Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics > #564015 > unrolled thread

NOY, did you watch these videos?

Started byJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
First post2016-03-20 18:18 -0700
Last post2016-03-23 04:45 +0100
Articles 20 on this page of 39 — 7 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics

Contents

  NOY, did you watch these videos? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 18:18 -0700
    Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 04:47 +0100
      Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 21:36 -0700
        Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 21:48 +0100
          Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 14:24 -0700
            Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 04:35 +0100
              Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 20:56 -0700
                Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 16:01 +0100
                  Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-22 09:41 -0600
                    Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 05:22 +0100
                      Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 06:29 -0600
      Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 22:42 -0700
        Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 16:09 +0100
          Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 11:09 -0700
            Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 06:06 +0100
              Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-21 22:45 -0700
                Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 16:16 +0100
                  Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-22 09:42 -0600
                    Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 05:53 +0100
                      Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 06:30 -0600
                  Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-22 08:49 -0700
                    Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:50 +0100
                      Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-22 21:31 -0700
                        Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 18:13 +0100
                          Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-23 10:32 -0700
                            Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-24 07:19 +0100
                              Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-24 07:54 +0000
                              Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 01:28 -0700
                                Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-24 19:44 +0100
                                  Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 13:09 -0700
                                    Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-25 06:21 +0100
                                      Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-24 22:40 -0700
                                        Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-25 18:34 +0100
                  Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 17:31 +0000
                    Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? "\"Fakey's\" dogwhistle holder living at 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop  Jockey), socked up as 5907 Stanton Avenue, Pittsburgh, PA 15206-2117" <root@127.0.0.1> - 2016-03-22 13:47 -0400
                    Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-22 11:03 -0700
                    Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-22 12:29 -0600
                      Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-22 11:45 -0700
                      Re: NOY, did you watch these videos? Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:45 +0100

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

#564015 — NOY, did you watch these videos?

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-20 18:18 -0700
SubjectNOY, did you watch these videos?
Message-ID<43100c64-1b95-4858-9a16-9e91da9a5cd0@googlegroups.com>
video: 
https://youtu.be/iDv2RoUrHTY?t=4m10s
https://youtu.be/WSGv08Rb_Lo ) 

Did you watch these?  Do you understand how this is distinctive from the standard model that Nilsson, Saykally, and Soper assume?

If you don't understand this then you don't understand my model, the underlying assumptions/mechanics of which are explained in my paper.

I'm not saying you have to agree with my model. But it's kind of ridiculous to dispute my model before you understand it.  It's also kind of ridiculous to dispute my model based on the fact that it does not match up exactly with the standard model when the purpose of my paper and these videos is to establish how and why my model is distinctive from the standard model.

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#564037

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-21 04:47 +0100
Message-ID<cc151156bfa7f0e82f6653d2eda38490@dizum.com>
In reply to#564015
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James McGinn, in
<news:43100c64-1b95-4858-9a16-9e91da9a5cd0@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> video: 
> https://youtu.be/iDv2RoUrHTY?t=4m10s
> https://youtu.be/WSGv08Rb_Lo ) 
> 
> Did you watch these?  Do you understand how this is distinctive from
> the standard model that Nilsson, Saykally, and Soper assume?

So you deny well-established, empirically-proven science in favor of
your moronic anti-science conspiracy theory blathering... and you
*don't* think you're insane, Jim?

> If you don't understand this then you don't understand my model,

That's because your "model not-a-model" doesn't make any sense, Jim.

> the underlying assumptions/mechanics of which are explained in my paper.

And that's all you have, Jim, is assumptions. Assumptions made by a
broken-brained uneducated halfwitted moron off his meds.

> I'm not saying you have to agree with my model. But it's kind of
> ridiculous to dispute my model before you understand it.  It's also
> kind of ridiculous to dispute my model based on the fact that it
> does not match up exactly with the standard model

Your model is disputed because it does not match up with reality,
James.

> when the purpose of my paper and these videos is to establish how
> and why my model is distinctive from the standard model.

"ab initro"... LOL! If you can't even say the fucking word, Jim, you
most certainly don't understand the concept.

"water pendulums", another reference to your "pendulimic energy"...
LOL! Fuck, Jim... you have no clue how atoms and molecules work, do
you?

For those who want to entertain themselves, watch this moron at 2x
speed... it highlights The Manic. LOL

KookTard, you've had some very informed highly educated people who
would most definitely know because they've measured such things
empirically via carefully-controlled experimentation tell you that H
bonding does not negate water molecule polarity... not only have you
been told that by people far smarter and saner than you, it'd violate
Coulomb's Law, given that H bonds are electrostatic in nature, a
scientific fact brought about from many, many years of empirical
observation via experimentation, as well.

You keep making these moronic videos filled with demonstrably false
blather and writing books and posts... and despite every single person
saner and smarter than you telling you that *you* *are* *wrong*, you
obliviously blather on, hoping against hope that your fairy tale
fabrication is true so you can justify your retarded claim that every
single scientist in the past 250+ years is wrong, thereby justifying
the fairy tale fabrication you've made, setting yourself as "King of
Science".

But you're an uneducated moronic halfwit, James. You're up against
highly educated people with super-genius IQs who did the hard work of
empirical observation via carefully-controlled experimentation. All
you have is your moronic blather about conspiracies and giant sentient
sky tornado monsters with noodly appendages that stretch for thousands
of miles to touch down tornadoes. You have no experimental data to
back up your twaddle, you have no corroborating studies, you have no
empirical evidence... you've pulled this entire fabrication straight
from your ass, and it's been torn to shreds. Yet you continue because
*you've* *gone* *psychotic*, James.

You need to get back on your meds and stop embarrassing yourself.
You've won no arguments, you've gained no followers, you've broken no
new ground, you've discovered nothing, you've proven nothing... all
you've done is demonstrated that you're an insane moronic uneducated
halfwit, and made a laughingstock of yourself.

The whole world is laughing at you, Jim. The sooner you wake the fuck
up and realize that fact, the sooner you can stop being such a fucking
retard.

Now, before you run away again, Jim... there's the matter of all those
questions you've been evading... they highlight the gaping logic holes
in your wholly fabricated 'theory'. Your inability to close those
logic holes stands as your tacit admission that you know your
halfwittery has no defense.

My .sig now has even more questions you'll run away from, Jim... the
noose has closed around the neck of McGinnism, and it is strung up,
rightfully convicted of being a scientific fraud.

-- 

Here, James, at the very least, try to address those tough questions
which spotlight the logical inconsistencies and contradictions
inherent in your "theory":

============================================================
Anders Nilsson measured (https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156) a
spectral peak that was not solid-phase nor liquid-phase water, James.
You claim that water remains liquid-phase upon evaporation. What was
Anders Nilsson measuring, James? Oh, that's right... gaseous phase
water, thereby proving that evaporation entails a phase change,
thereby proving latent heat of evaporation exists, thereby
*dis*proving a gigantic chunk of your theory, James.

You make a supposition that a "plasma not-a-plasma" is created from
water due to wind shear, which transports energy throughout the
atmosphere via wind driven by that plasma. Where does the energy come
from to create your "wind shear" to create your "plasma not-a-plasma"
if the "plasma not-a-plasma" cannot exist and thereby "transport
energy" by driving that wind to create the "wind shear" which creates
your "plasma not-a-plasma", unless there is "wind shear" to begin
with, James? Your logic is so twisted you're going in circles. You've
created a circulus in probando causality dilemma, which utterly
destroys your theory, James.

According to your "theory", electrostatic attraction *increases* with
distance (in violation of Coulomb's Law), which means that when an
electron falls in orbit, it has to *absorb* energy. And that higher
energy level somehow translates into a *weaker* electrostatic
attraction. Now let's look at the other side of the coin... the
electron in orbit would give off energy, rise in orbit, and somehow,
that *lower* energy level translates into a *stronger* electrostatic
attraction... how's *that* work, James? Explain how you've not just
violated the Law of Conservation of Energy on an atomic level.

How do your "jet stream vortices" travel potentially hundreds of miles
away from your "jet stream / giant tornado in the sky", without
detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar, and know where and when to
touch down so they always hit clouds, rather than tornadoes randomly
appearing out of the clear blue sky, James? Is your "jet stream /
giant tornado in the sky" sentient, James?

Go on, Jim, tell us... *why* is there a "boundary" between the
troposphere and the stratosphere... we're waiting, Jim... No answer,
Jim? Is it because that's where your "sentient jet stream / giant
tornado monster with noodly appendages" lives, and it likes it that
way, Jim? Do you need your meds, Jim?

If, as you claim, the jet stream is a vortex, why is the ride while
inside the jet stream so smooth, James? Have you never ridden in an
airplane inside a jet stream, James? Is it just that your "sentient
jet stream / giant tornado monster with noodly appendages" likes its
back scratched by the aircraft, so it doesn't rip the aircraft to
shreds, Jim?

Do you not understand that once the air going upward through the
tornadic funnel reaches the cumulonimbus cloud base above the
mesocyclone, it spreads out, thus the tornado is strictly a phenomenon
which happens from cloud base to ground? It does *not* go from the
ground all the way up through the cloud to the tropopause as you
claim, James, and it most certainly does not continue for potentially
hundreds of miles in the upper troposphere to join the jet stream,
which would make air travel deadly.

Explain why the jets run easterly, whereas the dry line runs N-S, if
the jets are powering the creation of tornadoes. How is a tornado
being created hundreds of miles from the edge of the jets, James?

Which direction does air flow from a flame, Jim? Up, does it not?
That's convection due to temperature-induced density differential, is
it not? Which direction does air flow from a flame in zero gravity,
James? Radially in all directions, thereby snuffing out the flame due
to lack of oxygen. So your claiming that convection doesn't exist
means you're further claiming that gravity does not exist, and fire
cannot burn for very long before it is smothered due to lack of
oxygen. Or were you not aware that convection is a gravity-induced
phenomenon due to density differential, James?

How does a hot air balloon rise, Jim? That's due to air density
differential due to temperature differential, is it not? That
less-dense air is convecting upward. Do you deny this, Jim? Is your
giant sentient sky tornado monster stretching one of its noodly
appendages down and gently lifting the hot air balloon, Jim?

How are your atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma,
Jim?

Do you not know what the definition of "plasma" is, James?

How is your "plasma not-a-plasma" (which you have admitted is a
hypothetical construct in a failed attempt to lend your claims even a
semblance of plausibility) forming if the nuclear binding energy and
dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water will
preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen unless hit with an
extremely energetic laser, Jim?

Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength,
extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except
photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above
the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the
troposphere to form your "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim?

How is the energy to plasmize your "plasma not-a-plasma" not
dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the
planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly
all the water is, and where all life is, Jim?

Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change
upon H bonding (which would have side effects such as random changes
in the solvent properties of water... and we know those properties do
not randomly change, Jim), and in fact the two spin isomers of water
molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account
for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your
implausible claims are workable, Jim?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Jim?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564043

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-20 21:36 -0700
Message-ID<38b06fcb-dd3f-4ea8-8b57-13e0a2da6ccb@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#564037
On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 8:58:09 PM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
> 
> James McGinn, in
> <news:43100c64-1b95-4858-9a16-9e91da9a5cd0@googlegroups.com> did
> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:
> 
> > video: 
> > https://youtu.be/iDv2RoUrHTY?t=4m10s
> > https://youtu.be/WSGv08Rb_Lo ) 
> > 
> > Did you watch these?  Do you understand how this is distinctive from
> > the standard model that Nilsson, Saykally, and Soper assume?
> 
> So you deny well-established, empirically-proven science

Obviously their model is not "empirically proven" dumbass.   They have their model.  I have a different model.  My model is more sophisticated because I understand the importance of symmetry and the fact that symmetry changes (is variable) with H bonding.  They don't know about this.  So they are perplexed by their data which does not match up well with what their model predicts.  

Also, as I indicated in the previous thread, that has lead Nilsson to transpose the significance of the data: 
(That is only the first discrepancy between my model and Nilsson's.  And it is a big one.  As I'll explain more explicitly below, it means that what he interprets as indicative of close proximity I interpret as distance and vice versa.* So, my interpretation of minimum and maximum bond strengths are transposed compared to this: https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=39m56s )

Stop acting like a child and pay attention.  You don't have to agree but you have to make an effort to understand.  If you keep throwing hissy fits you are never going to comprehend the difference between my model and the standard model.  

Be sure you understand first.  There is plenty of time for you to throw a temper tantrum later.

> > If you don't understand this then you don't understand my model,
> 
> That's because your "model not-a-model" doesn't make any sense, Jim.

You are too impatient--like a child.  You are not willing to work through the cognitive dissonance.  All I can suggest is that you first settle down and try to explain what it is you are not understanding so that I can help you.  If you don't provide details then I won't know what it is you are not understanding.  And stop whining like a child.  Just step your way through--maybe re-watch some of the earlier videos. 


> > the underlying assumptions/mechanics of which are explained in my paper.
> 
> And that's all you have, Jim, is assumptions. 

That is all they have also, dumbass.

> > I'm not saying you have to agree with my model. But it's kind of
> > ridiculous to dispute my model before you understand it.  It's also
> > kind of ridiculous to dispute my model based on the fact that it
> > does not match up exactly with the standard model
> 
> Your model is disputed because it does not match up with reality,
> James.

Without details how can I help you.   Or should I just assume you are a complete dingbat that doesn't have the slightest idea what is going on here.

> they've measured such things
> empirically via carefully-controlled experimentation

Then why aren't you presenting that, you fucking moron?

> many years of empirical
> observation via experimentation, as well.

Where is it?  Present it.  You can't.  You are a dingbat that barely understands what is going on.  You are like a monkey with a shiney object.

> You keep making these moronic videos filled with demonstrably false

If it is "demonstrably false" then you should be able to demonstrate it . . . right . . . well.  Where is your demonstration?  

The reality is you are a birdbrain that barely understands any of this, or science in general.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564266

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-21 21:48 +0100
Message-ID<8fa783a2623817e29e49db4ee37b7c59@dizum.com>
In reply to#564043
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James McGinn, in 
<news:38b06fcb-dd3f-4ea8-8b57-13e0a2da6ccb@googlegroups.com> did 
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 8:58:09 PM UTC-7,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>> So you deny well-established, empirically-proven science

> Obviously their model is not "empirically proven" dumbass.

Obviously it is, via x-ray spectroscopy as Anders Nilsson used, 
optical absorption spectroscopy, dielectric spectroscopy, diffraction 
methods, models, nuclear magnetic resonance, vibrational spectra, 
thermodynamics and neutron scattering are just some of the methods 
used, James.

<http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_methods.html>

Obviously *your* "model not-a-model" is not "empirically proven", 
Dumbass. You've done *no* experimentation. All your fairy tale blather 
is pulled straight from your ass.

> They have their model.

And x-ray spectroscopy as Anders Nilsson used, optical absorption 
spectroscopy, dielectric spectroscopy, diffraction methods, models, 
nuclear magnetic resonance, vibrational spectra, thermodynamics, 
neutron scattering and a number of other methods used.

Whereas your model has the misfiring neurons of a badly broken brain 
backing it up.

> I have a different model.

You have a fairy tale "model not-a-model" with no empirical evidence.

> My model is more sophisticated

No. Your model is more moronic.

> because I understand the importance of symmetry

Liquid water doesn't have "symmetry", James. This has been explained 
to you by people far smarter and saner than you. People who've used 
x-ray spectroscopy as Anders Nilsson used, optical absorption 
spectroscopy, dielectric spectroscopy, diffraction methods, models, 
nuclear magnetic resonance, vibrational spectra, thermodynamics, 
neutron scattering and a number of other methods to determine what 
they knew aligned with reality.

> and the fact that symmetry changes (is variable) with H bonding.

There is no "symmetry" in liquid water, Moron. Soper told you that, 
you continue to deny reality.

> They don't know about this.

Is it a soooper sekret that isn't exposed by x-ray spectroscopy as 
Anders Nilsson used, optical absorption spectroscopy, dielectric 
spectroscopy, diffraction methods, models, nuclear magnetic resonance, 
vibrational spectra, thermodynamics and neutron scattering as those 
far smarter and far saner researchers used, James?

> So they are perplexed by their data which does not match up well with
> what their model predicts.  

It doesn't match up well with reality, James. Because you're 
psychotic.

> Also, as I indicated in the previous thread, that has lead Nilsson to
> transpose the significance of the data: (That is only the first
> discrepancy between my model and Nilsson's.  And it is a big one.

The main discrepancy between Nilsson's empirical observations and your 
"model not-a-model" is that yours doesn't align with reality, James.

> As I'll explain more explicitly below, it means that what he interprets
> as indicative of close proximity I interpret as distance and vice versa.
> * So, my interpretation of minimum and maximum bond strengths are
> transposed compared to this: https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=39m56s )

And that's because you're a moron who doesn't understand that H 
bonding is an electrostatic bonding, which follows Coulomb's Law, it 
decreases as the inverse square of distance, James. That's another 
scientific fact that was discovered by rigorous scientific 
experimentation, whereas your "discovery not-a-discovery" was the 
result of your badly broken brain farting out stupidity.

> Stop acting like a child and pay attention.

Stop acting like a psychotic retard and educate yourself.

> You don't have to agree but you have to make an effort to understand.

No, I don't want to understand your insanity, James. That'd make me as 
insane as you are.

> If you keep throwing hissy fits

Translation: "If you keep drop-kicking my psychotic ass with facts"

> you are never going to comprehend the difference between my model and
> the standard model.  

Sure I understand the difference between your "model not-a-model" and 
the Standard Model... the Standard Model reflects reality, whereas 
your "model not-a-model" reflects the malfunctioning of a brain badly 
in need of meds.

> Be sure you understand first.  There is plenty of time for you to throw
> a temper tantrum later.

Translation: "Those facts and reality hurt my broken little brain."

>>> If you don't understand this then you don't understand my model,

>> That's because your "model not-a-model" doesn't make any sense, Jim.

> You are too impatient--like a child.  You are not willing to work
> through the cognitive dissonance.

The only "cognitive dissonance" going on, James, is your throwing a 
temper tantrum because your "model not-a-model" is being exposed to 
the light of scientific truth, and you can't handle the reality that 
you're a scientific fraud. Your broken brain actively repels reality.

> All I can suggest is that you first settle down and try to explain what
> it is you are not understanding so that I can help you.

I don't understand how you can deny such wide swaths of reality, 
remain so clue repellant and demonstrate your uneducated stupidity on 
a daily basis and *not* consider yourself fully psychotic, James.

> If you don't provide details then I won't know what it is you are not
> understanding.  And stop whining like a child.

You're projecting, James. And whining like a child.

> Just step your way through--maybe re-watch some of the earlier videos. 

I've seen your moronic "explanation", James. It doesn't reflect 
reality. You've done no experiments, you have no model, you have no 
data, you have no empirical evidence, you have no corroborating 
studies, you have nothing but the gaseous vapors emanating from your 
badly overheating brain as it feverishly works to dig its way out of a 
giant stupidity hole... and you're so insane, you've rejected the 
notion of "when you find yourself stuck in a hole, stop digging", and 
instead dig faster.

>>> the underlying assumptions/mechanics of which are explained in my paper.

>> And that's all you have, Jim, is assumptions. 

> That is all they have also, dumbass.

Except all that rigorous and carefully-controlled scientific 
experimentation using x-ray spectroscopy as Anders Nilsson used, 
optical absorption spectroscopy, dielectric spectroscopy, diffraction 
methods, models, nuclear magnetic resonance, vibrational spectra, 
thermodynamics and neutron scattering, James.

Whereas all you have is assumptions, suppositions and blather about 
fairy tale impossible physical processes and a giant sentient sky 
tornado monster with noodly appendages that extend thousands of miles 
through the atmosphere to touch down tornadoes and wreak havoc upon 
the populace.

>>> I'm not saying you have to agree with my model. But it's kind of
>>> ridiculous to dispute my model before you understand it.  It's also
>>> kind of ridiculous to dispute my model based on the fact that it
>>> does not match up exactly with the standard model

>> Your model is disputed because it does not match up with reality, James.

> Without details how can I help you.

Reality... that which has been proven to be real via rigorous and 
carefully-controlled scientific experimentation, as opposed to the mad 
ranting of an uneducated lackwit blathering out fairy tales with no 
connection to reality.

> Or should I just assume you are a complete dingbat that doesn't have
> the slightest idea what is going on here.

You're projecting again, James.

>> they've measured such things empirically via carefully-controlled
>> experimentation

> Then why aren't you presenting that, you fucking moron?

I have. You've run away from it. Here's just a tiny, tiny sampling of 
the studies you'll have to disprove, James:

<http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/ref.html>
<http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/ref2.html>
.... ...
<http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/ref25.html>
<http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/ref26.html>

You'll note there are 100 peer-reviewed papers of rigorous and 
carefully controlled scientific research on each of those pages.

Get to work, James. Or run away from reality again.

>> many years of empirical observation via experimentation, as well.

> Where is it?  Present it.  You can't.  You are a dingbat that
> barely understands what is going on.  You are like a monkey
> with a shiney object.

Awww, look at the retarded monkey bleating out his butthurt. What's 
the matter, Jim? Is reality ruining your little fairy tale in which 
you've painted yourself as the King Of Science, smarter than every 
researcher in the past 250+ years?

You hate being exposed as a scientific fraud, don't you, Jim?

>> You keep making these moronic videos filled with demonstrably false

> If it is "demonstrably false" then you should be able to demonstrate it
> . . . right . . . well.  Where is your demonstration?  

Already made here, condensed to save space so it'll get past the
server. Add @dizum.com to each:
<910a3b6c3baf6ecfefb6505162b5393c><59de46e56833e802ffb541f95bec654e>
<a5e82b3faebefc6443a18618bb478ab7><d0bfce9ab9680a4276be73c19082817a>
<f14b3ddf043a85ecc8327769a777e451><d9d827db4a7df03d332042e899a77030>
<9f938a8128279124eb54c8c7295e9c0f><f593297b90dc04fb5f0fb1c87b155409>
<477037b2caf278107a73eb31288c84db><a4a5a2f7ab5c2b3256814dd4c6d9ca69>
<9a0a5a9f6cad79ce5d7b924abdc6cfc8><dfe6fb5ba7845ecab8c7f514f3b584af>
<f603d966cebf083cfc716a972d18a29a><af052b6ad0769198f25c57bc3f806f78>
<62d2b79d8f5d72ee342d534f05a90965><dd1ca99246e6a02b1688d1508a4f8015>
<7de0ed42906c3cf402fe546f7d591ca7><b4fff105ac24a694f4ff7a2f4f52cc8f>
<16ac6ab66395bebfc4da6f35c6cc9c5c><4819aa6ca3ee8aa204420c9e791e7219>
<3743010fad8da9fce6795e8f9149017e><5169ac69436fde2a64246e5a70bf3d0f>
<e7b68e96c932b645ca76f71c9bcdab4c><fb786885b86868851dcbb80bbf53a449>
<fa98f6fe3da9b5c36d230a3798fcbc89><fee8520b82337d0fc1d600e5c4044d75>
<3e85a67d19ce3b2b7416e2e70ce24b2a><dbb6a010a96f7fc25e89afef3259fc0e>
<a9037d42850bc365089581da6a905132><3957213f26b82a90a25d8a7105c52bd9>
<adcb794730162cb65afc00aeb31ca18a><1a7a69c9429dc23b34ab195a39e309f1>
<497a7ccbf78b578659dbf1c254345f41><d9bc3e40ade4d1d60cbb378b7290a8f9>
<1c360973da7dc57b55ff708e175edbeb><fa160c3126a97c6bef7f23f27106e877>
<3b5bb9d859e32fe3ed0cfab088d08e86><da6b6261b23e26489f96a8b8184503b2>
<056771765eec75cacb84b83bf93b3079><34cd8f66003351d202ca08369d22ee08>
<93b2558293d80093b20754a0c7a6f10f><deef586f0db89cc6d8cc5b17af613eee>
<323719d8a0ffc7eeeb81d09b5da2b252><57375f4a05eaba5e0451b8c7bb9aed67>
<0631b44482c4ebff7cdaa3fffdc186e5><edf224cd7e3a9afcb3af6a33a42b01e5>
<06d6d6118736c38098ac31f651a0a985><c49a74db62e18eddf44a4169317e9b72>
<cf3ac7272ccdbea6a76a4f94b13d684b><ef3f50a4c5dceabeb69262166dd5e9f0>
<0d6b1332baad53f3e37672c6c4d115ef><30592b12b1e0534bb072e81f1f9184cc>
<f7cdf8b51e79787065a0c82f02e74e55><3919a6785d3b0da0da5c8f2bef582441>
<5f24e91292c55a004c9c07231f9e1e8a><077052cabddefee706a2f93ac660a3f2>
<0e7d19c3e0991f82383b8752b5daac77><c80c10f4c483bfab0575b342145b736a>
<95098d7e1a4fea93cf6686b7dd536719><a91eb5d26158517293a2fa42bd9d8ee5>
<681dddc9f88472de0e13b13dfee41d99><5e829d302a8914c7c8a93ffe56acd1f8>
<2997c31859758123d1ae290c92f337f1><ed7c3c626b991f8634c578ec146804d5>
<d15c9a0d02d7d85182bdbc94fedd4669><ffa40135c12c11a7a50398d8686161fb>
<c8fa07f9f38df6e42020780449c1e2fe><4a405f985fcf2db45de34bede093e489>
<cc7d7cb6cff3ecf998176d1d63eeb801><931d4178a58446d02d03a4a5a1179679>
<01365b15259c2e1e2c0d914a4f7a1a8c><0b6c275bf47d264b925a4870b560420c>
<2d8448f4623e0263f0e44013bc3ceaec><7a17a6f1c194d67e1729477e7910f316>
<1d00f176b1306817e7df59364bed6ca9><701530e3d8d7b26ac83691cc38b68b21>
<2cad18d851130f5197769de6a2e6f8c9><3a336839b35e41298e0d380e5379b9ec>
<1679f84a3cce327eabd968c27528aede><f33fe48e3d7b4b11054aa7b891abe2d5>
<40cf388c9f85ba6b9c63bcb4daa35723><ea47f024155d017848417c086073e8e3>
<248b979ce8b36a21b1cea21844e010d6><99085d93b23b8ba0c7b6f0d591b4947e>
<3b30aba297661cdca1914c24c4960061><c84fe0f8201b303c9bbcbcbb9b97bd1d>
<9c8f8ea59e6f7cb3317265e057f1a8be><0c12e326533cf4d6f7970bb6039c804f>
<cc6eaee77e55c9ed3b28e71ad44c98fc><4981dfb19df51c25a8726a68e9a32883>
<4b85bc71eb91e16bdb082fcaba68636c><57b6f6e2f58db066aa693cef68d02692>
<59a61dc72604e892f0e92414521057c3><1472efa3ca6bdfccb5285d6f040a6594>
<2a3072956dc3a57cae0b7459fc9bf0cf><baa17e76b06b65fafdd542472b29ee00>
<7043e575b199cc379ede0bd6d8432f6e><bc5458d7ca3b9489680f5a31622d8b76>
<3186ef619eae0d822e20101fa894f107><e556426aa1e54e099993762f44260116>
<44f0c39dc5bdb8acbbbf1540ff0fd2b2><b787cc8b0c75ffffd0d95b86e4cd8e56>
<ef373fad842eb1d3b972219b805e3cf1><0c867f8f22c40d291e3dcee1498f5443>
<5ed901c761ca842e2693082258f9fd8d><4ef3443d7f490d5e240cd03c9f6a0f68>
<fbfc22381db129441a77eac6a3789b45><97f2b779e21b2e1884e74d45a35fbe86>
<1a082b5b2a283e2f08bc25b1d7f781ed><f87db38813e6155b04bb5186efcaf3c2>
<bd5a4f37294daee9813c4e35d9ca3b5a><e8096307838a0b979f0fbc8e201fb9e6>
<6ee8ec64a49327c39896e28cc2adbe6c><84d76f192da7b92e045ade7a36650d81>
<9d476b2b8116b673d10a56a9bb5d8646><9f64bbd2e3ccf7fc01ee2538a2fd4139>
<9274573975c53cd004cf5294a0c32472><c5c71181223dcdf5f38737e87f64f47f>
<0cdc2ac7127f58566dcf4c7b8f305455><7a3ede290a69c06a373b66f2e0ba752a>
<5a23b6d6f34ca0c0e6d555124fc509aa><daa8f83137c745a5487a1e83a1e67bad>
<d3fab06574213d6ad3cecc273baf804c><0bc0c234d82e81bd3a218195d3d35a11>
<e3139fec3310c45dccb6510c6861590b><c643767cfb31bc2d98807adcbbb5a6ff>
<2aa66d77ccf2f2dc27335490d3174051><5cc9967543ee80076ee6df13c17444c7>
<df5d7b58da0e1690b5d0cfeb065eb908><d7aef4eae4f59a5ad2a2bcec739831c3>
<46310bbd4c9b2bb4a4aae286d2595dcc><273c4a99282afcda2fa61e091f31b025>
<2ddffb0afbf7aa9672c9e88f7665b918><da3bad6f752a1ecd15ce394ff0da878c>
<e88302c1732ca7bb49c4d6aa3f4bf3c5><50b6e7a18286f7ce8c5be71714773b92>
<3d322700957508c73c9ca40ef8209880><e62f2bbe91e582a78058bd72747a5170>
<7d4ade8dabc0b0ca116417ab56303870><1af22ef07aaf4b2cf7a7fff78ae0a127>
<33b36cedd42f02f0b747f4312064b05f><22ab07a4a75962440c28e423552c3f32>
<9e941c77939a251b4e858c5658f944d2><d90162fea3fdc8212509cff394770f5f>
<120b563234823f2695cb29dd4de8f583><a0b11080a64386da2a1f0bd2538d05bf>
<dc2d2b6a13775f0408d4323f66ae656c><fc0a279540251112ff266c92b4a6fa82>
<4057d040fed54382ec64a0da4530cea6><b008563c0e190abf176e5872b8ede24e>
<bf0d0c2465ae841d6fe6811c6adc7936><648829b2bedb3ea8d39a4e3ec2724acf>
<8255892712bc9b7a055f7390de18fdfd><597a0c212654f13ac8661a211b0815d0>
<6bae9e3d0006bce6025cc5dd0acd4153><08c0d0cc7849759a8d91f6a02de7d96c>
<29d39821ebf137245ea1ea534e60d25e><7854272526b6ca4355c21e3e0c70a934>
<fc67ad1cbfe0e39ce95f66cb1232f1d7><f56762225249e20a9ffbda9d8317a043>
<c7af872ed1fa884ddb1f5e7f92d370c4><6b58de6eb845aa26b377c109dd625104>
<6aa26c2cebf4b9c18cf57481be649ef5><9a0fecba4a64d3ee9cb01d99a9782fc2>
<9934e1f19473bd9594f653a992d2fb0a><4410de6b0d49a2ab5e592a8ff763bfa7>
<f337917195a7a6576070297785c9a4e1><f671e10c04c35da55d5ea3dde492beac>
<0f4ab76c1b9d4ea25f14f6df381f8749><59fa099608d3f114e3fc70182286b172>
<3ad49b835fddde44c9f3f65bf1337c01><14e42fe1e9d38d7490b24e87300a4f2b>
<e3594a57f2bf8a3d184bb1a1b51db5c0><92c76c50f6d04fb963a57230f65c748a>
<b35fc654f75a526133dc318752121b53><cfcd3e126b4086d5a8dc7eccc8567867>
<4d92bc09bef2725cd3b5676cffff5a84><5bc87a191369777db18bf08f6e09afc9>
<97b05666b3de706154c8f230ab91584a><68ecbc4770da33299ac0eac7d3c59d29>
<90caecd87c26ab0ebfb6d3ecd3d40700><0111abaf853fcc1d31c2aca4e0b8fda0>
<1227cc1f58ffc4700ef47d3ffed50338><740bd5f27aa8a4f49bb33870adf0a0cc>
<ae7d03f871ad6ab77ed8dc49216429ca><0c70759136baecfdcd41e85990a0955e>
<2b6484b800103dd8c96b0788e38cfd94><fdc7fb9c57de87e6ba846b3c522bef82>
<c543993d21c2fd24f081f484716ef3c0><3b2c2d7c3889d5eec82b6be05d77190a>
<337ad27d8e86048358de5b626d8eda98><8eef00f2b2bd1916f4d8eae5f68d9a3a>
<7cefb3c2f6ff09c64baaaf451a7b397d><1c31842926661af6a8b975bd0b183c27>
<614f6d7a02313dbc6019e087911b5a08><a7aec78998f53a147a142db7cee55b12>
<7234755e51b77217d2743fc660ef8e5d><a0535884746744447ca1a08b76447be6>
<c8f9b686044dea761d2fe2f25316388f><db833059ded4f681160e603c4528803f>
<976f9d87da18fb5f4eb4ca6558bdbcd9><6101e157bb2999e2534076ddd064aa8a>
<9aea46fc1669dfb78c954cd4960562da><dff16a02718814c1b1b741c538d7f03b>
<675eb67413d7e396ebe6f1d051de6c7c><33714f8180584342328eb4eed4e2f839>
<a0fecd3b61f4c7c5015ab22651361b01><7b8c6778868e80561e46aa0d23f5edd4>
<9762d52121de63967ed408a6aee76a39><340d28d2db87a933e68c228000136ef2>
<51a14069005f9dc751e175a187638cec><9157f330d864433e04927b95d1378b74>
<1e42510151d05df18189ab24b246ea30><cc151156bfa7f0e82f6653d2eda38490>
<26c79b0ccd40eb509fb6961ebb80f4f3><7ca1ffd22a290d3f4bede71f406e4e8f>

You've run away from all of them, James, just as you've run from all 
those peer reviewed studies, just as you've run away from addressing 
the massive gaping logical contradictions in your "theory 
not-a-theory", as outlined in my .sig.

> The reality is you are a birdbrain that barely understands any of
> this, or science in general.

Awwww, you're projecting again, James.

-- 

Here, James, at the very least, try to address those tough questions 
which spotlight the logical inconsistencies and contradictions 
inherent in your "theory":

============================================================
Anders Nilsson measured (https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156) a 
spectral peak that was not solid-phase nor liquid-phase water, James. 
You claim that water remains liquid-phase upon evaporation. What was 
Anders Nilsson measuring, James? Oh, that's right... gaseous phase 
water, thereby proving that evaporation entails a phase change, 
thereby proving latent heat of evaporation exists, thereby 
*dis*proving a gigantic chunk of your theory, James.

You make a supposition that a "plasma not-a-plasma" is created from 
water due to wind shear, which transports energy throughout the 
atmosphere via wind driven by that plasma. Where does the energy come 
from to create your "wind shear" to create your "plasma not-a-plasma" 
if the "plasma not-a-plasma" cannot exist and thereby "transport 
energy" by driving that wind to create the "wind shear" which creates 
your "plasma not-a-plasma", unless there is "wind shear" to begin 
with, James? Your logic is so twisted you're going in circles. You've 
created a circulus in probando causality dilemma, which utterly 
destroys your theory, James.

According to your "theory", electrostatic attraction *increases* with 
distance (in violation of Coulomb's Law), which means that when an 
electron falls in orbit, it has to *absorb* energy. And that higher 
energy level somehow translates into a *weaker* electrostatic 
attraction. Now let's look at the other side of the coin... the 
electron in orbit would give off energy, rise in orbit, and somehow, 
that *lower* energy level translates into a *stronger* electrostatic 
attraction... how's *that* work, James? Explain how you've not just 
violated the Law of Conservation of Energy on an atomic level.

How do your "jet stream vortices" travel potentially hundreds of miles 
away from your "jet stream / giant tornado in the sky", without 
detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar, and know where and when to 
touch down so they always hit clouds, rather than tornadoes randomly 
appearing out of the clear blue sky, James? Is your "jet stream / 
giant tornado in the sky" sentient, James?

Go on, Jim, tell us... *why* is there a "boundary" between the 
troposphere and the stratosphere... we're waiting, Jim... No answer, 
Jim? Is it because that's where your "sentient jet stream / giant 
tornado monster with noodly appendages" lives, and it likes it that 
way, Jim? Do you need your meds, Jim?

If, as you claim, the jet stream is a vortex, why is the ride while 
inside the jet stream so smooth, James? Have you never ridden in an 
airplane inside a jet stream, James? Is it just that your "sentient 
jet stream / giant tornado monster with noodly appendages" likes its 
back scratched by the aircraft, so it doesn't rip the aircraft to 
shreds, Jim?

Do you not understand that once the air going upward through the 
tornadic funnel reaches the cumulonimbus cloud base above the 
mesocyclone, it spreads out, thus the tornado is strictly a phenomenon 
which happens from cloud base to ground? It does *not* go from the 
ground all the way up through the cloud to the tropopause as you 
claim, James, and it most certainly does not continue for potentially 
hundreds of miles in the upper troposphere to join the jet stream, 
which would make air travel deadly.

Explain why the jets run easterly, whereas the dry line runs N-S, if 
the jets are powering the creation of tornadoes. How is a tornado 
being created hundreds of miles from the edge of the jets, James?

Which direction does air flow from a flame, Jim? Up, does it not? 
That's convection due to temperature-induced density differential, is 
it not? Which direction does air flow from a flame in zero gravity, 
James? Radially in all directions, thereby snuffing out the flame due 
to lack of oxygen. So your claiming that convection doesn't exist 
means you're further claiming that gravity does not exist, and fire 
cannot burn for very long before it is smothered due to lack of 
oxygen. Or were you not aware that convection is a gravity-induced 
phenomenon due to density differential, James?

How does a hot air balloon rise, Jim? That's due to air density 
differential due to temperature differential, is it not? That 
less-dense air is convecting upward. Do you deny this, Jim? Is your 
giant sentient sky tornado monster stretching one of its noodly 
appendages down and gently lifting the hot air balloon, Jim?

How are your atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma, 
Jim?

Do you not know what the definition of "plasma" is, James?

How is your "plasma not-a-plasma" (which you have admitted is a 
hypothetical construct in a failed attempt to lend your claims even a 
semblance of plausibility) forming if the nuclear binding energy and 
dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water will 
preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen unless hit with an 
extremely energetic laser, Jim?

Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength, 
extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except 
photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above 
the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the 
troposphere to form your "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim?

How is the energy to plasmize your "plasma not-a-plasma" not 
dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the 
planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly 
all the water is, and where all life is, Jim?

Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change 
upon H bonding (which would have side effects such as random changes 
in the solvent properties of water... and we know those properties do 
not randomly change, Jim), and in fact the two spin isomers of water 
molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account 
for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your 
implausible claims are workable, Jim?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Jim?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564270

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-21 14:24 -0700
Message-ID<c0eb7db3-afb7-467f-a0f5-058b918f8d70@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#564266
On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 1:58:44 PM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
> 
> James McGinn, in 
> <news:38b06fcb-dd3f-4ea8-8b57-13e0a2da6ccb@googlegroups.com> did 
> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:
> 
> > On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 8:58:09 PM UTC-7,
> > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> 
> >> So you deny well-established, empirically-proven science
> 
> > Obviously their model is not "empirically proven" dumbass.
> 
> Obviously it is, via x-ray spectroscopy as Anders Nilsson 

You don't have a point.  Like all science groupies you have a belief that standard theory must be right. But you can't carry on a discussion to that effect.  So you try to bulldoze the discussion with irrelevancies and links that lead to endless loops of nonsense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564345

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-22 04:35 +0100
Message-ID<ddf3b084854eeaab83367d2bed910adb@dizum.com>
In reply to#564270
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James McGinn, in
<news:c0eb7db3-afb7-467f-a0f5-058b918f8d70@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 1:58:44 PM UTC-7,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>> James McGinn, in 
>> <news:38b06fcb-dd3f-4ea8-8b57-13e0a2da6ccb@googlegroups.com> did 
>> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

>>> On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 8:58:09 PM UTC-7,
>>> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>>>> So you deny well-established, empirically-proven science

>>> Obviously their model is not "empirically proven" dumbass.

>> Obviously it is, via x-ray spectroscopy as Anders Nilsson used, 
>> optical absorption spectroscopy, dielectric spectroscopy, diffraction 
>> methods, models, nuclear magnetic resonance, vibrational spectra, 
>> thermodynamics and neutron scattering are just some of the methods 
>> used, James.
>> 
>> <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_methods.html>
>> 
>> Obviously *your* "model not-a-model" is not "empirically proven", 
>> Dumbass. You've done *no* experimentation. All your fairy tale blather 
>> is pulled straight from your ass.

> You don't have a point.

You don't have a substantive defense of your psychosis. You run from
substantively addressing the gaping logic holes in your wholly
fabricated, unsupported by research or reality, "theory".

You lose, James. You're a scientific fraud and a laughingstock. You've
proven you're barking mad. Everyone is laughing at you, no one takes
your psychotic blather seriously. You're a sad joke.

That's reality, Jim. Deal with it.

-- 

Here, James, at the very least, try to address those tough questions
which spotlight the logical inconsistencies and contradictions
inherent in your "theory":

============================================================
Anders Nilsson measured (https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156) a
spectral peak that was not solid-phase nor liquid-phase water, James.
You claim that water remains liquid-phase upon evaporation. What was
Anders Nilsson measuring, James? Oh, that's right... gaseous phase
water, thereby proving that evaporation entails a phase change,
thereby proving latent heat of evaporation exists, thereby
*dis*proving a gigantic chunk of your theory, James.

You make a supposition that a "plasma not-a-plasma" is created from
water due to wind shear, which transports energy throughout the
atmosphere via wind driven by that plasma. Where does the energy come
from to create your "wind shear" to create your "plasma not-a-plasma"
if the "plasma not-a-plasma" cannot exist and thereby "transport
energy" by driving that wind to create the "wind shear" which creates
your "plasma not-a-plasma", unless there is "wind shear" to begin
with, James? Your logic is so twisted you're going in circles. You've
created a circulus in probando causality dilemma, which utterly
destroys your theory, James.

According to your "theory", electrostatic attraction *increases* with
distance (in violation of Coulomb's Law), which means that when an
electron falls in orbit, it has to *absorb* energy. And that higher
energy level somehow translates into a *weaker* electrostatic
attraction. Now let's look at the other side of the coin... the
electron in orbit would give off energy, rise in orbit, and somehow,
that *lower* energy level translates into a *stronger* electrostatic
attraction... how's *that* work, James? Explain how you've not just
violated the Law of Conservation of Energy on an atomic level.

How do your "jet stream vortices" travel potentially hundreds of miles
away from your "jet stream / giant tornado in the sky", without
detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar, and know where and when to
touch down so they always hit only cumulonimbus clouds, rather than
tornadoes randomly appearing out of the clear blue sky or from other
types of clouds, James? Is your "jet stream / giant tornado in the
sky" sentient, James?

Go on, Jim, tell us... *why* is there a "boundary" between the
troposphere and the stratosphere... we're waiting, Jim... No answer,
Jim? Is it because that's where your "sentient jet stream / giant
tornado monster with noodly appendages" lives, and it likes it that
way, Jim? Do you need your meds, Jim?

If, as you claim, the jet stream is a vortex, why is the ride while
inside the jet stream so smooth, James? Have you never ridden in an
airplane inside a jet stream, James? Is it just that your "sentient
jet stream / giant tornado monster with noodly appendages" likes its
back scratched by the aircraft, so it doesn't rip the aircraft to
shreds, Jim?

Do you not understand that once the air going upward through the
tornadic funnel reaches the cumulonimbus cloud base above the
mesocyclone, it spreads out, thus the tornado is strictly a phenomenon
which happens from cloud base to ground? It does *not* go from the
ground all the way up through the cloud to the tropopause as you
claim, James, and it most certainly does not continue for potentially
hundreds of miles in the upper troposphere to join the jet stream,
which would make air travel deadly.

Explain why the jets run easterly, whereas the dry line runs N-S, if
the jets are powering the creation of tornadoes. How is a tornado
being created hundreds of miles from the edge of the jets, James?

Which direction does air flow from a flame, Jim? Up, does it not?
That's convection due to temperature-induced density differential, is
it not? Which direction does air flow from a flame in zero gravity,
James? Radially in all directions, thereby snuffing out the flame due
to lack of oxygen. So your claiming that convection doesn't exist
means you're further claiming that gravity does not exist, and fire
cannot burn for very long before it is smothered due to lack of
oxygen. Or were you not aware that convection is a gravity-induced
phenomenon due to density differential, James?

How does a hot air balloon rise, Jim? That's due to air density
differential due to temperature differential, is it not? That
less-dense air is convecting upward. Do you deny this, Jim? Is your
giant sentient sky tornado monster stretching one of its noodly
appendages down and gently lifting the hot air balloon, Jim?

How are your atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma,
Jim?

Do you not know what the definition of "plasma" is, James?

How is your "plasma not-a-plasma" (which you have admitted is a
hypothetical construct in a failed attempt to lend your claims even a
semblance of plausibility) forming if the nuclear binding energy and
dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water will
preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen unless hit with an
extremely energetic laser, Jim?

Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength,
extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except
photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above
the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the
troposphere to form your "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim?

How is the energy to plasmize your "plasma not-a-plasma" not
dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the
planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly
all the water is, and where all life is, Jim?

Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change
upon H bonding (which would have side effects such as random changes
in the solvent properties of water... and we know those properties do
not randomly change, Jim), and in fact the two spin isomers of water
molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account
for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your
implausible claims are workable, Jim?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Jim?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564352

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-21 20:56 -0700
Message-ID<2273c08e-5b6b-4c95-a43a-4149a714a70d@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#564345
On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 8:45:49 PM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

> > You don't have a point.
> 
> You don't have a substantive defense of your psychosis. 

You are a confused, angry child.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564480

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-22 16:01 +0100
Message-ID<c32c7e120401918cf059d7b300dc81ef@dizum.com>
In reply to#564352
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James McGinn, in
<news:2273c08e-5b6b-4c95-a43a-4149a714a70d@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 8:45:49 PM UTC-7,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>>> You don't have a point.

>> You don't have a substantive defense of your psychosis. You run from
>> substantively addressing the gaping logic holes in your wholly
>> fabricated, unsupported by research or reality, "theory".
>> 
>> You lose, James. You're a scientific fraud and a laughingstock. You've
>> proven you're barking mad. Everyone is laughing at you, no one takes
>> your psychotic blather seriously. You're a sad joke.
>> 
>> That's reality, Jim. Deal with it.

> You are a confused, angry child.

You are a psychotic old fool trying desperately to twist reality to
your psychosis as means of justifying your remaining psychotic so you
can continue your comforting delusion that all of science is wrong and
you know better.

You're a sick-headed pathetic old joke, James. Seek professional
psychiatric intervention immediately.

As proof that what I write above is true, you'll yet again run away
from substantively defending your wholly fabricated pulled straight
from your ass "theory", as is highlighted via the gaping logical
contradictions inherent in your "theory, in my .sig.

-- 

Here, James, at the very least, try to address those tough questions
which spotlight the logical inconsistencies and contradictions
inherent in your "theory":

============================================================
Anders Nilsson measured (https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156) a
spectral peak that was not solid-phase nor liquid-phase water, James.
You claim that water remains liquid-phase upon evaporation. What was
Anders Nilsson measuring, James? Oh, that's right... gaseous phase
water, thereby proving that evaporation entails a phase change,
thereby proving latent heat of evaporation exists, thereby
*dis*proving a gigantic chunk of your theory, James.

You make a supposition that a "plasma not-a-plasma" is created from
water due to wind shear, which transports energy throughout the
atmosphere via wind driven by that plasma. Where does the energy come
from to create your "wind shear" to create your "plasma not-a-plasma"
if the "plasma not-a-plasma" cannot exist and thereby "transport
energy" by driving that wind to create the "wind shear" which creates
your "plasma not-a-plasma", unless there is "wind shear" to begin
with, James? Your logic is so twisted you're going in circles. You've
created a circulus in probando causality dilemma, which utterly
destroys your theory, James.

According to your "theory", electrostatic attraction *increases* with
distance (in violation of Coulomb's Law), which means that when an
electron falls in orbit, it has to *absorb* energy. And that higher
energy level somehow translates into a *weaker* electrostatic
attraction. Now let's look at the other side of the coin... the
electron in orbit would give off energy, rise in orbit, and somehow,
that *lower* energy level translates into a *stronger* electrostatic
attraction... how's *that* work, James? Explain how you've not just
violated the Law of Conservation of Energy on an atomic level.

How do your "jet stream vortices" travel potentially hundreds of miles
away from your "jet stream / giant tornado in the sky", without
detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar, and know where and when to
touch down so they always hit only cumulonimbus clouds, rather than
tornadoes randomly appearing out of the clear blue sky or from other
types of clouds, James? Is your "jet stream / giant tornado in the
sky" sentient, James?

Go on, Jim, tell us... *why* is there a "boundary" between the
troposphere and the stratosphere... we're waiting, Jim... No answer,
Jim? Is it because that's where your "sentient jet stream / giant
tornado monster with noodly appendages" lives, and it likes it that
way, Jim? Do you need your meds, Jim?

If, as you claim, the jet stream is a vortex, why is the ride while
inside the jet stream so smooth, James? Have you never ridden in an
airplane inside a jet stream, James? Is it just that your "sentient
jet stream / giant tornado monster with noodly appendages" likes its
back scratched by the aircraft, so it doesn't rip the aircraft to
shreds, Jim?

Do you not understand that once the air going upward through the
tornadic funnel reaches the cumulonimbus cloud base above the
mesocyclone, it spreads out, thus the tornado is strictly a phenomenon
which happens from cloud base to ground? It does *not* go from the
ground all the way up through the cloud to the tropopause as you
claim, James, and it most certainly does not continue for potentially
hundreds of miles in the upper troposphere to join the jet stream,
which would make air travel deadly.

Explain why the jets run easterly, whereas the dry line runs N-S, if
the jets are powering the creation of tornadoes. How is a tornado
being created hundreds of miles from the edge of the jets, James?

Which direction does air flow from a flame, Jim? Up, does it not?
That's convection due to temperature-induced density differential, is
it not? Which direction does air flow from a flame in zero gravity,
James? Radially in all directions, thereby snuffing out the flame due
to lack of oxygen. So your claiming that convection doesn't exist
means you're further claiming that gravity does not exist, and fire
cannot burn for very long before it is smothered due to lack of
oxygen. Or were you not aware that convection is a gravity-induced
phenomenon due to density differential, James?

How does a hot air balloon rise, Jim? That's due to air density
differential due to temperature differential, is it not? That
less-dense air is convecting upward. Do you deny this, Jim? Is your
giant sentient sky tornado monster stretching one of its noodly
appendages down and gently lifting the hot air balloon, Jim?

How are your atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma,
Jim?

Do you not know what the definition of "plasma" is, James?

How is your "plasma not-a-plasma" (which you have admitted is a
hypothetical construct in a failed attempt to lend your claims even a
semblance of plausibility) forming if the nuclear binding energy and
dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water will
preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen unless hit with an
extremely energetic laser, Jim?

Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength,
extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except
photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above
the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the
troposphere to form your "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim?

How is the energy to plasmize your "plasma not-a-plasma" not
dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the
planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly
all the water is, and where all life is, Jim?

Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change
upon H bonding (which would have side effects such as random changes
in the solvent properties of water... and we know those properties do
not randomly change, Jim), and in fact the two spin isomers of water
molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account
for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your
implausible claims are workable, Jim?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Jim?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564496

FromSkeet <invalid@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-03-22 09:41 -0600
Message-ID<trp2fbl0cir782nm48ru2boft3e0cdis9i@4ax.com>
In reply to#564480
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 16:01:05 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>You are a psychotic old fool trying desperately to twist reality to
>your psychosis as means of justifying your remaining psychotic so you
>can continue your comforting delusion that all of science is wrong and
>you know better.


"says the" yoular transformation lotus lying post editing outer
filthing coward.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564715

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-23 05:22 +0100
Message-ID<363eb8ba9e740361313305894cc6115b@dizum.com>
In reply to#564496
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Trailer Trash Tony the Law-Breaking Scam-Running Drug-Dealing
Wife-Beating Child-Endangering Tax-Evading Unemployable Racist
High-School-Dropout Needle-Tracked Drug-Addled Alcoholic Pissbum (aka
Tony Ray Rawlings, aka Anton Ray Eaks of 600 Raintree Blvd #58,
Lamplighter Trailer Park, Canon City, CO), socked up as Skeet, in
<news:trp2fbl0cir782nm48ru2boft3e0cdis9i@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 16:01:05 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood
> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> You are a psychotic old fool trying desperately to twist reality to
>> your psychosis as means of justifying your remaining psychotic so you
>> can continue your comforting delusion that all of science is wrong and
>> you know better.

> "says the" yoular transformation lotus lying post editing outer
> filthing coward.

Says the lying low-rent unemployable four-eyed wrinkled-up
woman-beating single-wide trailer-monkey pissbum who had to beg online
for *teeth* and who married Howdy Doody in drag. LOL

It's Howdy Doody Time!:
<http://i.imgur.com/1myBylb.jpg> <--- LOL!

Bwahahahaaa! You're *never* gonna live those down, Pissbum. That's
comedy gold. LOL

> <http://imgur.com/xt9bcTq>
> 
> I were a execyootive reegunal sailes man making deleverys.
> Now I are a toofless unemployalbe pissbum.

<snicker>

> I just found out today. Maybe a year. I love you all.
> My shits fucked up anyboby givs a damn?

No.

Lying Drug-Abusing Woman-Beating Pissbum Trailer Trash Tony Ray Eaks.

<snicker>

-- 

Proof that Lamey (aka Skeeter) is Anton Ray Eaks:
Message-ID: <kus7dj$bh0$1@news.mixmin.net>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/alt.usenet.kooks/messageid$3Akus7dj$24bh0$241@news.mixmin.net/alt.usenet.kooks/MLAQo_O73UM>

Pissbum hard at work to earn his drug-money:
<http://i.imgur.com/hr4eMvS.jpg> <--- LOL!

Just say no to drugs and alcohol, kids!
<http://i.imgur.com/uoZbsGI.jpg> <--- LOL!

It's Howdy Doody Time!:
<http://i.imgur.com/1myBylb.jpg> <--- LOL!

The Pissbum Clan:
<http://i.imgur.com/cixImyq.jpg> <--- LOL!

MID: <81670ab47076fa4432bc62e70914ee31@dizum.com>

Thanks for admitting you live in single-wide trailer #58 at the Lamp
Lighter Mobile Home Park on Raintree Boulevard in Canon City,
Colorado, Pissbum. LOL

<https://web.archive.org/web/20150301045717/http://coloradovoters.info/by_number/0005/59023_anton_ray_eaks.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20150224004840/http://coloradovoters.info/by_address/81212.html>
600 Raintree Blvd. #58
Canon City, CO 81212

Another single-wide? Of course it is... the Lamp Lighter Mobile Home
Park only has single-wide trailers. LOL

And you get caught in your "I don't do FaceBook" lie again, not to
mention your "I'm not Tony Eaks" lie:

A drug-addled loserly pissbum wrote:
Message-ID: <c30abe10716ad5092ff377450c199bae@dizum.com>
"It's dump day today, woke up to fire trucks across the street, seems
the house caught fire. What a view I have now...LOL"

<https://www.facebook.com/CanonCityDailyRecord?hc_location=timeline>
"Tony Eaks - Right across the street from me, Woke up to flames and
lights."

<https://web.archive.org/web/20150122055700/http://www.canoncitydailyrecord.com/ci_27053304/early-morning-fire-destroys-home-at-lamp-lighter>

And before he was a Canon City, CO single-wide trailer-dwelling
unemployable pissbum, he was a Fairplay, CO single-wide
trailer-dwelling unemployable pissbum. LOL

In Fairplay, CO he mooched his mother to an early death... now he's
mooching his ultra-ugly transsexual Howdy Doody wife Beverly Jean
Johnson-Eaks, who is forced to work two minimum-wage jobs (cashier at
Alco, cashier at Dollar Tree) to support Trailer Trash Tony's drug
habit. LOL

Message-ID: <96a8a62d10d76cd522bcf86bbaef274d@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <91a9d7e35f68d22eef5b72f79ef505c0@dizum.com>
Unit 66. Trailer Trash Tony is a single-wide pissbum! Bwahahahaaa!
============================================================
Trailer Trash Tony wrote:
> Can you prove this single wide trailer thing? Or is it
> just another attempt to try and "act" better than me?  LOL

Yeah, I can now prove "this single wide trailer thing", Trailer Trash
Tony. Which by your own admission makes me better than you. LOL

So I was right about everything I wrote about you... which makes you a
pissbum, Pissbum. LOL

<https://web.archive.org/web/20140724093727/http://coloradovoters.info/0005/59023.html>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Anton Ray Eaks was born in 1953 and he registered to vote, giving his
address as 21980 HWY 285 UNIT 66, FAIRPLAY, PARK COUNTY, COLORADO
80440. His telephone number is 1-719-477-3574. His voting status is:
Active. He is unaffiliated.
RESIDENTIAL_ADDRESS:	 21980 HWY 285 UNIT 66
RESIDENTIAL_CITY:	 FAIRPLAY
RESIDENTIAL_STATE:	 CO
RESIDENTIAL_ZIP_CODE:	 80440
REGISTRATION_DATE:	 07/31/2012
BIRTH_YEAR:	 1953
PHONE_NUM:	 719-477-3574
MAILING_ADDRESS_1:	 PO BOX 473
MAILING_CITY:	 FAIRPLAY
MAILING_STATE:	 CO
MAILING_ZIP_CODE:	 80440
MAILING_ZIP_PLUS:	 0473
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NOTE: That phone number is the Alcoholics Anonymous hot-line at South
Park Christian Chapel:
<https://web.archive.org/web/20150131161807/http://www.southparkevents.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=48:on-going-activities-for-the-month-&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=54>
"Alcoholics Anonymouis meeting 7-8pm at So Pk Christian Chapel
719-477-3574"

Trailer Trash Tony is *such* a drunkard that when he registered to
vote, he put down the AA DrunkieLine as his phone number! LOL

A map of the gravel quarry / junkyard / trailer park where Trailer
Trash Tony rented his shitty single-wide trailer for only $675 / month
(and still couldn't pay the rent, and got evicted! LOL):
<https://www.google.com/maps/place/21980+Hwy+285+%2366,+Fairplay,+CO+80440/@39.2157874,-105.9922529,346m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x876ae8155a400885:0xfb9ff5490348163d>

Unit 66:
This is a 3 bd/2ba single-wide trailer.
<https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.318572058245476.1073741834.131803693588981&type=1&_fb_noscript=1>

SPANKY-SPANKY! (tm)

<snicker>
============================================================

Lamey (aka Skeeter) the alcoholic wife-beating outer-filthing
drug-addict:
Message-ID: <lfjfe7$b3t$4@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <1b7ef90407a4295786c3f1338e80d553@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <c39bc1cce43a9e6860b642e72943f3ce@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <ae39676e2ac093e5259ccf8210ecbb25@dizum.com>

Trailer Trash Tony makes a multi-pronged confession:
MID: <k9m2ca5g26l46qb2t9h05ff87skcjiov1o@4ax.com>
"Yup, I can take 4 or 5 percs and roof your house. It's called the
paradoxical affect."

Pissbum groveled. LOL
Pissbum lost. LOL!
Message-ID: <lchuas$q96$4@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <c92bbbbfefed840db0563eb29f2d6498@dizum.com>

Cowardly Pissbum gets caught in lie after lie. LOL!
Message-ID: <l0rfde$hv8$2@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <l0smsq$fcq$2@news.mixmin.net>

Lamey (aka Skeeter) the forger, busted and scrambling for cover like a
coward:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/2oWKmfnSPEA/RE_35HZp8qAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/2oWKmfnSPEA/-RZxQp6TAe4J>
Message-ID: <db92667a7bac368fab1b8ff5085f8b2e@dizum.com>

Pissbum gets kicked so hard he's *still* bouncing around Usenet like a
SuperBall:
============================================
Message-ID: <kv42gb$vd8$1@news.mixmin.net>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=alt.usenet.kooks/ZyzzhJiku3c/Q0c2J9_Jc5YJ>

Message-ID: <kuatrj$b2g$1@news.mixmin.net>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=alt.usenet.kooks/N91lSABoN2s/JYDwKwwIZn4J>
============================================

Trailer Trash Tony the Single-Wide Trailer-Dwelling Pissbum is driven
so insane by my truthiness that he's forced by his psychiatric
professional to take Seroquel, a strong anti-psychotic that its maker
(Astra Zeneca) only indicates for use in treating schizophrenia and
bipolar disorder:
==================================================
Lamey (aka Skeeter) admits he now takes Seroquel "to sleep"... it's a
prescription medication for the treatment of mania and depression
associated with bipolar disease and schizophrenia. I've driven him
mad. LOL

Pissbum tries to k'lame his doctor-recommended dosage is only half of
the smallest tablet Astra Zeneca produces for Seroquel:
MID: <3elg2aduthcn6j92jlledhg6sa4ibnbro1@4ax.com>:
"Just like seriquil, I take it for sleep at night, 12.5 mg"

I shred Pissbum Tony's lies and prove he's gone batty:
MID: <0c4a46b95e1b8983104047001ec4e05f@dizum.com>
MID: <11715d7d5e802fb4248513f981621812@dizum.com>
MID: <3bb2754531e630d89eb7330623ee6281@dizum.com>
MID: <8bc988e4842e4338432ad962f84a89d4@dizum.com>
==================================================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564761

FromSkeet <invalid@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-03-23 06:29 -0600
Message-ID<8135fbtg2m4336hmsdvk2jg63q0d27dge7@4ax.com>
In reply to#564715
On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 05:22:11 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> "says the" yoular transformation lotus lying post editing outer
>> filthing coward.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564062

FromSolving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-20 22:42 -0700
Message-ID<c6316f90-cbb5-42a5-bb48-021a8ba83267@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#564037
On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 8:58:09 PM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
> 
> James McGinn, in
> <news:43100c64-1b95-4858-9a16-9e91da9a5cd0@googlegroups.com> did
> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:
> 
> > video: 
> > https://youtu.be/iDv2RoUrHTY?t=4m10s
> > https://youtu.be/WSGv08Rb_Lo ) 
> > 
> > Did you watch these?  Do you understand how this is distinctive from
> > the standard model that Nilsson, Saykally, and Soper assume?
> 
> So you deny well-established, empirically-proven science in favor of
> your moronic anti-science conspiracy theory blathering... and you
> *don't* think you're insane, Jim?

Using your own words, explain how my model is different from the standard model.  

If you can't answer this question then it must be because you lack the intelligence to follow a mildly complex argument.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564148

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-21 16:09 +0100
Message-ID<f51951cf91bbb96ac9d0955f2952e369@dizum.com>
In reply to#564062
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James Bernard McGinn, Jr. of Antioch, CA, socked up as Solving
Tornadoes, in
<news:c6316f90-cbb5-42a5-bb48-021a8ba83267@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Sunday, March 20, 2016 at 8:58:09 PM UTC-7,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>> James McGinn, in
>> <news:43100c64-1b95-4858-9a16-9e91da9a5cd0@googlegroups.com> did
>> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

>>> video: 
>>> https://youtu.be/iDv2RoUrHTY?t=4m10s
>>> https://youtu.be/WSGv08Rb_Lo ) 
>>> 
>>> Did you watch these?  Do you understand how this is distinctive from
>>> the standard model that Nilsson, Saykally, and Soper assume?

>> So you deny well-established, empirically-proven science in favor of
>> your moronic anti-science conspiracy theory blathering... and you
>> *don't* think you're insane, Jim?

> Using your own words, explain how my model is different from the
> standard model.  

The Standard Model has been rigorously tested utilizing
carefully-controlled experimentation via several methods.

Conversely your fairy tale fabrication is a scientific fraud
constructed from nothing more than your own feverish fumings, wholly
unsupported by data, experimentation or empirical evidence.

> If you can't answer this question then it must be because you
> lack the intelligence to follow a mildly complex argument.

You've lost, James. You're a scientific fraud. Your 'theory' has holes
large enough to drive a Mack truck through, you keep slapping patches
on your kooky 'theory' in a desperate attempt at patching those logic
holes, exposing even more logic holes in the process, and you find
yourself utterly unable to mount a substantive defense of your moronic
'theory'. Every time you've tried, your blather has been ripped to
shreds.

Just give up, Jim. Take your meds and go educate yourself. Stop being
such a fucking moron.

-- 

Here, James, at the very least, try to address those tough questions
which spotlight the logical inconsistencies and contradictions
inherent in your "theory":

============================================================
Anders Nilsson measured (https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156) a
spectral peak that was not solid-phase nor liquid-phase water, James.
You claim that water remains liquid-phase upon evaporation. What was
Anders Nilsson measuring, James? Oh, that's right... gaseous phase
water, thereby proving that evaporation entails a phase change,
thereby proving latent heat of evaporation exists, thereby
*dis*proving a gigantic chunk of your theory, James.

You make a supposition that a "plasma not-a-plasma" is created from
water due to wind shear, which transports energy throughout the
atmosphere via wind driven by that plasma. Where does the energy come
from to create your "wind shear" to create your "plasma not-a-plasma"
if the "plasma not-a-plasma" cannot exist and thereby "transport
energy" by driving that wind to create the "wind shear" which creates
your "plasma not-a-plasma", unless there is "wind shear" to begin
with, James? Your logic is so twisted you're going in circles. You've
created a circulus in probando causality dilemma, which utterly
destroys your theory, James.

According to your "theory", electrostatic attraction *increases* with
distance (in violation of Coulomb's Law), which means that when an
electron falls in orbit, it has to *absorb* energy. And that higher
energy level somehow translates into a *weaker* electrostatic
attraction. Now let's look at the other side of the coin... the
electron in orbit would give off energy, rise in orbit, and somehow,
that *lower* energy level translates into a *stronger* electrostatic
attraction... how's *that* work, James? Explain how you've not just
violated the Law of Conservation of Energy on an atomic level.

How do your "jet stream vortices" travel potentially hundreds of miles
away from your "jet stream / giant tornado in the sky", without
detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar, and know where and when to
touch down so they always hit clouds, rather than tornadoes randomly
appearing out of the clear blue sky, James? Is your "jet stream /
giant tornado in the sky" sentient, James?

Go on, Jim, tell us... *why* is there a "boundary" between the
troposphere and the stratosphere... we're waiting, Jim... No answer,
Jim? Is it because that's where your "sentient jet stream / giant
tornado monster with noodly appendages" lives, and it likes it that
way, Jim? Do you need your meds, Jim?

If, as you claim, the jet stream is a vortex, why is the ride while
inside the jet stream so smooth, James? Have you never ridden in an
airplane inside a jet stream, James? Is it just that your "sentient
jet stream / giant tornado monster with noodly appendages" likes its
back scratched by the aircraft, so it doesn't rip the aircraft to
shreds, Jim?

Do you not understand that once the air going upward through the
tornadic funnel reaches the cumulonimbus cloud base above the
mesocyclone, it spreads out, thus the tornado is strictly a phenomenon
which happens from cloud base to ground? It does *not* go from the
ground all the way up through the cloud to the tropopause as you
claim, James, and it most certainly does not continue for potentially
hundreds of miles in the upper troposphere to join the jet stream,
which would make air travel deadly.

Explain why the jets run easterly, whereas the dry line runs N-S, if
the jets are powering the creation of tornadoes. How is a tornado
being created hundreds of miles from the edge of the jets, James?

Which direction does air flow from a flame, Jim? Up, does it not?
That's convection due to temperature-induced density differential, is
it not? Which direction does air flow from a flame in zero gravity,
James? Radially in all directions, thereby snuffing out the flame due
to lack of oxygen. So your claiming that convection doesn't exist
means you're further claiming that gravity does not exist, and fire
cannot burn for very long before it is smothered due to lack of
oxygen. Or were you not aware that convection is a gravity-induced
phenomenon due to density differential, James?

How does a hot air balloon rise, Jim? That's due to air density
differential due to temperature differential, is it not? That
less-dense air is convecting upward. Do you deny this, Jim? Is your
giant sentient sky tornado monster stretching one of its noodly
appendages down and gently lifting the hot air balloon, Jim?

How are your atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma,
Jim?

Do you not know what the definition of "plasma" is, James?

How is your "plasma not-a-plasma" (which you have admitted is a
hypothetical construct in a failed attempt to lend your claims even a
semblance of plausibility) forming if the nuclear binding energy and
dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water will
preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen unless hit with an
extremely energetic laser, Jim?

Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength,
extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except
photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above
the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the
troposphere to form your "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim?

How is the energy to plasmize your "plasma not-a-plasma" not
dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the
planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly
all the water is, and where all life is, Jim?

Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change
upon H bonding (which would have side effects such as random changes
in the solvent properties of water... and we know those properties do
not randomly change, Jim), and in fact the two spin isomers of water
molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account
for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your
implausible claims are workable, Jim?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Jim?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564209

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-21 11:09 -0700
Message-ID<01eb3db4-5251-4e0b-ab52-034ab0353c4c@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#564148
On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 8:20:13 AM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

> > Using your own words, explain how my model is different from the
> > standard model.  
> 
> The Standard Model has been rigorously tested 

LOL. That is not the question I asked, you evasive twit.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564388

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-22 06:06 +0100
Message-ID<f227f44bbdecd91ae036ca57c9713930@dizum.com>
In reply to#564209
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James McGinn, in
<news:01eb3db4-5251-4e0b-ab52-034ab0353c4c@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 8:20:13 AM UTC-7,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>>> Using your own words, explain how my model is different from the
>>> standard model.  

>> The Standard Model has been rigorously tested 

> LOL. That is not the question I asked, you evasive twit.

You cowardly snipping evasive piece of shit. You deny that H bonding
strength diminishes by the inverse square of distance, therefore you
deny how electrostatic interactions work in *all* instances, including
electron orbit. Thereby you deny the Standard Model, thereby you deny
the mechanism by which the electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear
forces work, thereby you deny all of particle physics.

That you were too fucking stupid to realize that your simple denial
would open such a can of worms and prove that you're a psychotic
uneducated moron shows just what a psychotic uneducated moron you are,
James.

-- 

Here, James, at the very least, try to address those tough questions
which spotlight the logical inconsistencies and contradictions
inherent in your "theory":

============================================================
Anders Nilsson measured (https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156) a
spectral peak that was not solid-phase nor liquid-phase water, James.
You claim that water remains liquid-phase upon evaporation. What was
Anders Nilsson measuring, James? Oh, that's right... gaseous phase
water, thereby proving that evaporation entails a phase change,
thereby proving latent heat of evaporation exists, thereby
*dis*proving a gigantic chunk of your theory, James.

You make a supposition that a "plasma not-a-plasma" is created from
water due to wind shear, which transports energy throughout the
atmosphere via wind driven by that plasma. Where does the energy come
from to create your "wind shear" to create your "plasma not-a-plasma"
if the "plasma not-a-plasma" cannot exist and thereby "transport
energy" by driving that wind to create the "wind shear" which creates
your "plasma not-a-plasma", unless there is "wind shear" to begin
with, James? Your logic is so twisted you're going in circles. You've
created a circulus in probando causality dilemma, which utterly
destroys your theory, James.

According to your "theory", electrostatic attraction *increases* with
distance (in violation of Coulomb's Law), which means that when an
electron falls in orbit, it has to *absorb* energy. And that higher
energy level somehow translates into a *weaker* electrostatic
attraction. Now let's look at the other side of the coin... the
electron in orbit would give off energy, rise in orbit, and somehow,
that *lower* energy level translates into a *stronger* electrostatic
attraction... how's *that* work, James? Explain how you've not just
violated the Law of Conservation of Energy on an atomic level.

How do your "jet stream vortices" travel potentially hundreds of miles
away from your "jet stream / giant tornado in the sky", without
detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar, and know where and when to
touch down so they always hit clouds, rather than tornadoes randomly
appearing out of the clear blue sky, James? Is your "jet stream /
giant tornado in the sky" sentient, James?

Go on, Jim, tell us... *why* is there a "boundary" between the
troposphere and the stratosphere... we're waiting, Jim... No answer,
Jim? Is it because that's where your "sentient jet stream / giant
tornado monster with noodly appendages" lives, and it likes it that
way, Jim? Do you need your meds, Jim?

If, as you claim, the jet stream is a vortex, why is the ride while
inside the jet stream so smooth, James? Have you never ridden in an
airplane inside a jet stream, James? Is it just that your "sentient
jet stream / giant tornado monster with noodly appendages" likes its
back scratched by the aircraft, so it doesn't rip the aircraft to
shreds, Jim?

Do you not understand that once the air going upward through the
tornadic funnel reaches the cumulonimbus cloud base above the
mesocyclone, it spreads out, thus the tornado is strictly a phenomenon
which happens from cloud base to ground? It does *not* go from the
ground all the way up through the cloud to the tropopause as you
claim, James, and it most certainly does not continue for potentially
hundreds of miles in the upper troposphere to join the jet stream,
which would make air travel deadly.

Explain why the jets run easterly, whereas the dry line runs N-S, if
the jets are powering the creation of tornadoes. How is a tornado
being created hundreds of miles from the edge of the jets, James?

Which direction does air flow from a flame, Jim? Up, does it not?
That's convection due to temperature-induced density differential, is
it not? Which direction does air flow from a flame in zero gravity,
James? Radially in all directions, thereby snuffing out the flame due
to lack of oxygen. So your claiming that convection doesn't exist
means you're further claiming that gravity does not exist, and fire
cannot burn for very long before it is smothered due to lack of
oxygen. Or were you not aware that convection is a gravity-induced
phenomenon due to density differential, James?

How does a hot air balloon rise, Jim? That's due to air density
differential due to temperature differential, is it not? That
less-dense air is convecting upward. Do you deny this, Jim? Is your
giant sentient sky tornado monster stretching one of its noodly
appendages down and gently lifting the hot air balloon, Jim?

How are your atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma,
Jim?

Do you not know what the definition of "plasma" is, James?

How is your "plasma not-a-plasma" (which you have admitted is a
hypothetical construct in a failed attempt to lend your claims even a
semblance of plausibility) forming if the nuclear binding energy and
dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water will
preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen unless hit with an
extremely energetic laser, Jim?

Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength,
extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except
photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above
the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the
troposphere to form your "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim?

How is the energy to plasmize your "plasma not-a-plasma" not
dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the
planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly
all the water is, and where all life is, Jim?

Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change
upon H bonding (which would have side effects such as random changes
in the solvent properties of water... and we know those properties do
not randomly change, Jim), and in fact the two spin isomers of water
molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account
for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your
implausible claims are workable, Jim?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Jim?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564398

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-21 22:45 -0700
Message-ID<c023b250-52b6-43c5-9ba5-273e1702cf1a@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#564388
On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 10:17:24 PM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

> >>> Using your own words, explain how my model is different from the
> >>> standard model.  
> 
> >> The Standard Model has been rigorously tested 
> 
> > LOL. That is not the question I asked, you evasive twit.
> 
> You cowardly snipping evasive piece of shit. 

This must be like a bad dream for you.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564484

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-22 16:16 +0100
Message-ID<967ba62177f244583a6d6f15ee790c2d@dizum.com>
In reply to#564398
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James McGinn, in
<news:c023b250-52b6-43c5-9ba5-273e1702cf1a@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Monday, March 21, 2016 at 10:17:24 PM UTC-7,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>>>>> Using your own words, explain how my model is different from the
>>>>> standard model.  

>>>> The Standard Model has been rigorously tested 

>>> LOL. That is not the question I asked, you evasive twit.

>> You cowardly snipping evasive piece of shit. You deny that H bonding
>> strength diminishes by the inverse square of distance, therefore you
>> deny how electrostatic interactions work in *all* instances, including
>> electron orbit. Thereby you deny the Standard Model, thereby you deny
>> the mechanism by which the electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear
>> forces work, thereby you deny all of particle physics.
>> 
>> That you were too fucking stupid to realize that your simple denial
>> would open such a can of worms and prove that you're a psychotic
>> uneducated moron shows just what a psychotic uneducated moron you are,
>> James.

> This must be like a bad dream for you.

Oh, no. I quite enjoy drop-kicking moronic lackwits like you, Jim. I
could do this for years and years and years. In fact, for other
moronic lackwits, I have... I drove one so insane he couldn't even
form sentences anymore. Another got so apoplectic he *died*.

This continues until you face reality, James.

-- 

Here, James, at the very least, try to address those tough questions
which spotlight the logical inconsistencies and contradictions
inherent in your "theory":

============================================================
Anders Nilsson measured (https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156) a
spectral peak that was not solid-phase nor liquid-phase water, James.
You claim that water remains liquid-phase upon evaporation. What was
Anders Nilsson measuring, James? Oh, that's right... gaseous phase
water, thereby proving that evaporation entails a phase change,
thereby proving latent heat of evaporation exists, thereby
*dis*proving a gigantic chunk of your theory, James.

You make a supposition that a "plasma not-a-plasma" is created from
water due to wind shear, which transports energy throughout the
atmosphere via wind driven by that plasma. Where does the energy come
from to create your "wind shear" to create your "plasma not-a-plasma"
if the "plasma not-a-plasma" cannot exist and thereby "transport
energy" by driving that wind to create the "wind shear" which creates
your "plasma not-a-plasma", unless there is "wind shear" to begin
with, James? Your logic is so twisted you're going in circles. You've
created a circulus in probando causality dilemma, which utterly
destroys your theory, James.

According to your "theory", electrostatic attraction *increases* with
distance (in violation of Coulomb's Law), which means that when an
electron falls in orbit, it has to *absorb* energy. And that higher
energy level somehow translates into a *weaker* electrostatic
attraction. Now let's look at the other side of the coin... the
electron in orbit would give off energy, rise in orbit, and somehow,
that *lower* energy level translates into a *stronger* electrostatic
attraction... how's *that* work, James? Explain how you've not just
violated the Law of Conservation of Energy on an atomic level.

How do your "jet stream vortices" travel potentially hundreds of miles
away from your "jet stream / giant tornado in the sky", without
detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar, and know where and when to
touch down so they always hit only cumulonimbus clouds, rather than
tornadoes randomly appearing out of the clear blue sky or from other
types of clouds, James? Is your "jet stream / giant tornado in the
sky" sentient, James?

Go on, Jim, tell us... *why* is there a "boundary" between the
troposphere and the stratosphere... we're waiting, Jim... No answer,
Jim? Is it because that's where your "sentient jet stream / giant
tornado monster with noodly appendages" lives, and it likes it that
way, Jim? Do you need your meds, Jim?

If, as you claim, the jet stream is a vortex, why is the ride while
inside the jet stream so smooth, James? Have you never ridden in an
airplane inside a jet stream, James? Is it just that your "sentient
jet stream / giant tornado monster with noodly appendages" likes its
back scratched by the aircraft, so it doesn't rip the aircraft to
shreds, Jim?

Do you not understand that once the air going upward through the
tornadic funnel reaches the cumulonimbus cloud base above the
mesocyclone, it spreads out, thus the tornado is strictly a phenomenon
which happens from cloud base to ground? It does *not* go from the
ground all the way up through the cloud to the tropopause as you
claim, James, and it most certainly does not continue for potentially
hundreds of miles in the upper troposphere to join the jet stream,
which would make air travel deadly.

Explain why the jets run easterly, whereas the dry line runs N-S, if
the jets are powering the creation of tornadoes. How is a tornado
being created hundreds of miles from the edge of the jets, James?

Which direction does air flow from a flame, Jim? Up, does it not?
That's convection due to temperature-induced density differential, is
it not? Which direction does air flow from a flame in zero gravity,
James? Radially in all directions, thereby snuffing out the flame due
to lack of oxygen. So your claiming that convection doesn't exist
means you're further claiming that gravity does not exist, and fire
cannot burn for very long before it is smothered due to lack of
oxygen. Or were you not aware that convection is a gravity-induced
phenomenon due to density differential, James?

How does a hot air balloon rise, Jim? That's due to air density
differential due to temperature differential, is it not? That
less-dense air is convecting upward. Do you deny this, Jim? Is your
giant sentient sky tornado monster stretching one of its noodly
appendages down and gently lifting the hot air balloon, Jim?

How are your atmospheric "water droplets" forming if they're plasma,
Jim?

Do you not know what the definition of "plasma" is, James?

How is your "plasma not-a-plasma" (which you have admitted is a
hypothetical construct in a failed attempt to lend your claims even a
semblance of plausibility) forming if the nuclear binding energy and
dissociation energy of water are identical, and thus the water will
preferentially dissociate into hydrogen and oxygen unless hit with an
extremely energetic laser, Jim?

Where is the energy (equivalent to photons of 103.32 nm wavelength,
extremely strong ultraviolet, just 3.32 nm away from x-rays... except
photons with shorter wavelength than 121 nm are absorbed high above
the troposphere because they ionize air so well) coming from in the
troposphere to form your "plasma not-a-plasma", Jim?

How is the energy to plasmize your "plasma not-a-plasma" not
dissociating all water on the planet and killing all life on the
planet given that the energy *must* be in the troposphere where nearly
all the water is, and where all life is, Jim?

Now that it's been proven that water molecule polarity doesn't change
upon H bonding (which would have side effects such as random changes
in the solvent properties of water... and we know those properties do
not randomly change, Jim), and in fact the two spin isomers of water
molecules account for the different H bonding strengths which account
for evaporation and condensation, do you still contend that your
implausible claims are workable, Jim?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Jim?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564497

FromSkeet <invalid@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-03-22 09:42 -0600
Message-ID<2up2fb9k84i5r0g826iu4jm5n6e1c9ghtb@4ax.com>
In reply to#564484
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 16:16:22 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>Oh, no. I quite enjoy drop-kicking moronic lackwits like you, Jim. I
>could do this for years and years and years. In fact, for other
>moronic lackwits, I have... I drove one so insane he couldn't even
>form sentences anymore. Another got so apoplectic he *died*.


More lies.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564723

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-23 05:53 +0100
Message-ID<f15e972b4acc30daa3c18caecbeb56b3@dizum.com>
In reply to#564497
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Trailer Trash Tony the Law-Breaking Scam-Running Drug-Dealing
Wife-Beating Child-Endangering Tax-Evading Unemployable Racist
High-School-Dropout Needle-Tracked Drug-Addled Alcoholic Pissbum (aka
Tony Ray Rawlings, aka Anton Ray Eaks of 600 Raintree Blvd #58,
Lamplighter Trailer Park, Canon City, CO), socked up as Skeet, in
<news:2up2fb9k84i5r0g826iu4jm5n6e1c9ghtb@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 16:16:22 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood
> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> Oh, no. I quite enjoy drop-kicking moronic lackwits like you, Jim. I
>> could do this for years and years and years. In fact, for other
>> moronic lackwits, I have... I drove one so insane he couldn't even
>> form sentences anymore. Another got so apoplectic he *died*.

> More lies.

See? There's one of them... I bootfucked that pathetic old junkie
pissbum so hard he's dedicated what little remains of his rapidly
dwindling life to following me around and toothlessly gnawing on my
ankle. LOL

> <http://imgur.com/xt9bcTq>
> 
> I were a execyootive reegunal sailes man making deleverys.
> Now I are a toofless unemployalbe pissbum.

<snicker>

> I just found out today. Maybe a year. I love you all.
> My shits fucked up anyboby givs a damn?

No.

Lying Drug-Abusing Woman-Beating Pissbum Trailer Trash Tony Ray Eaks.

<snicker>

-- 

Proof that Lamey (aka Skeeter) is Anton Ray Eaks:
Message-ID: <kus7dj$bh0$1@news.mixmin.net>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topicsearchin/alt.usenet.kooks/messageid$3Akus7dj$24bh0$241@news.mixmin.net/alt.usenet.kooks/MLAQo_O73UM>

Pissbum hard at work to earn his drug-money:
<http://i.imgur.com/hr4eMvS.jpg> <--- LOL!

Just say no to drugs and alcohol, kids!
<http://i.imgur.com/uoZbsGI.jpg> <--- LOL!

It's Howdy Doody Time!:
<http://i.imgur.com/1myBylb.jpg> <--- LOL!

The Pissbum Clan:
<http://i.imgur.com/cixImyq.jpg> <--- LOL!

MID: <81670ab47076fa4432bc62e70914ee31@dizum.com>

Thanks for admitting you live in single-wide trailer #58 at the Lamp
Lighter Mobile Home Park on Raintree Boulevard in Canon City,
Colorado, Pissbum. LOL

<https://web.archive.org/web/20150301045717/http://coloradovoters.info/by_number/0005/59023_anton_ray_eaks.html>
<https://web.archive.org/web/20150224004840/http://coloradovoters.info/by_address/81212.html>
600 Raintree Blvd. #58
Canon City, CO 81212

Another single-wide? Of course it is... the Lamp Lighter Mobile Home
Park only has single-wide trailers. LOL

And you get caught in your "I don't do FaceBook" lie again, not to
mention your "I'm not Tony Eaks" lie:

A drug-addled loserly pissbum wrote:
Message-ID: <c30abe10716ad5092ff377450c199bae@dizum.com>
"It's dump day today, woke up to fire trucks across the street, seems
the house caught fire. What a view I have now...LOL"

<https://www.facebook.com/CanonCityDailyRecord?hc_location=timeline>
"Tony Eaks - Right across the street from me, Woke up to flames and
lights."

<https://web.archive.org/web/20150122055700/http://www.canoncitydailyrecord.com/ci_27053304/early-morning-fire-destroys-home-at-lamp-lighter>

And before he was a Canon City, CO single-wide trailer-dwelling
unemployable pissbum, he was a Fairplay, CO single-wide
trailer-dwelling unemployable pissbum. LOL

In Fairplay, CO he mooched his mother to an early death... now he's
mooching his ultra-ugly transsexual Howdy Doody wife Beverly Jean
Johnson-Eaks, who is forced to work two minimum-wage jobs (cashier at
Alco, cashier at Dollar Tree) to support Trailer Trash Tony's drug
habit. LOL

Message-ID: <96a8a62d10d76cd522bcf86bbaef274d@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <91a9d7e35f68d22eef5b72f79ef505c0@dizum.com>
Unit 66. Trailer Trash Tony is a single-wide pissbum! Bwahahahaaa!
============================================================
Trailer Trash Tony wrote:
> Can you prove this single wide trailer thing? Or is it
> just another attempt to try and "act" better than me?  LOL

Yeah, I can now prove "this single wide trailer thing", Trailer Trash
Tony. Which by your own admission makes me better than you. LOL

So I was right about everything I wrote about you... which makes you a
pissbum, Pissbum. LOL

<https://web.archive.org/web/20140724093727/http://coloradovoters.info/0005/59023.html>
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Anton Ray Eaks was born in 1953 and he registered to vote, giving his
address as 21980 HWY 285 UNIT 66, FAIRPLAY, PARK COUNTY, COLORADO
80440. His telephone number is 1-719-477-3574. His voting status is:
Active. He is unaffiliated.
RESIDENTIAL_ADDRESS:	 21980 HWY 285 UNIT 66
RESIDENTIAL_CITY:	 FAIRPLAY
RESIDENTIAL_STATE:	 CO
RESIDENTIAL_ZIP_CODE:	 80440
REGISTRATION_DATE:	 07/31/2012
BIRTH_YEAR:	 1953
PHONE_NUM:	 719-477-3574
MAILING_ADDRESS_1:	 PO BOX 473
MAILING_CITY:	 FAIRPLAY
MAILING_STATE:	 CO
MAILING_ZIP_CODE:	 80440
MAILING_ZIP_PLUS:	 0473
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

NOTE: That phone number is the Alcoholics Anonymous hot-line at South
Park Christian Chapel:
<https://web.archive.org/web/20150131161807/http://www.southparkevents.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=48:on-going-activities-for-the-month-&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=54>
"Alcoholics Anonymouis meeting 7-8pm at So Pk Christian Chapel
719-477-3574"

Trailer Trash Tony is *such* a drunkard that when he registered to
vote, he put down the AA DrunkieLine as his phone number! LOL

A map of the gravel quarry / junkyard / trailer park where Trailer
Trash Tony rented his shitty single-wide trailer for only $675 / month
(and still couldn't pay the rent, and got evicted! LOL):
<https://www.google.com/maps/place/21980+Hwy+285+%2366,+Fairplay,+CO+80440/@39.2157874,-105.9922529,346m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x876ae8155a400885:0xfb9ff5490348163d>

Unit 66:
This is a 3 bd/2ba single-wide trailer.
<https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.318572058245476.1073741834.131803693588981&type=1&_fb_noscript=1>

SPANKY-SPANKY! (tm)

<snicker>
============================================================

Lamey (aka Skeeter) the alcoholic wife-beating outer-filthing
drug-addict:
Message-ID: <lfjfe7$b3t$4@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <1b7ef90407a4295786c3f1338e80d553@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <c39bc1cce43a9e6860b642e72943f3ce@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <ae39676e2ac093e5259ccf8210ecbb25@dizum.com>

Trailer Trash Tony makes a multi-pronged confession:
MID: <k9m2ca5g26l46qb2t9h05ff87skcjiov1o@4ax.com>
"Yup, I can take 4 or 5 percs and roof your house. It's called the
paradoxical affect."

Pissbum groveled. LOL
Pissbum lost. LOL!
Message-ID: <lchuas$q96$4@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <c92bbbbfefed840db0563eb29f2d6498@dizum.com>

Cowardly Pissbum gets caught in lie after lie. LOL!
Message-ID: <l0rfde$hv8$2@news.mixmin.net>
Message-ID: <l0smsq$fcq$2@news.mixmin.net>

Lamey (aka Skeeter) the forger, busted and scrambling for cover like a
coward:
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/2oWKmfnSPEA/RE_35HZp8qAJ>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/#!original/alt.usenet.kooks/2oWKmfnSPEA/-RZxQp6TAe4J>
Message-ID: <db92667a7bac368fab1b8ff5085f8b2e@dizum.com>

Pissbum gets kicked so hard he's *still* bouncing around Usenet like a
SuperBall:
============================================
Message-ID: <kv42gb$vd8$1@news.mixmin.net>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=alt.usenet.kooks/ZyzzhJiku3c/Q0c2J9_Jc5YJ>

Message-ID: <kuatrj$b2g$1@news.mixmin.net>
<https://groups.google.com/forum/message/raw?msg=alt.usenet.kooks/N91lSABoN2s/JYDwKwwIZn4J>
============================================

Trailer Trash Tony the Single-Wide Trailer-Dwelling Pissbum is driven
so insane by my truthiness that he's forced by his psychiatric
professional to take Seroquel, a strong anti-psychotic that its maker
(Astra Zeneca) only indicates for use in treating schizophrenia and
bipolar disorder:
==================================================
Lamey (aka Skeeter) admits he now takes Seroquel "to sleep"... it's a
prescription medication for the treatment of mania and depression
associated with bipolar disease and schizophrenia. I've driven him
mad. LOL

Pissbum tries to k'lame his doctor-recommended dosage is only half of
the smallest tablet Astra Zeneca produces for Seroquel:
MID: <3elg2aduthcn6j92jlledhg6sa4ibnbro1@4ax.com>:
"Just like seriquil, I take it for sleep at night, 12.5 mg"

I shred Pissbum Tony's lies and prove he's gone batty:
MID: <0c4a46b95e1b8983104047001ec4e05f@dizum.com>
MID: <11715d7d5e802fb4248513f981621812@dizum.com>
MID: <3bb2754531e630d89eb7330623ee6281@dizum.com>
MID: <8bc988e4842e4338432ad962f84a89d4@dizum.com>
==================================================

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#564762

FromSkeet <invalid@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-03-23 06:30 -0600
Message-ID<9235fb91bhlcqk48hpftqqaag62j9kfk5e@4ax.com>
In reply to#564723
On Wed, 23 Mar 2016 05:53:55 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> More lies.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 2  [1] 2  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics

csiph-web