Get your fill of sci-fi, science, and mockery of stupid people
* FAQ    * Search   * Register   * Login 
Want to support this site? Click

Quote of the Week: "A great civilization is not conquered from without until it has destroyed itself from within." - Will Durant, American historian (1885-1981)


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Quick note and explanation. PostPosted: 2004-02-24 03:03pm
Offline
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Posts: 70016
Location: Toronto, Canada
Stewart at SDI wrote:
Just a quick note to explain that I will reply to your post in a week or so, after I have contacted other experts in the fields being discussed.

Nice copout, jack-ass. I thought you said you were an expert.
Quote:
I noticed that you failed to quote the full text and related articles for the nasa data you cite. If you had read the whole article you would note that the effects were seen for more than 2,000 miles and for a conciderable duration.

For a pair of detonations below 100km altitude, which puts them in the lower atmosphere? No shit. They're even more irrelevant than Starfish, in case you didn't notice. Did you seriously think that part even merited comment? What part of "the atmosphere is different from space" do you not understand?
Quote:
In addition the refferance is from 1957 and when the origional source for the effects of nuclear weapons is consulted, it states that bomb residue is clearly visable to the eye for many seconds after a detonation in space.

Provide the quote in context. Nobody is listening to your convenient "interpretations" of source material any more, not after your voluminous bullshit.
Quote:
Again, what leads you to belive that the dencity of space in the Hoth asteroid field is less dence than that were the "Starfish" shot was done?

We've been over this. "Interplanetary space" vs "upper atmosphere", dumb-ass. Everyone gets this but you.
Quote:
Will reply fully after consulting other experts.

Let me translate that for you:
Stewart from SDI wrote:
[Translated from Stewart-ese into English]

I'll get back to you when I'm done extracting your boot from my ass.

If you didn't have a response (and you obviously don't), you should have been man enough to concede this argument instead of pretending that you'll run off to consult the other members of your imaginary "institute".

I think we all know what kind of institution you belong in, Stewart. It involves men with white coats, but it has nothing to do with research.



Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-02-24 03:16pm
Offline
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Posts: 70016
Location: Toronto, Canada
Stewart at SDI wrote:
Please send any address that I can use to mail photos and documents to you. If you do not wish to give out your home address, work or General Delivery in your or any ajasent town will do. I do not own a scanner and have no idea how to get this stuff to you otherwise. You also have my direct e-mail address to avoid letting everyone else know it.

Sincerly, Stewart.

Let me get this straight: you claim to run your own "strategic defense institute", which is a think-tank that charges huge amounts of money to select military clients for your world-renowned expertise (even though nobody can find it in the yellow pages, white pages, or business registrations for your area), yet you have no scanner and can't afford one? :lol:

*cue sound of violins for Stewart's poor cash-strapped "strategic defense institute"*

Let me take up a collection plate for you. No wait, on second thought, why don't you ask your parents to buy a scanner for you?



Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Quick note and explanation. PostPosted: 2004-03-07 11:38pm
Offline
Pathological liar

Joined: 2004-01-28 09:19pm
Posts: 146
Location: Crystal Lake Il.
Quote:
Nice copout, jack-ass. I thought you said you were an expert.


I am, but you consistantly refuse to aknowledge my supirior training in this aria and claim that your engineering degree makes you more qualified than I am in maters relating to weapons and their effects. What part of your training qualifies you in this aria?

Quote:
For a pair of detonations below 100km altitude, which puts them in the lower atmosphere? No shit.


Wrong again, three times. Yes shit!

There were three detonations that the AEC and DoD concidered to be in space as they defined it. All three were visable for many, 20-40 seconds, by all news paper accounts, from more than 2,200 miles way in Hawii. After all they, the DoD and AEC are experts in this sort of thing and they planed all three test's to determine the effects of nuclear detonations in "space"! (Read "The Secret History of U.S. Nuclear Weapons" by "Chuck Hansen" for compleat details of all three "Space" shots.)

Thirdly, for your information, since it is obiously lacking, the "Lower" atmosphere is that which is below the tropopause, IE below 11,000M. The stratisphere then extends up to ~50Km. Above this is the "Ionisphere" that contains mostly Hydrogen ions and a few "traces" of other gases Ions. NASA conciders this altitude >50Km, to be "Space" as they have awarded "Astronaught's Wings" to several X-15 pilots for flights above it!

Quote:
They're even more irrelevant than Starfish, in case you didn't notice. Did you seriously think that part even merited comment?


Why are they irrelevant? Yes I did, since the people who disigned and conducted all three of the test's designated them to be in "SPACE"! Since they surely know more about these things than you do, I will defere to them. Can you cite anything credible that claims any of the three shots were not in space? After all we all know that your degree does not qualify you to have competent knowledge in this aria!

Quote:
What part of "the atmosphere is different from space" do you not understand?


What part of this do you understand? NASA, the DoD and AEC all agreed that "SPACE" began at altitudes greater than 50 kilometers as far as weapons tests and some other things went. Why are you ignorant of those facts?

Quote:
Provide the quote in context. Nobody is listening to your convenient "interpretations" of source material any more, not after your voluminous bullshit.


I did not interpret anything. I just recalled from my vast memory and I did provide the sources. It's just up to you to read the entire referance to get the data that you desire, or provide a quote and source that disputes my claims. Your oppinions are worth less than mine. I have training in this and related fields. You never claimed that you did have any equivalent.

I have asked repeatedly for you to quote anything that might even hint that the nuclear weapons shots in question would appear any differently than the supposed very large release of energy required to "vaporise" any asteroid. In return all you ever gave is your "oppinion" that the density of the medium surrounding the three shots and the "Starfish-Prime" shot in particular when compaired to your undefined and unspecified "Interplanetary Space" in the Hoth system would make the event as portraid vastly different than all other known similar events!

How does your engineering degree qualify you to have any valid oppinion on this subject? Why should we accept your therory that directly dissagrees with the AEC, DoD and the weaponeers who disigned and conducted the nuclear test shots in question? When they all thought the test shots were in space? Did you study Physics? Cosmotoligy? Astronomy? Aerodynamics? Or to become a aircraft pilot? Any of these subjects might give you a glimps into the reallivant knowledge, but as far as we know, you are ignorant in all of those arias.

Quote:
Again, what leads you to belive that the dencity of space in the Hoth asteroid field is less dence than that were the "Starfish" shot was done?

We've been over this. "Interplanetary space" vs "upper atmosphere", dumb-ass. Everyone gets this but you.[/quote]

One last time. What is the density of "Interplanetary Space" in general and in the Hoth system in particular and how do you know that it is any different than the environment surounding the Nuclear Weapons Effects "Space" Shots in question? I've asked this question several times, but you have continued to duck the qustion.

Quote:
Let me translate that for you:
"Stewart from SDI"][Translated from Stewart-ese into English]

I'll get back to you when I'm done extracting your boot from my ass.


Only in your most vivid dream fantasies could a person of your demonstraited expertise and self imagined strength ever assault by H2H, any person with my expertise and then pretend to live threw it!

Quote:
If you didn't have a response (and you obviously don't), you should have been man enough to concede this argument instead of pretending that you'll run off to consult the other members of your imaginary "institute".


Since you have failed to answer my questions and ignored my expertise in this field, even after stating that your own degree was in an unrelated field, while claiming that it afforded you expert statis that is denieghed me, with a degree in "General Science" that includes hours in Physics, You have belittled my expertise in other fields, without demonstraiting that you have any knowledge what so ever in them, therefore, I am forced to consult with people who's degrees are supirior to your own. In addition, since I would never presume upon our feindships among my colegues, I am forced to go to outside sources to question Phd Physisists and Professors of Cosmotology, Astro-physics and Astronomy.

I origionaly thought to question them by E-mail but did not get a single person willing to be interviewed for an "on line" article. So I changed my tack and drove over 1,000 miles to Millwaky, Beliot, Rockford, Barrington, Chicago and four suburbs, Champainge/Urbana and the Fermi National Laboratory just 30 or 40 miles south of me.

The pitch whent like this; Hello I am Stewart Davies and I am writing an article for publication on line about the differances between science and science fiction. Whould you be willing to answer 8-10 questions over lunch that I am buying at your favorite resturant? When only five of the first twelve agreed, I started to bring a cooler with Sub-Way sandwiches, Sodas and a variety of adult beverages. I then asked if we could do lunch in thier office,if they were to buisy for a resturant, or finaly, just while we walked to were ever they were going. A total of eight Phd-plus type guys agreed to answer the questions. I first gave them prints of the film clip in it's entirety and transcripts down loaded from the debate, then told them that "exact" answers were not required, just thier best oppinions. The questions and thier answers are below. Just think, I got all this for less than $800 bucks worth of wear and tear on the car, expences and ten days of my time. What a bargain!!!:)

1. Given that the asteroid in question is between 20 and 40M long and 12 and 24M in diamiter, has a specific density between 1.5 and 8 and thus masses between <3,400 and >144,000 metric tons, is there any possability what so ever, that this film clip of less than .3 seconds, could be an accurate depiction of 4.18E12 to 4.18E15 Joules, equivilant to ONE KILOTON to ONE MEGATON of TNT'S worth of energy "Vaporising" said asteroid?

All eight answered NO!

2. Can you think of any known mechanism that would alow this film clip to accurately portray the above event?

Again all eight answered NO!

3. Given that all of the several asteroid blastings showed virtually identicle chains of events, all lasting less than 1/2rd of a second, Could the slow fraim rate of 24 per second have missed any significant event that could change you oppinion as stated previously?

All eight answered NO, Again!

4. If the asteroid in the question above were "vaporised" deep in "Interplanetary Space", How many seconds would you expect the resulting incandesant gas to be visable to the naked eye? Would the event happening at an equivilant Earth altitude of 200Km. cange the results above substantialy?

All eight answers ranged fron "a few seconds" to "several tens of seconds" When I pressed, the few seconds became 2-3, maby 10. No, the differance in dencity is not sufficiant to change the results significantly.

5. Given that the camera's possition is reallitivly close to the detonation, could the expanding gas that we would expect to see escape the view fraim durring the 10-12 Ms interfraim time between exposures? Or would it still be visable as it recieded into the distance?

After some discusion about the total number of fraims in the clip, all eight again agreed that it was not possable for the expanding cloud of incandesant gas to escape the camera's view into the distance.

6. Given the irregular, non-spherical shape of the gas/smoke or dust shown in fraim one and the reallitive lack of expansion of same in fraim two, Could the asteroid be compleatly "Vaporised" in fraim one?

All eight answered NO!

7. Given that the appirant volume of the cloud of smoke or gas is between >50,000M.E3 and <400,000M.E3, not counting the volume of the unvaporised asteroid inside, How much of the asteroid would have to be vaporised to make that cloud and what would the density be?

All eight answers ran like this. I'de only be guessing about the total mass, but the density would vary between at most 1 Kg/ME3 at the suface being vaporised to 1E-9 to E-12 Kg./ME3 at the visable edges of the cloud formation.

(Since I did not want to waist my precious interview time, I made these calculations later. If the average dencity is 1E-5 Kg/ME3 then the total mass of the gas in the cloud would be between .5 and 4 kilos! If my calculations are right? Furthermore, if the total suface aria of the smaller size asteroid that we are possiting is 754 million Cm^2 then the depth of vaporisation is thus much less than .01MM, while the larger size needs less than 0.1MM of it's surface vaporised to make the visable cloud seen in the film.)

8. Is there any known mechanism that could make the incandesant gas in fraims 1 and 2 change color by fraim three? What if the gas in fraims one and two were realy smoke or dust, Could secondary or terciary reactions in ordinary high explosive account for the changes as the cloud dissipates?

All eight said yes there was, but absent the expansion required to supercool the gas between fraims, as evidenced by the film, No it's not possable. Two agreed that ordinary HE does sometimes change the color of the smoke generated as the detonation progresses.

9. Given that the ~160 kilogrames of ordinary high explosive in a nominal 750 pound bomb leaves a crater +14M. accross by +2M. deep. Could a simmilar yeald of less than 1,000 kilos of HE compleatly shatter a typical asteroid as we know them, in a manner consistant with that portaid in the film clip shown?

Six did not know, but one said certainly and the last said it probably would not take 100 kilos to get the results seen in the film, even for the largest asteroid possited. He also recomended that I get a copy of "The Blaster's Handbook" published by "E. I. Du Pont D. Namours" to find the required amount and type of explosive to shatter the loose agregate rock that is typical of most asteroids.

10. If you were a contestant in a science quiz show and had to choose one answer below for a million dollar prize, between the two compeeting theories below and highlighted in the text of the down load. Which would you choose?

A. An invisable beam "vaporises" the asteroid in fraim one. There is less than 50% expansion of the resulting gas in fraim two as some bright bolt of "plasma" impacts the incandesant cloud. It expands beyond the bounds of the camera's fraim before fraim three and then leaves a residual smoke cloud of a different color. In fraim four, it shrinks and changes color, getting darker and dimmer. It fades from view completely by fraim eight.

Or.

B. Either an invisable beam or a missile of some kind impacts between fraim 0 and fraim one, and dislodges dust from the surface visable in fraim one. The plasma bolt or missile impacts in fraim two, generating very little aditional expansion of the original cloud of smoke or dust as it detonates. The asteroid shatters in fraim three, leaving behind a cloud of dust and smoke. Larger pieces are not visable either due to poor lighting preventing adiquate exposure of the fast moving fragments or insufficiant resolution of the camera system. The cloud expands slowly over the next three or four fraims and faids from view by fraim eight.

All eight chose answer B!

One Professor reminded me that the missile could have been rocket powered as much of the exhaust is not visable in several types of rocket untill secondary and even terciary reactions take place. The exhaust is visable in fraim one but the missile could have been in the target already.

A second pointed out that if the asteroid was being tracked by a sufficiantly powerfull missile guidance illumination radar, that radar beam could have "micro-waved" the surface of the body enough to cause what little gas we see in fraims one and two to "vaporise". He also pointed out that radar energy flows over the surface of any target untill it is absorbed or hits a discontinuety to be re-radiated. It could therefore burn off mattierial from every side of the body in question.

In addition, if the radar transmision was a "half wave signal of only positive or negitive parts of the wave that a much lower power level could cause the build up of "static" electricity that would cause the dust to jump from the surface and repell it self from every other particle giving the appearance of a smoth surface. He could not think how that half wave transmitter might work but it is more likely than the vaporisation theory "A" above.

There you have it, eight Phd. Proffessors who agree with me and find your explanation untenable. Because they asked me not to publish thier names and or organisations for a variety of reasons not the least of wich was your rude and beligerant behaviour, embarasment at being associated with such trivial persuites and thier buisy schedules, therefore, I am with holding thier names, Etc. I also know you will avoid the points above and asail me for withholding the names, with some crap like I made it all up or some other specious argument, but I don't care, I can proove my sources. Can you find anyone at all with a Phd in physics who will agree with you?

To asail this data you must find equivilant Phd.s that dispute the above findings for the ten questions and ARE WILLING TO PUBLISH THIER NAMES AND INSTITUTIONS FOR PEER REVIEW! At least three of the people that I interviewed will then be willing to enter into a private online debate with your experts and then post an agreed statement.

How many of the posters on this board are willing to put up $100 U.S.D. on which answer, A or B above, that the most Physics Phd's choose? I am! We all know what they say about walk'n and talk'n, are you walk'n or are you $TALK'N$?

P.S. Will post photos tomorrow of previously discussed items.



Stratigic Defense Instatute, We provide Elegant Solutions to your Insolvable Problems.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Quick note and explanation. PostPosted: 2004-03-08 02:43am
Offline
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Posts: 70016
Location: Toronto, Canada
It took you two weeks to come up with this drivel? Pathetic.
Stewart at SDI wrote:
Quote:
Nice copout, jack-ass. I thought you said you were an expert.

I am, but you consistantly refuse to aknowledge my supirior training in this aria and claim that your engineering degree makes you more qualified than I am in maters relating to weapons and their effects. What part of your training qualifies you in this aria?

Basic physics, which is quite obviously more than you possess, all of your lies aside. Interplanetary space is not the same as the upper atmosphere.
Quote:
Wrong again, three times. Yes shit!

There were three detonations that the AEC and DoD concidered to be in space as they defined it.

Oh I see, and could you provide the quote where they explicitly stated that all of the published data showing the ionosphere to be many orders of magnitude denser than interplanetary space is incorrect? Oh wait, you can't, because it doesn't exist.
Quote:
All three were visable for many, 20-40 seconds, by all news paper accounts, from more than 2,200 miles way in Hawii. After all they, the DoD and AEC are experts in this sort of thing and they planed all three test's to determine the effects of nuclear detonations in "space"! (Read "The Secret History of U.S. Nuclear Weapons" by "Chuck Hansen" for compleat details of all three "Space" shots.)

Actually, NASA is generally considered the foremost authority on space-related matters. And accuracy of astrophysical terminology is not the DoD's primary interest.
Quote:
Thirdly, for your information, since it is obiously lacking, the "Lower" atmosphere is that which is below the tropopause, IE below 11,000M. The stratisphere then extends up to ~50Km. Above this is the "Ionisphere" that contains mostly Hydrogen ions and a few "traces" of other gases Ions. NASA conciders this altitude >50Km, to be "Space" as they have awarded "Astronaught's Wings" to several X-15 pilots for flights above it!

And yet they state very clearly on their own website that it is part of the upper atmosphere.
Quote:
Quote:
They're even more irrelevant than Starfish, in case you didn't notice. Did you seriously think that part even merited comment?

Why are they irrelevant? Yes I did, since the people who disigned and conducted all three of the test's designated them to be in "SPACE"! Since they surely know more about these things than you do, I will defere to them. Can you cite anything credible that claims any of the three shots were not in space? After all we all know that your degree does not qualify you to have competent knowledge in this aria!

NASA's own website contradicts your ignorant bullshit.
Quote:
Quote:
What part of "the atmosphere is different from space" do you not understand?

What part of this do you understand? NASA, the DoD and AEC all agreed that "SPACE" began at altitudes greater than 50 kilometers as far as weapons tests and some other things went. Why are you ignorant of those facts?

NASA's own website contradicts your ignorant bullshit.
Quote:
Quote:
Provide the quote in context. Nobody is listening to your convenient "interpretations" of source material any more, not after your voluminous bullshit.

I did not interpret anything. I just recalled from my vast memory and I did provide the sources. It's just up to you to read the entire referance to get the data that you desire, or provide a quote and source that disputes my claims. Your oppinions are worth less than mine. I have training in this and related fields. You never claimed that you did have any equivalent.

Actually, I could have claimed all kinds of things, if I were as dishonest as you. Unverified claims count for precisely dick, which is why I made a point of linking to specific references. Something which you have conspicuously failed to do.
Quote:
I have asked repeatedly for you to quote anything that might even hint that the nuclear weapons shots in question would appear any differently than the supposed very large release of energy required to "vaporise" any asteroid. In return all you ever gave is your "oppinion" that the density of the medium surrounding the three shots and the "Starfish-Prime" shot in particular when compaired to your undefined and unspecified "Interplanetary Space" in the Hoth system would make the event as portraid vastly different than all other known similar events!

Yes, when you change the environment of a nuclear blast, its interaction with that environment will change. This is not just my "opinion"; it is basic logic. It is also backed up by NASA itself; a fact which you conspicuously and conveniently and repeatedly ignore.
Quote:
How does your engineering degree qualify you to have any valid oppinion on this subject?

I know basic physics, which is more than enough to refute your ignorant bullshit. Your claims of superior expertise are worth precisely dick, since everyone knows you have been lying through your teeth since Day One.
Quote:
Why should we accept your therory that directly dissagrees with the AEC, DoD and the weaponeers who disigned and conducted the nuclear test shots in question? When they all thought the test shots were in space? Did you study Physics? Cosmotoligy? Astronomy? Aerodynamics? Or to become a aircraft pilot? Any of these subjects might give you a glimps into the reallivant knowledge, but as far as we know, you are ignorant in all of those arias.

Physics is a required subject in mechanical engineering, you idiot. Mechanical engineering is applied physics. Thanks for demonstrating yet again that your knowledge amounts to that of a high school kid.
Quote:
One last time. What is the density of "Interplanetary Space" in general and in the Hoth system in particular and how do you know that it is any different than the environment surounding the Nuclear Weapons Effects "Space" Shots in question? I've asked this question several times, but you have continued to duck the qustion.

More lies. I answered this question a long time ago, to deafening silence from you. See http://bbs.stardestroyer.net/viewtopic. ... 859#929859 for the details. For the umpteenth time, the density of the atmosphere at 400km altitude is between one thousand and one million times the density of interplanetary space.
Quote:
Only in your most vivid dream fantasies could a person of your demonstraited expertise and self imagined strength ever assault by H2H, any person with my expertise and then pretend to live threw it!

Oooooooh, I'm soooooo scared. Didn't your Mommy ever tell you that nobody gives points in a debate for bragging about how big and strong you are?
Quote:
Since you have failed to answer my questions and ignored my expertise in this field

I answered your questions with numbers, statements, a graph, and even direct quotes from NASA; you ignored it all. As for your claims of "expertise", give it a rest. No one believes you.
Quote:
even after stating that your own degree was in an unrelated field, while claiming that it afforded you expert statis that is denieghed me, with a degree in "General Science" that includes hours in Physics,

"Hours in Physics"? HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!

*takes breath*

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAAA!!!!

What kind of education did you get, where "hours in physics" was considered useful? :lol: Oh, by the way, do you really think that anyone will be impressed by your claim of a degree in "General Science"? Most schools don't even offer such a degree, and those that do are generally low-grade tech schools, because any useful level of competence in modern science requires specialization. BTW, mechanical engineering is applied physics; something you would know if you had a real technical background.
Quote:
You have belittled my expertise in other fields, without demonstraiting that you have any knowledge what so ever in them, therefore, I am forced to consult with people who's degrees are supirior to your own.

Ah yes, unnamed people for whom you can make up even more impressive imaginary credentials. I'm soooooo impressed.
Quote:
In addition, since I would never presume upon our feindships among my colegues,

Of course not, since they don't exist.
Quote:
I am forced to go to outside sources to question Phd Physisists and Professors of Cosmotology, Astro-physics and Astronomy.

I have occasionally consulted Curtis Saxton myself, since he has a PhD in astrophysics. Rest assured that he does not contradict NASA on the fact that the ionosphere is not equivalent to interplanetary space. There is an altitude above which people often consider the density low enough to consider "space" because it is not useful for things like jet propulsion, aerodynamic lift, etc. That does not mean it is actually functionally identical to interplanetary space, and you can whine about that fact until the cows come home but you won't be able to change it.
Quote:
I origionaly thought to question them by E-mail but did not get a single person willing to be interviewed for an "on line" article. So I changed my tack and drove over 1,000 miles to Millwaky, Beliot, Rockford, Barrington, Chicago and four suburbs, Champainge/Urbana and the Fermi National Laboratory just 30 or 40 miles south of me.

Yeah, I'm sure you did. I believe you. You went and drove thousands of miles all over the northeastern United States to question a bunch of science experts (and who all made time for you even though they didn't know you from Adam, of course), all for the purpose of trying to win a "Star Wars vs Star Trek" argument. If that were really true, it would be the most pathetic thing I've ever heard. Luckily, we all know it's not true.
Quote:
The pitch whent like this; Hello I am Stewart Davies and I am writing an article for publication on line about the differances between science and science fiction. Whould you be willing to answer 8-10 questions over lunch that I am buying at your favorite resturant? When only five of the first twelve agreed, I started to bring a cooler with Sub-Way sandwiches, Sodas and a variety of adult beverages. I then asked if we could do lunch in thier office,if they were to buisy for a resturant, or finaly, just while we walked to were ever they were going. A total of eight Phd-plus type guys agreed to answer the questions. I first gave them prints of the film clip in it's entirety and transcripts down loaded from the debate, then told them that "exact" answers were not required, just thier best oppinions. The questions and thier answers are below. Just think, I got all this for less than $800 bucks worth of wear and tear on the car, expences and ten days of my time. What a bargain!!!:)

You have a talent for very detailed stories. Perhaps you believe that all of this superfluous detail will convince us that your story is authentic instead of the laughable pile of obvious lies that we all know it is.
Quote:
1. Given that the asteroid in question is between 20 and 40M long and 12 and 24M in diamiter, has a specific density between 1.5 and 8 and thus masses between <3,400 and >144,000 metric tons, is there any possability what so ever, that this film clip of less than .3 seconds, could be an accurate depiction of 4.18E12 to 4.18E15 Joules, equivilant to ONE KILOTON to ONE MEGATON of TNT'S worth of energy "Vaporising" said asteroid?

All eight answered NO!

Wow, all eight of your imaginary friends agreed with you! Yippeeee!
Quote:
2. Can you think of any known mechanism that would alow this film clip to accurately portray the above event?

Again all eight answered NO!

Wow, all eight of your imaginary friends agreed with you! Yippeeee!
Quote:
3. Given that all of the several asteroid blastings showed virtually identicle chains of events, all lasting less than 1/2rd of a second, Could the slow fraim rate of 24 per second have missed any significant event that could change you oppinion as stated previously?

All eight answered NO, Again!

Wow, all eight of your imaginary friends agreed with you! Yippeeee!
Quote:
4. If the asteroid in the question above were "vaporised" deep in "Interplanetary Space", How many seconds would you expect the resulting incandesant gas to be visable to the naked eye? Would the event happening at an equivilant Earth altitude of 200Km. cange the results above substantialy?

All eight answers ranged fron "a few seconds" to "several tens of seconds" When I pressed, the few seconds became 2-3, maby 10. No, the differance in dencity is not sufficiant to change the results significantly.

Wow, all eight of your imaginary friends agreed with you! Yippeeee!
Quote:
5. Given that the camera's possition is reallitivly close to the detonation, could the expanding gas that we would expect to see escape the view fraim durring the 10-12 Ms interfraim time between exposures? Or would it still be visable as it recieded into the distance?

After some discusion about the total number of fraims in the clip, all eight again agreed that it was not possable for the expanding cloud of incandesant gas to escape the camera's view into the distance.

Wow, all eight of your imaginary friends agreed with you! Yippeeee!
Quote:
6. Given the irregular, non-spherical shape of the gas/smoke or dust shown in fraim one and the reallitive lack of expansion of same in fraim two, Could the asteroid be compleatly "Vaporised" in fraim one?

All eight answered NO!

Wow, all eight of your imaginary friends agreed with you! Yippeeee!
Quote:
7. Given that the appirant volume of the cloud of smoke or gas is between >50,000M.E3 and <400,000M.E3, not counting the volume of the unvaporised asteroid inside, How much of the asteroid would have to be vaporised to make that cloud and what would the density be?

All eight answers ran like this. I'de only be guessing about the total mass, but the density would vary between at most 1 Kg/ME3 at the suface being vaporised to 1E-9 to E-12 Kg./ME3 at the visable edges of the cloud formation.

(Since I did not want to waist my precious interview time, I made these calculations later. If the average dencity is 1E-5 Kg/ME3 then the total mass of the gas in the cloud would be between .5 and 4 kilos! If my calculations are right? Furthermore, if the total suface aria of the smaller size asteroid that we are possiting is 754 million Cm^2 then the depth of vaporisation is thus much less than .01MM, while the larger size needs less than 0.1MM of it's surface vaporised to make the visable cloud seen in the film.)

Wow, all eight of your imaginary friends agreed with you! Yippeeee!
Quote:
8. Is there any known mechanism that could make the incandesant gas in fraims 1 and 2 change color by fraim three? What if the gas in fraims one and two were realy smoke or dust, Could secondary or terciary reactions in ordinary high explosive account for the changes as the cloud dissipates?

All eight said yes there was, but absent the expansion required to supercool the gas between fraims, as evidenced by the film, No it's not possable. Two agreed that ordinary HE does sometimes change the color of the smoke generated as the detonation progresses.

Wow, all eight of your imaginary friends agreed with you! Yippeeee!
Quote:
9. Given that the ~160 kilogrames of ordinary high explosive in a nominal 750 pound bomb leaves a crater +14M. accross by +2M. deep. Could a simmilar yeald of less than 1,000 kilos of HE compleatly shatter a typical asteroid as we know them, in a manner consistant with that portaid in the film clip shown?

Six did not know, but one said certainly and the last said it probably would not take 100 kilos to get the results seen in the film, even for the largest asteroid possited. He also recomended that I get a copy of "The Blaster's Handbook" published by "E. I. Du Pont D. Namours" to find the required amount and type of explosive to shatter the loose agregate rock that is typical of most asteroids.

Wow, all eight of your imaginary friends agreed with you! Yippeeee! I did like the part where you fed your imaginary friends your assumption that the asteroid was shattered rather than vapourized, despite all of the times I've had to show you the picture of the asteroid clearly glowing white-hot. You know, this one:
Image
Still waiting for you to answer the point, dumb-ass. Not to mention your moronic claim that the asteroids were "soft lumps of talc" even though they somehow resisted deformation after being impacted by metallic TIE fighters.
Quote:
10. If you were a contestant in a science quiz show and had to choose one answer below for a million dollar prize, between the two compeeting theories below and highlighted in the text of the down load. Which would you choose?

A. An invisable beam "vaporises" the asteroid in fraim one. There is less than 50% expansion of the resulting gas in fraim two as some bright bolt of "plasma" impacts the incandesant cloud. It expands beyond the bounds of the camera's fraim before fraim three and then leaves a residual smoke cloud of a different color. In fraim four, it shrinks and changes color, getting darker and dimmer. It fades from view completely by fraim eight.

Or.

B. Either an invisable beam or a missile of some kind impacts between fraim 0 and fraim one, and dislodges dust from the surface visable in fraim one. The plasma bolt or missile impacts in fraim two, generating very little aditional expansion of the original cloud of smoke or dust as it detonates. The asteroid shatters in fraim three, leaving behind a cloud of dust and smoke. Larger pieces are not visable either due to poor lighting preventing adiquate exposure of the fast moving fragments or insufficiant resolution of the camera system. The cloud expands slowly over the next three or four fraims and faids from view by fraim eight.

All eight chose answer B!

Wow, all eight of your imaginary friends agreed with you! Yippeeee!
Quote:
One Professor reminded me that the missile could have been rocket powered as much of the exhaust is not visable in several types of rocket untill secondary and even terciary reactions take place. The exhaust is visable in fraim one but the missile could have been in the target already.

What missile? You are aware that there was no rocket-powered missile at all, right? We're talking about a turbolaser bolt, moron.
Quote:
A second pointed out that if the asteroid was being tracked by a sufficiantly powerfull missile guidance illumination radar, that radar beam could have "micro-waved" the surface of the body enough to cause what little gas we see in fraims one and two to "vaporise". He also pointed out that radar energy flows over the surface of any target untill it is absorbed or hits a discontinuety to be re-radiated. It could therefore burn off mattierial from every side of the body in question.

Oh yes, I'm suuuuuure that radar sets normally cause a piece of rocky iron to look like this:

Image
Quote:
In addition, if the radar transmision was a "half wave signal of only positive or negitive parts of the wave that a much lower power level could cause the build up of "static" electricity that would cause the dust to jump from the surface and repell it self from every other particle giving the appearance of a smoth surface. He could not think how that half wave transmitter might work but it is more likely than the vaporisation theory "A" above.

And you think that somehow explains this?
Image
Quote:
There you have it, eight Phd. Proffessors who agree with me and find your explanation untenable. Because they asked me not to publish thier names and or organisations for a variety of reasons not the least of wich was your rude and beligerant behaviour, embarasment at being associated with such trivial persuites and thier buisy schedules, therefore, I am with holding thier names, Etc. I also know you will avoid the points above and asail me for withholding the names, with some crap like I made it all up or some other specious argument, but I don't care, I can proove my sources.

Yeah, sure. I believe you. Unnamed authorities that you supposedly drove thousands of miles to see, who are afraid of my belligerence after some weirdo drives hundreds of miles to ask them sci-fi questions, and who willingly gave their valuable time to perform sci-fi analyses for the great prize of a submarine sandwich and soft drinks. Who could possibly doubt such a story?
Quote:
Can you find anyone at all with a Phd in physics who will agree with you?

Curtis Saxton, PhD astrophysics, author of the Star Wars Technical Commentaries which can be found at http://www.theforce.net/swtc
Quote:
To asail this data you must find equivilant Phd.s that dispute the above findings for the ten questions and ARE WILLING TO PUBLISH THIER NAMES AND INSTITUTIONS FOR PEER REVIEW!

That's a pretty fucking funny demand, coming from a guy who just appealed to the authority of a bunch of imaginary experts whose names he shall "withold".
Quote:
At least three of the people that I interviewed will then be willing to enter into a private online debate with your experts and then post an agreed statement.

I hear lots of big talk, but as usual, no action. Verily, thou art the master of unverified claims.
Quote:
How many of the posters on this board are willing to put up $100 U.S.D. on which answer, A or B above, that the most Physics Phd's choose? I am! We all know what they say about walk'n and talk'n, are you walk'n or are you $TALK'N$?

Ah yes, when in trouble, resort to trash-talk, empty threats, and wagers that you obviously have no intention of keeping. Sorry bubba, but it ain't gonna fly. You obviously think that by pretending to bet money, you bolster your authority. However, the names and universities and contact information for these imaginary professors would have gone a lot farther toward bolstering your claims than this empty bluffing, and if you think people don't see through your little games, you're even dumber than I thought.
Quote:
P.S. Will post photos tomorrow of previously discussed items.

Yeah, sure. Whatever you say.

Let me summarize your entire post:

"I'm Stewart Davies, and I can't explain why I'm right, so I'm just going to claim that I'm right because I'm more qualified. And since no one's buying that, I'll just claim that I know some unnamed people who are even more qualified, and believe me, they think I'm right too".

My dear boy, you are a truly sad case. Never in my wildest dreams did I imagine that you would come up with such a laughable symphony of lies. I did like the part where you bragged about spending $800 to drive around and interview experts about this, though. Now people will be confused about whether they should point and laugh at you, or feel pity for you.



Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Photo posting PostPosted: 2004-03-09 04:00pm
Offline
Pathological liar

Joined: 2004-01-28 09:19pm
Posts: 146
Location: Crystal Lake Il.
I went to the local Office Max last night to post photos, but they were unable to send them to you because your web site said that photos must be "Stored on line"? I have the files saved to disk to send to you but I still have to learn how. Can and more importantly, will you tell me how to send my pic's to your page?

I noticed that you attacked me instead of answering my points. How would you answer the ten questions I asked them? All threw this debate you have avoided answering most of my questions, attacking me instead. Or provided misleading answers like the "Free Electron Density Chart" as if it was more than tangentaly pertanent to our topic. What is the mass of an electron compaired to a Hydrogen Nucleus?

The question is not and never has been, wether the differance in density affects the effects seen in the two shots but how much. I say that the density at ~400 Km is between 1E-11 and 1E-13 depending on time of day, while you have never cited a density for interplanetary space. "Interplanetary Space" is less than 3-OoM less. (See chart referanced below.) You say that that up to .000000000000001 Kilograms per cubic meter less density makes the resulting cloud of luminesant gas appier more than ONE TRILLION TIMES SMALLER than it otherwise would as compaired to the Starfish-prime shot. I think that less density should make the resulting cloud that much larger and after reading part of Dr. Saxton's web page about explosions he would seem to agree with me. I would quote the part about the fireball expanding untill it reached "Equalibrium with the surrounding media" IF I knew how.

I have found the chart from your site that I had refferanced earlier. It quotes/display's the atmospheric density for the 800Km above Earth. It is located here;
http://www.asu.cas.cz/~bezdek/density_t ... satm1a.png

I think it is much more realivant than the Electron density chart that you cited. In it, there apier to be two orders of magnatude differance between ~400 Km and were the curve flatens out between 7-800 Km alt. I think that those two orders of magnatude are a crutch that you are using, like attacking me instead of answering my possits so that you will not have to admit that the energy yeald of the turbo laser is really quite pathetic.

Acording to Dr. Saxton's explosion energy chart, on the web page that your link sent me to, the asteroid blast in question, if it is 50M in diamiter, should have between 9.95x10^9th and 1.66x10^10 joules of energy in it. Even He appears to support my position.

That I am not a debater and have poor spelling, garmer and computer skills does not change the validity of my conclusions. Address them, do not attack me.

I am going to a different Kinko's to try again.



Stratigic Defense Instatute, We provide Elegant Solutions to your Insolvable Problems.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 12:05am
Offline
Emperor's Hand
User avatar

Joined: 2003-09-17 02:31am
Posts: 7438
Location: Kweh?!
Stewart at SDI wrote:
I went to the local Office Max last night to post photos, but they were unable to send them to you because your web site said that photos must be "Stored on line"? I have the files saved to disk to send to you but I still have to learn how. Can and more importantly, will you tell me how to send my pic's to your page?


Once again, you show a penchant for overly detailed stories, as if you think that by shoving in a bunch of superfulous information is going to somehow give you credibility. :roll:

Quote:
I noticed that you attacked me instead of answering my points.


Points? Ahh, you must mean the list of appeals to authority that had nothing backing them up besides your word. Also, I believe it was YOU who said that Mike needed to have the support of PhD's to remain credible, thus you decided to attack the man instead of the argument. Very dishonest pig fucker.

Quote:
How would you answer the ten questions I asked them? All threw this debate you have avoided answering most of my questions, attacking me instead. Or provided misleading answers like the "Free Electron Density Chart" as if it was more than tangentaly pertanent to our topic. What is the mass of an electron compaired to a Hydrogen Nucleus?


Have you ever heard of Google shitstain?

Quote:
I think that less density should make the resulting cloud that much larger and after reading part of Dr. Saxton's web page about explosions he would seem to agree with me. I would quote the part about the fireball expanding untill it reached "Equalibrium with the surrounding media" IF I knew how.


You don't know how because you are an illiterate high school kid with delusions of grandeur.

Quote:
I think that those two orders of magnatude are a crutch that you are using, like attacking me instead of answering my possits so that you will not have to admit that the energy yeald of the turbo laser is really quite pathetic.


Nice! You have combined a false analogy and an ad hominem all in one!

Quote:
That I am not a debater and have poor spelling, garmer and computer skills does not change the validity of my conclusions. Address them, do not attack me.


If your conclusions were backed by an evidence other then "I KNOW EIGHT PHD's WHO AGREE WITH ME!!! HAHAHAHAHA!!!" then perhaps they might be worth responding to.

Quote:
I am going to a different Kinko's to try again.


Of course you are. And tomorrow you'll come up with another excuse for why you couldn't post them, while still maintaining that you are the most brilliant scientist/warrior/lover since James Bond got gene spliced with Albert Einstein.

Do yourself a favor kid and quite while you're behind.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Photo posting PostPosted: 2004-03-10 12:08am
Offline
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Posts: 70016
Location: Toronto, Canada
Stewart at SDI wrote:
I went to the local Office Max last night to post photos, but they were unable to send them to you because your web site said that photos must be "Stored on line"? I have the files saved to disk to send to you but I still have to learn how. Can and more importantly, will you tell me how to send my pic's to your page?

For someone who claims to be a "Dean of Technology", your utter technical ineptitude is quite hilarious. Tell me again why anyone should believe you.
Quote:
I noticed that you attacked me instead of answering my points.

I think anyone who reads my previous post will recognize that your laughable dodge of inventing eight imaginary "phd-plus types" to agree with you was not a series of "points".
Quote:
How would you answer the ten questions I asked them? All threw this debate you have avoided answering most of my questions, attacking me instead. Or provided misleading answers like the "Free Electron Density Chart" as if it was more than tangentaly pertanent to our topic. What is the mass of an electron compaired to a Hydrogen Nucleus?

I believe the people reading this thread can judge for themselves whether I have addressed your points. And you are certainly not making any points now. By the way, if you're such a science expert, why don't you know the mass of an electron compared to the mass of a hydrogen nucleus? Why do you have to ask me? By the way, an electron's rest mass is roughly 5.5E-4u, while a hydrogen atom's rest mass is roughly 1u. Not that this validates your squirming, since the ionosphere is not composed entirely of electrons; there are ionized nuclei out there as well.
Quote:
The question is not and never has been, wether the differance in density affects the effects seen in the two shots but how much. I say that the density at ~400 Km is between 1E-11 and 1E-13 depending on time of day, while you have never cited a density for interplanetary space. "Interplanetary Space" is less than 3-OoM less. (See chart referanced below.)

The density of interplanetary space is roughly 10 atoms per cubic centimetre, moron. Assuming light elements (rather generously, since it's probably composed largely of ionized hydrogen), that's less than 1E-19 kg/m^3. Much, much lower than any of the figures on the chart you linked, where the average density of the atmosphere at 400km was between 1E-11 and 1E-12 kg/m^3.
Quote:
You say that that up to .000000000000001 Kilograms per cubic meter less density makes the resulting cloud of luminesant gas appier more than ONE TRILLION TIMES SMALLER than it otherwise would as compaired to the Starfish-prime shot. I think that less density should make the resulting cloud that much larger and after reading part of Dr. Saxton's web page about explosions he would seem to agree with me. I would quote the part about the fireball expanding untill it reached "Equalibrium with the surrounding media" IF I knew how.

You don't even know how to copy and paste? If you're so sure that Curtis Saxton would agree with you, then how do you explain the fact that he claims kiloton-range lower limits for the asteroid event, just as I do? You don't even know how to read, do you? In fact, it's increasingly clear that you have never read any of my rebuttals, since I have made it very clear on numerous occasions that the cloud is not visibly luminescent because of several reasons, none of which involve it instantly expanding to the density of interplanetary space. You don't help your cause by insistently repeating this facile strawman.
Quote:
I have found the chart from your site that I had refferanced earlier. It quotes/display's the atmospheric density for the 800Km above Earth. It is located here;
http://www.asu.cas.cz/~bezdek/density_t ... satm1a.png

I think it is much more realivant than the Electron density chart that you cited. In it, there apier to be two orders of magnatude differance between ~400 Km and were the curve flatens out between 7-800 Km alt.

Now that's really funny; you are obviously assuming that the atmospheric density at 800km is identical to that of interstellar space.
Quote:
I think that those two orders of magnatude are a crutch that you are using, like attacking me instead of answering my possits so that you will not have to admit that the energy yeald of the turbo laser is really quite pathetic.

So it's a "crutch" to point out that your entire argument depends on equating the upper atmosphere to interplanetary space? Here's an alternate interpretation: you are a stubborn little child and you have become so thoroughly entangled in your little web of lies, transparent inventions about your personal prowess, and pride that you honestly can't understand why someone would harp on an obvious glaring hole in your argument, so you become flustered and declare that it is a "crutch" for him to keep pointing it out.

I suppose debates are much easier for you when they take place entirely in your own head among your council of highly educated imaginary "Strategic Defense Institute" colleagues, since none of them would use the "crutch" of pointing out glaring holes in your argument. Tell me, if I'm not allowed to use the "crutch" of pointing out glaring holes in your argument, what techniques am I permitted to use? Inventing imaginary colleagues and saying that they agree with me, the way you do?
Quote:
Acording to Dr. Saxton's explosion energy chart, on the web page that your link sent me to, the asteroid blast in question, if it is 50M in diamiter, should have between 9.95x10^9th and 1.66x10^10 joules of energy in it. Even He appears to support my position.

And now you resort to outright lies. Pathetic. From http://www.theforce.net/swtc/isd.html#w ... -asteroids we can see that he actually says this:
Curtis Saxton wrote:
During its hunt for the Millennium Falcon, the star destroyer Avenger used its minor guns in the brim trench and on the hull to clearing asteroids in its path [TESB]. These observations indicate a lower limit on the energy delivered by a single blast from one of the smallest turbolasers. These were probably not full-power shots, but were merely intense enough to remove the asteroids with minimal trouble and waste. The asteroids were on the order of several meters to several dozens of metres in diameter, and composed chiefly of iron and similar metals. Realistically, the asteroid composition may have been silicate (eg. like granite or basalt) or dominated by iron-like metals.

The energy delivered by the turbolaser shot must raise the asteroid material from the initial temperature to the melting temperature (Tf), then supply the latent heat of fusion (Lf) to change the state frm solid to liquid, and then raise the temperature to a boiling point (Tv) and provide a latent heat of vaporisation (Lv). The boiling point is pressure-sensitive; in principle it might be close to the melting point because vaporisation of the exterior of the asteroid occurs in a nearly perfect vacuum.

Nope, no support for your moronic "soft lumps of talc" description of the asteroids, nor is there any support for your ridiculous assertion that they were fragmented into invisible pieces rather than being vapourized. He also says this:
Curtis Saxton wrote:
In terrestrial conditions, the latent heat of vaporisation of a 10m diameter iron ball is approximately 25.8 TJ ... Therefore, considering the maximum observed fire rate of at least 1/s [in the asteroid field and in battles throughout the saga] we can estimate a lower limit on the power of each of the small anti-fighter point-defence cannons as between 250TW and 2000TW.

Did you really think that you could simply lie about the contents of his page and expect people not to check?
Quote:
That I am not a debater and have poor spelling, garmer and computer skills does not change the validity of my conclusions. Address them, do not attack me.

This is a pretty funny statement coming from someone whose entire previous post consisted entirely of "my imaginary credentials are better than your real ones, and my imaginary colleagues are smarter than you".

As for your so-called "points", I have addressed them, many times. Rather than deal with the rebuttals, you simply get frustrated at your inability to come up with a workable answer, so you invent some imaginary anonymous "professors" to bolster your authority, brag about how you have superior credentials (even though you have demonstrated quite convincingly that you don't know shit), and now you have resorted to the unbelievable tactics of calling it a "crutch" to keep pointing out huge holes in your argument. Your absurd attempt to misrepresent Curtis Saxton is just the icing on the cake.
Quote:
I am going to a different Kinko's to try again.

Good luck, "Dean of Technology of the Strategic Defense Institute". Maybe you should ask them if they accept payment in "Chuck E Cheese" tokens.



Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 12:15am
Offline
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Posts: 70016
Location: Toronto, Canada
OK, for those who missed it, this debate has gone over the 5-round limit and he hasn't raised a genuine new point in a very long time, so this thread is now open for all members. Fire away!



Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 12:18am
Offline
Emperor's Hand
User avatar

Joined: 2002-11-23 12:02am
Posts: 18399
Location: Iowa
NOTE: This was posted before Kernel's and Darth Wong's post, originally, but was removed by a hasty mod.

A hasty mod who corrected your quote tag too...so pfffft

All spelling errors have been bolded.

Stewpot wrote:
I went to the local Office Max last night to post photos, but they were unable to send them to you because your web site said that photos must be "Stored on line"?



All that money and expertise, and you don't know how to use an FTP?

Quote:
I have the files saved to disk to send to you but I still have to learn how. Can and more importantly, will you tell me how to send my pic's to your page?



You don't know how to send an e-mail attachment?

Quote:
How would you answer the ten questions I asked them? All threw this debate you have avoided answering most of my questions, attacking me instead. Or provided misleading answers like the "Free Electron Density Chart" as if it was more than tangentaly pertanent to our topic.



How so?


Quote:
What is the mass of an electron compaired to a Hydrogen Nucleus?



Shouldn't you know that?


Quote:
after reading part of Dr. Saxton's web page about explosions he would seem to agree with me. I would quote the part about the fireball expanding untill it reached "Equalibrium with the surrounding media" IF I knew how.



You don't even know how to CUT AND PASTE? You are a real piece of work Stewpot.

Quote:
I have found the chart from your site that I had refferanced earlier. It quotes/display's the atmospheric density for the 800Km above Earth. It is located here;
http://www.asu.cas.cz/~bezdek/density_t ... satm1a.png

I think it is much more realivant than the Electron density chart that you cited. In it, there apier to be two orders of magnatude differance between ~400 Km and were the curve flatens out between 7-800 Km alt. I think that those two orders of magnatude are a crutch that you are using, like attacking me instead of answering my possits so that you will not have to admit that the energy yeald of the turbo laser is really quite pathetic.



Great strawman, really. Wong has the turbolaser calcs on the site... you haven't done shit to prove them wrong.

Quote:
Acording to Dr. Saxton's explosion energy chart, on the web page that your link sent me to, the asteroid blast in question, if it is 50M in diamiter, should have between 9.95x10^9th and 1.66x10^10 joules of energy in it. Even He appears to support my position.



Provide the link, and quote the relevent passage. Oh wait, I forgot: YOU DON'T KNOW HOW!

Quote:
That I am not a debater and have poor spelling, garmer and computer skills does not change the validity of my conclusions.



Yes they do, shitwad. No credible "expert" would be caught dead typing like you do. That, combined with your ludicrous, unbacked (let's not forget impossible) claims show beyond a shadow of a doubt that you are just some sad virgin living in your mother's basement, wanking to Janeway porn.



Mayabird is my girlfriend
Justice League:BotM:MM:SDnet City Watch:Cybertron's Finest
"Well then, science is bullshit. "
-revprez, with yet another brilliant rebuttal.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 01:40am
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2004-01-31 04:48am
Posts: 1915
Location: In Rose's room, looking at a tiny floating whale
Darth_Zod wrote:
amazingly, insolvable is actually a word. Dictionary.Com is your friend.


Thanks, I wasn't sure if it was or not. As far as I knew, unsolvable was the proper word.

BTW, you know who Stewie kinda reminds me of? Calvin, from Calvin and Hobbes. If you think about it, the similarities are startling. :shock:



Image
どうして?お前が夜に自身を触れるから。
Long ago in a distant land, I, Aku, the shape-shifting Master of Darkness, unleashed an unspeakable evil, but a
foolish samurai warrior wielding a magic sword stepped forth to oppose me. Before the final blow was struck, I
tore open a portal in time and flung him into the future, where my evil is law! Now, the fool seeks to return to
the past, and undo the future that is Aku... -Aku, Master of Masters, Deliverer of Darkness, Shogun of Sorrow

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 01:45am
Offline
Mammy Two-Shoes
User avatar

Joined: 2002-07-05 05:45pm
Posts: 30776
Location: Reykjavík, Iceland (not really)
I can't see it. Maybe because I loved Calvin and thought he was a funny kid. Stewart is just a dumb kid who can't spell.



Image
I believe in a sign of Zeta.

[BOTM|WG|JL|Mecha Maniacs|Pax Cybertronia|Veteran of the Psychic Wars|Eva Expert]

"And besides, who cares if a monster destroys Australia?"

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 02:31am
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2004-01-31 04:48am
Posts: 1915
Location: In Rose's room, looking at a tiny floating whale
I was mostly referring to his episodic trips into an imaginary world in which he is right, and his "Stratigic Defense Instatute" AKA "Stewi'z Privit Clubhows. Gurls not wellcum!" Also, some things he has said reminded me a bit of Calvinball, debate-style. Then again, maybe it's just me. :?



Image
どうして?お前が夜に自身を触れるから。
Long ago in a distant land, I, Aku, the shape-shifting Master of Darkness, unleashed an unspeakable evil, but a
foolish samurai warrior wielding a magic sword stepped forth to oppose me. Before the final blow was struck, I
tore open a portal in time and flung him into the future, where my evil is law! Now, the fool seeks to return to
the past, and undo the future that is Aku... -Aku, Master of Masters, Deliverer of Darkness, Shogun of Sorrow

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 02:36am
Offline
Scrapping TIEs since 1997
User avatar

Joined: 2003-11-12 02:10pm
Posts: 16738
Location: Classified
Executor32 wrote:
Darth_Zod wrote:
amazingly, insolvable is actually a word. Dictionary.Com is your friend.


Thanks, I wasn't sure if it was or not. As far as I knew, unsolvable was the proper word.

BTW, you know who Stewie kinda reminds me of? Calvin, from Calvin and Hobbes. If you think about it, the similarities are startling. :shock:

That's an insult to Calvin. I must decapitate you now. *Snap-hiss*

[]oIIIII///o\\\IIIII[]{IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII>

Now then. Stewart, I seriously suggest that you cut your losses and run. You think Mike was insulting? Wait until the general population gets ahold of you. Consider this your friendly warning, which you likely don't deserve, but I'm just a nice guy. :P If you persist, I'll join in the crowd because you've just been that annoying.



Image
It's Rogue, not Rouge!

HAB | KotL | VRWC/ELC/CDA | TRotR | The Anti-Confederate | Sluggite | Gamer | Blogger | Staff Reporter | Student | Musician

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 03:05am
Offline
Jedi Council Member
User avatar

Joined: 2004-01-31 04:48am
Posts: 1915
Location: In Rose's room, looking at a tiny floating whale
Yep, it's just me.

*dies from decapitation*



Image
どうして?お前が夜に自身を触れるから。
Long ago in a distant land, I, Aku, the shape-shifting Master of Darkness, unleashed an unspeakable evil, but a
foolish samurai warrior wielding a magic sword stepped forth to oppose me. Before the final blow was struck, I
tore open a portal in time and flung him into the future, where my evil is law! Now, the fool seeks to return to
the past, and undo the future that is Aku... -Aku, Master of Masters, Deliverer of Darkness, Shogun of Sorrow

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 06:50pm
Offline
Jedi Knight
User avatar

Joined: 2003-01-20 03:43pm
Posts: 613
Location: West Lafayette, IN
I have a Chemistry Midterm to study for, and decided I'd read this thread as a nice study break. The bad thing is that my IQ has dropped 10's of points :( Maybe I shoulda just watched some mindless sitcom....



Proud owner of a B.S. in Economics from Purdue University :) Class of 2007 w00t

"Sometimes, I just feel bad for the poor souls on this board"

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 09:12pm
Offline
Sith Marauder
User avatar

Joined: 2002-08-18 03:07pm
Posts: 3508
Location: The Adirondacks
*rips Stewie's head off and starts gnawing on it*

Blech! Concrete!



Don't hate; appreciate!

RIP Eddie.

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject: Re: Photo posting PostPosted: 2004-03-10 09:33pm
Offline
Charismatic Cult Leader
User avatar

Joined: 2002-08-18 07:27pm
Posts: 13741
Location: Wheeeee!!
Stewart at SDI wrote:
I went to the local Office Max last night to post photos, but they were unable to send them to you because your web site said that photos must be "Stored on line"? I have the files saved to disk to send to you but I still have to learn how. Can and more importantly, will you tell me how to send my pic's to your page?


Let me get this straight, you actually thought the Office Max could take your photos and do everything for you? Also, you don't know what it means to store or host photos online? Furthermore, you don't know how to use the post office to send disks to Mike? Question for you, have you figured out how to take your pants off to shit or piss or are you still in diapers?

Quote:
That I am not a debater and have poor spelling, garmer and computer skills does not change the validity of my conclusions. Address them, do not attack me.


Thank you for stating the obvious...in case it went over your head it means you're a whack-a-loon and your conclusions are completely invalid.

Quote:
I am going to a different Kinko's to try again.


Whatsamatter? Did the mean clerk laugh at you and make you cry?



Image
aerius: I'll vote for you if you sleep with me. :)
Lusankya: Deal!
Say, do you want it to be a threesome with your wife? Or a foursome with your wife and sister-in-law? I'm up for either. :P

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-10 11:10pm
Offline
Sith Lord
Sith Lord
User avatar

Joined: 2002-07-03 12:25am
Posts: 70016
Location: Toronto, Canada
The grammar discussion of proper apostrophe usage has been split to a new thread in the OT forum. Come on guys, with all of the clay pidgeons Mr. Dean of Technology threw in the air, you could have found something better to shoot at than an improper use of apostrophes.



Image
"It's not evil for God to do it. Or for someone to do it at God's command."- Jonathan Boyd on baby-killing

"you guys are fascinated with the use of those "rules of logic" to the extent that you don't really want to discussus anything."- GC

"I do not believe Russian Roulette is a stupid act" - Embracer of Darkness

"Viagra commercials appear to save lives" - tharkûn on US health care.

http://www.stardestroyer.net/Mike/RantMode/Blurbs.html

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-11 02:10pm
Offline
Ruthless Imperial Tyrant
User avatar

Joined: 2002-07-03 06:11pm
Posts: 5755
Location: Canada
Here's a question Stewie: if these "PhD plus guys' thought you were writing an article, wouldn't they think beforehand there names would be published?



"You know, I was God once."
"Yes, I saw. You were doing well, until everyone died."
Bender and God, Futurama

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-11 02:21pm
Offline
Spirit of Vengeance
User avatar

Joined: 2002-09-24 01:48pm
Posts: 27779
Location: DC...looking up from the gutters to the stars
Hell I wanna know what a PhD plus guy is.

That and nice to see he spends $800 to go around asking folks...but doesn't spend the $800 on a man calling him out.



MM /CF/WG/BOTM/JL/Original Warsie/ACPATHNTDWATGODW FOREVER!!

Sometimes we can choose the path we follow. Sometimes our choices are made for us. And sometimes we have no choice at all

Saying and doing are chocolate and concrete

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-11 02:25pm
Offline
Kneel before Zod!
User avatar

Joined: 2003-11-18 04:08pm
Posts: 27196
Location: F you
personally i could find much better things to spend $800.00 on than an ST vs. SW debate. like. . . .say. . . .porn. this stewie person is either filthy fucking rich, or he has no concept of monetary value.



"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."

Image

Image

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-11 02:35pm
Offline
Spirit of Vengeance
User avatar

Joined: 2002-09-24 01:48pm
Posts: 27779
Location: DC...looking up from the gutters to the stars
Darth_Zod wrote:
personally i could find much better things to spend $800.00 on than an ST vs. SW debate. like. . . .say. . . .porn. this stewie person is either filthy fucking rich, or he has no concept of monetary value.


Remember he works at home with his ultra high tech secret society...he probably doesn't even pay taxes



MM /CF/WG/BOTM/JL/Original Warsie/ACPATHNTDWATGODW FOREVER!!

Sometimes we can choose the path we follow. Sometimes our choices are made for us. And sometimes we have no choice at all

Saying and doing are chocolate and concrete

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-11 02:39pm
Offline
Kneel before Zod!
User avatar

Joined: 2003-11-18 04:08pm
Posts: 27196
Location: F you
Ghost Rider wrote:
Darth_Zod wrote:
personally i could find much better things to spend $800.00 on than an ST vs. SW debate. like. . . .say. . . .porn. this stewie person is either filthy fucking rich, or he has no concept of monetary value.


Remember he works at home with his ultra high tech secret society...he probably doesn't even pay taxes


well, if you consider living in your parents' basement as ultra high tech, i suppose. and that would also explain the lack of paying taxes. he's not old enough to legally work yet. :D



"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."

Image

Image

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-11 04:50pm
Offline
Jedi Knight
User avatar

Joined: 2003-01-20 03:43pm
Posts: 613
Location: West Lafayette, IN
Filthy rich? How about lying out of his ass. Comon everyone...the odds that this guy is telling the truth have to be worse than 1 in 100,000. We shouldn't even entertain the idea that he is anything more than a lying retard :)



Proud owner of a B.S. in Economics from Purdue University :) Class of 2007 w00t

"Sometimes, I just feel bad for the poor souls on this board"

Top
 Profile  
 Post subject:  PostPosted: 2004-03-11 04:51pm
Offline
Kneel before Zod!
User avatar

Joined: 2003-11-18 04:08pm
Posts: 27196
Location: F you
Butterbean569 wrote:
Filthy rich? How about lying out of his ass. Comon everyone...the odds that this guy is telling the truth have to be worse than 1 in 100,000. We shouldn't even entertain the idea that he is anything more than a lying retard :)


your sarcasm radar doesn't seem to be working. :P



"It's you Americans. There's something about nipples you hate. If this were Germany, we'd be romping around naked on the stage here."

Image

Image

Top
 Profile  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic This topic is locked, you cannot edit posts or make further replies.  [ 78 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group