Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > sci.physics > #714719 > unrolled thread
| Started by | carleto4157990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-11-25 15:00 -0800 |
| Last post | 2018-11-29 15:20 -0800 |
| Articles | 19 on this page of 39 — 12 participants |
Back to article view | Back to sci.physics
Apollo 11 was Fake carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 15:00 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 15:07 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 15:25 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 15:35 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 15:40 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-26 00:27 +0000
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-26 00:45 +0000
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-26 00:57 +0000
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 18:02 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake Steve <invalidz@example.net> - 2018-11-25 16:51 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 17:14 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake moroney@world.std.spaamtrap.com (Michael Moroney) - 2018-11-26 02:01 +0000
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 18:24 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 18:47 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 18:42 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 18:48 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 18:52 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 19:26 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-11-25 22:40 -0500
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-25 19:51 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> - 2018-11-26 09:20 -0500
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 07:43 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 16:08 +0000
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 12:57 -0500
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 19:27 +0000
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-26 13:43 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake consequently7990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-26 13:48 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 22:57 +0000
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> - 2018-11-26 15:36 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 13:21 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 13:26 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com - 2018-11-29 00:45 +0000
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 13:27 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake pnalsing@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 13:34 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 15:04 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-11-28 15:11 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 09:50 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake carleto4157990662@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 14:38 -0800
Re: Apollo 11 was Fake numbernumber1964@gmail.com - 2018-11-29 15:20 -0800
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
| From | Wally W. <ww84wa@aim.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 09:20 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <h80ovdpeior457sjrdalto1ba97rcobmvs@4ax.com> |
| In reply to | #714770 |
On Sun, 25 Nov 2018 19:51:21 -0800 (PST), pnalsing@gmail.com wrote: >On Sunday, November 25, 2018 at 7:40:35 PM UTC-8, Wally W. wrote: > >> We should ramp up funding for making fusion power plants. > >I'm pretty sure that fusion power plants are still a long way off... The less funding it gets, the longer off it will be.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 07:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <10ffdcce-cbaa-4d08-ac77-c8162cee6947@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714770 |
pnal “I'm pretty sure that fusion power plants are still a long way off... ” Like...never
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 16:08 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pth5p0$rkg$2@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #714830 |
john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: > pnal > “I'm pretty sure that fusion power plants are still a long way off... > ” > Like...never > You know, for a guy who puts a lot of stock in alien power sources and cold fusion household generators promised by hucksters, you sure are dour about something that actually stands a chance of working someday. So how is it that you insist that promising ideas are hopeless but way-far-out-there ideas seem very likely to you? Is it just love of the underdogs and outcasts? -- Odd Bodkin — Maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 12:57 -0500 |
| Message-ID | <pthc6k$18gb$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #714833 |
On 11/26/2018 11:08 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: > john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: >> pnal >> “I'm pretty sure that fusion power plants are still a long way off... >> ” >> Like...never >> > > You know, for a guy who puts a lot of stock in alien power sources and cold > fusion household generators promised by hucksters, you sure are dour about > something that actually stands a chance of working someday. > > So how is it that you insist that promising ideas are hopeless but > way-far-out-there ideas seem very likely to you? Is it just love of the > underdogs and outcasts? > Odd for a guy so absolutely determined to insure that stays completely ignorant of anything New even to the point of refusing to read papers and books if they have not been officially approved and endorsed by the power-establishment of science, you really have no room to criticize someone who actually has an open mind which is one of the "norms" of science which you would know IF you hadn't refused to even glance at my pook on the subject so you could maintain your current level of stupidity. You are still a fool.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 19:27 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pthhf1$1i3p$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #714842 |
benj <benj.fake@gmail.com> wrote: > On 11/26/2018 11:08 AM, Odd Bodkin wrote: >> john <johnsefton288@gmail.com> wrote: >>> pnal >>> “I'm pretty sure that fusion power plants are still a long way off... >>> ” >>> Like...never >>> >> >> You know, for a guy who puts a lot of stock in alien power sources and cold >> fusion household generators promised by hucksters, you sure are dour about >> something that actually stands a chance of working someday. >> >> So how is it that you insist that promising ideas are hopeless but >> way-far-out-there ideas seem very likely to you? Is it just love of the >> underdogs and outcasts? >> > Odd for a guy so absolutely determined to insure that stays completely > ignorant of anything New even to the point of refusing to read papers > and books if they have not been officially approved and endorsed by the > power-establishment of science, you really have no room to criticize > someone who actually has an open mind which is one of the "norms" of > science which you would know IF you hadn't refused to even glance at my > pook on the subject so you could maintain your current level of stupidity. I already told you. I have your book. I’ve looked at it. How many times are you going to insist that I refuse to look at it? As for “open mind”, if you two want to entertain yourselves by following every fringe AND VERY LIKELY BAD idea, at the expense of learning anything that shows promise and where lots of people are working on it, then by all means you can be the fringe fanboys. Most people try to optimize their time, doing things that are likely to pan out. Some people like you two, though, love hunting for buried UFOs in cornfields with metal detectors precisely because no one else is doing it and you’d get famous if you found one; and it doesn’t matter at all to you that this is very likely a huge waste of time. After all, it’s your time to waste. What’s funny is your ranting that everyone should waste their time in the same way because you do. > > You are still a fool. > -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | consequently7990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 13:43 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <c1043e98-0a5a-4905-99f4-b6d75792150f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714719 |
The NASA mars probe is fake.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | consequently7990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 13:48 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f60f4bff-381d-4751-a343-c2a220ac02ff@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714719 |
Wow it took 4 trillion dollars to invent a portable vacuum cleaner. I'm impressed and clean of lunar dust particles. roommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Odd Bodkin <bodkinodd@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 22:57 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pthto3$83i$1@gioia.aioe.org> |
| In reply to | #714873 |
<consequently7990662@gmail.com> wrote: > Wow it took 4 trillion dollars to invent a portable vacuum cleaner. I'm > impressed and clean of lunar dust particles. roommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm > No. It took that much money to go to the moon. For its own sake. Along the way a bunch of other stuff got done. -- Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Arindam Banerjee <banerjeeadda1234@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-26 15:36 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2e71ddff-0985-432e-8728-52eaaa6d08f7@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714884 |
On Tuesday, 27 November 2018 09:57:13 UTC+11, Odd Bodkin wrote: > <consequently7990662@gmail.com> wrote: > > Wow it took 4 trillion dollars to invent a portable vacuum cleaner. I'm > > impressed and clean of lunar dust particles. roommmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmm > > > > No. It took that much money to go to the moon. For its own sake. > > Along the way a bunch of other stuff got done. > > -- > Odd Bodkin -- maker of fine toys, tools, tables Also nice to know, most of the Moon-goers are safe and sound today, not suffering from the effects of radiation or particles from the Sun, van Allen belts, escaped kinetic impact from micro-meteors, and unknown hazards. Great for the space travel to come, commerically! Cheers, Arindam Banerjee
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carleto4157990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-28 13:21 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2a7f0d6f-7e43-488b-a39d-22f2f347fff1@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714719 |
No one has every landed on the Moon. How would you communicate.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | pnalsing@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-28 13:26 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f77b17db-e555-4a58-a321-3933791ba4fc@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #715186 |
On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 1:21:18 PM UTC-8, carleto4...@gmail.com wrote: > No one has every landed on the Moon. How would you communicate. The same way you communicate with all other spacecraft, including probes that have visited virtually all of the other planets and many comets and asteroids.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | jimp@specsol.spam.sux.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-29 00:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <pdp3df-kpp.ln1@mail.specsol.com> |
| In reply to | #715186 |
carleto4157990662@gmail.com wrote: > No one has every landed on the Moon. How would you communicate. Yet another blithering idiot for the kill file. -- Jim Pennino
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carleto4157990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-28 13:27 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <f67cdf23-22c0-4c78-bcef-587ec3d1541c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714719 |
Do radio waves disperse???
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | pnalsing@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-28 13:34 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2a907d7b-2875-4788-b3c7-fa1c8dffcb9e@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #715190 |
On Wednesday, November 28, 2018 at 1:27:29 PM UTC-8, carleto4...@gmail.com wrote: > Do radio waves disperse??? Are you incapable of looking this up for yourself? https://tinyurl.com/y86zndup
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carleto4157990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-28 15:04 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <295ca379-e4b3-44a3-8516-3d80cfbb3972@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714719 |
Does laser light disperse?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-28 15:11 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <b3aa9408-0cf0-46f0-a763-de29b8c1490f@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714719 |
"If we adopt either Fresnel's or Maccullagh's form of the undulatory theory, half of this energy is in the form of potential energy, due to the distortion of elementary portions of the medium, and half in the form of kinetic energy, due to the motion of the medium. We must therefore regard the aether as possessing elasticity similar to that of a solid body, and also as having a finite density." (Maxwell, Part XCVII, p. 767).
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carleto4157990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-29 09:50 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <35a2eb95-3cea-4278-ab5c-6da205e0f128@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714719 |
Does light disperse. Why do you not try and put the value of the distance to Mars in a dispersion equation?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | carleto4157990662@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-29 14:38 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <062e88e6-a797-4519-a284-b153ef3b04da@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714719 |
trump got nailed
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | numbernumber1964@gmail.com |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-11-29 15:20 -0800 |
| Message-ID | <2327ad00-d904-4789-9686-95781a78aebf@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #714719 |
nor is induction a particle effect.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]
Back to top | Article view | sci.physics
csiph-web