Aethelwulf Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 :doh: I did. Post #94 Ok... It's a kite. What was the point of the vid? (and I never watched it, because this is my first entrance to this thread). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 When we got into the Chatwick episode you said you know little to nothing of kites. Have you studied the subject since? If no, then you are still in no position to judge what may or may not be one. I know enough about physics than I do kites in general... But I can tell you knowing physics and by the quality of a lot of sightings, that a great deal more than a handful of cases could even be passed off as kites. You'd have to ignore a large percentage of physical evidence to suggest it being kites a lot of the cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 Ok... It's a kite. What was the point of the vid? (and I never watched it, because this is my first entrance to this thread). Ok...so you didn't read the thread thoroughly before you responded. Nothing new there. Perhaps if you do read my exchange with MoonTan here you can figure out the point of the vid. Or not. :shrug: Maybe you should consult your oracle Nick? You know, the guy who's an expert but backed down when I pressed him on Chatwick. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) I know enough about physics than I do kites in general... But I can tell you knowing physics and by the quality of a lot of sightings, that a great deal more than a handful of cases could even be passed off as kites. You'd have to ignore a large percentage of physical evidence to suggest it being kites a lot of the cases. I've read your postings on physics here and at other forums. You get either no responses or ridicule. I have no faith in your knowledge of physics, let alone how it applies to kites. e.g. http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/78687-the-nature-of-the-electron/?do=findComment&comment=767724You link the electric charge and Newton's constant via what you call the Heaviside relation. I think this is just a bastardization of the Planck charge. You have a system of units that numerically relates the electric charge to Newton's constant and try to draw out more meaning from this. Rubbish. For the moment we are on about the Syrian video MoonTan posted and whether or not the UFO's could be kites. Edited September 23, 2013 by Turtle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 I've read your postings on physics here and at other forums. You get either no responses or ridicule. I have no faith in your knowledge of physics, let alone how it applies to kites. For the moment we are on about the Syrian video MoonTan posted and whether or not the UFO's could be kites. Your words are so hurtful! lol If no one ever responds to my posts, then I don't know where all this criticism comes from you allude to. Unlike most here, I can actually hold an intelligible discussion on physics. I do so quite often in fact on other forums. But this isn't about my knowledge of physics, it is rather about your lack of knowledge concerning the UFO phenomenon. If your understanding of the subject wasn't so... distorted, your posts might actually have been themselves met with better reception. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) Your words are so hurtful! lol If no one ever responds to my posts, then I don't know where all this criticism comes from you allude to. Unlike most here, I can actually hold an intelligible discussion on physics. I do so quite often in fact on other forums. But this isn't about my knowledge of physics, it is rather about your lack of knowledge concerning the UFO phenomenon. If your understanding of the subject wasn't so... distorted, your posts might actually have been themselves met with better reception. Check the reference I just added in support of my assertion concerning your physics knowledge. e.g. http://www.sciencefo...on/#entry767724You link the electric charge and Newton's constant via what you call the Heaviside relation. I think this is just a bastardization of the Planck charge. You have a system of units that numerically relates the electric charge to Newton's constant and try to draw out more meaning from this. Rubbish. Moreover you have no basis to make a judgment on my knowledge of the UFO phenom, unless of course you read a few of my early posts to this thread. I suspect you have not read them. Again, no surprise there. Edited September 23, 2013 by Turtle Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 (edited) Check the reference I just added in support of my assertion concerning your physics knowledge. Yes I have. And as always, you haven't said anything about the content, you just point a finger and expect everyone to understand what your point is. That work has been scrutanized by other posters in other forums. None of them have found problems with the math, my knowledge of the subject was strong enough to hold intelligible conversations on the work... so what is your point? Edited September 23, 2013 by Aethelwulf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 Moreover you have no basis to make a judgment on my knowledge of the UFO phenom, unless of course you read a few of my early posts to this thread. I suspect you have not read them. Again, no surprise there. Oh I can. Your previous posts on the subject is somewhat lacking, enough to say that you have no real interest in the subject. You have spent most of your time at this forum, providing hogwash explanations to observed UFO sightings and what adds to your problems, is that you sound less credible when you try to associate the larger majority of them... to kites. It's quite laughable and very Krauss of you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 Yes I have. And as always, you haven't said anything about the content, you just point a finger and expect everyone to understand what your point is. That work has been scrutanized by other posters in other forums. None of them have found problems with the math, my knowledge of the subject was strong enough to hold intelligible conversations on the work. Calling it 'rubbish' is not finding a problem? If any other of you dear tender readers don't understand what my point is then by all means question me on it. Let's get back to the Syria video and why or why not the UFO's in it can or cannot physically be kites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 Oh I can. Your previous posts on the subject is somewhat lacking, enough to say that you have no real interest in the subject. You have spent most of your time at this forum, providing hogwash explanations to observed UFO sightings and what adds to your problems, is that you sound less credible when you try to associate the larger majority of them... to kites. It's quite laughable and very Krauss of you. What exactly constitutes 'real' interest as opposed to a fake interest? I have an interest. Period. CraigD 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 Calling it 'rubbish' is not finding a problem? Your explanations are hogwash, yes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 What exactly constitutes 'real' interest as opposed to a fake interest? I have an interest. Period. No you don't. Your interest is in kites, not UFO's per se. If you had a real interest in UFO's, you would actually have a bit more respect for the sightings in the past you've tried to wash away with hogwash kite explanations that a 6 year old could make up. If you had a real interest in the phenomenon, you would have studied to the extent of realizing it was a real phenomena. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 Your explanations are hogwash, yes. :doh: The rubbish comment is a quote commenting on your physics knowledge from another forum. Your ability to follow even a simple conversation is a serious impediment to conducting one [simple conversation]. :blink: Again, let's get back to MoonTan's Syria UFO video and why/how or why/how not it could be kites. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 No you don't. Your interest is in kites, not UFO's per se. If you had a real interest in UFO's, you would actually have a bit more respect for the sightings in the past you've tried to wash away with hogwash kite explanations that a 6 year old could make up. If you had a real interest in the phenomenon, you would have studied to the extent of realizing it was a real phenomena. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 :doh: The rubbish comment is a quote commenting on your physics knowledge from another forum... Oh you are calling me a liar? I can assure the same post has been talked about on other forums. This fixation of my knowledge on physics, won't sidestep the fact however your knowledge of UFO's suck and that you really are more interested in making a mockery of the subject. Time and time again, this has been proven. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 See no real interest in discussion, more making a mockery of the subject or by those who are discussing it. Actually, that's a troll tactic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Turtle Posted September 23, 2013 Report Share Posted September 23, 2013 Oh you are calling me a liar? I can assure the same post has been talked about on other forums. This fixation of my knowledge on physics, won't sidestep the fact however your knowledge of UFO's suck and that you really are more interested in making a mockery of the subject. Time and time again, this has been proven. I haven't called you anything, just characterized your posting and called your intelligence into question. We're not supposed to unnecessarily make people look stupid here, but when someone keeps making it obvious then it's OK -if not necessary- to point it out. So again, let's get back to the Syria UFO and why or why not it may be kites. Stupid is as stupid does. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.