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


Groups > sci.physics > #563318 > unrolled thread

Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason

Started byJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
First post2016-03-18 00:07 -0700
Last post2016-04-06 06:59 +0200
Articles 20 on this page of 106 — 11 participants

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics


Contents

  Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 00:07 -0700
    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Sergio <invalid@invalid.com> - 2016-03-18 08:50 -0500
      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason HVAC <mr.hvac@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 08:24 -0700
    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-18 16:58 +0100
      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-18 09:22 -0700
        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 06:45 +0100
          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 10:48 -0700
            Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 20:19 +0100
              Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 12:36 -0700
                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-19 21:10 +0100
                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-19 15:02 -0700
                    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 08:56 +0100
                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 01:24 -0700
                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Poutnik <poutnik4nntp@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 09:56 +0100
                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 19:11 +0100
                          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 03:46 +0800
                            Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-20 20:51 +0000
                            Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-20 21:50 +0100
                              Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 05:51 +0800
                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 05:47 +0100
                                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-21 15:18 +0800
                                    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-21 17:19 +0100
                                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-21 16:39 +0000
                                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-21 12:54 -0400
                                          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:42 +0800
                                            Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 06:11 +0100
                                              Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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 01:30 -0400
                                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 16:46 +0100
                                                  Fakey admits to counting lines in his obsessed way. Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-22 10:32 -0600
                                                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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 13:05 -0400
                                                    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:50 +0100
                                                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-23 03:33 -0400
                                                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-23 08:08 +0000
                                                          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-23 04:11 -0400
                                                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 06:33 -0600
                                                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 18:50 +0000
                                                    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-22 11:57 -0700
                                                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 19:04 +0000
                                                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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 16:16 -0400
                                                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-22 15:03 -0700
                                                          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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 19:52 -0400
                                                            Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-22 17:47 -0700
                                                            Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:57 +0100
                                                              Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-23 03:03 -0400
                                                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-23 07:30 +0000
                                                                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-23 03:38 -0400
                                                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 18:28 +0100
                                                                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-23 13:50 -0400
                                                                    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-23 10:57 -0700
                                                                    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-24 06:57 +0100
                                                                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-24 02:20 -0400
                                                                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-24 00:23 -0700
                                                                          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-24 03:25 -0400
                                                                          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-24 08:06 +0000
                                                                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-24 19:39 +0100
                                                                          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-24 17:34 -0400
                                                                            Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-25 06:21 +0100
                                                                              Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-25 01:35 -0400
                                                                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-25 17:55 +0800
                                                                                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-25 10:03 +0000
                                                                                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-25 12:14 -0400
                                                                                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-25 18:13 +0100
                                                                                    CHECK OUT FAKEY'S COMPLETE MELTDOWN "\"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> - 2016-03-25 13:25 -0400
                                                                                      Re: CHECK OUT FAKEY'S COMPLETE MELTDOWN Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-25 19:03 -0700
                                                                                      Re: CHECK OUT FAKEY'S COMPLETE MELTDOWN Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-26 06:43 +0100
                                                                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-25 14:12 +0800
                                                                          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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> - 2016-03-25 12:09 -0400
                                                                            Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-25 19:16 -0700
                                                                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-24 08:05 +0000
                                                              Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 06:34 -0600
                                                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-23 09:11 -0700
                                                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:30 +0100
                                                          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 06:30 -0600
                                                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:40 +0100
                                                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-23 06:31 -0600
                                                          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Mustaffa Sheboygan <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-03-23 09:09 -0700
                                            Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 07:36 +0000
                                              Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 17:12 +0800
                                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 09:25 +0000
                                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 17:37 +0100
                                              Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 15:40 +0100
                                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Skeet <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-03-22 08:58 -0600
                                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason "\"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 12:53 -0400
                                                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 05:12 +0100
                                                    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-23 17:09 +0800
                                                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 18:08 +0100
                                                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-22 18:57 +0000
                                                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-23 04:50 +0100
                                                    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason snipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe) - 2016-03-23 07:04 +0000
                                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Bite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future> - 2016-03-22 02:38 +0800
                                        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-22 05:05 +0100
                    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Solving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com> - 2016-03-20 22:53 -0700
    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-29 21:29 -0700
      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-03-30 17:59 +0200
        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 13:01 -0700
          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-01 08:00 +0200
            Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-03-31 23:27 -0700
              Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-01 18:57 +0200
                Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 10:26 -0700
                  Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-02 07:34 +0200
                    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-01 22:57 -0700
                      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-02 18:18 +0200
        Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-03 18:28 -0700
          Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-04 08:17 +0200
    Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-04-05 17:15 -0700
      Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for good reason Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-04-06 06:59 +0200

Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6  Next page →


#564467

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-22 15:40 +0100
Message-ID<f7e944d5ce9df85a00ed3b35b8f3a023@dizum.com>
In reply to#564403
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Tr!pe the Hypoxic ChickenFucker (aka Steve Hall), in
<news:1mki4yz.6434do1mz4ow0N%snipeco.2@gmail.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> Maybe the faker doesn't know that there's a "Lines: n" header, 
> stranger things have happened.

Not in my posts, there's not. You'll be getting right on showing this
purported "Lines: n" header in my posts, Squawky McChickenFucker.

<snicker>

-- 

---------------------------------------------
Tr!pe the Hypoxic ChickenFucker squawked, in
<news:1l9enri.1boemg21mhmo5lN%snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk>:
"If you want to know about bird sex, just ask me."

Steve Hall (G8DGC, snipeco.1@gmail.com, snipeco.2@gmail.com,
snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk, snipe@notforspam.fsnet.co.uk) fucks birds.
LOL

http://i.imgur.com/f0euFil.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/pR0mX95.jpg

Slow bird sex... if Tr!pe chickenfucks fast, he turns blue. LOL
Too much chickenspooge clogging up his lungs. LOL
That's why he's too stupid to do simple math. Lack of oxygen. LOL
That also explains his rampant paranoia. Hypoxic brain damage. LOL
And his segue to human penis... birds aren't enough for him now. LOL

Maths Fail:
Message-ID: <07f2598e7078240cb9a4b25fa701c861@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <444e1cce007418ec5345daa93ec0ba38@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <1aefd4d212571584185eacda6e6750d8@dizum.com>

Paranoia Will Destroy Ya:
Message-ID: <6620b273ab1a048aaaff3acbf2583ca9@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <9db516a6a44943053aed3107df34af86@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <0793f311af986182080222026eab9325@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <6b28ba3566b3f36fa69ff1cb311d4d89@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <aa840a32fa3dc7050cc69f1dda0de7e3@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <938a2d9957c61a788fcbfd0f613aa92d@dizum.com>

Tr!pe The Penis Obsessed Poof:
Message-ID: <48bc243b312b3999403a6ab8b26ea0b0@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <0eb75ae7a93df2df718219c1ccd622a6@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <9a5d3b92c9841c7e71a07f484653a125@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <a4c326b191a39afe57a747dc51e7166b@dizum.com>
---------------------------------------------

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


#564473

FromSkeet <invalid@invalid.invalid>
Date2016-03-22 08:58 -0600
Message-ID<6cn2fbtro6t34p0kndk6qnphvc59d22clm@4ax.com>
In reply to#564467
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 15:40:52 +0100 (CET), Friendly Neighborhood Vote
Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
>
>Tr!pe the Hypoxic ChickenFucker (aka Steve Hall), in
><news:1mki4yz.6434do1mz4ow0N%snipeco.2@gmail.com> did thusly jump head
>first into the wood chipper again:
>
>> Maybe the faker doesn't know that there's a "Lines: n" header, 
>> stranger things have happened.
>
>Not in my posts, there's not. You'll be getting right on showing this
>purported "Lines: n" header in my posts, Squawky McChickenFucker.
>
><snicker>


Maybe you should read the instructions.

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


#564530

From"\"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>
Date2016-03-22 12:53 -0400
Message-ID<op.yeqjv1j2tm21m2@benson.localhost>
In reply to#564467
On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:40:52 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler  
Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

> Injection-Info: sewer.dizum.com - 194.109.206.211
> Bytes: 3080
> Lines: 53

> Not in my posts, there's not. You'll be getting right on showing this
> purported "Lines: n" header in my posts, Squawky McChickenFucker.

HTH

-- 
"sines, sines, everywhere there's sines
blocking up the snickerTurds, breaking his mind"
http://imgur.com/a/yMFsu

-

FNVWe attempts to rewrite physics texts in Message-ID:  
<3dcad3dd0a0d39727506717506883c26@dizum.com>

">>let's not forget that mine also had the correct applied mathematics
>> equations unlike fakey the supposed know-it-all:
>>  phase A: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x)
>> phase B: 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi)
>>  voltage difference between phase A and phase B at any point x in time:
>> 120*sin(2*pi*60*x) - 120*sin(2*pi*60*x+pi) = 240*sin(2*pi*60*x)

Wrong, as has already been proven. What does it say below, you fecking  
*moron*?

"The _sum_ E(θ) ≡ E(a) + E(b) can be written thusly:""

it says that you don't even know how to correctly apply mathematics to  
real-world AC electricity, snickerTurds.  it says that you're in denial  
about the inversion of your AC legs.

http://www.allaboutcircuits.com/textbook/alternating-current/chpt-10/single-phase-power-systems/
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/02170.png
"To mathematically calculate voltage between “hot” wires, we must subtract  
voltages, because their polarity marks show them to be opposed to each  
other:"
http://sub.allaboutcircuits.com/images/12112.png

http://www.samlexamerica.com/support/documents/WhitePaper-120240VACSingleSplitPhaseandMultiWireBranchCircuits.pdf

on page 2:

** NOTE: The phase of Hot Leg 2 (Phase B) is in the
  opposite direction - i.e., 180° apart from the phase
  of Hot Leg L1 (Phase A)

*COUGH*
SPNAK!!

-

i know a guy on the internet who will draw a triangular sine wave in ASCII  
art if you ask nicely.</GROUCHO MARX>
see: Message-ID: <4ba4a50aaaebc7fb8a348293c5cf9f13@dizum.com>

-

snickerTurds can't seem to refute the following:

- begin snickerSinewaveStew.cpp --
/*
HOW TO RUN: download arbitrary precision libraries from:

http://www.hvks.com/Numerical/arbitrary_precision.html

place those files in a directory and save this file as  
snickerSinewaveStew.cpp inside that same directory.

compiles with:

gcc -Wall -I. precisioncore.cpp snickerSinewaveStew.cpp -lstdc++

run with:

./a.out

enjoy the LULZ ;)

*/
#include <fprecision.h>
#include <iostream.h>

using namespace std;

int main(){

   //float_precision MIN=float_precision(0);
   //float_precision MAX=float_precision(0);

   float_precision STEP=float_precision(.0001);
   float_precision t=float_precision(0);    // time variable
   float_precision sum=float_precision(0);  // sum of SnickerTurd's  
ridiculous sinewave mess
   float_precision snickerPrediction=float_precision(2550.25);  //  
snickerTurd's erroneous k0oK-k'lame Sum
   float_precision PI;
   PI =_float_table(_PI,25);

   // this while loop will run forever, but snickers doesn't understand why
   while(sum < snickerPrediction){

     // fakey's Sinewave Stew(TM) see: MID:  
<db672705e57e4932eba3632562e0a941@dizum.com>
     sum = (float_precision(150) * float_precision(  
sin(float_precision(120)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +  
(float_precision(20.25) * float_precision(  
sin(float_precision(33)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +  
(float_precision(1400)* float_precision(  
sin(float_precision(150)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +(float_precision(20)*  
float_precision(sin(float_precision(5013)*float_precision(2)*PI*t))) +  
(float_precision(600)*float_precision(sin(float_precision(13)*float_precision(2)*PI*t)))  
+  
(float_precision(360)*float_precision(sin(float_precision(1209)*float_precision(2)*PI*t)));

     // perhaps show a few values larger than +2300 to educate teh  
snickerTurds
     if(sum>float_precision(2300)){
       cout << "t=" << t << " sum=" << sum << std::endl;
     }
     t = t+STEP;
   }
/*

Message-ID: <c8523e6d9c31e3282bbe581fa525a2a8@dizum.com>
"Oh, yeah... it's 2550.25 volts... so why does your graph not even
reach 2500 volts, given that eventually all the sinewaves will
constructively interfere (ie: *add* to each other) to *sum* to 2550.25
volts?"

Fakey, it doesn't reach 2500 volts because the summation of your sinewaves  
never reaches that.  They never reach their max values at the same time.   
That's how stupid you are.

Message-ID: <731d08dcc702b9a8a13077ffc201e91f@dizum.com>
"I most certainly *did* prove otherwise. It can't even arrive at the
correct sinewave summation voltage of 2550.25 volts"

Fakey, you only *proved* that you are too inept to graph the equations and  
notice a few things about the interactions of their frequencies when  
summed.

the next line of code is never executed, but snickers DEFINITELY can't  
figure out why it isn't and instead has a bunch of lame excuses while  
still having not produced a value for t where the sum=2550.25, as he has  
k0okily proklamed in many usenet messages that are archived FOREVER.

*/
   cout << "snickerTurds was right! the sum is " << sum << " at time t=" <<  
t <<endl;
}
- end snickerSinewaveStew.cpp --

-

Fakey irrationally demands a theme song to foam to:
"all I really want your pathetic pwned ass to do is write me a classic  
rock song as tribute to your Usenet Lord and Master..."  
<f4f9193fa7d28b760a9de681e61427e7@dizum.com>

-

Somewhere Abouts Round Fri, 12 Feb 2016 17:25:03 -0500, Friendly  
Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

<snicker>

Fag. LOL
Idiot. LOL
Moron. LOL
Tranny. LOL
Libtard. LOL
Crackhead. LOL
GableTard. LOL
DildoRider. LOL
Bad Musician. LOL
Stick Figure. LOL
Terrible Liar. LOL
Sinewave Spammer. LOL
Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
Math Challenged Halfwit. LOL
Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In The History Of Usenet. LOL

<the band strikes up a rousing version of "on top of old smokey">

on top of old snick-ers, all covered with Fag. LOL
is where my usenet lord and mas-ter
can go straight to hell*

*hell doesn't exist.  hope everybody is having a productive evening.

-

http://i.imgur.com/2tH6zVB.jpg

http://cafepress.com/kooktown

http://i.imgur.com/pnWqhSG.jpg

-

If my poasts are offensive to you, you can always block all From: headers  
containing "root@127.0.0.1", unless you are an idiot who would like to  
yammer about "morphing" and maybe try to lodge some frivolous complaints  
to my news provider, then please be sure to ignore this helpful  
information and have fun making an ass of yourself in public.  :)

if that route of silencing those horrid opinions of mine that you  
downloaded to your computer under duress doesn't work you can always try:  
http://i.imgur.com/jlsN9JX.png?2

-

http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Gish_Gallop
The Gish Gallop is often used as an indirect argument from authority — as  
it appears to paint the galloper as an expert in a broad range of subjects  
or with an extensive knowledge of an individual one. Simultaneously it  
presents opponents (in spoken debates) or refuters (in written,  
Internet-based ones) as incompetent bumblers who didn't do their homework  
before the debate. Such emphasis on style over substance is the reason  
many scientists disdain public debates as a forum for disseminating  
opinions. - Page #1 from the Gospel of SnickerTurd

-

Coming soon!  To a newsgroup near you!:

$ perl fakeyBot.pl
FakeyBot>       I'm FakeyBot. What's your name so I can Google-stalk you,  
look you up on Radaris, and hurl invective and probably-illegal harrassing  
bile from behind an anonymous dizum account?  <snicker>
You>    Robert Michael Wolfe
FakeyBot>       Oh look, you're back again to polish my size 16 steel-toed  
boot with your colon and listen to me talk about bestiality and cocks,  
Robert. <snicker>
Robert> you talk about cocks a lot.
FakeyBot>       Oh, I talk about sex a lot?
Robert> gay sex, mostly...
FakeyBot>       Fag!

(just as useful as the original!)

-

snickers the wonderturd describes how he alerted lots of his kiddie pr0n  
friends to the ensuing FBI sting in message  
<b5e7da79a455d0c9227b1b50e25e7ea1@dizum.com>:
"That's easy enough to do... how do you think my crew uncovered the
largest CP ring using Tor and I2P, which we promptly turned over to
the FBI? I discovered a way to uncover the IP addresses the I2P users were  
using, and a way of tracking Eepsites back to their IP addresses, then we  
figured out that we could DDOS a Tor IP address and modify Tor headers  
while checking whether a Tor hidden service was still up, then using  
process of elimination to pinpoint the IP address hosting that hidden  
service. It's not rocket science.

_The I2P community got all up in arms when I discussed on their forum how  
I was doing it, and that it'd be a good way of cleaning up I2P so it can  
get on with being a platform to research anonymous communication... my  
distinct impression was that the "anonymity
research platform" story was just a cover story to allow pervs to
trade CP._  (NOTE: admits to participating in what he "suspected" was a  
kiddie pr0n network.)

That Silk Road 2.0 was taken offline in the ensuing FBI Operation
Onymous was just icing on the cake."

-

Golden Killfile, June 2005
KOTM, November 2006
Bob Allisat Memorial Hook, Line & Sinker, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, November 2006
Special Ops Cody Memorial Purple Heart, September 2007
Tony Sidaway Memorial "Drama Queen" Award, November 2006
Busted Urinal Award, April 2007
Order of the Holey Sockpuppet, September 2007
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, September 2006
Barbara Woodhouse Memorial Dog Whistle, April 2008
Tinfoil Sombrero, February 2007
AUK Mascot, September 2007
Putting the Awards Out of Order to Screw With the OCD Fuckheads, March 2016

 

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


#564709

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-23 05:12 +0100
Message-ID<dbc5b056a64fdafbfb8cfd8ff1cf7a42@dizum.com>
In reply to#564530
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
DildoRider) of 5907 Stanton Ave., Pittsburgh, PA (aka Teh Mop Jockey),
socked up as sucksroot@127.0.0.1, in
<news:op.yeqjv1j2tm21m2@benson.localhost> did thusly jump head first
into the wood chipper again:

> On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:40:52 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood
> Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:

>> Injection-Info: sewer.dizum.com - 194.109.206.211
>> Bytes: 3080
>> Lines: 53
> 
>> Not in my posts, there's not. You'll be getting right on showing this
>> purported "Lines: n" header in my posts, Squawky McChickenFucker.

> HTH

Bwahahahaaa! Yet again DildoRider demonstrates that not only can't he
count, but that he's a lying sack of shit. Or didn't you realize,
DildoRider, that Shiny Tinfoil Spankard has already admitted my posts
have no line number header?

SPNAK! on Robert Michael Wolfe the Mathematical Mega-Moron.

Fag. LOL
Idiot. LOL
Moron. LOL
Tranny. LOL
Libtard. LOL
Crackhead. LOL
GableTard. LOL
DildoRider. LOL
Bad Musician. LOL
Stick Figure. LOL
Terrible Liar. LOL
Obsessed Retard. LOL
Sinewave Spammer. LOL
Outerfilthing Stalker. LOL
Talentless FrothMonkey. LOL
Math Challenged Halfwit. LOL
Klimate Katastrophe Kook. LOL
Defeated Tearful Spankard. LOL
Waster Of Time To Save $10. LOL
Worst Maker Of Sinewaves In Usenet History. LOL

-- 

Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka
DildoRider, aka Teh Mop Jockey)
5907 Stanton Ave.
Pittsburgh, PA
(412) 853-6395
(412) 799-0532
(412) 665-8289
(412) 404-8757

DildoRider admits he's stoooopid:
MID: <c65504c436778934b3e8a0fb022b7618@dizum.com>
=================================================
>> it appears I've kicked your ass so hard it's
>> damaged your brain, DildoRider.

> then it appears that you like shooting fish in
> barrels, intellectually lazy fuckhead that you are.

Well, you've just admitted that intellectually kicking your ass is
akin to shooting fish in a barrel... IOW, you've admitted that you're
stoooopid. No un-ringing that bell.

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

DildoRider admits he's "really stupid" (his words). LOL
MID: <8a9faed11123abfaa1257fb33fb0c082@dizum.com>
=================================================
> so what you're saying is that your targets for attack
> have to be really stupid or else you can't manage?
=================================================

DildoRider admits much more about himself:
MID: <36c6802852caf4f712515dedb738e450@dizum.com>
=================================================
"absolutely and completely retarded, insane, gay, ugly, smelly,
toothless, dirt-poor, incontinent and possibly homeless"
=================================================

This is a libtard's method of "winning", for fuck sake.

150 IQ? LOL

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


#564752

FromBite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future>
Date2016-03-23 17:09 +0800
Message-ID<ptm4fbtmge9mj197bbs5efqc7ejpvfgcul@4ax.com>
In reply to#564709
Fakey wrote:

> Robert Michael Wolfe the Pittsburgh Pied Piper Of Penis (aka

> > On Tue, 22 Mar 2016 10:40:52 -0400, Friendly Neighborhood
> > Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> wrote:
> 
> >> Injection-Info: sewer.dizum.com - 194.109.206.211
> >> Bytes: 3080
> >> Lines: 53
> > 
> >> Not in my posts, there's not. You'll be getting right on showing this
> >> purported "Lines: n" header in my posts, Squawky McChickenFucker.
> 
> > HTH
> 
> Bwahahahaaa! Yet again DildoRider demonstrates that not only can't he
> count, but that he's a lying sack of shit. Or didn't you realize,
> DildoRider, that Shiny Tinfoil Spankard has already admitted my posts
> have no line number header?

Oh!

> X-Abuse: abuse@dizum.com
> Injection-Info: sewer.dizum.com - 194.109.206.211
> Bytes: 2867
> Lines: 99

Must have been added by latent remailers, fakey.

-- 
"..the term 'electronegativity' denotes a *positive* nucleal
charge."  --Fakey the Chemist waxes stupid

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


#564852

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-23 18:08 +0100
Message-ID<bd1ece73345e6d5e051bf30263ceef20@dizum.com>
In reply to#564752
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Spankard), in
<news:ptm4fbtmge9mj197bbs5efqc7ejpvfgcul@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> FNVWe stomped a retard's brain flat. Again:

>> Bwahahahaaa! Yet again DildoRider demonstrates that not only can't he
>> count, but that he's a lying sack of shit. Or didn't you realize,
>> DildoRider, that Shiny Tinfoil Spankard has already admitted my posts
>> have no line number header?

> Oh!

Have you figured out how to copy-n-paste LaTeX notation into a LaTeX
compatible program to view the *formula* yet, Mathematical Moron? LOL

==========================================================
Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Spankard), in
<news:0k22fbd94mkubsjkbpnnm60r2e9n8q5lto@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> Agent displays the value of the Lines: header in the thread
> view.  If there's no Lines: header (as in fakey's posts), it
> will count the lines when downloading the body.  YMMV.  (i
> mean, YKMV... the english don't use the english system any
> more.)
> 
> I guess fakey's Lines: header is being stripped out due
> to... remailer latency, of course.
==========================================================

>> X-Abuse: abuse@dizum.com
>> Injection-Info: sewer.dizum.com - 194.109.206.211
>> Bytes: 2867
>> Lines: 99

> Must

Have you figured out that formulas are math yet, Mathematical Moron?
LOL

> have

Have you figured out that wave interference works the same for
standing and traveling waves yet, Mathematical Moron? LOL

> been

Have you figured out that a sinusoid is a transform of a circle yet,
Mathematical Moron? LOL

> added

Have you figured out that "mnemonic" is not spelled "mneumonic" yet,
Mathematical Moron? LOL

> by

Have you figured out what LaTeX notation is yet, Mathematical Moron?
LOL

> latent

Have you figured out there's a *formula* in that plain text LaTeX
notation yet, Mathematical Moron? LOL

> remailers,

Have you figured out that sin^2 is a sinusoid yet, Mathematical Moron?
LOL

> fakey.

Must have been added by a lying kooktard who's just caught himself in
yet another of his multitude of backpedaling lies, Shiny Tinfoil
Spankard.

SPNAK!

-- 

Shiny Tinfoil Spankard (aka Bite My Shiny Metal Ass) didn't know:
=====================================
MID: <13d33d0638e0ec690b63393d0710f658@dizum.com>
MID: <80d61a6928a9e7df316c519affcf3838@dizum.com>
The Euler equation is a subset of equations known as the Euler-Fourier
Formulas, thus that a sinewave is a transformation of a circle (which
should have been intuitive, given that generators *rotate* to create
*sinusoids*).

MID: <ff81cb60204ffbd777cd15a6261cfb67@dizum.com>
That cross correlation is used with Fourier transforms.

That superposition is the same as wave interference.

That wave interference works the same for standing or traveling waves.

That RMS and peak-to-peak voltage are two different things.

That RMS isn't a DC voltage.

That 170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase service gives 208.207
volts RMS L-L.

That 4444525800 != 4400000000 != 1.

The difference between frequency and period of a sinewave.

That there's no difference between 'i' and 'j' in electrical
engineering, physics and control systems engineering.

What a positive or negative vector is.

That the vector sum of 3-phase AC constitutes a closed loop per
Kirchhoff's Voltage Law, thus that the three phases sum to zero.

That "mnemonic" is not spelled "mneumonic".

That his claim: "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2
positive and 2 negative." is nonsense from a blathering moron.

That the term "electronegativity" denotes a *positive* effective
nuclear charge.

What the definition of the word "equivalent" is.

That digital voltmeters do indeed take discrete instantaneous samples.

That the atmosphere (and the gaseous phase water within the
atmosphere) does indeed follow the Ideal Gas Law to within 1.337842%
margin of error *worst* *case* at 70 F.

That the square of the instantaneous sample of peak-to-peak voltage of
a peak-voltage sinewave is an offset sinewave, thus its average does
*not* equal zero, as Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames.

That the Ideal Gas Law does not require an ideal gas because it takes
into account molar volume.

That "within 10% error" does not equal "10% error".

That water can be plasmized.

That atomic number does not equal effective nuclear charge.

MID: <382fa822c6dbca9a6f88cab5a104bf62@dizum.com>
That formulas *are* math.

How to use a graphing calculator.

MID: <8e4e21f5748d85599f700ee8ff174611@dizum.com>
What LaTeX notation is.

MID: <8e4e21f5748d85599f700ee8ff174611@dizum.com>
That LaTeX notation *is* "plain text", not a script.

MID: <c1c02875af2c6615bd30ab20416b75b5@dizum.com>
That a formula in LaTeX notation is still a formula.

That scientific notation and LaTeX notation are not the same.
DUURRRHH! GoogleTard. LOL

That LaTeX notation can be copy-n-pasted into a LaTeX compatible
program to view the formula.

And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph.
=====================================

Shiny Tinfoil Spankard the Mathematical Moron maunders and mewls:
=====================================
"All you've shown us is graphs of formulas. No equal signs, no maths
done." - Shiny Tinfoil Brain demonstrates his Mathematical Moronism.
=====================================

SPNAK!

<snicker>

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


#564593

Fromsnipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
Date2016-03-22 18:57 +0000
Message-ID<1mkj0dy.12lgy0moaqqe4N%snipeco.2@gmail.com>
In reply to#564467
Fake Neighbourhood Mnokey Spnaker Ersatzus 
<FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> (Snickerturd) indignantly wrote:


> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
> 
> Tr!pe the Hypoxic ChickenFucker (aka Steve Hall), in
> <news:1mki4yz.6434do1mz4ow0N%snipeco.2@gmail.com> did thusly jump head
> first into the wood chipper again:
> 
> > Maybe the faker doesn't know that there's a "Lines: n" header, 
> > stranger things have happened.
> 
> Not in my posts, there's not. You'll be getting right on showing this
> purported "Lines: n" header in my posts, Squawky McChickenFucker.
> 
> <snicker>

----------------------8<---------------------

From: Fake Neighbourhood Mnokey Spnaker Ersatzus
<FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> (Snickerturd):
References: <9934e1f19473bd9594f653a992d2fb0a@dizum.com>
 <e3594a57f2bf8a3d184bb1a1b51db5c0@dizum.com>
 <65ba7d4c67cab5eda408af15ce150a9e@dizum.com>
 <1mkgzkp.16cfbxe812ijkN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>
 <op.yeoo9amvtm21m2@benson.localhost>
 <8uf0fbtffk85a9muvbauigbsnfavs6t6v1@4ax.com>
 <1mki4yz.6434do1mz4ow0N%snipeco.2@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for
good
 reason
Message-ID: <f7e944d5ce9df85a00ed3b35b8f3a023@dizum.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 15:40:52 +0100 (CET)
Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks,sci.physics
Path:
buffer1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.mixmin.net!sewer!news.dizum.net!not-for-mail
Organization: dizum.com - The Internet Problem Provider
X-Abuse: abuse@dizum.com
Injection-Info: sewer.dizum.com - 194.109.206.211
Bytes: 3052

*****************
Lines: 53
*****************

Xref: number.nntp.giganews.com sci.physics:2094183
alt.usenet.kooks:2640533

------------------>8------------------------------

HTH HAND HORSE

-- 
^Ï^.       Sn!pe       <snipeco.1@gmail.com>

My pet rock Gordon wants home rule for England.

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


#564700

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-23 04:50 +0100
Message-ID<84890c253e51887e743833db9d804905@dizum.com>
In reply to#564593
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Tr!pe the Hypoxic ChickenFucker (aka Steve Hall), in
<news:1mkj0dy.12lgy0moaqqe4N%snipeco.2@gmail.com> squawked as he
pulled it to poultry porn:

> Friendly Neighbourhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus 
> <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> drop-kicked a retard:

>> Tr!pe the Hypoxic ChickenFucker (aka Steve Hall), in
>> <news:1mki4yz.6434do1mz4ow0N%snipeco.2@gmail.com> squawked
>> as he pulled it to poultry porn:

>>> Maybe the faker doesn't know that there's a "Lines: n" header, 
>>> stranger things have happened.

>> Not in my posts, there's not. You'll be getting right on showing this
>> purported "Lines: n" header in my posts, Squawky McChickenFucker.
>> 
>> <snicker>

> ----------------------8<---------------------

You've quite obviously post-edited this, thus you cannot be believed,
Tr!pey old lying piece of shit.

> From: Fake Neighbourhood Mnokey Spnaker Ersatzus
> <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> (Snickerturd):
> References: <9934e1f19473bd9594f653a992d2fb0a@dizum.com>
>  <e3594a57f2bf8a3d184bb1a1b51db5c0@dizum.com>
>  <65ba7d4c67cab5eda408af15ce150a9e@dizum.com>
>  <1mkgzkp.16cfbxe812ijkN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>
>  <op.yeoo9amvtm21m2@benson.localhost>
>  <8uf0fbtffk85a9muvbauigbsnfavs6t6v1@4ax.com>
>  <1mki4yz.6434do1mz4ow0N%snipeco.2@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for
> good
>  reason
> Message-ID: <f7e944d5ce9df85a00ed3b35b8f3a023@dizum.com>
> Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 15:40:52 +0100 (CET)
> Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks,sci.physics
> Path:
> buffer1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!border1.nntp.ams1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!news.mixmin.net!sewer!news.dizum.net!not-for-mail
> Organization: dizum.com - The Internet Problem Provider
> X-Abuse: abuse@dizum.com
> Injection-Info: sewer.dizum.com - 194.109.206.211
> Bytes: 3052
> 
> *****************
> Lines: 53
> *****************
> 
> Xref: number.nntp.giganews.com sci.physics:2094183
> alt.usenet.kooks:2640533
> 
> ------------------>8------------------------------
> 
> HTH HAND HORSE

You either added that, or your NSP did. Either way, the line count is
wrong, BirdBrain.

From: Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus
<FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
References: <9934e1f19473bd9594f653a992d2fb0a@dizum.com>
 <e3594a57f2bf8a3d184bb1a1b51db5c0@dizum.com>
 <65ba7d4c67cab5eda408af15ce150a9e@dizum.com>
 <1mkgzkp.16cfbxe812ijkN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>
 <op.yeoo9amvtm21m2@benson.localhost>
 <8uf0fbtffk85a9muvbauigbsnfavs6t6v1@4ax.com>
 <1mki4yz.6434do1mz4ow0N%snipeco.2@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence for
good
 reason
Message-ID: <f7e944d5ce9df85a00ed3b35b8f3a023@dizum.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2016 15:40:52 +0100 (CET)
Newsgroups: alt.usenet.kooks,sci.physics
Path: news.dizum.net!sewer!news.dizum.net!not-for-mail
Organization: dizum.com - The Internet Problem Provider
X-Abuse: abuse@dizum.com
Injection-Info: sewer.dizum.com - 194.109.206.211
Xref: news.dizum.net alt.usenet.kooks:978383 sci.physics:791671

-- 

---------------------------------------------
Tr!pe the Hypoxic ChickenFucker squawked, in
<news:1l9enri.1boemg21mhmo5lN%snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk>:
"If you want to know about bird sex, just ask me."

Steve Hall (G8DGC, snipeco.1@gmail.com, snipeco.2@gmail.com,
snipe@spambin.fsnet.co.uk, snipe@notforspam.fsnet.co.uk) fucks birds.
LOL

http://i.imgur.com/f0euFil.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/pR0mX95.jpg

Slow bird sex... if Tr!pe chickenfucks fast, he turns blue. LOL
Too much chickenspooge clogging up his lungs. LOL
That's why he's too stupid to do simple math. Lack of oxygen. LOL
That also explains his rampant paranoia. Hypoxic brain damage. LOL
And his segue to human penis... birds aren't enough for him now. LOL

Maths Fail:
Message-ID: <07f2598e7078240cb9a4b25fa701c861@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <444e1cce007418ec5345daa93ec0ba38@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <1aefd4d212571584185eacda6e6750d8@dizum.com>

Paranoia Will Destroy Ya:
Message-ID: <6620b273ab1a048aaaff3acbf2583ca9@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <9db516a6a44943053aed3107df34af86@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <0793f311af986182080222026eab9325@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <6b28ba3566b3f36fa69ff1cb311d4d89@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <aa840a32fa3dc7050cc69f1dda0de7e3@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <938a2d9957c61a788fcbfd0f613aa92d@dizum.com>

Tr!pe The Penis Obsessed Poof:
Message-ID: <48bc243b312b3999403a6ab8b26ea0b0@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <0eb75ae7a93df2df718219c1ccd622a6@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <9a5d3b92c9841c7e71a07f484653a125@dizum.com>
Message-ID: <a4c326b191a39afe57a747dc51e7166b@dizum.com>
---------------------------------------------

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


#564741

Fromsnipeco.2@gmail.com (Sn!pe)
Date2016-03-23 07:04 +0000
Message-ID<1mkjy8o.l2rlpx1kgsgysN%snipeco.2@gmail.com>
In reply to#564700
Fake Neighbourhood Mnokey Spnaker Ersatzus 
<FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> (Snickerturd) wrote:

> Lines: 122
        
-- 
^Ï^.       Sn!pe       <snipeco.1@gmail.com>

My pet rock Gordon wants home rule for England.

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


#564223

FromBite My Shiny Metal Ass <bender@the.future>
Date2016-03-22 02:38 +0800
Message-ID<58f0fbprvs82t7p4kc01csr4587hd34cbd@4ax.com>
In reply to#564172
Fakey wrote:

> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Brain), in
> 
> > Fakey wrote:
> 
> >> Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Spankard), in
> 
> >>> Hi, laughingstock who thinks i need to solve for d in d/dx.
> >>> What temperature is the red-body emission from your
> >>> blistered ass?
> >>> LOL!
> 
> >> Oh, you mean d/dx [sin(x)] = cos(x)?
> 
> > Wooohoooo!  Fakey googled a derivative, and now admits i'm
> > right, which means: _____ __ _____.
> 
> Which means you're desperately trying to divert attention away from

Pooooooor fakey.  Dogwhistle proved you wrong, i proved you
wrong.  To cover your shame, you keep bleating that you are
right.  It failed -- you're a usenet laughing stock.

Have you ever been right, fakey?  Let's see... you claimed
to get a potential DIFFERNCE by adding... you claimed 'd' is
a variable, and the electronegativity of oxygen is 8... do i
have to regale you with all the details?  You lied,
disembled, ignored, ran, and replied to information with
invective.

Gawd, you're fun to beat up.

> > Hint:  Fakey is _____.  C'mon fakey?
> 
> Drop-kicking a cowardly Mathematical Moron. LOL

For a definition of drop-kicking defined as W-R-O-N-G.

> > A least you're creeping up the IQ ladder, fakey, i have to
> > give you credit for that.  You must be up to your hawt
> > wife's age by now.
> > 
> > Do you know what 'd' means now?
> 
> It means you're desperate to divert attention away from the fact that
> you proved yourself a Mathematical Moron, and you Google-rape harder
> than I do. LOL

Hahaha! Translation: "I've been SPNAKED!  WAAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!"

> Liar. Do you think your cowardly snipping out that giant whomping
> SPNAK! and prok'laming 'victolly' means you've actually won, you
> delusional spankard? LOL

You haven't spanked anyone yet, spankard.
Well, maybe Jim.  That's like spanking a baby.

> I also notice you're running just as fast from all the SPNAK!s you
> took, as outlined in my .sig.

I ignore all your re-run screed.  It's just meaningless,
WRONG blither-blather in a desperate effort to save face.

But your face is gone, fakezoid.  ROFL!

<snip re-ran screed>

-- 
"The 120.208 volt RMS L-N sinewaves peak at 120.208 volts,
moron. LOL"
  --fakey claims RMS and peak voltage are identically equal

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


#564363

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-22 05:05 +0100
Message-ID<d2b16987029c4e51115d8b3fc50d3479@dizum.com>
In reply to#564223
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

Bite My Shiny Metal Ass (aka Shiny Tinfoil Spankard), in
<news:58f0fbprvs82t7p4kc01csr4587hd34cbd@4ax.com> did thusly jump head
first into the wood chipper again:

> FNVWe stomped a retard's brain flat. Again:

>>>> Oh, you mean d/dx [sin(x)] = cos(x)?

>>> Wooohoooo!  Fakey googled a derivative, and now admits i'm
>>> right, which means: _____ __ _____.

Your cowardly snipping is defeated, Cowardly Backpedaling Spankard.

>> Which means you're desperately trying to divert attention away from
>> your having defended DildoRider's kooky sinewave subtraction equation
>> for weeks, to include your cowardly snipping out the proof that you've
>> proven yourself a Mathematical Moron twice in the past week. LOL

> Pooooooor fakey.  Dogwhistle proved you wrong, i proved you
> wrong.  To cover your shame, you keep bleating that you are
> right.  It failed -- you're a usenet laughing stock.

Wrong. I proved you both wrong, which is why you're *both* running
away from that massive whomping SPNAK! you morons took. See below,
then run away from it again, Spankard. LOL

> Have you ever been right, fakey?  Let's see... you claimed
> to get a potential DIFFERNCE by adding... you claimed 'd' is
> a variable, and the electronegativity of oxygen is 8... do i
> have to regale you with all the details?  You lied,
> disembled, ignored, ran, and replied to information with
> invective.
> 
> Gawd, you're fun to beat up.

Awww, look at the spankard backpedaling and running away at a full 
sprint from his having yet again proven himself to be a Mathematical 
Moron. LOL

SPNAK! #1:
=========================================================
>> He says, using Euler's Formula and not knowing it. LOL

> It's not Euler's Theorem, faketard.  I realize phasors
> totally mystify you, so you think it's all magic.  It's not.
> Did you see any complex numbers?

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sine_and_cosine_transforms#Relation_with_complex_exponentials>
"The form of the Fourier transform used more often today is... Euler's
Formula"

Some Mathematical Moron wrote:
>   = A[cos(0°)x^ + sin(0°)y^] -A[cos(-120°)x^ + sin(-120°)y^]

Euler wrote:
<https://upload.wikimedia.org/math/e/4/2/e4285d1d4bd15710afcc2753c9ed3095.png>

SPNAK! on the Mathematical Moron, who didn't even realize he was using
Euler's Formula. Bwahahahaaa! That's going into the SPNAK!-pile from
which you'll run away.
=========================================================


SPNAK! #2:
=========================================================
> Does 2sin(x)cos(x) = cos(x) ?
> 
> Oh yes... yes, it does, for the fortuitous case of
> 2sin(x)=1, which, like a broken clock, and like you, is
> right twice per cycle.

Wrong. 2sin(x)cos(x) will never coincide with cos(x) when 2sin(x)=1:
<http://i.imgur.com/8mSBxeg.png>

SPNAK!

Shiny Tinfoil Spankard's response?

> Who cares what you can graph, or if you can even graph it
> right.  You can't understand any of it.

Translation:
"I'm wrong. Who cares? I'm a Mathematical Moron. Who cares? I can't 
understand any of it, let alone graph it. Who cares? <backpedal> 
<backpedal> <backpedal> <backpedal>"

SPNAK!
=========================================================


SPNAK! #3:
=========================================================
Keep proving you're a mathematical moron, Mathematical Moron. Why are 
you running scared from that giant whomping SPNAK! as detailed below, 
Shiny Tinfoil Spankard? LOL

Here, Shiny Tinfoil Spankard... how about you take another crack at 
refuting^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H backpedaling from that giant whomping 
drop-kick you just received, which you screamed "KOOK!", snipped like 
a coward and ran away from.

If Gerald Newton is such a "kook", Shiny Tinfoil Spankard, why is he 
smarter than you? You can't even figure out vector summation, because 
you're Usenet's Mathematical Moron who claims formulas are not math.

<snicker>

===============================================================
Bwahahahaaa! The Mathematical Moron sticks up for the Mathematical
Mega-Moron. And that makes them both *wrong*.

<http://www.electrician2.com/electa1/electa4htm.html>
<http://www.electrician2.com/electa1/electa3htm.htm>
=====================================================
Mathematically, we can precisely *add* the three vectors for the line 
currents by converting vectors into their horizontal and vertical 
components by using trigonometry.  We can *add* the horizontal 
components, then *add* the vertical components, then convert this to 
polar coordinates to find the *sum* of the vectors. This is called 
algebraic *vector* *addition*.
=====================================================

And that all goes back to you moron's inability to grok the 
Superposition Principle, and thus the Additivity and Homogeneity 
properties of same... mostly you... you k'lamed that superposition and 
wave constructive/destructive interference were different things, and 
that constructive/destructive interference worked differently for 
standing waves and traveling waves... so you're especially moronic on 
this topic...

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superposition_principle>
"Note that when vectors or vector fields are involved, a superposition 
is interpreted as a vector sum."

There's not a minus sign in an equation on that entire page. Morons.

Here, you fecking *morons*... let me demonstrate it a way you halfwits 
will hopefully understand...

<http://i.imgur.com/cuw4gus.png>

Red: 100 volt, 0 degree phase
Green: 100 volt, 120 degree phase
Blue: Red + Green

See where the Red and Green lines cross? What's that voltage? Oh, it's 
50 volts. What's 50 + 50, you fucking *morons*? Oh, so when you sum 
two like sinewaves, you shift the resultant to exactly between the two 
tributaries, with the same amplitude as the tributaries.

Hence the resultant is 180 degrees phase from the remaining third 
phase, hence the sum of the three phases of 3-phase AC must always 
equal zero.

Now, let's look at what you morons are doing...

<http://i.imgur.com/zdNCScp.png>

Same exact graph, but the third phase has been added in Orange to show 
the Blue Line is 180 degrees phase from that Orange line, and a Purple 
line has been added to reflect DildoRider's moronic sinewave 
subtraction equation... now remember, we're figuring out the 
superposition (the constructive and destructive interference) of the 
Red and the Green lines.

In that image, at the X axis where the Purple line peaks, the Red line 
has an amplitude of 87 volts. The green line has an amplitude of -87 
volts.

Now, you *fucking* *morons*... what is the wave interference result 
when two waves interfere that have exactly opposite amplitudes? Oh... 
that's right, its ZERO. Which is also why the Blue line is at ZERO at 
that point on the X axis.

Where's that 173.205 volts coming from in DildoRider's kooky sinewave 
subtraction equation, you *fucking* *morons*?

But wait! It gets even better!

<http://i.imgur.com/0l0SQjy.png>

That's the same exact graph, but with DildoRider's kooky sinewave
subtraction equation as purple and black lines... the purple line has
the 0 degree phase as the first part of the equation, the black line
has the 120 degree phase as the first part of the equation.

And one can see that the result is flipped. According to DildoRider's
kooky sinewave subtraction equation, he can convert 87 volts directly
into either 173 *or* -173 volts!

Because you're both Mathematical Morons.

SPNAK!

<dances a jig on the brains of the morons because I've irrefutably 
proven myself right, and proven the two *morons* are indeed huge 
fucking *Mathematical* *Morons*>

Why are you *so* *stupid*, Shiny Tinfoil Spankard? LOL

And the above proves DildoRider *and* Shiny Tinfoil Spankard have been 
*wrong* about every fucking thing they've been blathering.

Bwahahaaaaa! Once again your Usenet Lord and Master drop-kicks your 
moronic asses across Usenet.

I'ma just add another SPNAK! here...

SPNAK!

I bet you wish you could be right just once, huh, Moron.

<snicker>

And just so you SPNAK!ards can't bleat that I didn't show the
formulas used:

100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(0\cdot \frac{\pi
}{180}\right)\right)\right)

100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(120\cdot
\frac{\pi }{180}\right)\right)\right)

100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(240\cdot
\frac{\pi }{180}\right)\right)\right)

\left(\left(100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot
60+\left(0\cdot \frac{\pi }{180}\right)\right)\right)+100\left(\sin
\left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(120\cdot \frac{\pi
}{180}\right)\right)\right)\right)\right)

\left(\left(100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot
60+\left(0\cdot \frac{\pi }{180}\right)\right)\right)-100\left(\sin
\left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(120\cdot \frac{\pi
}{180}\right)\right)\right)\right)\right)

\left(\left(100\left(\sin \left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot
60+\left(120\cdot \frac{\pi }{180}\right)\right)\right)-100\left(\sin
\left(2\cdot x\cdot \pi \cdot 60+\left(0\cdot \frac{\pi
}{180}\right)\right)\right)\right)\right)

And I'll just drop another SPNAK! in here for added effect...

SPNAK!

You may begin backpedaling in 3... 2... 1... GO!

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

Your inability to understand, let alone refute, that reality stands as
your tacit admission that you are Usenet's Mathematical Moron.

SPNAK!

RUN! SHINY TINFOIL SPANKARD! RUUUUUNNNNNN!!!!

> I ignore all your re-run screed.  It's just meaningless,
> WRONG blither-blather in a desperate effort to save face.

Translation:
"I'll continue running away from those *two* SPNAK!s because I've
proven myself a mathematical moron *twice*, because I believe in
proving myself a backpedaling coward and equal number of times which I
prove myself a Mathematical Moron." LOL!

> But your face is gone, fakezoid.  ROFL!
> 
> <snip re-ran screed>

RUUUUUUNNN! SHINY TINFOIL SPANKARD! RRRRRRUUUUUUUUUNNNNN!!!!

Bwahahahaaa!

Spankard.

-- 

Shiny Tinfoil Spankard (aka Bite My Shiny Metal Ass) didn't know:
=====================================
MID: <13d33d0638e0ec690b63393d0710f658@dizum.com>
MID: <80d61a6928a9e7df316c519affcf3838@dizum.com>
The Euler equation is a subset of equations known as the Euler-Fourier
Formulas, thus that a sinewave is a transformation of a circle (which
should have been intuitive, given that generators *rotate* to create
*sinusoids*).

That cross correlation is used with Fourier transforms.

That superposition is the same as wave interference.

That wave interference works the same for standing or traveling waves.

That RMS and peak-to-peak voltage are two different things.

That RMS isn't a DC voltage.

That 170 volt peak, 120.208 volt RMS L-N 3-phase service gives 208.207
volts RMS L-L.

That 4444525800 != 4400000000 != 1.

The difference between frequency and period of a sinewave.

That there's no difference between 'i' and 'j' in electrical
engineering, physics and control systems engineering.

What a positive or negative vector is.

That the vector sum of 3-phase AC constitutes a closed loop per
Kirchhoff's Voltage Law, thus that the three phases sum to zero.

That "mnemonic" is not spelled "mneumonic".

That his claim: "Water is tetrahedral. It actually has 4 poles, 2
positive and 2 negative." is nonsense from a blathering moron.

That the term "electronegativity" denotes a *positive* effective
nuclear charge.

What the definition of the word "equivalent" is.

That digital voltmeters do indeed take discrete instantaneous samples.

That the atmosphere (and the gaseous phase water within the
atmosphere) does indeed follow the Ideal Gas Law to within 1.337842%
margin of error *worst* *case* at 70 F.

That the square of the instantaneous sample of peak-to-peak voltage of
a peak-voltage sinewave is an offset sinewave, thus its average does
*not* equal zero, as Shiny Tinfoil Brain k'lames.

That the Ideal Gas Law does not require an ideal gas because it takes
into account molar volume.

That "within 10% error" does not equal "10% error".

That water can be plasmized.

That atomic number does not equal effective nuclear charge.

And the moron continues to demonstrate his inability to read a graph.
=====================================

Shiny Tinfoil Spankard the Mathematical Moron maunders and mewls:
=====================================
"All you've shown us is graphs of formulas. No equal signs, no maths
done." - Shiny Tinfoil Brain demonstrates his Mathematical Moronism.
=====================================

SPNAK!

<snicker>

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


#564066

FromSolving Tornadoes <solvingtornadoes@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-20 22:53 -0700
Message-ID<26e8b72c-251d-45ec-a356-167b972b9e0e@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#563724
On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 3:02:51 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> On Saturday, March 19, 2016 at 1:20:29 PM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> > > If you like I'll hereby give you an opportunity to make a retraction.
> > > 
> > > Fair enough?
> > 
> > The only one who needs to make a retraction is you, 
> 
> You can't say I didn't give you the opportunity.

Is it a secret?

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


#566584

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-29 21:29 -0700
Message-ID<bfc4fc70-2cad-436b-844a-0cb11aa68cc2@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#563318
On Friday, March 18, 2016 at 12:07:23 AM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote:
> NOY:
> How do your "jet stream vortices" travel hundreds of miles away from the jet stream, without detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar,
> 
> If these jet stream-originated tendrils are reaching hundreds of miles away from the edge of the jet stream to drop down as tornadoes, why can't we detect them long before they touch down via satellite or Doppler radar, and thus have hours of warning prior to tornadic activity, James?
> 
> James McGinn:
> Being comprised of polymers of H2O (spinning droplets that have elongated) they should be about as invisible as gaseous H2O.  Why in the world would be expect them to be detectable?
> 
> 
Let me put it this way, Clear Air Turbulence is called Clear Air Turbulence because it has energetic wind shear and, uh, because it is clear.
> 
> IOW, you can't see the jet streams, dumbass.  In fact we didn't even know they existed until they were encountered over Japan in WWII and instruments revealed a constant, strong wind.
> 
> Every once in a while you should pull your head out.

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


#566664

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-03-30 17:59 +0200
Message-ID<72a0e148658928056e607f9655db3495@dizum.com>
In reply to#566584
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James 'Tardnado' McGinn, in
<news:bfc4fc70-2cad-436b-844a-0cb11aa68cc2@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> FNVWe drop-kicked a moron. Again:

>> How do your "jet stream vortices" travel hundreds of miles away
>> from the jet stream, without detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar,
>> 
>> If these jet stream-originated tendrils are reaching hundreds of
>> miles away from the edge of the jet stream to drop down as tornadoes,
>> why can't we detect them long before they touch down via satellite
>> or Doppler radar, and thus have hours of warning prior to tornadic
>> activity, James?

> Being comprised of polymers of H2O (spinning droplets that have elongated)

Wrong. That's your supposition, pulled straight from your ass, Jim,
and wholly unsupported by any research of any sort.

> they should be about as invisible as gaseous H2O.

Which isn't invisible at all to satellites and ground stations using
the microwave range or infrared range, James. Are you really this
stupid? Or are you just desperately writhing like a worm on a hotplate
in attempting to keep your retarded "theory" alive so you can continue
to delude yourself into thinking yourself smarter than every scientist
in the past 250+ years, Jim, when in reality you're an uneducated
moron?

How do you think the satellites and ground stations track humidity and
thus weather patterns, James? You know, those fucking humidity maps on
the weather websites, James? Have you never looked at a humidity map,
James? Are you so fucking stupid that you think they're just making
those maps up? Did it never dawn on that badly broken brain of yours
that they must have some means of tracking humidity?

Good Christ, James... you're the dumbest, most deluded, least educated
moronic kooktard on Usenet.

> Why in the world would be expect them to be detectable?

Because, Jim, water absorbs microwave radiation. That's kind of how
*microwave* *ovens* work, you fucking moron. It also emits in the
~11-micron infrared atmospheric window.

Thus, if that water, even in gaseous phase, is concentrated in your
kooky vortexes that are stretching for hundreds of miles horizontally
through the troposphere, the satellites and ground stations would pick
that up.

And that's not to mention that all those tendrils of vortexes
stretching all across the fucking upper troposphere would make air
travel a deadly proposition, James.

So yeah, you *are* _that_ fucking retarded, Jim.

> Let me put it this way, Clear Air Turbulence is called
> Clear Air Turbulence because it has energetic wind shear
> and, uh, because it is clear.

In the visible, Jim. Have you never heard of the Ultraviolet Light
Detection and Ranging instrument that allows pilots to detect clear
air turbulence, Jim?

And clear air turbulence has nothing to do with tornadoes, Jim. It's a
*turbulence*, chaotic, not a vortex, and it occurs above and to the
immediate sides of the jets. It does not fucking stretch for hundreds
of miles away from the jets, Jim.

You're just a moronic delusional kooktard slapping patches on your
retarded theory as fast as you can to cover over the gaping logic
holes and inconsistencies, in the process your kooky fabrication gets
more and more convoluted, as every fabrication does, until it
collapses under the weight of its own contradictions.

Yeah, you *are* _that_ fucking retarded and deluded, Jim.

> IOW, you can't see the jet streams, dumbass.  In fact we didn't
> even know they existed until they were encountered over Japan
> in WWII and instruments revealed a constant, strong wind.

"constant, strong wind"? But James, you claim it's a vortex, which
cannot be a "constant, strong wind", and it most certainly wouldn't
provide a smooth ride inside that jet stream, as we know occurs. Do
you need to take your meds, James?

> Every once in a while you should pull your head out.

Every once in a while, you should realize you're projecting, Jim. And
that you're a delusional moron.

Here, Jim... take another crack at addressing those tough questions
which highlight the logical inconsistencies and contradictions in your
"theory"... or will you run away from them again, Jim, because they
cause your moronic brain painful cognitive dissonance?

-- 

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

============================================================
Why are you known as Tardnado McGinn, the delusional moronic ignorant
uneducated psychotic babbling loon, James?

Why have you been legally deemed to be mentally incompetent and a
lifelong ward of your parents James, Sr. and Constance, necessitating
that you live with your parents because you'd be a danger to yourself
if you lived independently, James? Is it your paranoid schizophrenia?
Is that why your mommy has to feed you, dress you, wipe your ass and
help you to not piss all over yourself?

And you call yourself a scientist, James? You're nothing more than a
pathetic basement-dwelling schizo-brained delusional loser.

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.

You've yet again slapped a patch on your theory, abandoning Coulomb's
Law for a separate "mechanism" by which electrostatic attraction
increases with increasing distance. How does your "mechanism" and
electrostatic attraction in accordance with Coulomb's Law not mutually
cancel, thereby dissociating all water, James?

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?

How does a hot air balloon work, James? No plasma, no giant sentient
tornado monster in the jet stream... how does it rise, Jim? Why can't
you explain that, James?

Why does water freeze from the top down, even if the heat sink is
*below* the container of water? That's another question your "theory
not-a-theory" can't answer.

Why can't you provide the explanation and mathematics to prove your
claim that humid air is heavier than dry air, James?

Why can't you explain or mathematically model even *one* of your
delusions, James?

Why can't you get your delusions through the peer-review process,
James?

Why can't you even get your delusion on a pre-print server, James?

Why are there *no* corroborating studies backing up your delusions,
James?

Why are you shunned by the scientific community, James?

Why is your blather on the comments sections of websites being
*deleted*, dismissed as the mad barking of a loon, James?

Why are you described in the reviews of the "books" you've written as
"delusional", "insane", and a "conspiracy theorist", James?

Why did you *fail* *out* of an elective Basic Meteorology class, in
which they teach the very concepts you're blathering out your lack of
education about now, James?

Why do you so hate meteorologists, James? Is it because you failed out
of the elective Basic Meteorology class because you've legally been
deemed mentally incompetent, James?

Why do you use your failing out of an elective Basic Meteorology class
as the basis to claim yourself to be a "physicist not-a-physicist",
James? Do you not understand that physicists are highly educated,
whereas you're ignorant and uneducated?

What universities did you attend, what were your majors and what was
the topic of your Ph.D. thesis, James? You don't have a Ph.D? Then
you're not a physicist, James. LOL

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

Do you not know that water droplets *minimize* surface area, James?
How are your "plasma not-a-plasma" "water droplets" *maximizing* their
surface area as you claim?

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 are you not taking your meds, James?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Jim?

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


#567019

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-31 13:01 -0700
Message-ID<f090ba37-26e4-4cb7-859c-19e730eced00@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#566664
On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 9:10:05 AM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

> >> How do your "jet stream vortices" travel hundreds of miles away
> >> from the jet stream, without detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar,
> >> 
> >> If these jet stream-originated tendrils are reaching hundreds of
> >> miles away from the edge of the jet stream to drop down as tornadoes,
> >> why can't we detect them long before they touch down via satellite
> >> or Doppler radar, and thus have hours of warning prior to tornadic
> >> activity, James?
> 
> > Being comprised of polymers of H2O (spinning droplets that have elongated)
> 
> Wrong. That's your supposition, 

Right.  It's theoretical.  Do you have a problem with that? 

> > they should be about as invisible as gaseous H2O.
> 
> Which isn't invisible at all 

Gaseous H2O (steam--a substance that has never been detected in earth's atmsophere, by the way) is perfectly invisible.


> How do you think the satellites and ground stations track humidity 

Because it is liquid, not gaseous.  Try to follow.

> > Why in the world would be expect them to be detectable?
> 
> Because, Jim, water absorbs microwave radiation. 

Liquid water does.  Gaseous H2O does not.

> Thus, if that water, even in gaseous phase,

Not gaseous.  Polymers.  Chains of H2O molecules spinning very fast.

Try to follow.

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


#567131

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-04-01 08:00 +0200
Message-ID<09acf3b2505e13a6a488c50abff409b7@dizum.com>
In reply to#567019
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James 'Tardnado' McGinn, in
<news:f090ba37-26e4-4cb7-859c-19e730eced00@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 9:10:05 AM UTC-7,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>>>> How do your "jet stream vortices" travel hundreds of miles away
>>>> from the jet stream, without detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar,
>>>> 
>>>> If these jet stream-originated tendrils are reaching hundreds of
>>>> miles away from the edge of the jet stream to drop down as tornadoes,
>>>> why can't we detect them long before they touch down via satellite
>>>> or Doppler radar, and thus have hours of warning prior to tornadic
>>>> activity, James?

>>> Being comprised of polymers of H2O (spinning droplets that have elongated)

>> Wrong. That's your supposition, pulled straight from your ass, Jim,
>> and wholly unsupported by any research of any sort.

> Right.  It's theoretical.  Do you have a problem with that? 

It's not "theoretical", Jim. A theory is backed up with evidence. Your
"plasma not-a-plasma" doesn't exist. You made it up. Pulled it
straight from your ass. It's delusional blather from your broken
schizo-brain. And you've retracted it. Remember?

James Bernard 'Tardnado' McGinn dribbled:
Message-ID: <3a52e2f1a86d44a43a939ee435645e09@dizum.com>
========================================================
> Retracted:
> Polarity is a variable. And the mechanism that alters (reduces)
> the polarity of H2O molecules is the completion of hydrogen
> bonds with adjoining water molecules.
========================================================

James Bernard 'Tardnado' McGinn dribbled:
Message-ID: <3a52e2f1a86d44a43a939ee435645e09@dizum.com>
========================================================
> In my post entitled Conservation of Energy in Earth's
> Atmosphere I describe how the spinning of water
> droplets/clusters--a direct result of wind shear--causes
> these droplets to elongate into chains of partially
> reactivated H2O molecules, effectuating a plasma with
> structural integrity. It is important to note that
> without the concept that is the subject of this post
> (the Polarity Neutralization Implication of Hydrogen
> Bonds Between Water Molecules and Groups Thereof) this
> would not be possible.
========================================================

Thus, without your "variable polarity of the water molecule" claim
(now retracted by you), your "plasma not-a-plasma" claim falls, by
your own admission. And without your "plasma not-a-plasma" claim, your
"boundaries and structures" which you claim that "plasma not-a-plasma"
forms which drives the winds. Thus your entire "theory not-a-theory"
just came crashing to the ground. That's what happens when you build
your "theory not-a-theory" like a Jenga tower of lies and
suppositions, James.

Yet again, you've destroyed your moronic theory in trying to slap
patches on it so you can writhe your way out of being proven wrong.
You're too ignorant, insane and uneducated to acknowledge or
understand reality, let alone model it, Tardnado. LOL

>>> they should be about as invisible as gaseous H2O.

Your out-of-context snipping is noted, you dishonest shitbag.

>> Which isn't invisible at all 

Restored:

>> Which isn't invisible at all to satellites and ground stations using
>> the microwave range or infrared range, James. Are you really this
>> stupid? Or are you just desperately writhing like a worm on a hotplate
>> in attempting to keep your retarded "theory" alive so you can continue
>> to delude yourself into thinking yourself smarter than every scientist
>> in the past 250+ years, Jim, when in reality you're an uneducated
>> moron?
>> 
>> How do you think the satellites and ground stations track humidity and
>> thus weather patterns, James? You know, those fucking humidity maps on
>> the weather websites, James? Have you never looked at a humidity map,
>> James? Are you so fucking stupid that you think they're just making
>> those maps up? Did it never dawn on that badly broken brain of yours
>> that they must have some means of tracking humidity?
>> 
>> Good Christ, James... you're the dumbest, most deluded, least educated
>> moronic kooktard on Usenet.

> Gaseous H2O (steam--a substance that has never been detected in earth's
> atmsophere, by the way) is perfectly invisible.

Wrong. Do you deny that satellites and ground-based Doppler radar can
differentiate between gaseous-phase (humidity) and liquid-phase (in
clouds) water in the atmosphere, Jim? Because that would mean you're
now claiming every single weather website is a sham. Is that what
you're claiming, Tardnado McGinn?

Further, your claiming that latent heat of evaporation of water
doesn't exist means you claim that water doesn't have a gaseous
phase... that's moronic, James, and demonstrably false. You'll be
getting right on proving even one of your moronic claims.

>> How do you think the satellites and ground stations track humidity 

> Because it is liquid, not gaseous.  Try to follow.

Wrong. Nilsson's study:
<https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156>

If water molecules are H bonded together, it's liquid water, James.
Nilsson measured a higher photon energy from electron orbital descent
in gaseous-phase water than that of liquid-phase water. If it'd been
liquid-phase water as you claim, the photon energy would have been
identical to that of liquid-phase water. It wasn't, hence gaseous
phase water is monomolecular with no H bonding.

Water In The Gas Phase - 
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3350649/
Not ab initio (which you stupidly call "ab initro" in your videos
LOL)... direct measurement of monomolecular water in the gaseous
phase. 16 referenced papers.

Max Planck Institute for Polymer Research
http://www.mpip-mainz.mpg.de/molecular_mechanism_of_water_evaporation
Direct empirical observation of monomolecular evaporation.

http://archiv.ub.uni-heidelberg.de/volltextserver/6686/
Active Long Path Differential Optical Absorption Spectroscopy to
directly observe monomolecular gaseous-phase water in the atmosphere

Now you can run away from reality all over again, James. You
delusional reality-denying kooktard.

>>> Why in the world would be expect them to be detectable?

>> Because, Jim, water absorbs microwave radiation. 

> Liquid water does.  Gaseous H2O does not.

You deny that gaseous-phase water exists, James. And you're lying to
support your delusions. Again.

<http://www.tau.ac.il/~pinhas/chapters/2011/David_et_al_microwave_2011.pdf>
Humidity Measurements using Commercial Microwave Links

<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_absorption_by_water>
The water molecule, in the gaseous state, has three types of
transition that can give rise to absorption of electromagnetic
radiation.

Again, do you deny that satellites and ground-based Doppler radar can
differentiate between gaseous-phase (humidity) and liquid-phase (in
clouds) water in the atmosphere, Jim? Because that would mean you're
now claiming every single weather website is a sham. Is that what
you're claiming, Tardnado McGinn?

Do you even know what the vibrational spectrum of water is, Tardnado?

>> Thus, if that water, even in gaseous phase,

> Not gaseous.  Polymers.  Chains of H2O molecules spinning very fast.

Wrong. Even a microwave oven spins the water molecules at 2.45 MHz and
it doesn't plasmize the water. You're now claiming that throughout the
entire troposphere exists a power source with more energy than that
found in a microwave oven, yet it somehow doesn't dissociate all water
(given that the dissociation energy and nuclear binding energy of
water are identical, meaning water will preferentially dissociate into
H and O rather than plasmize unless hit with unusually high amounts of
energy), and it's somehow not killing all life (given that all life
requires water).

IOW, you're a delusional blathering moron, James Bernard McGinn, Jr.
of Antioch, CA.

> Try to follow.

Try to take your meds, Jim.

Why can't you answer those questions, Tardnado McGinn?

-- 

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

============================================================
Why are you known as Tardnado McGinn, the delusional moronic ignorant
uneducated psychotic babbling loon, James?

Why have you been legally deemed to be mentally incompetent and a
lifelong ward of your parents James, Sr. and Constance, necessitating
that you live with your parents because you'd be a danger to yourself
if you lived independently, James? Is it your paranoid schizophrenia?
Is that why your mommy has to feed you, dress you, wipe your ass and
help you to not piss all over yourself?

And you call yourself a scientist, James? You're nothing more than a
pathetic basement-dwelling schizo-brained delusional loser.

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.

You've yet again slapped a patch on your theory, abandoning Coulomb's
Law for a separate "mechanism" by which electrostatic attraction
increases with increasing distance. How does your "mechanism" and
electrostatic attraction in accordance with Coulomb's Law not mutually
cancel, thereby dissociating all water, 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 the polarity of the electron and the proton cancel if, as even
you admit, there is a distance between them as a result of the Pauli
Exclusion Principle and the repulsive van der Waals force, KookTard,
and once they've cancelled, how is polarity reestablished, and how is
that not dissociating the water?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why is the boiling
point of water anomalously high as compared to other H-bonded
hydrides, KookTard?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, then water's
cohesion would also drop. Why does it not do that, KookTard?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, how is water *not*
splitting up into hydroxide and hydronium ions, KookTard?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why does water have
such a high latent heat of vaporization, a direct result of that same
H bonding, KookTard? Of course, being the delusional uneducated moron
that you are, you deny that water has any latent heat of
vaporization... but you're *so* stupid that you didn't realize that
your denial also means you deny that water has a gaseous phase, and
that's just retarded.

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why does water not
because much more dense upon fully H bonding, KookTard?

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?

How does a hot air balloon work, James? No plasma, no giant sentient
tornado monster in the jet stream... how does it rise, Jim? Why can't
you explain that, James?

Why does water freeze from the top down, even if the heat sink is
*below* the container of water? That's another question your "theory
not-a-theory" can't answer.

Why can't you provide the explanation and mathematics to prove your
claim that humid air is heavier than dry air, James?

Why can't you explain or mathematically model even *one* of your
delusions, James?

Why can't you get your delusions through the peer-review process,
James?

Why can't you even get your delusion on a pre-print server, James?

Why are there *no* corroborating studies backing up your delusions,
James?

Why are you shunned by the scientific community, James?

Why is your blather on the comments sections of websites being
*deleted*, dismissed as the mad barking of a loon, James?

Why are you described in the reviews of the "books" you've written as
"delusional", "insane", and a "conspiracy theorist", James?

Why did you *fail* *out* of an elective Basic Meteorology class, in
which they teach the very concepts you're blathering out your lack of
education about now, James?

Why do you so hate meteorologists, James? Is it because you failed out
of the elective Basic Meteorology class because you've legally been
deemed mentally incompetent, James?

Why do you use your failing out of an elective Basic Meteorology class
as the basis to claim yourself to be a "physicist not-a-physicist",
James? Do you not understand that physicists are highly educated,
whereas you're ignorant and uneducated?

What universities did you attend, what were your majors and what was
the topic of your Ph.D. thesis, James? You don't have a Ph.D? Then
you're not a physicist, James. LOL

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

Do you not know that water droplets *minimize* surface area, James?
How are your "plasma not-a-plasma" "water droplets" *maximizing* their
surface area as you claim?

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 are you not taking your meds, James?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Tardnado Jim?

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


#567138

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-03-31 23:27 -0700
Message-ID<87c601a6-9e79-4499-88db-d379ee0d3e55@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#567131
On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 11:11:53 PM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>
> 
> James 'Tardnado' McGinn, in
> <news:f090ba37-26e4-4cb7-859c-19e730eced00@googlegroups.com> did
> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:
> 
> > On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 9:10:05 AM UTC-7,
> > Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:
> 
> >>>> How do your "jet stream vortices" travel hundreds of miles away
> >>>> from the jet stream, without detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar,
> >>>> 
> >>>> If these jet stream-originated tendrils are reaching hundreds of
> >>>> miles away from the edge of the jet stream to drop down as tornadoes,
> >>>> why can't we detect them long before they touch down via satellite
> >>>> or Doppler radar, and thus have hours of warning prior to tornadic
> >>>> activity, James?
> 
> >>> Being comprised of polymers of H2O (spinning droplets that have elongated)
> 
> >> Wrong. That's your supposition, pulled straight from your ass, Jim,
> >> and wholly unsupported by any research of any sort.
> 
> > Right.  It's theoretical.  Do you have a problem with that? 
> 
> It's not "theoretical", 

You are sniveling twit.

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


#567223

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-04-01 18:57 +0200
Message-ID<1f768700316bf0e8264ddf510c886100@dizum.com>
In reply to#567138
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James 'Tardnado' McGinn, in
<news:87c601a6-9e79-4499-88db-d379ee0d3e55@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Thursday, March 31, 2016 at 11:11:53 PM UTC-7,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>> James 'Tardnado' McGinn, in
>> <news:f090ba37-26e4-4cb7-859c-19e730eced00@googlegroups.com> did
>> thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

>>> On Wednesday, March 30, 2016 at 9:10:05 AM UTC-7,
>>> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>>>>>> How do your "jet stream vortices" travel hundreds of miles away
>>>>>> from the jet stream, without detection by satellite *or* Doppler radar,
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If these jet stream-originated tendrils are reaching hundreds of
>>>>>> miles away from the edge of the jet stream to drop down as tornadoes,
>>>>>> why can't we detect them long before they touch down via satellite
>>>>>> or Doppler radar, and thus have hours of warning prior to tornadic
>>>>>> activity, James?

>>>>> Being comprised of polymers of H2O (spinning droplets that have elongated)

>>>> Wrong. That's your supposition, pulled straight from your ass, Jim,
>>>> and wholly unsupported by any research of any sort.

>>> Right.  It's theoretical.  Do you have a problem with that? 

>> It's not "theoretical", Jim. A theory is backed up with evidence. Your
>> "plasma not-a-plasma" doesn't exist. You made it up. Pulled it
>> straight from your ass. It's delusional blather from your broken
>> schizo-brain. And you've retracted it. Remember?
>> 
>> James Bernard 'Tardnado' McGinn dribbled:
>> Message-ID: <3a52e2f1a86d44a43a939ee435645e09@dizum.com>
>> ========================================================
>> > Retracted:
>> > Polarity is a variable. And the mechanism that alters (reduces)
>> > the polarity of H2O molecules is the completion of hydrogen
>> > bonds with adjoining water molecules.
>> ========================================================
>> 
>> James Bernard 'Tardnado' McGinn dribbled:
>> Message-ID: <3a52e2f1a86d44a43a939ee435645e09@dizum.com>
>> ========================================================
>> > In my post entitled Conservation of Energy in Earth's
>> > Atmosphere I describe how the spinning of water
>> > droplets/clusters--a direct result of wind shear--causes
>> > these droplets to elongate into chains of partially
>> > reactivated H2O molecules, effectuating a plasma with
>> > structural integrity. It is important to note that
>> > without the concept that is the subject of this post
>> > (the Polarity Neutralization Implication of Hydrogen
>> > Bonds Between Water Molecules and Groups Thereof) this
>> > would not be possible.
>> ========================================================
>> 
>> Thus, without your "variable polarity of the water molecule" claim
>> (now retracted by you), your "plasma not-a-plasma" claim falls, by
>> your own admission. And without your "plasma not-a-plasma" claim, your
>> "boundaries and structures" which you claim that "plasma not-a-plasma"
>> forms which drives the winds. Thus your entire "theory not-a-theory"
>> just came crashing to the ground. That's what happens when you build
>> your "theory not-a-theory" like a Jenga tower of lies and
>> suppositions, James.
>> 
>> Yet again, you've destroyed your moronic theory in trying to slap
>> patches on it so you can writhe your way out of being proven wrong.
>> You're too ignorant, insane and uneducated to acknowledge or
>> understand reality, let alone model it, Tardnado. LOL

> You are sniveling twit.

You are an uneducated moronic brain-damaged paranoid psychotic lying
piece of shit who babbles out delusional blather.

You are shunned throughout the scientific world, your name has become
synonymous with scientific fraud.

You've been proven to be an uneducated and ineducable halfwit who
couldn't even pass a Basic Meteorology class.

You're a paranoid delusional doofus whose blather gets deleted on
website comments sections because they don't let barkingly mad loons
blather out their moronic insanity.

You're a "tornado expert not-an-expert" who's never seen, experienced
or researched tornadoes.

You're a "physicist not-a-physicist" who holds no advanced degrees,
whose sum total of scientific education consists of a Basic
Meteorology class you failed out of.

You're a worldwide laughingstock, a babbling buffoon who can't wrap
his broken tard-brain around reality.

You've been proven to be so psychotic that you've legally been deemed
a ward of your elderly parents because you'd be a danger to yourself
if you lived independently.

You are a cowardly-snipping evading writhing moron who can't provide
any proof to back up the delusions you blather out.

You are defeated.

Why can't you answer those questions which highlight your psychosis,
TornadoTard?

-- 

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

============================================================
Why are you known as Tardnado McGinn, the delusional moronic ignorant
uneducated psychotic babbling loon, James?

Why have you been legally deemed to be mentally incompetent and a
lifelong ward of your parents James, Sr. and Constance, necessitating
that you live with your parents because you'd be a danger to yourself
if you lived independently, James? Is it your paranoid schizophrenia?
Is that why your mommy has to feed you, dress you, wipe your ass and
help you to not piss all over yourself?

And you call yourself a scientist, James? You're nothing more than a
pathetic basement-dwelling schizo-brained delusional loser.

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.

You've yet again slapped a patch on your theory, abandoning Coulomb's
Law for a separate "mechanism" by which electrostatic attraction
increases with increasing distance. How does your "mechanism" and
electrostatic attraction in accordance with Coulomb's Law not mutually
cancel, thereby dissociating all water, 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 the polarity of the electron and the proton cancel if, as even
you admit, there is a distance between them as a result of the Pauli
Exclusion Principle and the repulsive van der Waals force, KookTard,
and once they've cancelled, how is polarity reestablished, and how is
that not dissociating the water?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why is the boiling
point of water anomalously high as compared to other H-bonded
hydrides, KookTard?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, then water's
cohesion would also drop. Why does it not do that, KookTard?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, how is water *not*
splitting up into hydroxide and hydronium ions, KookTard?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why does water have
such a high latent heat of vaporization, a direct result of that same
H bonding, KookTard? Of course, being the delusional uneducated moron
that you are, you deny that water has any latent heat of
vaporization... but you're *so* stupid that you didn't realize that
your denial also means you deny that water has a gaseous phase, and
that's just retarded.

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why does water not
because much more dense upon fully H bonding, KookTard?

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?

How does a hot air balloon work, James? No plasma, no giant sentient
tornado monster in the jet stream... how does it rise, Jim? Why can't
you explain that, James?

Why does water freeze from the top down, even if the heat sink is
*below* the container of water? That's another question your "theory
not-a-theory" can't answer.

Why can't you provide the explanation and mathematics to prove your
claim that humid air is heavier than dry air, James?

Why can't you explain or mathematically model even *one* of your
delusions, James?

Why can't you get your delusions through the peer-review process,
James?

Why can't you even get your delusion on a pre-print server, James?

Why are there *no* corroborating studies backing up your delusions,
James?

Why are you shunned by the scientific community, James?

Why is your blather on the comments sections of websites being
*deleted*, dismissed as the mad barking of a loon, James?

Why are you described in the reviews of the "books" you've written as
"delusional", "insane", and a "conspiracy theorist", James?

Why did you *fail* *out* of an elective Basic Meteorology class, in
which they teach the very concepts you're blathering out your lack of
education about now, James?

Why do you so hate meteorologists, James? Is it because you failed out
of the elective Basic Meteorology class because you've legally been
deemed mentally incompetent, James?

Why do you use your failing out of an elective Basic Meteorology class
as the basis to claim yourself to be a "physicist not-a-physicist",
James? Do you not understand that physicists are highly educated,
whereas you're ignorant and uneducated?

What universities did you attend, what were your majors and what was
the topic of your Ph.D. thesis, James? You don't have a Ph.D? Then
you're not a physicist, James. LOL

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

Do you not know that water droplets *minimize* surface area, James?
How are your "plasma not-a-plasma" "water droplets" *maximizing* their
surface area as you claim?

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 are you not taking your meds, James?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Tardnado Jim?

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


#567237

FromJames McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com>
Date2016-04-01 10:26 -0700
Message-ID<f34ef190-bbb3-48ee-9251-d707006a84db@googlegroups.com>
In reply to#567223
On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 10:08:06 AM UTC-7, Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

> > You are sniveling twit.

> You are shunned throughout the scientific world, 

LOL.  Well, considering that I am calling attention to a plethora of 
brain-dead, sheepishness, that is to be expected.

Do these same people that shun me embrace you and your <cough> scientific 
methods?

Maybe you could write a book on the art of ignoring details to arrive 
at scientific truth.  I'm sure many of the other regulars in this forum 
will be big supporters.

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


#567381

FromFriendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx>
Date2016-04-02 07:34 +0200
Message-ID<d0f68a801b958924007574461ac9f6af@dizum.com>
In reply to#567237
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker>

James 'Tardnado' McGinn, in
<news:f34ef190-bbb3-48ee-9251-d707006a84db@googlegroups.com> did
thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again:

> On Friday, April 1, 2016 at 10:08:06 AM UTC-7,
> Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus wrote:

>>> You are sniveling twit.

>> You are an uneducated moronic brain-damaged paranoid psychotic lying
>> piece of shit who babbles out delusional blather.
>> 
>> You are shunned throughout the scientific world, your name has become
>> synonymous with scientific fraud.
>> 
>> You've been proven to be an uneducated and ineducable halfwit who
>> couldn't even pass a Basic Meteorology class.
>> 
>> You're a paranoid delusional doofus whose blather gets deleted on
>> website comments sections because they don't let barkingly mad loons
>> blather out their moronic insanity.
>> 
>> You're a "tornado expert not-an-expert" who's never seen, experienced
>> or researched tornadoes.
>> 
>> You're a "physicist not-a-physicist" who holds no advanced degrees,
>> whose sum total of scientific education consists of a Basic
>> Meteorology class you failed out of.
>> 
>> You're a worldwide laughingstock, a babbling buffoon who can't wrap
>> his broken tard-brain around reality.
>> 
>> You've been proven to be so psychotic that you've legally been deemed
>> a ward of your elderly parents because you'd be a danger to yourself
>> if you lived independently.
>> 
>> You are a cowardly-snipping evading writhing moron who can't provide
>> any proof to back up the delusions you blather out.
>> 
>> You are defeated.

> LOL.  Well, considering that I am calling attention to a plethora of 
  reality which I delusionally deny, that is to be expected.

LOL!

> brain-dead, sheepishness, that is to be expected.

Yes, from you we all expect brain-dead sheepishness, TornadoTard.

> Do these same people that shun me embrace you and your <cough> scientific 
> methods?

They embrace reality, which you reject at every turn, James. That is
why, after all, you're a lifelong ward of your parents, forced to live
at home with mommy and daddy because you've legally been deemed to be
a mental incompetent, so paranoid-delusional you'd be a danger to
yourself and others if you lived independently.

> Maybe you could write a book on the art of ignoring details to arrive 
> at scientific truth.  I'm sure many of the other regulars in this forum 
> will be big supporters.

Maybe you should take your meds, James. Go on, take it. We of the
Meteorology Cabal most definitely haven't taken over the pharmacy and
medical trades to such an extent that we now control every doctor and
pharmacist. So your crazy pills were most definitely not swapped out
for bath salts, James.

Why can't you answer those questions which highlight your psychosis,
TornadoTard?

-- 

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

============================================================
Why are you known as Tardnado McGinn, the delusional moronic ignorant
uneducated psychotic babbling loon, James?

Why have you been legally deemed to be mentally incompetent and a
lifelong ward of your parents James, Sr. and Constance, necessitating
that you live with your parents because you'd be a danger to yourself
if you lived independently, James? Is it your paranoid schizophrenia?
Is that why your mommy has to feed you, dress you, wipe your ass and
help you to not piss all over yourself?

And you call yourself a scientist, James? You're nothing more than a
pathetic basement-dwelling schizo-brained delusional loser.

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.

You've yet again slapped a patch on your theory, abandoning Coulomb's
Law for a separate "mechanism" by which electrostatic attraction
increases with increasing distance. How does your "mechanism" and
electrostatic attraction in accordance with Coulomb's Law not mutually
cancel, thereby dissociating all water, 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 the polarity of the electron and the proton cancel if, as even
you admit, there is a distance between them as a result of the Pauli
Exclusion Principle and the repulsive van der Waals force, KookTard,
and once they've cancelled, how is polarity reestablished, and how is
that not dissociating the water?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why is the boiling
point of water anomalously high as compared to other H-bonded
hydrides, KookTard?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, then water's
cohesion would also drop. Why does it not do that, KookTard?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, how is water *not*
splitting up into hydroxide and hydronium ions, KookTard?

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why does water have
such a high latent heat of vaporization, a direct result of that same
H bonding, KookTard? Of course, being the delusional uneducated moron
that you are, you deny that water has any latent heat of
vaporization... but you're *so* stupid that you didn't realize that
your denial also means you deny that water has a gaseous phase, and
that's just retarded.

If water molecule polarity dropped upon H bonding, why does water not
because much more dense upon fully H bonding, KookTard?

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?

How does a hot air balloon work, James? No plasma, no giant sentient
tornado monster in the jet stream... how does it rise, Jim? Why can't
you explain that, James?

Why does water freeze from the top down, even if the heat sink is
*below* the container of water? That's another question your "theory
not-a-theory" can't answer.

Why can't you provide the explanation and mathematics to prove your
claim that humid air is heavier than dry air, James?

Why can't you explain or mathematically model even *one* of your
delusions, James?

Why can't you get your delusions through the peer-review process,
James?

Why can't you even get your delusion on a pre-print server, James?

Why are there *no* corroborating studies backing up your delusions,
James?

Why are you shunned by the scientific community, James?

Why is your blather on the comments sections of websites being
*deleted*, dismissed as the mad barking of a loon, James?

Why are you described in the reviews of the "books" you've written as
"delusional", "insane", and a "conspiracy theorist", James?

Why did you *fail* *out* of an elective Basic Meteorology class, in
which they teach the very concepts you're blathering out your lack of
education about now, James?

Why do you so hate meteorologists, James? Is it because you failed out
of the elective Basic Meteorology class because you've legally been
deemed mentally incompetent, James?

Why do you use your failing out of an elective Basic Meteorology class
as the basis to claim yourself to be a "physicist not-a-physicist",
James? Do you not understand that physicists are highly educated,
whereas you're ignorant and uneducated?

What universities did you attend, what were your majors and what was
the topic of your Ph.D. thesis, James? You don't have a Ph.D? Then
you're not a physicist, James. LOL

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

Do you not know that water droplets *minimize* surface area, James?
How are your "plasma not-a-plasma" "water droplets" *maximizing* their
surface area as you claim?

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 are you not taking your meds, James?
============================================================

Why can't you answer those questions, Tardnado Jim?

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


Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics


csiph-web