Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #584813 > unrolled thread
| Started by | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2016-06-13 21:51 -0700 |
| Last post | 2016-06-14 22:31 +0200 |
| Articles | 10 — 5 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> - 2016-06-13 21:51 -0700
Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-06-14 08:08 +0200
Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored LotusLooser <FNVW@AUK.xxx> - 2016-06-14 11:24 -0600
Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored "\"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> - 2016-06-14 13:32 -0400
Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-06-14 12:47 -0700
Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored "\"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> - 2016-06-14 15:48 -0400
Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-06-14 12:53 -0700
Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored "\"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> - 2016-06-14 15:59 -0400
Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> - 2016-06-14 14:40 -0700
Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> - 2016-06-14 22:31 +0200
| From | James McGinn <jimmcginn9@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-13 21:51 -0700 |
| Subject | Re: H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored |
| Message-ID | <ba3093bf-4d25-4996-86bb-6b9c5d93d408@googlegroups.com> |
On Friday, March 25, 2016 at 5:04:17 PM UTC-7, James McGinn wrote: > James McGinn: > You are ignoring symmetry, to no good effect. > > NOY: > You don't even know what 'symmetry' means, Jim. > > James McGinn: > Actually I do. In fact I'm the first person to correctly recognize the > significance of the variability of symmetry to determine the variability > of polarity. Accordingly, I understand polarity better than anybody. > See my paper for details: > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/Cin1MQ4ZyFU/QmNEM9mnDgAJ > > NOY: > No, you don't. > > James McGinn: > Actually I do. No joke. > > NOY: > In fact, the H bonding gets *weaker* when one is knocked loose. > > James McGinn: > You are just as clueless as Martin Chaplin and the other people you > quote. Surface tension proves you wrong and me right. As described > in my paper, H bonds get stronger when asymmetry is restored with > the breaking of one of the two hydrogen bonds. As I describe > explicitly, polarity depends on the existence of asymmetry: > https://groups.google.com/d/msg/sci.physics/Cin1MQ4ZyFU/QmNEM9mnDgAJ > > NOY: > You've already been proven wrong below, Jim. > > James McGinn: > How so? Explain surface tension using your model. Go ahead. If > what you are saying is true H2O would have no surface tension in > that a surface forces the breaking of some but not all bonds. > Accordingly the surface would be weaker, not stronger. > > NOY: > The surface condition is a special case, Jim, so I'm not surprised > you don't know about it. > > James McGinn: > Nothing in physics is a "special case." That is just a copout. > If your model can't explain what is observed then it is useless as > an explanation. > > NOY: > So the "surface tension" is a result of the increased viscosity of the > interfacial water: > http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/interfacial_water.html > Analysis of simple thermodynamics c shows the surface has > considerable > structuring, having identical density to that of bulk water at just > under 4C. In addition, the surface water structuring varies less > with temperature than the bulk. Refractive index study of the > water-air surface reveals it to be about 1.7 nm thick at 22C and > more dense than the bulk liquid (that is, it behaves like water at a > lower temperature). > > James McGinn: > That is just a descriptive model based on observation. You are > presenting it as an explanation! In other words, your explanation > of surface tension is ad hoc. It's not intrinsic. You just tacked it > on. It's worthless. Moreover, its just a model. IOW, its an attempt > to explain what is observed. Only an amateur would employ a > descriptive model as proof. > > NOY: > That model happens to be the model that is accepted > > James McGinn: > It's still just a model. Model's are not evidence. That you use a > descriptive model as evidence reveals your cluelessness. > Descriptive models can't be used to dispute reality. For your > model to be valid it has to be proven through rigorous attempt > to refute it. You don't have that. You just have a descriptive > model that doesn't even conform with what is observed. In > sharp contrast, what I presented is a genuine explanation > supported by theory.
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-14 08:08 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <f7a6c2cc1cbac3e7b993e0c8dde91be9@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #584813 |
Time to spin the kooks up again. Melt, kooks, melt. <snicker> James 'Tardnado' McGinn, in <news:ba3093bf-4d25-4996-86bb-6b9c5d93d408@googlegroups.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: >> Oh, Jim didn't realize that >> water in its gaseous phase, water in its liquid phase and water in its >> solid phase would reflect and refract different wavelengths, did he? >> >> Water in its gaseous phase reflects and refracts microwave radiation >> at a far lower rate than does, say, the water vapor in clouds. Thus >> the differential tells researchers cloud depth as well as humidity. > If you think it definitive then why not make an argument to that effect? I just did, Jim. The multi-frequency split-window technique to determine cloud optical depth and atmospheric humidity has been used for years by NASA, Jim. > But it has to be definitive. No Global-warming-reasoning will be accepted. Um, Jim? You're talking to the guy who proved that CO2-driven AGW violates the Laws of Thermodynamics, and thus is a fairy tale. CO2 has been proven by NASA to be a global *cooling* gas. >> Did you never stop to consider why, exactly, water in its gaseous >> phase exists primarily in the troposphere, whereas carbon dioxide and >> nitrogen, for example, can rise far above the troposphere, Jim? > Yes: https://www.youtu<SMACKAKOOK!> Referring back to your own kooky conspiracy theory blather is like standing in an echo chamber screaming at the top of your lungs and taking the echoes as confirmation of your kooky blathering, Jim. It's an indication of mental instability and a burgeoning schizoid paranoiac insanity. Seek immediate professional psychiatric intervention, Jim. >> Did you never stop to consider why water can go *below* its freezing >> temperature after being updrafted into the upper troposphere, yet not >> immediately fall out of the sky (hint: because it's in its gaseous >> phase... individual molecules... > Wrong. It' is always liquid or solid (ice). It is never gaseous. Wrong. I've presented *four* peer-reviewed studies proving the existence of monomolecular gaseous-phase water in the atmosphere, Jim. Is water "speshul", James? Does it not have a gaseous phase like every other molecule? Nilsson's study: <https://youtu.be/7hGqlEpvODw?t=2156> If water molecules are H bonded together, it's liquid water, James. Photon energy from electron orbital descent is dependent upon H bonding strength (given that it's an electrostatic bond), the stronger the H bond, the lower the photon energy. 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. Now let's contrast that with what you've got, James... you've *retracted* the central premise for your entire delusion as you writhed and squirmed in trying to escape being proven wrong, then when you realized that your having done so destroyed your entire delusion, you quickly picked up your "variable polarity of the H2O molecule" claim from the ground, dusted it off, slapped it back onto your delusion and duct-taped it in place. That had to be embarrassing for you, eh? LOL 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 That was an embarrassing gaffe on your part, wasn't it, TornadoTard? LOL >> According to you, since you k'lame >> all water in the atmosphere is clustered, it would be heavier than air >> and would thus all fall out of the air once its mass exceeded its >> downward-facing combined radius holding it up due to updraft... > I address this point in my videos. Your kooky conspiracy theory videos are merely the outgrowth of your kooky written conspiracy theory, Jim. The same retarded tripe in a different form. IOW, you have nothing in your arsenal to refute the peer-reviewed studies I presented with utterly *destroyed* your kooky conspiracy theory. >> thus rainfall would be next to impossible, the lower troposphere would >> perpetually be enveloped in falling mist, and every horizontal surface >> would be perpetually covered with a film of water. > Right. Based on meteorology's assumptions clouds should drop out of > the sky like bricks. Right? But they don't. Why do you think that is? Wrong, that's according to your wrong interpretation of meteorology's precepts. The reality of physical phenomena such as clouds has been explained to you, including links to corroborable data. You snipped it out and ran away from it because you're a delusional paranoiac suffering from the crippling effects of Dunning-Kruger. >> Are you beginning to understand that you don't understand much at all, >> Jim? Are you beginning to see that you conceived of your kooky little >> theory and ran off half-cocked, crowing about your "discovery" without >> fully testing its premises, Jim? > You exemplify the dimwittedness of meteorological assumptions. That must be why you find yourself utterly unable to refute any of that peer-reviewed data, right, Jim? Everyone else is crazy and *you* are the only sane one. Everyone else who has years of training and experience is wrong, but *you*, a high school dropout kooktard who has demonstrated his stupidity repeatedly, are the only one who is right. Yeah, that makes sense, Jim. Right? Why can't you get your kooky conspiracy theory through the peer-review process, Jim? Answer the question, you evasive twit. >>>> Then you'll have no problem providing a microscopy printout of these >>>> so-called "small droplets", Jim. Do you even own a microscope? >>> So, now you are conceding that you don't have counterevidence? >> I've just provided yet another peer reviewed study > Yet you are conceding that it is not conclusive, right? I "conceded" no such thing, Jim. It is a peer-reviewed study which utterly decimates your kooky conspiracy theory. Do you not understand what the peer-review process entails, Jim? Oh, of course you don't... you can't get your kooky conspiracy theory through the peer-review process, nor can you even get your kooky conspiracy theory published on any pre-print servers. Why can't you get your kooky conspiracy theory through the peer-review process, Jim? Answer the question, you evasive twit. >>> Ever heard of the scientific method? >> Sure I have, which is why I've been offering evidence consisting of >> peer reviewed studies... > Peer review is consensus. Consensus is politics. (I am not a > climate scientist.) Only empirical evidence is valid if you > want to collect the money. Sorry to burst your bubble. I thought > this was obvious. Sorry if you got the wrong idea. Ah, another goalpost move from the evasive twit James McGinn. Well, it's a good thing I've presented empirical evidence such as you taking a trip from sea level to the top of Mt. Everest with a container of water, eh, Jim? That also disproves your kooky theory. So you'll be paying up. Now. >>>> Wrong, but nice CAPSscreed, Jim. The two acceptor bonds are to two >>>> *different* water molecules. >>> No duh. >> Then breaking one will not affect the other, KookTard. > It affects the symmetry on the Oxygen molecule, dumbass. No, it doesn't. It affects the diametrically-opposed covalent bond, shortening it, as I've proven via two peer-reviewed studies, which you snipped out and ran away from, Jim. <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_hydrogen_bonding.html> "There is a trade-off between the covalent and hydrogen bond strengths; the stronger the H····O hydrogen bond, the weaker the O-H covalent bond, and the shorter the O····O distance" Note the graph... the covalent bond remains shorter (and stronger) than the inter-molecular H bond. Because the inter-molecular H bond is ~1/20th the strength of the covalent bond, the diametrically-opposite covalent bond will preferentially shorten and strengthen when one of the inter-molecular bonds is broken, Jim. That's why, when using high frequency AC to dissociate water, you target the short covalent bond frequency, as the long covalent bond frequency is too close to the H bond frequency, and if you break that, you strengthen the covalent bonds. You are *wrong*. Your kooky theory is *wrong*. The entire underlying premise of your kooky theory is fallacious. I've just destroyed your kooky theory, Jim. Now what will you do? <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/water_hydrogen_bonding.html> "The movement of electrons from the oxygen atom to the O-H antibonding orbital on a neighboring molecule (HO-H-····OH2) both weaken the covalent O-H bond (so lengthening it ) and reduces the HO-H····OH2 'hydrogen' bond." Hence, when that inter-molecular H bond is broken, the diametrically opposed covalent bond is shortened and strengthened, Jim. This has been known and is well-exploited when building HHO welders for a great number of years, Jim. That's why, when dissociating water, you don't target the long covalent bond, as the resonant frequency required to break that covalent bond is too close to the inter-molecular H bond resonant frequency, and breaking that would strengthen the covalent bond opposite, thereby costing more energy in dissociating the water. Again, your lack of understanding of physical processes stems in part from your broken delusional Dunning-Kruger afflicted brain rejecting any information from those you deem to be of higher authority than you (which would be pretty much everyone), and in part from your lack of education. Both conditions together lead you off into the brambles of your kooky discredited conspiracy theory, and both can be ameliorated by subjecting yourself to those very same psychiatric and educational authorities your broken brain rejects... hence you'll remain delusional for the remainder of your pathetic life, Jim... but you'll find your delusion and hence your insanity grows until it destroys your life. Fix yourself, Jim, or suffer the same fate of every other D-K sufferer. <snicker> >>> You are ignoring symmetry, to no good effect. >> You don't even know what 'symmetry' means, Jim, > Look into VESPR theory. Oh, trust me, Jim. I know about VSEPR theory. You're still misusing the word 'symmetry', Jim. Liquid water has no symmetry. Gaseous-phase water has absolutely no symmetry. You're 180 degrees out from reality. >>> I understand polarity better than anybody >> No, you don't. You're a moronic delusional Dunning-Kruger afflicted >> kooktard who believes himself to know polarity better than anybody, >> but you demonstrate daily that in reality you know squat, Jim. > Actually I do. Actually, you don't, as the data above proves, Jim. >>>> In fact, the H bonding gets *weaker* when one is knocked loose. >>> Surface tension proves you wrong and me right. >> You've already been proven wrong below, Jim. > Explain surface tension using your model. Go ahead. > What are you waiting for? The surface condition is a special case, Jim, so I'm not surprised you don't know about it. <http://www1.lsbu.ac.uk/water/interfacial_water.html> ===================================================== Analysis of simple thermodynamics c shows the surface has considerable structuring, having identical density to that of bulk water at just under 4 °C. In addition, the surface water structuring varies less with temperature than the bulk. Refractive index study of the water-air surface reveals it to be about 1.7 nm thick at 22 °C and more dense than the bulk liquid (that is, it behaves like water at a lower temperature). ===================================================== So the "surface tension" is a result of the increased viscosity of the interfacial water, Jim. Did you not know this, Jim? What kind of loon would hold themselves out as the 'premiere expert' on water, and yet not know a single fact *about* water, Jim? > Your explanation of surface tension is ad hoc. It's not intrinsic. > You just tacked it on. It's worthless. That explanation is backed up by 2517 peer-reviewed studies, you fecking nong. It's been vetted and proven to reflect reality. Why can't you get your kooky conspiracy theory through the peer-review process, Jim? Answer the question, you evasive twit. >>> That's a model, dumbass. That is not reality. >>> That is a (poorly considered) attempt to explain what is observed. >>> So, only a loon would employ that as proof. >> That model happens to be the model that is accepted > It's still just a model, dumbass. Model's are not evidence. > That you use a model as evidence reveals your dimwittedness. It is a model which explains all physical phenomenon of water, Jim. Backed up by 2517 peer-reviewed studies. How many studies back up your kooky conspiracy theory, Jim? Oh, that's right, ZERO. In fact, you can't even get your kooky conspiracy theory itself through the peer-review process. Why is that, Jim? Answer the question, you evasive twit. >>> Descriptive models don't dispute reality, dumbass. >>> Then do the experiment that prove it. >> Kooktard keeps asking for "experiments", when that data has been known >> for a very long time... > As you are revealing, none of it is definitive. It is, you're just backpedaling away from the fact that your kooky conspiracy theory has been utterly destroyed, Jim. >> I'll let you do this experiment, Jim. Carry a beaker of water to sea >> level, heat it to 100 C. You'll note the water gaseous pressure is >> sufficient to overcome the 760 mm Hg atmospheric pressure. >> >> Now allow the water to cool to 70 C, you'll note the vapor pressure is >> insufficient to overcome the 750 mm Hg atmospheric pressure, so >> boiling does not occur, > Boiling stops below 100, dumbass. Very good, Jim! At least you can acknowledge reality when it suits you to do so. So we know you're not fully delusional... yet. >> yet evaporation does occur. > Evaporation occurs all the way do to freezing, dumbass. Very good again, Jim! In fact, it occurs even *below* the freezing point, Jim. Or are you going to now deny sublimation? >> Now, while maintaining that water at 70 C, carry it to the top of Mt. >> Everest. You'll note that as you rise in altitude, the water will >> again begin boiling, despite the temperature of the water only being >> 70 C. > You're an idiot. I've proven your kooky theory is *wrong*, Jim. You're the idiot. >> Hence, boiling and evaporation are the same process, > Surreal. I'm sure you do find reality to be "surreal", Jim... Dunning-Kruger sufferers often do. It's part and parcel of your burgeoning insanity. You can fix yourself, it's not too late. All it requires is acknowledging that your kooky conspiracy theory has been utterly destroyed, and thereby escaping its insanity-inducing grip. I don't think you're strong enough to do that, Jim. Why can't you answer those questions which highlight your psychosis, James Bernard 'Tardnado' McGinn, Jr. of Antioch, CA? -- 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 become 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]
| From | LotusLooser <FNVW@AUK.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-14 11:24 -0600 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31c9ebd11f57c97a989680@free.xsusenet.com> |
| In reply to | #584830 |
> The multi-frequency split-window technique to > determine cloud optical depth and atmospheric humidity has been used > for years by NASA. I find that *interesting*
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| 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> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-14 13:32 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.yi15n2v8tm21m2@benson.localhost> |
| In reply to | #584883 |
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 13:24:55 -0400, LotusLooser <FNVW@auk.xxx> wrote:
>
>> The multi-frequency split-window technique to
>> determine cloud optical depth and atmospheric humidity has been used
>> for years by NASA.
>
> I find that *interesting*
he believes in NASA only when it's convenient for him.
--
ga·ble
'gab?l/
noun
the part of a wall that encloses the end of a pitched roof.
a wall topped with a gable.
noun: gable end; plural noun: gable ends
a gable-shaped canopy over a window or door.
http://www.thisoldhouse.com/toh/photos/0,,1213138,00.html
Gable
Gabled roofs are the kind young children typically draw. They have two
sloping sides that come together at a ridge, creating end walls with a
*triangular extension*, called a gable, at the top. The house shown here
has two gable roofs and two dormers, each with gable roofs of their own.
The slant, or pitch, of the gables varies, an inconsistency that many
builders try to avoid.
LOL
-
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on tryin'
Oohoohooh oooh
Sit down, take a look at yourself
Don't you want to be somebody
Someday somebody's gonna see inside
You have to face up, you can't run and hide
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on tryin'
Unlucky in love, least that's what they say
He lost his head and he gabled his heart away
He still keeps posting though there's nothing left
Staked his heart and lost, now he has to pay the cost
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on cryin'
"Fag. LOL", he smiles and says
Though this RMS is driving him crazy
He don't show what goes on in his head
But if you watch very close you'll see it all
Sit down, take a look at yourself
Don't you want to be somebody
Someday somebody's gonna see inside
You have to face up, you can't run and hide
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on cryin'
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Now tell me have you heard about the lotusLoser
-
LOL
well i guess if we went to:
http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/color-summarizer/
and gave it the URL to the image THAT YOU POSTED IN POST:
<617072d3bd042b9634ebeb7c28503997@dizum.com>
<http://i.imgur.com/gchDiBs.png>
I took that on my way to eat lunch. I tried to make an index card with
backward writing so the SPANKY-SPANKY! reflection would show up with
frontward writing, but apparently I can't write backward legibly, so
you gets what you gets."
it would say "definitely not green", right???
http://i.imgur.com/1CkNIDC.png
D'OH!!!!
*SPNAKITY-SPNAKITY*
-
"People didn't cause the Great Depression, Liberal ko0kTarD. Governmental
policy did." - Fakey in MID <7880b90ad2ecebe35ba01b4557597d80%40dizum.com>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Great_Depression
"The initial stock market crash triggered a "panic sell-off" that made the
stock market go even lower."
so... so the "government" panicked, snickers?
funny that a bona-fide conservative horatio alger hero type would want the
government stepping in to save the stock market.
"Current theories may be broadly classified into two main points of view
and several heterodox points of view.
First, there are demand-driven theories, from Keynesian and institutional
economists who argue that the depression was caused by a widespread loss
of confidence that led to underconsumption. The demand-driven theories
argue that the financial crisis following the 1929 crash led to a sudden
and persistent reduction in consumption and investment spending.[1] Once
panic and deflation set in, many people believed they could avoid further
losses by keeping clear of the markets. Holding money therefore became
profitable as prices dropped lower and a given amount of money bought ever
more goods, exacerbating the drop in demand.
Second, there are the monetarists, who believe that the Great Depression
started as an ordinary recession, but that significant policy mistakes by
monetary authorities (especially the Federal Reserve), caused a shrinking
of the money supply which greatly exacerbated the economic situation,
causing a recession to descend into the Great Depression. Related to this
explanation are those who point to debt deflation causing those who borrow
to owe ever more in real terms."
wait? what? no major "third" konservative k0okTheory blaming the
government for everything mentioned?
odd, that. eh, lotusLoser?
-
the never-ending saga of fakey's "lotus"...
https://web.archive.org/web/20160408001051/http://i.imgur.com/e3OrQSq.png
-
"sines, sines, everywhere there's sines
blocking up the snickerTurds, breaking his mind"
http://i.imgur.com/Z4p1Z55.png
-
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]
| From | "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-14 12:47 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31c9ff2a33c6b32f98d611@news.altopia.com> |
| In reply to | #584883 |
In article <MPG.31c9ebd11f57c97a989680@free.xsusenet.com>, FNVW@AUK.xxx says... > > > The multi-frequency split-window technique to > > determine cloud optical depth and atmospheric humidity has been used > > for years by NASA. > > I find that *interesting* They first used it in 1963, with sensors inside a Corvette. -- Checkmate, AUK DoW #1, new Honorary FNVW of AUK, and Fakey's master AUK Hammer of Thor award, Feb. 2012 (Pre-Burnore) Destroyer of the AUK Ko0k Vote (Post-Burnore) Originator of the "Dance for me" (tm) lame Copyright © 2016 all rights reserved https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ&feature=youtu.be
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| 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> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-14 15:48 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.yi2by4xktm21m2@benson.localhost> |
| In reply to | #584907 |
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:47:27 -0400, Checkmate, DoW #1
<Lunatic.Fringe@the.edge> wrote:
> In article <MPG.31c9ebd11f57c97a989680@free.xsusenet.com>, FNVW@AUK.xxx
> says...
>
>
>>
>> > The multi-frequency split-window technique to
>> > determine cloud optical depth and atmospheric humidity has been used
>> > for years by NASA.
>>
>> I find that *interesting*
>
> They first used it in 1963, with sensors inside a Corvette.
>
what year corvette was it?
--
ga·ble
'gab?l/
noun
the part of a wall that encloses the end of a pitched roof.
a wall topped with a gable.
noun: gable end; plural noun: gable ends
a gable-shaped canopy over a window or door.
http://www.thisoldhouse.com/toh/photos/0,,1213138,00.html
Gable
Gabled roofs are the kind young children typically draw. They have two
sloping sides that come together at a ridge, creating end walls with a
*triangular extension*, called a gable, at the top. The house shown here
has two gable roofs and two dormers, each with gable roofs of their own.
The slant, or pitch, of the gables varies, an inconsistency that many
builders try to avoid.
LOL
-
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on tryin'
Oohoohooh oooh
Sit down, take a look at yourself
Don't you want to be somebody
Someday somebody's gonna see inside
You have to face up, you can't run and hide
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on tryin'
Unlucky in love, least that's what they say
He lost his head and he gabled his heart away
He still keeps posting though there's nothing left
Staked his heart and lost, now he has to pay the cost
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on cryin'
"Fag. LOL", he smiles and says
Though this RMS is driving him crazy
He don't show what goes on in his head
But if you watch very close you'll see it all
Sit down, take a look at yourself
Don't you want to be somebody
Someday somebody's gonna see inside
You have to face up, you can't run and hide
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on cryin'
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Now tell me have you heard about the lotusLoser
-
LOL
well i guess if we went to:
http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/color-summarizer/
and gave it the URL to the image THAT YOU POSTED IN POST:
<617072d3bd042b9634ebeb7c28503997@dizum.com>
<http://i.imgur.com/gchDiBs.png>
I took that on my way to eat lunch. I tried to make an index card with
backward writing so the SPANKY-SPANKY! reflection would show up with
frontward writing, but apparently I can't write backward legibly, so
you gets what you gets."
it would say "definitely not green", right???
http://i.imgur.com/1CkNIDC.png
D'OH!!!!
*SPNAKITY-SPNAKITY*
-
"People didn't cause the Great Depression, Liberal ko0kTarD. Governmental
policy did." - Fakey in MID <7880b90ad2ecebe35ba01b4557597d80%40dizum.com>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Great_Depression
"The initial stock market crash triggered a "panic sell-off" that made the
stock market go even lower."
so... so the "government" panicked, snickers?
funny that a bona-fide conservative horatio alger hero type would want the
government stepping in to save the stock market.
"Current theories may be broadly classified into two main points of view
and several heterodox points of view.
First, there are demand-driven theories, from Keynesian and institutional
economists who argue that the depression was caused by a widespread loss
of confidence that led to underconsumption. The demand-driven theories
argue that the financial crisis following the 1929 crash led to a sudden
and persistent reduction in consumption and investment spending.[1] Once
panic and deflation set in, many people believed they could avoid further
losses by keeping clear of the markets. Holding money therefore became
profitable as prices dropped lower and a given amount of money bought ever
more goods, exacerbating the drop in demand.
Second, there are the monetarists, who believe that the Great Depression
started as an ordinary recession, but that significant policy mistakes by
monetary authorities (especially the Federal Reserve), caused a shrinking
of the money supply which greatly exacerbated the economic situation,
causing a recession to descend into the Great Depression. Related to this
explanation are those who point to debt deflation causing those who borrow
to owe ever more in real terms."
wait? what? no major "third" konservative k0okTheory blaming the
government for everything mentioned?
odd, that. eh, lotusLoser?
-
the never-ending saga of fakey's "lotus"...
https://web.archive.org/web/20160408001051/http://i.imgur.com/e3OrQSq.png
-
"sines, sines, everywhere there's sines
blocking up the snickerTurds, breaking his mind"
http://i.imgur.com/Z4p1Z55.png
-
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]
| From | "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-14 12:53 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31ca007d5a82c16998d613@news.altopia.com> |
| In reply to | #584908 |
In article <op.yi2by4xktm21m2@benson.localhost>, root@127.0.0.1 says... > > On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:47:27 -0400, Checkmate, DoW #1 > <Lunatic.Fringe@the.edge> wrote: > > > In article <MPG.31c9ebd11f57c97a989680@free.xsusenet.com>, FNVW@AUK.xxx > > says... > > > > > >> > >> > The multi-frequency split-window technique to > >> > determine cloud optical depth and atmospheric humidity has been used > >> > for years by NASA. > >> > >> I find that *interesting* > > > > They first used it in 1963, with sensors inside a Corvette. > > > > what year corvette was it? A 1963, of course. That was the only won with split windows. -- Checkmate, AUK DoW #1, new Honorary FNVW of AUK, and Fakey's master AUK Hammer of Thor award, Feb. 2012 (Pre-Burnore) Destroyer of the AUK Ko0k Vote (Post-Burnore) Originator of the "Dance for me" (tm) lame Copyright © 2016 all rights reserved https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ&feature=youtu.be
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| 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> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-14 15:59 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <op.yi2cg1r8tm21m2@benson.localhost> |
| In reply to | #584911 |
On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:53:22 -0400, Checkmate, DoW #1
<Lunatic.Fringe@the.edge> wrote:
> In article <op.yi2by4xktm21m2@benson.localhost>, root@127.0.0.1 says...
>
>
>>
>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:47:27 -0400, Checkmate, DoW #1
>> <Lunatic.Fringe@the.edge> wrote:
>>
>> > In article <MPG.31c9ebd11f57c97a989680@free.xsusenet.com>,
>> FNVW@AUK.xxx
>> > says...
>> >
>> >
>> >>
>> >> > The multi-frequency split-window technique to
>> >> > determine cloud optical depth and atmospheric humidity has been
>> used
>> >> > for years by NASA.
>> >>
>> >> I find that *interesting*
>> >
>> > They first used it in 1963, with sensors inside a Corvette.
>> >
>>
>> what year corvette was it?
>
> A 1963, of course. That was the only won with split windows.
>
they should have used a '52 beetle
--
ga·ble
'gab?l/
noun
the part of a wall that encloses the end of a pitched roof.
a wall topped with a gable.
noun: gable end; plural noun: gable ends
a gable-shaped canopy over a window or door.
http://www.thisoldhouse.com/toh/photos/0,,1213138,00.html
Gable
Gabled roofs are the kind young children typically draw. They have two
sloping sides that come together at a ridge, creating end walls with a
*triangular extension*, called a gable, at the top. The house shown here
has two gable roofs and two dormers, each with gable roofs of their own.
The slant, or pitch, of the gables varies, an inconsistency that many
builders try to avoid.
LOL
-
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on tryin'
Oohoohooh oooh
Sit down, take a look at yourself
Don't you want to be somebody
Someday somebody's gonna see inside
You have to face up, you can't run and hide
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on tryin'
Unlucky in love, least that's what they say
He lost his head and he gabled his heart away
He still keeps posting though there's nothing left
Staked his heart and lost, now he has to pay the cost
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on cryin'
"Fag. LOL", he smiles and says
Though this RMS is driving him crazy
He don't show what goes on in his head
But if you watch very close you'll see it all
Sit down, take a look at yourself
Don't you want to be somebody
Someday somebody's gonna see inside
You have to face up, you can't run and hide
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Beaten by the queen of Pembroke each time
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
He's a loser, but he still keeps on cryin'
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Have you heard about the lotusLoser
Now tell me have you heard about the lotusLoser
-
LOL
well i guess if we went to:
http://mkweb.bcgsc.ca/color-summarizer/
and gave it the URL to the image THAT YOU POSTED IN POST:
<617072d3bd042b9634ebeb7c28503997@dizum.com>
<http://i.imgur.com/gchDiBs.png>
I took that on my way to eat lunch. I tried to make an index card with
backward writing so the SPANKY-SPANKY! reflection would show up with
frontward writing, but apparently I can't write backward legibly, so
you gets what you gets."
it would say "definitely not green", right???
http://i.imgur.com/1CkNIDC.png
D'OH!!!!
*SPNAKITY-SPNAKITY*
-
"People didn't cause the Great Depression, Liberal ko0kTarD. Governmental
policy did." - Fakey in MID <7880b90ad2ecebe35ba01b4557597d80%40dizum.com>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_the_Great_Depression
"The initial stock market crash triggered a "panic sell-off" that made the
stock market go even lower."
so... so the "government" panicked, snickers?
funny that a bona-fide conservative horatio alger hero type would want the
government stepping in to save the stock market.
"Current theories may be broadly classified into two main points of view
and several heterodox points of view.
First, there are demand-driven theories, from Keynesian and institutional
economists who argue that the depression was caused by a widespread loss
of confidence that led to underconsumption. The demand-driven theories
argue that the financial crisis following the 1929 crash led to a sudden
and persistent reduction in consumption and investment spending.[1] Once
panic and deflation set in, many people believed they could avoid further
losses by keeping clear of the markets. Holding money therefore became
profitable as prices dropped lower and a given amount of money bought ever
more goods, exacerbating the drop in demand.
Second, there are the monetarists, who believe that the Great Depression
started as an ordinary recession, but that significant policy mistakes by
monetary authorities (especially the Federal Reserve), caused a shrinking
of the money supply which greatly exacerbated the economic situation,
causing a recession to descend into the Great Depression. Related to this
explanation are those who point to debt deflation causing those who borrow
to owe ever more in real terms."
wait? what? no major "third" konservative k0okTheory blaming the
government for everything mentioned?
odd, that. eh, lotusLoser?
-
the never-ending saga of fakey's "lotus"...
https://web.archive.org/web/20160408001051/http://i.imgur.com/e3OrQSq.png
-
"sines, sines, everywhere there's sines
blocking up the snickerTurds, breaking his mind"
http://i.imgur.com/Z4p1Z55.png
-
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]
| From | "Checkmate, DoW #1" <Lunatic.Fringe@The.Edge> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-14 14:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <MPG.31ca19bedf9d3dcf98d617@news.altopia.com> |
| In reply to | #584914 |
In article <op.yi2cg1r8tm21m2@benson.localhost>, root@127.0.0.1 says... > > On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:53:22 -0400, Checkmate, DoW #1 > <Lunatic.Fringe@the.edge> wrote: > > > In article <op.yi2by4xktm21m2@benson.localhost>, root@127.0.0.1 says... > > > > > >> > >> On Tue, 14 Jun 2016 15:47:27 -0400, Checkmate, DoW #1 > >> <Lunatic.Fringe@the.edge> wrote: > >> > >> > In article <MPG.31c9ebd11f57c97a989680@free.xsusenet.com>, > >> FNVW@AUK.xxx > >> > says... > >> > > >> > > >> >> > >> >> > The multi-frequency split-window technique to > >> >> > determine cloud optical depth and atmospheric humidity has been > >> used > >> >> > for years by NASA. > >> >> > >> >> I find that *interesting* > >> > > >> > They first used it in 1963, with sensors inside a Corvette. > >> > > >> > >> what year corvette was it? > > > > A 1963, of course. That was the only won with split windows. > > > they should have used a '52 beetle NASA only goes for the expensive stuff. -- Checkmate, AUK DoW #1, new Honorary FNVW of AUK, and Fakey's master AUK Hammer of Thor award, Feb. 2012 (Pre-Burnore) Destroyer of the AUK Ko0k Vote (Post-Burnore) Originator of the "Dance for me" (tm) lame Copyright © 2016 all rights reserved https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sdyBYSuqQBQ&feature=youtu.be
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1" <FNVWe@altusenetkooks.xxx> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2016-06-14 22:31 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <567945853e9db8eac78771e142e832da@dizum.com> |
| In reply to | #584883 |
A retard who can't figure out how to forge properly attempted to forge his Usenet Lord and Master the Friendly Neighborhood Vote Wrangler Emeritus, DoW #1, in <news:MPG.31c9ebd11f57c97a989680@free.xsusenet.com> did thusly jump head first into the wood chipper again: >> The multi-frequency split-window technique to >> determine cloud optical depth and atmospheric humidity has been used >> for years by NASA. > I find that *inter<SMACKAMORON!> You'll find that you are doing a horrible job of forging me, moron. It must be due to your broken brain. You may want to get your broken brain checked by a reputable doctor who treats morons. LOL <snicker> -- Chimpy likes tickling pickles. His picklecycle is a classic. He visited Greg, who showed him his peg, but Chimpy only likes Vlasics. "It's no Vlasic for sure, but my poor closet door", said Chimpy as he kneeled on one knee, "is already broken so I'll get to throatin', but after this I get to pee!" But Gargles had one more condition before being sucked to perdition. "Put on this dress and I'll do the rest, imagining you're in transition." The nickel slot glowed furiously hot and slurping drowned out the sea noise. Soon Gargles was done, he'd had all his fun. It was quick because Gargles likes boys. When Chimpy was done he smacked Gargles' ass and said, "Now *that's* how to suck it!" But no Golden Showers for Chimpy, alas. Greg went to play with his bucket! Bucket play done Gargles wanted more fun so he told Chimpy it was his turn. Chimpy didn't demur, Gargles dropped to the floor and his throat got a case of cock burn! "Not to worry", was heard from the retarded turd, fapping blindingly fast like a fool. "We'll put everything right by the end of the night. Just swallow this, trust me, it's cool." Gargles guzzled for hours before hitting the showers. "How's the throat?" was the query. "No pain! So when I am done, we'll have some more fun, my throat's good so let's do it again!" On into the night as the waves lapped the boat, sounds of gagging and slurping and juice. In that gay little boat, Chimpy battered on throat 'til Gargles said, "Let's call a truce!" "I can't take any more! You've outgayed me for sure" Gargles cried as he sat all defeated. Chimpy beamed victory, "You can't beat me, you see? My gayness is just half depleted!" <snicker>
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web