces affecting the Sun." Couldn't source this.

I did some calculating and I get something around 91%.

Spoiler: some physical acknowledgments

I only included the four heaviest objects (Jupiter, Saturn, Uranus and Neptune) from the list on Wikipedia, as the masses of other objects in our solar system get so ridicolously small (compared to Jupiter). So the real number is probably a tad lower.
(I know distance is a huge factor as well, but the force between Mercury and the Sun is only about half of the force between Saturn and the sun, and that was already less than a tenth of the one between Jupiter and the Sun)

I really don't think the planets' gravity has any affect on our sun whatsoever, considering the sun is the most massive object in our solar system.

They do, even though it might be just a really small effect. Every object with mass excerts gravitational force on any other object with mass (well, and some massless things apparently like photons and even space and time). It's just that this force is dependant on the masses of both objects (meaning that not one object really excerts a force on the other one, but both the same on each other) and that it decreases drastically over distance.

"Out of these 7 planets, 4 are non-rocky gas or ice giants." Again, arbitrary combination.

You mean the differentiation between rocky and non-rocky planets? To be fair, they have totally different mechanisms of origin and inherently different structures and the differentiation between rocky or "earth-like" planets and gas- or ice-giants is common in planetology (though how that relates to the numbers 4 and 7 is beyond me).

 

[Handsome Pete]

wagglyplacebo,

Are you being sarcastic? Please make your stance very clear; this is important!

Do you believe in GOD: the 'system as a whole'/the 'universal quantum computer'?
Do you believe in God-incarnate (in the Guardin' of Eden, Y'shua ben Yosef, 2nd Coming of the Christ): the original and number 174 programmer/the Creator of all 'true Earth-like plan-its'?


Synchronism: 1/4/15 10:32 "Captain Watson did the best he could." - Zach Johnson on Feherty, Golf Channel

Do you believe theres 2 times in this world ok and
type of time #1: when im blazed
time #2: when im pissd at nerds like u

Oh, and you can't see your signature because Null hates signatures.

 

[Gene Parmesan]

I did some calculating and I get something around 91%.
You mean the differentiation between rocky and non-rocky planets? To be fair, they have totally different mechanisms of origin and inherently different structures and the differentiation between rocky or "earth-like" planets and gas- or ice-giants is common in planetology (though how that relates to the numbers 4 and 7 is beyond me).

I'll be glad to clairfy. So, yes the gas giants and ice giants are dissimilar from the rocky planets. But the ice giants differ from the gas giants in many ways as well. Formed similarly, compositionally very different.... I mean, rather than exposing how little I know about planetary formation and construction, they're distinct enough that science has chose to make the distinction 'gas giant' and 'ice giant' and combining them just to get the number '4' is arbitrary.

 

[Adamska]

They do, even though it might be just a really small effect. Every object with mass excerts gravitational force on any other object with mass (well, and some massless things apparently like photons and even space and time). It's just that this force is dependant on the masses of both objects (meaning that not one object really excerts a force on the other one, but both the same on each other) and that it decreases drastically over distance.

Oh, they do get effected, just by not a whole lot. Stars wobble when they have smaller bodies orbit them. It's how scientists have been able to find extrasolar planets; by charting a star's wobble.

EDIT: Ice Giants are called that because they are mostly composed of heavier elements than just hydrogen and helium. They are mostly composed of stuff like water, methane, and ammonia.

 

[MurcDusen]

they're distinct enough that science has chose to make the distinction 'gas giant' and 'ice giant' and combining them just to get the number '4' is arbitrary.

Ah, okay. Yeah, that's true. And to be fair, unless I just missed the actual theory part of his "theory", all of those "facts" are arbitrary either way (my point was moot to begin with I guess). It also makes this a worse theory than even Timecube, since that at least had some degree of abstraction and... well theorizing. Or is there more to this than just listings of 4's and 7's?

 

[Johnny Bravo]

They do, even though it might be just a really small effect. Every object with mass excerts gravitational force on any other object with mass (well, and some massless things apparently like photons and even space and time). It's just that this force is dependant on the masses of both objects (meaning that not one object really excerts a force on the other one, but both the same on each other) and that it decreases drastically over distance.

Ah, I see what you're saying. Even if Jupiter accounts for 91% of the gravitational force acting on our sun the total amount of force is very small. That begs the question: even if Brad's calculations were correct, why is that significant?

The thing about numerology is if you manipulate the numbers enough you can get them to add up to anything. It's all confirmation bias. If your theory depends on 74 you just engineer all your equations to come out to 74. How you get to 74 is unimportant, all that matters is you get there somehow.

By the way 7 + 4 = 11. Therefore God buys cigarettes from 7-11.

 

[wristwatchswisswatch]

Kiwis, there's a meditation group up every Tuesday in Miami and I'm pretty fucking sure this dude is that one dude who has been running around asking people if they knew their numbers and about numerology. It's really funny.

EDIT: My pal who frequents the meditation (I went once last week) told me the "crazy number man" was named Brandon. I'm definetly going to say hi.

 

[Cubanodun]

wow this thread is more educational than discovery channel

 

[Brad Watson_Miami]

wristwatchswisscheese,

Wrong. I've never been to any "meditation group" and would probably never go to one. DO NOT CURSE on this thread or when talking to me. And don't private message me again.

It's really funny how so many atheists and Christian fundamentalists think I do numerology; I do not. 949O20S.

 

[Educated Stupid]

Now we can have a dialogue and you guys can judge me for yourselves if you so chose. But keep in mind what Jesus son of Joseph said in Matthew 7:1, "Judge not or you will be judged."

Matthew 7 is about hypocrisy, not judging others.
If you look 3 sentences (?) later, giving the passage Matthew 7:4 (7_4, the significant number), you get "How can you say to your brother, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' when all the time there is a plank in your own eye?"
Also, I don't really understand what certain things having the 7_4 pattern really proves. What you have is a pattern, but not what it shows. Could you please elaborate?

 

[Frank Rizzo]

wristwatchswisscheese,

Wrong. I've never been to any "meditation group" and would probably never go to one. DO NOT CURSE on this thread or when talking to me. And don't private message me again.

It's really funny how so many atheists and Christian fundamentalists think I do numerology; I do not. 949O20S.

Sorry about that Brad, some motherfuckers have no fucking manners at all. That shit will never happen again.

 

[Brad Watson_Miami]

Are you God's Judge of All Humanity?

Yes. In my eternal soul's last human incarnation, I was Albert Einstein. 2,000 years ago, I was Y'shua bar Yosef. 6,000 years ago, I was the ET/'God-guy' in the Guardin' of Eden. 500,000,000 years ago, I was the first amphibian.... I AM GOD's 'chosen one'/the Christ.

Are you open-minded to reincarnation? And please, no answers from the 5th Grade class-clown.

 

[Frank Rizzo]

Y'shua ben Yosef

You guys might know him better as Cat Stevens.