Users Online Now: 1,248 (Who's On?) Visitors Today: 279,223 Pageviews Today: 376,886 Threads Today: 96 Posts Today: 1,854 03:27 AM

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing

# WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!

AnonPhysicist
User ID: 1406242
United States
10/16/2012 12:04 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
I have made this challenge in nearly every science forum I have posted to, and banned permanent and immediately afterword.I wonder why?. Well, not really. Unfortunately the internet has suffered the same fate as the media and publishing industries.
BUT
I challenge anyone posting here to explain any of the following in a universally accepted manner that is explainable by conventional empirical based and known science like my thoery does:

1) What causes time dilation.(in my theory there is no such thing, time is simply not a linear function.)
2) Explain Gravity being the result of a distortion in the "space time continuum" (My theory explains gravity as a weak electromagnetic force)
3) Define "space time continuum" (IN my model there are three dimensions, time being a non linear repeating function.)
4)Explain how and why photons transmit kinetic energy
5)Explain the transmission of kinetic energy in the absence of mass when mass is a component of kinetic energy as it is defined by proved science.
6)Explain succinctly with empirical based science (real science, real scientific method) how photons induce a flow of electrons and produce electricity without quickly draining the photovoltaic material very quickly of electrons.How does the 'photon' convert itself into an electron, and if it doesn't, where do the excess electrons come from?
7)Explain how and why photons always seem to convert to a form of energy that is also produced by electrons upon impact with atoms..
8)Explain the energy level and composition of cosmic "rays", giving a full description of their nature.

Put your thinking yarmulkes on now.

The funny thing about this is, none of these questions can really be answered with "conventional quantum theory", the answer always involves more theory, but every one can be answered succinctly and easily by MY theory with an actual empirical answer that is easily understood. Why do you suppose that is? ...Who do you suppose would want to prevent a source of almost limitless and costless energy from being put into common usage and why?

The cleansing is nessecary because these parasitic things will never relinquish their control without intervention from the creator, deception is the very act of creating an artificial reality contrary to the creators intention.
AnonPhysicist
User ID: 1406242
United States
10/16/2012 12:17 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!

Yes you are, specifically you work for the NSA and post out of pine gap Australia.I have known you for over ten years. I know who and what you are, a goddamned traitor and a disgrace.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

You are wrong about my employment, you are wrong where I am, you are wrong about how long we have engaged one another, and you have no evidence to support any of your hopelessly erroneous claims about me.

Just like so many of your ideas.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

You sure seemed to show up pretty quickly seeing as this is just a hobby of yours....

I have no reason to be dishonest about what I do for a living, even if I am somewhat reticent about revealing any more about my identity. And, as usual, when challenged to *prove* that I am lying, by stating who I am and who my father was (as you claim to know), *you're* the one who balks.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444
You don't know shit about internet technology and if you do you are using it to hack loyal American citizens.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

1406242:MV8xNzY4NjI5XzMzOTEzOTk1XzdGNzBCMzg2]
'Internet Technology?' Oh, dear. That one made me laugh.

I know quite a bit more than you, obviously. Here you are, balking again about proving you know my identity. I am sure you'll bring up how IP addresses are assigned by cellular towers, soon, too.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

IT means information technology as it relates to the internet exclusively. What is humorous? IP addresses are not 'assigned by cell towers", they are assigned by ISP's but if you have a mobile 4g connection your IP changes as you link to another tower. How can you deny what anyone who has watched their ID number here on GLP change as they move from place to place knows, and if you are an expert in this technology how could you be unaware of this??
1406242:MV8xNzY4NjI5XzMzOTEzOTk1XzdGNzBCMzg2]
Oooh. My side hurts.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

You are the dumbest disinformation op left on the internet, I swear your intent is simply to dull my intellect.

1406242:MV8xNzY4NjI5XzMzOTEzOTk1XzdGNzBCMzg2]
You are either a liar or have a poor memory, or you'd be able to cite *sources* for your particular claim about the ascent stage. Perhaps I should demonstrate how it should be done...
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

The internet has fallen prey to "IT" people like you work for, there is absolutely no place for the truth on it any more. Sources can simple be erased, is this not so?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/16/2012 12:21 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
Very well. A *proper* rebuttal. You know, with *sources.*

Doh. Take 2.

No one has ever attempted to disqualify this theory, though it is falsifiable hundreds of different ways experimentally.

Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

Carefully and completely spell out five different experiments that would specifically falsify and disqualify your theory.

And watch my surprise when you can't.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

1)Prove the production of electricity from a photovoltaic cell is not the result of electrons in the form of light being intercepted by the atomic structure of the photovoltaic material and converted to normal low electrons. (By the way, the function of photovoltaic cells is most succinctly explained by my theory)
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1406242

But the theory that best suits the facts is the current traditional one, and you have proposed no experiment to verify your idea while disqualifying the current theory.

What experiment would you propose that *specifically tests the validity of YOUR model*, and then disqualifies the traditional one? Spell out the experiment!

2)Prove that light frequency energy cannot be conducted by the same materials as electricity in the non EMR form. Radio antennae and wires being used to conduct EMR are in almsot every electronic device, and are conductors of electrons. Repeated experiments mentioned in early debates involving plants producing photosynthesis in total darkness using metal plates and conductors will get in your way though,as well
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

This seems to be the closest you got to actual experimental verification of anything. If I understand you, you are saying that if your explanation is true, and the traditional theory false, that you should be able to put plants in total darkness, and if there are metal plates and conductors, the plants will flourish anyway, proving that light is getting to them through electro-magnetic radiation. You would have, as a control, another identical room without the metal plates and conductors, and the plants should die. Is that an accurate way to describe an experiment that could qualify your theory? And does it really disprove the traditional model? Be specific.

3)Prove that the energy of electromagnetic radiation is not directly related to it's velocity, speed amplitude and frequency, in other words prove that the particle I suggest is not moving the precise distance and velocity to produce the energy it does using the classic 1/2M X V2 formula. (I give the simple math proving this in my theorem)
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

Not sure if I understand you, here. Electromagnetic waves travel through a vacuum at a constant velocity known as the speed of light, c. The relationship between the speed of light, wavelength, and frequency is:

f=c/(lambda)

F is the freq in cycles per second, c is light velocity in meters, and (lambda) is the wavelength in meters.

When light passes through other media, the velocity of light decreases. For a given frequency of light, the wavelength also must decrease. This decrease in velocity is quantitated by the refractive index, n, which is the ratio of c to the velocity of light in another medium, v:

n = c / v

Since the velocity of light is lower in other media than in a vacuum, n is always a number greater than one. which is the refractive index. Refractive index is an intrinsic physical property of a substance, and can be used to monitor purity or the concentration of a solute in a solution. The refractive index of a material is measured with a refractometer, and is usually made versus air. If the precision warrants, the measurements can be corrected for vacuum. Note that the difference between n(air) and n(vacuum) is only significant in the fourth decimal place.

So I am not sure how your theory and the traditional theory are at odds here. Again, propose an experiment to VERIFY your idea as the better model. Knocking down the current idea is irrelevant. Giving evidence that SUPPORTS yours is what is relevant, and what you stubbornly refuse to do.

4)Prove that and momentum can exist without mass
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

The use of words can make a lot of confusion. Unfortunately, the word "mass" has been used in two different ways in physics. One was the way Einstein used it in E=mc2, where mass is really just the same thing as energy (E) but measured in different units. This is the same "m" that you multiply velocity by to find momentum, and thus is sometimes called the inertial mass. It's also the mass that provides the source of gravitational effects. Light has this "m" because it has energy. So it is indeed affected by gravity- not just in black holes but in all sorts of less extreme situations too. In fact, the first important *confirmation* of General Relativity came in 1919, when it was found that light from stars bends as it goes by the Sun.

The other way "mass" is often used, especially in recent years, is to mean "rest mass" or "invariant mass", which is sqrt(E2-p2*c2)/c2. This is invariant because it doesn't change when you describe an object at rest or from the point of view of someone who says it's moving. Obviously that's a good type of "mass" to give when you want to make a list of masses of particles. For a light beam traveling in a single direction, E=pc, so this "m" is zero. There is no point of view from which the light is standing still.

However, once you consider light traveling in a variety of directions, the E's from the different parts just add up to give the total E but the vector p's don't. In fact the total p can be zero if there are beams traveling opposite ways. So for many purposes the older definition of m (the inertial mass) is more convenient than the invariant particle mass, since it's the inertial mass that's just the sum of the inertial masses of the parts. For light moving equally in all directions, like the light bouncing around inside a star, total p is zero, so both definitions just give m=E/c2.

Oh, and here's a first-year physics student proving momentum without mass:

"We constructed a torsion pendulum in a vacuum chamber and fired a powerful laser at a mirror attached to the pendulum. The pendulum rotated away from the laser light and we could measure the force of the light by the angle of deflection. By using a second laser to measure the
angle of deflection and a photosensor attached to a computer, we could see the effect of light on the pendulum in real-time, and were able to record precise data about its motion."

You seem to be sticking with F=G(M1*M2)/R^2 where, m1=mass of heavenly body r=distance f=gravitational force m2=0=mass of light. If you tried to use that force equation, you'd calculate some bending of light in a gravitational field, but it would only be half the observed amount. General Relativity, which describes the distortion of space-time by mass *and* momentum, is needed to get the right answer.

5)Isolate and fully describe the "photon"
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

In physics, the photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of the electromagnetic field and the basic unit of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation. It is also the force carrier for the electromagnetic force. This force's easily visible human-scale effects and applications, from sunlight to radiotelephones, are due to the fact that the photon has no mass and thus can produce interactions at long distances. Like all elementary particles, the photon is governed by quantum mechanics and so exhibits wave-particle duality: that is, it exhibits both wave and particle properties.

The photon is massless, has no electric charge,and does not decay spontaneously in empty space. A photon has two possible polarization states and is described by exactly three continuous parameters: the components of its wave vector, which determine its wavelength (lambda); and its direction of propagation.

In 1986, Grangier, Roger, and Aspect performed an elegant
experiment to isolate single photons. Conceptually very simple, their approach was to examine correlations between photodetections at the transmission and reflection outputs of a 50/50 beamsplitter. To quote the experimenters, ‘‘a single photon can only be detected once!’’ Hence, if a single quantum of light is incident on the beamsplitter, it should be detected at the transmission output or at the reflection output, but not both: there should be no coincident detections between the two outputs.

Others have repeated and refined the experiments.

You see? SOURCES.

But, again, knocking on the current theory does nothing to support yours. Do you have an experiment that would demonstrate your theory models better than experiments involving photons? Be very specific, please, and spell out an experiment that would prove massless photons exist that *you* would accept.

And hey, only 66 days left for yet another experiment to conclude, which will falsify many of your nigh-certain claims... even if you *won't* wager on it.
AnonPhysicist
User ID: 1406242
United States
10/16/2012 12:26 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
You are either a liar or have a poor memory,
Quoting: Agent 74444

Since I have an extremely good memory and one of us is obviously a liar, who do you think the readers would put their money on being a liar? ESPECIALLY the ones working with you?

or you'd be able to cite *sources* for your particular claim about the ascent stage. Perhaps I should demonstrate how it should be done...
Quoting: Agent 74444

Sure, write up one real quick on wikipedia or britanica.

you keep forgetting , I am not a 'newbie' and I KNOW how it is done.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/16/2012 12:31 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!

Yes you are, specifically you work for the NSA and post out of pine gap Australia.I have known you for over ten years. I know who and what you are, a goddamned traitor and a disgrace.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

You are wrong about my employment, you are wrong where I am, you are wrong about how long we have engaged one another, and you have no evidence to support any of your hopelessly erroneous claims about me.

Just like so many of your ideas.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

You sure seemed to show up pretty quickly seeing as this is just a hobby of yours....
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

Sometimes I am quick, when I am online, and sometimes I take days because I'm doing other things. In both cases, you cite it as positive evidence that I work for some government outfit. Tell me: what is the PROPER interval that would allow you to conclude that I don't work for any government?

I have no reason to be dishonest about what I do for a living, even if I am somewhat reticent about revealing any more about my identity. And, as usual, when challenged to *prove* that I am lying, by stating who I am and who my father was (as you claim to know), *you're* the one who balks.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444
You don't know shit about internet technology and if you do you are using it to hack loyal American citizens.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

1406242:MV8xNzY4NjI5XzMzOTEzOTk1XzdGNzBCMzg2]
'Internet Technology?' Oh, dear. That one made me laugh.

I know quite a bit more than you, obviously. Here you are, balking again about proving you know my identity. I am sure you'll bring up how IP addresses are assigned by cellular towers, soon, too.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

IT means information technology as it relates to the internet exclusively. What is humorous?
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

That you had to go look it up immediately after calling it 'Internet Technology.'

IP addresses are not 'assigned by cell towers", they are assigned by ISP's but if you have a mobile 4g connection your IP changes as you link to another tower.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

If that were true, how could you do a long download while you were driving around?

How can you deny what anyone who has watched their ID number here on GLP change as they move from place to place knows, and if you are an expert in this technology how could you be unaware of this??
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

Because that's not what happens -- unless you reboot or re-enable your wireless as you go from place to place. Again, how would a long download 'hand off' from one IP to a different one and not be interrupted? TCP/IP doesn't work that way.

1406242:MV8xNzY4NjI5XzMzOTEzOTk1XzdGNzBCMzg2]
Oooh. My side hurts.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

You are the dumbest disinformation op left on the internet, I swear your intent is simply to dull my intellect.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

You do that just fine all by yourself.

1406242:MV8xNzY4NjI5XzMzOTEzOTk1XzdGNzBCMzg2]
You are either a liar or have a poor memory, or you'd be able to cite *sources* for your particular claim about the ascent stage. Perhaps I should demonstrate how it should be done...
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

The internet has fallen prey to "IT" people like you work for, there is absolutely no place for the truth on it any more. Sources can simple be erased, is this not so?
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

No, they can't. Information published on the internet has been compared to piss in a swimming pool: once it's out there, it's out there. It can be tough to find, but it exists, if you know how to look.

Which you obviously don't. How about all those records you've kept of every post you've made... oh, yes. They were all stolen. Convenient.
AnonPhysicist
User ID: 1406242
United States
10/16/2012 12:39 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
Very well.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

Not a single source you referenced wasn't traditional academia , a source independent of government or corporate funding in it's research and many of your sources are outright .govs .

As far as I'm concerned after reading over what you wrote, you didn't and couldn't answer a single one of my questions empirically,you don't even know what empirical means apparently. You didn't answer because you can't.

Volume doesn't trump quality and never will, you wrote a pile of garbage that simply wasted bandwidth and trashed up my thread. The truly intelligent can actually explain their ideas in ways that are easily understood and prove self evidently they know what they are talking about without need of referencing 'sources' that are paid to relate specific 'beliefs' Your bullshit is not science, it is a faith based atheistic religion.
AnonPhysicist
User ID: 1406242
United States
10/16/2012 12:43 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
If that were true, how could you do a long download while you were driving around?

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

What a FUCKING IDIOT you are!

And that proves you're not in IT.

I know little about computer technology and even I know this!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 7554855
10/16/2012 12:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
AA....I recently listened to a talk given by a Native man from the Iroquois nation. He said that we need to prepare ourselves, because we will get hammered by 2 CME's which will wipe out the grid. Said the first CME would arrive very quickly after the lift off from the Sun. It will be followed by a 2nd CME which will catch up with the first one. We need to prep now.

What's your thoughts on this AA???
AnonPhysicist
User ID: 1406242
United States
10/16/2012 12:50 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
AA....I recently listened to a talk given by a Native man from the Iroquois nation. He said that we need to prepare ourselves, because we will get hammered by 2 CME's which will wipe out the grid. Said the first CME would arrive very quickly after the lift off from the Sun. It will be followed by a 2nd CME which will catch up with the first one. We need to prep now.

What's your thoughts on this AA???
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 7554855

I would take heed, he is right. I have found it useless and in some cases extremely infuriating fighting these liars fro covering up the truth. If you read back through the last ten pages you will see my predictions for the near future. Science and spirituality are intrinsically intertwined, that is why native science is pure and predictions reliable.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/16/2012 12:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
Very well.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

Not a single source you referenced wasn't traditional academia , a source independent of government or corporate funding in it's research and many of your sources are outright .govs .
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

So what sources will you consider acceptable? I gave your sources from five different *countries,* outlining experiments that you can duplicate. If .edu, .gov, .other country, wikis, papers with library of congress numbers, papers without library of congress numbers, online encyclopedias, and articles are *all* out, what's IN? What sources do you find acceptable?

As far as I'm concerned after reading over what you wrote, you didn't and couldn't answer a single one of my questions empirically,you don't even know what empirical means apparently. You didn't answer because you can't.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

Amusing. You didn't give a single experiment to verify your claim, nor did you even comment on the one you alluded to with plants using photosynthesis using only EMR as positive confirmation of your ideas.

The claims are yours, not mine. You need to provide *positive* evidence for them, specifically And you haven't come up with a single experiment that can falsify your idea: therefore it is not science, just a belief of yours. QED.

Volume doesn't trump quality and never will, you wrote a pile of garbage that simply wasted bandwidth and trashed up my thread. The truly intelligent can actually explain their ideas in ways that are easily understood and prove self evidently they know what they are talking about without need of referencing 'sources' that are paid to relate specific 'beliefs' Your bullshit is not science, it is a faith based atheistic religion.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

Sorry, that isn't the way it works. You cite sources, you footnote, you quote and point at where you got the info so that someone else can double check you by doing the same thing.

You have not created an experiment that proves any aspect of your cosmology *at all.* Not one. You merely handwave, and scream that you are right, and damned to anyone who disagrees with you in the slightest. Who's fault is that?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/16/2012 12:59 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
If that were true, how could you do a long download while you were driving around?

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

What a FUCKING IDIOT you are!

And that proves you're not in IT.

I know little about computer technology and even I know this!
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

Ah. Then explain it.

You are driving in a car, and are watching Netflix, wirelessly over, say, an AT&T connection.

You hop from one AT&T tower to the next. What happens?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/16/2012 01:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
AA....I recently listened to a talk given by a Native man from the Iroquois nation. He said that we need to prepare ourselves, because we will get hammered by 2 CME's which will wipe out the grid. Said the first CME would arrive very quickly after the lift off from the Sun. It will be followed by a 2nd CME which will catch up with the first one. We need to prep now.

What's your thoughts on this AA???
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 7554855

I would take heed, he is right. I have found it useless and in some cases extremely infuriating fighting these liars fro covering up the truth. If you read back through the last ten pages you will see my predictions for the near future. Science and spirituality are intrinsically intertwined, that is why native science is pure and predictions reliable.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

And yet you won't wager even your too-precious ego on it. You certainly have faith in its reliability!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 7554855
10/16/2012 01:03 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
AA....I recently listened to a talk given by a Native man from the Iroquois nation. He said that we need to prepare ourselves, because we will get hammered by 2 CME's which will wipe out the grid. Said the first CME would arrive very quickly after the lift off from the Sun. It will be followed by a 2nd CME which will catch up with the first one. We need to prep now.

What's your thoughts on this AA???
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 7554855

I would take heed, he is right. I have found it useless and in some cases extremely infuriating fighting these liars fro covering up the truth. If you read back through the last ten pages you will see my predictions for the near future. Science and spirituality are intrinsically intertwined, that is why native science is pure and predictions reliable.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

Yes, I agree. I have been aware of these times for many years now, so I am prepared as best I can. This Native Elder had a beautiful spirit & I have to say, that my friends & I left the lecture with a new sense of urgency. I feel that things are escalating now, & people need to take the warnings very seriously.

Thank you for your reply. I will read the last 10 pages now, as I have not been on here for some time.

Blessings to you.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 1406242
United States
10/16/2012 01:06 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
AA....I recently listened to a talk given by a Native man from the Iroquois nation. He said that we need to prepare ourselves, because we will get hammered by 2 CME's which will wipe out the grid. Said the first CME would arrive very quickly after the lift off from the Sun. It will be followed by a 2nd CME which will catch up with the first one. We need to prep now.

What's your thoughts on this AA???
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 7554855

I would take heed, he is right. I have found it useless and in some cases extremely infuriating fighting these liars fro covering up the truth. If you read back through the last ten pages you will see my predictions for the near future. Science and spirituality are intrinsically intertwined, that is why native science is pure and predictions reliable.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

And yet you won't wager even your too-precious ego on it. You certainly have faith in its reliability!
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

FUCKOFF
AnonPhysicist
User ID: 1406242
United States
10/16/2012 02:13 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
If that were true, how could you do a long download while you were driving around?

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

What a FUCKING IDIOT you are!

And that proves you're not in IT.

I know little about computer technology and even I know this!
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

Ah. Then explain it.

You are driving in a car, and are watching Netflix, wirelessly over, say, an AT&T connection.

You hop from one AT&T tower to the next. What happens?
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/16/2012 03:02 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
AA....I recently listened to a talk given by a Native man from the Iroquois nation. He said that we need to prepare ourselves, because we will get hammered by 2 CME's which will wipe out the grid. Said the first CME would arrive very quickly after the lift off from the Sun. It will be followed by a 2nd CME which will catch up with the first one. We need to prep now.

What's your thoughts on this AA???
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 7554855

I would take heed, he is right. I have found it useless and in some cases extremely infuriating fighting these liars fro covering up the truth. If you read back through the last ten pages you will see my predictions for the near future. Science and spirituality are intrinsically intertwined, that is why native science is pure and predictions reliable.
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

And yet you won't wager even your too-precious ego on it. You certainly have faith in its reliability!
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

FUCKOFF
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1406242

Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/16/2012 03:08 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
If that were true, how could you do a long download while you were driving around?

Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

What a FUCKING IDIOT you are!

And that proves you're not in IT.

I know little about computer technology and even I know this!
Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

Ah. Then explain it.

You are driving in a car, and are watching Netflix, wirelessly over, say, an AT&T connection.

You hop from one AT&T tower to the next. What happens?
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

Quoting: AnonPhysicist 1406242

Another high-level retort. Are you sure you're firing on all cylinders tonight? Though perhaps you've been a cylinder or two down over the last couple years...

By the way, it wasn't a rhetorical question. What do you think happens when you get handed from one tower to the next? What are the consequences to your connection? The consequences to your address? How does the handoff work? Do you even know?

Ah, well. We'll be testing another idea of yours in just a few handfuls of days. I am sure you'll get to post your LMAO smiley -- which, of course, will mean you were wrong about the internet failing by then. But the irony will likely be lost on you.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25613995
United Kingdom
10/16/2012 03:15 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!

Very well. A *proper* rebuttal. You know, with *sources.*

Doh. Take 2.

...

Carefully and completely spell out five different experiments that would specifically falsify and disqualify your theory.

And watch my surprise when you can't.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

1)Prove the production of electricity from a photovoltaic cell is not the result of electrons in the form of light being intercepted by the atomic structure of the photovoltaic material and converted to normal low electrons. (By the way, the function of photovoltaic cells is most succinctly explained by my theory)
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1406242

But the theory that best suits the facts is the current traditional one, and you have proposed no experiment to verify your idea while disqualifying the current theory.

What experiment would you propose that *specifically tests the validity of YOUR model*, and then disqualifies the traditional one? Spell out the experiment!

2)Prove that light frequency energy cannot be conducted by the same materials as electricity in the non EMR form. Radio antennae and wires being used to conduct EMR are in almsot every electronic device, and are conductors of electrons. Repeated experiments mentioned in early debates involving plants producing photosynthesis in total darkness using metal plates and conductors will get in your way though,as well
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

This seems to be the closest you got to actual experimental verification of anything. If I understand you, you are saying that if your explanation is true, and the traditional theory false, that you should be able to put plants in total darkness, and if there are metal plates and conductors, the plants will flourish anyway, proving that light is getting to them through electro-magnetic radiation. You would have, as a control, another identical room without the metal plates and conductors, and the plants should die. Is that an accurate way to describe an experiment that could qualify your theory? And does it really disprove the traditional model? Be specific.

3)Prove that the energy of electromagnetic radiation is not directly related to it's velocity, speed amplitude and frequency, in other words prove that the particle I suggest is not moving the precise distance and velocity to produce the energy it does using the classic 1/2M X V2 formula. (I give the simple math proving this in my theorem)
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

Not sure if I understand you, here. Electromagnetic waves travel through a vacuum at a constant velocity known as the speed of light, c. The relationship between the speed of light, wavelength, and frequency is:

f=c/(lambda)

F is the freq in cycles per second, c is light velocity in meters, and (lambda) is the wavelength in meters.

When light passes through other media, the velocity of light decreases. For a given frequency of light, the wavelength also must decrease. This decrease in velocity is quantitated by the refractive index, n, which is the ratio of c to the velocity of light in another medium, v:

n = c / v

Since the velocity of light is lower in other media than in a vacuum, n is always a number greater than one. which is the refractive index. Refractive index is an intrinsic physical property of a substance, and can be used to monitor purity or the concentration of a solute in a solution. The refractive index of a material is measured with a refractometer, and is usually made versus air. If the precision warrants, the measurements can be corrected for vacuum. Note that the difference between n(air) and n(vacuum) is only significant in the fourth decimal place.

So I am not sure how your theory and the traditional theory are at odds here. Again, propose an experiment to VERIFY your idea as the better model. Knocking down the current idea is irrelevant. Giving evidence that SUPPORTS yours is what is relevant, and what you stubbornly refuse to do.

4)Prove that and momentum can exist without mass
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

The use of words can make a lot of confusion. Unfortunately, the word "mass" has been used in two different ways in physics. One was the way Einstein used it in E=mc2, where mass is really just the same thing as energy (E) but measured in different units. This is the same "m" that you multiply velocity by to find momentum, and thus is sometimes called the inertial mass. It's also the mass that provides the source of gravitational effects. Light has this "m" because it has energy. So it is indeed affected by gravity- not just in black holes but in all sorts of less extreme situations too. In fact, the first important *confirmation* of General Relativity came in 1919, when it was found that light from stars bends as it goes by the Sun.

The other way "mass" is often used, especially in recent years, is to mean "rest mass" or "invariant mass", which is sqrt(E2-p2*c2)/c2. This is invariant because it doesn't change when you describe an object at rest or from the point of view of someone who says it's moving. Obviously that's a good type of "mass" to give when you want to make a list of masses of particles. For a light beam traveling in a single direction, E=pc, so this "m" is zero. There is no point of view from which the light is standing still.

However, once you consider light traveling in a variety of directions, the E's from the different parts just add up to give the total E but the vector p's don't. In fact the total p can be zero if there are beams traveling opposite ways. So for many purposes the older definition of m (the inertial mass) is more convenient than the invariant particle mass, since it's the inertial mass that's just the sum of the inertial masses of the parts. For light moving equally in all directions, like the light bouncing around inside a star, total p is zero, so both definitions just give m=E/c2.

Oh, and here's a first-year physics student proving momentum without mass:

"We constructed a torsion pendulum in a vacuum chamber and fired a powerful laser at a mirror attached to the pendulum. The pendulum rotated away from the laser light and we could measure the force of the light by the angle of deflection. By using a second laser to measure the
angle of deflection and a photosensor attached to a computer, we could see the effect of light on the pendulum in real-time, and were able to record precise data about its motion."

You seem to be sticking with F=G(M1*M2)/R^2 where, m1=mass of heavenly body r=distance f=gravitational force m2=0=mass of light. If you tried to use that force equation, you'd calculate some bending of light in a gravitational field, but it would only be half the observed amount. General Relativity, which describes the distortion of space-time by mass *and* momentum, is needed to get the right answer.

5)Isolate and fully describe the "photon"
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

In physics, the photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of the electromagnetic field and the basic unit of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation. It is also the force carrier for the electromagnetic force. This force's easily visible human-scale effects and applications, from sunlight to radiotelephones, are due to the fact that the photon has no mass and thus can produce interactions at long distances. Like all elementary particles, the photon is governed by quantum mechanics and so exhibits wave-particle duality: that is, it exhibits both wave and particle properties.

The photon is massless, has no electric charge,and does not decay spontaneously in empty space. A photon has two possible polarization states and is described by exactly three continuous parameters: the components of its wave vector, which determine its wavelength (lambda); and its direction of propagation.

In 1986, Grangier, Roger, and Aspect performed an elegant
experiment to isolate single photons. Conceptually very simple, their approach was to examine correlations between photodetections at the transmission and reflection outputs of a 50/50 beamsplitter. To quote the experimenters, ‘‘a single photon can only be detected once!’’ Hence, if a single quantum of light is incident on the beamsplitter, it should be detected at the transmission output or at the reflection output, but not both: there should be no coincident detections between the two outputs.

Others have repeated and refined the experiments.

You see? SOURCES.

But, again, knocking on the current theory does nothing to support yours. Do you have an experiment that would demonstrate your theory models better than experiments involving photons? Be very specific, please, and spell out an experiment that would prove massless photons exist that *you* would accept.

And hey, only 66 days left for yet another experiment to conclude, which will falsify many of your nigh-certain claims... even if you *won't* wager on it.
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

AA posted these questions at 12:04

at 12:21 agent 74444 answered all of them with a post that would have taken a very knowledgeable scientist probably 15 minutes to answer including typing and separating all the quotes up.......so how the fook does a guy who works in IT answer it in 17 minutes with a very thorough post??

this has now completely made my mind up that agent 74444 is indeed NSA/NASA et al......without a doubt...
I mean just look at those replies and supporting data/links....
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25613995
United Kingdom
10/16/2012 03:18 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!

Very well. A *proper* rebuttal. You know, with *sources.*

Doh. Take 2.

...

Carefully and completely spell out five different experiments that would specifically falsify and disqualify your theory.

And watch my surprise when you can't.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

1)Prove the production of electricity from a photovoltaic cell is not the result of electrons in the form of light being intercepted by the atomic structure of the photovoltaic material and converted to normal low electrons. (By the way, the function of photovoltaic cells is most succinctly explained by my theory)
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 1406242

But the theory that best suits the facts is the current traditional one, and you have proposed no experiment to verify your idea while disqualifying the current theory.

What experiment would you propose that *specifically tests the validity of YOUR model*, and then disqualifies the traditional one? Spell out the experiment!

2)Prove that light frequency energy cannot be conducted by the same materials as electricity in the non EMR form. Radio antennae and wires being used to conduct EMR are in almsot every electronic device, and are conductors of electrons. Repeated experiments mentioned in early debates involving plants producing photosynthesis in total darkness using metal plates and conductors will get in your way though,as well
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

This seems to be the closest you got to actual experimental verification of anything. If I understand you, you are saying that if your explanation is true, and the traditional theory false, that you should be able to put plants in total darkness, and if there are metal plates and conductors, the plants will flourish anyway, proving that light is getting to them through electro-magnetic radiation. You would have, as a control, another identical room without the metal plates and conductors, and the plants should die. Is that an accurate way to describe an experiment that could qualify your theory? And does it really disprove the traditional model? Be specific.

3)Prove that the energy of electromagnetic radiation is not directly related to it's velocity, speed amplitude and frequency, in other words prove that the particle I suggest is not moving the precise distance and velocity to produce the energy it does using the classic 1/2M X V2 formula. (I give the simple math proving this in my theorem)
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

Not sure if I understand you, here. Electromagnetic waves travel through a vacuum at a constant velocity known as the speed of light, c. The relationship between the speed of light, wavelength, and frequency is:

f=c/(lambda)

F is the freq in cycles per second, c is light velocity in meters, and (lambda) is the wavelength in meters.

When light passes through other media, the velocity of light decreases. For a given frequency of light, the wavelength also must decrease. This decrease in velocity is quantitated by the refractive index, n, which is the ratio of c to the velocity of light in another medium, v:

n = c / v

Since the velocity of light is lower in other media than in a vacuum, n is always a number greater than one. which is the refractive index. Refractive index is an intrinsic physical property of a substance, and can be used to monitor purity or the concentration of a solute in a solution. The refractive index of a material is measured with a refractometer, and is usually made versus air. If the precision warrants, the measurements can be corrected for vacuum. Note that the difference between n(air) and n(vacuum) is only significant in the fourth decimal place.

So I am not sure how your theory and the traditional theory are at odds here. Again, propose an experiment to VERIFY your idea as the better model. Knocking down the current idea is irrelevant. Giving evidence that SUPPORTS yours is what is relevant, and what you stubbornly refuse to do.

4)Prove that and momentum can exist without mass
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

The use of words can make a lot of confusion. Unfortunately, the word "mass" has been used in two different ways in physics. One was the way Einstein used it in E=mc2, where mass is really just the same thing as energy (E) but measured in different units. This is the same "m" that you multiply velocity by to find momentum, and thus is sometimes called the inertial mass. It's also the mass that provides the source of gravitational effects. Light has this "m" because it has energy. So it is indeed affected by gravity- not just in black holes but in all sorts of less extreme situations too. In fact, the first important *confirmation* of General Relativity came in 1919, when it was found that light from stars bends as it goes by the Sun.

The other way "mass" is often used, especially in recent years, is to mean "rest mass" or "invariant mass", which is sqrt(E2-p2*c2)/c2. This is invariant because it doesn't change when you describe an object at rest or from the point of view of someone who says it's moving. Obviously that's a good type of "mass" to give when you want to make a list of masses of particles. For a light beam traveling in a single direction, E=pc, so this "m" is zero. There is no point of view from which the light is standing still.

However, once you consider light traveling in a variety of directions, the E's from the different parts just add up to give the total E but the vector p's don't. In fact the total p can be zero if there are beams traveling opposite ways. So for many purposes the older definition of m (the inertial mass) is more convenient than the invariant particle mass, since it's the inertial mass that's just the sum of the inertial masses of the parts. For light moving equally in all directions, like the light bouncing around inside a star, total p is zero, so both definitions just give m=E/c2.

Oh, and here's a first-year physics student proving momentum without mass:

"We constructed a torsion pendulum in a vacuum chamber and fired a powerful laser at a mirror attached to the pendulum. The pendulum rotated away from the laser light and we could measure the force of the light by the angle of deflection. By using a second laser to measure the
angle of deflection and a photosensor attached to a computer, we could see the effect of light on the pendulum in real-time, and were able to record precise data about its motion."

You seem to be sticking with F=G(M1*M2)/R^2 where, m1=mass of heavenly body r=distance f=gravitational force m2=0=mass of light. If you tried to use that force equation, you'd calculate some bending of light in a gravitational field, but it would only be half the observed amount. General Relativity, which describes the distortion of space-time by mass *and* momentum, is needed to get the right answer.

5)Isolate and fully describe the "photon"
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

In physics, the photon is an elementary particle, the quantum of the electromagnetic field and the basic unit of light and all other forms of electromagnetic radiation. It is also the force carrier for the electromagnetic force. This force's easily visible human-scale effects and applications, from sunlight to radiotelephones, are due to the fact that the photon has no mass and thus can produce interactions at long distances. Like all elementary particles, the photon is governed by quantum mechanics and so exhibits wave-particle duality: that is, it exhibits both wave and particle properties.

The photon is massless, has no electric charge,and does not decay spontaneously in empty space. A photon has two possible polarization states and is described by exactly three continuous parameters: the components of its wave vector, which determine its wavelength (lambda); and its direction of propagation.

In 1986, Grangier, Roger, and Aspect performed an elegant
experiment to isolate single photons. Conceptually very simple, their approach was to examine correlations between photodetections at the transmission and reflection outputs of a 50/50 beamsplitter. To quote the experimenters, ‘‘a single photon can only be detected once!’’ Hence, if a single quantum of light is incident on the beamsplitter, it should be detected at the transmission output or at the reflection output, but not both: there should be no coincident detections between the two outputs.

Others have repeated and refined the experiments.

You see? SOURCES.

But, again, knocking on the current theory does nothing to support yours. Do you have an experiment that would demonstrate your theory models better than experiments involving photons? Be very specific, please, and spell out an experiment that would prove massless photons exist that *you* would accept.

And hey, only 66 days left for yet another experiment to conclude, which will falsify many of your nigh-certain claims... even if you *won't* wager on it.
Quoting: Anonymous Astrophysicist

AA posted these questions at 12:04

at 12:21 agent 74444 answered all of them with a post that would have taken a very knowledgeable scientist probably 15 minutes to answer including typing and separating all the quotes up.......so how the fook does a guy who works in IT answer it in 17 minutes with a very thorough post??

this has now completely made my mind up that agent 74444 is indeed NSA/NASA et al......without a doubt...
I mean just look at those replies and supporting data/links....
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25613995
United Kingdom
10/16/2012 03:23 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
Very well. A *proper* rebuttal. You know, with *sources.*
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

I don't understand....
I have tried twice to reply to this post by agent 74444, but on both occasions the text above from his post appears as if I have posted it when I reply to that specific post.....hmmm

not sure what will happen here when I cut all the other text out and just reply with that text only in?? let's see...

this has never happened to me before on glp on any thread/post....hmmm
I definetly didn't make a mistake as I tried it twice (this being the 3rd time without the full body of text). I wasn't messing about with the quotes in those previous 2 replis just a straight 'reply with quote' and my text at the end...

a very big hmmm.....
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/16/2012 03:32 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
AA posted these questions at 12:04

at 12:21 agent 74444 answered all of them with a post that would have taken a very knowledgeable scientist probably 15 minutes to answer including typing and separating all the quotes up.......so how the fook does a guy who works in IT answer it in 17 minutes with a very thorough post??
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

Practice. To be fair, I had looked up a couple of points earlier, as I was interested in the idea of the plant experiment, and how that might work.

this has now completely made my mind up that agent 74444 is indeed NSA/NASA et al......without a doubt...
I mean just look at those replies and supporting data/links....
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

You don't have to work for NASA to use search engines and type fast. It just takes practice. And regardless if I worked for NASA/NSA or not, it doesn't make my points any less valid.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/16/2012 03:34 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
Very well. A *proper* rebuttal. You know, with *sources.*
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

I don't understand....
I have tried twice to reply to this post by agent 74444, but on both occasions the text above from his post appears as if I have posted it when I reply to that specific post.....hmmm

not sure what will happen here when I cut all the other text out and just reply with that text only in?? let's see...

this has never happened to me before on glp on any thread/post....hmmm
I definetly didn't make a mistake as I tried it twice (this being the 3rd time without the full body of text). I wasn't messing about with the quotes in those previous 2 replis just a straight 'reply with quote' and my text at the end...

a very big hmmm.....
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

The quote functions here have always been awfully touchy. The thing that gets me all the time is the closing bracket, but the preview button is pretty helpful with that.

It could be tags left over in my post that make it messy, but allow my post to be all right. I just use the preview to check on it, and if it looks the way I want, off it goes.

Hope that is helpful to you.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25613995
United Kingdom
10/16/2012 03:46 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
AA posted these questions at 12:04

at 12:21 agent 74444 answered all of them with a post that would have taken a very knowledgeable scientist probably 15 minutes to answer including typing and separating all the quotes up.......so how the fook does a guy who works in IT answer it in 17 minutes with a very thorough post??
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

Practice. To be fair, I had looked up a couple of points earlier, as I was interested in the idea of the plant experiment, and how that might work.

this has now completely made my mind up that agent 74444 is indeed NSA/NASA et al......without a doubt...
I mean just look at those replies and supporting data/links....
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

You don't have to work for NASA to use search engines and type fast. It just takes practice. And regardless if I worked for NASA/NSA or not, it doesn't make my points any less valid.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

I have followed this thread from day 1, there is no way an IT guy could have made that reply in that timescale unaided.
Impossible.....I don't need to say any more on this subject imo agent 74444.
anyone intelligent can look at the content of that reply you made and see that you would need a very high level of the subject matter at hand......a very high level, even to research on the web and find the relevant articles in that time frame....then there are parts of your post which have been made by intelligence not cut'n'paste....

I think you have finally given your game away agent 74444
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25613995
United Kingdom
10/16/2012 03:49 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
I have followed this thread from day 1, there is no way an IT guy could have made that reply in that timescale unaided.
Impossible.....I don't need to say any more on this subject imo agent 74444.
anyone intelligent can look at the content of that reply you made and see that you would need a very high level of the subject matter at hand......a very high level, even to research on the web and find the relevant articles in that time frame....then there are parts of your post which have been made by intelligence not cut'n'paste....

I think you have finally given your game away agent 74444
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

Thread: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED! (Page 331)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
10/16/2012 03:54 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
AA posted these questions at 12:04

at 12:21 agent 74444 answered all of them with a post that would have taken a very knowledgeable scientist probably 15 minutes to answer including typing and separating all the quotes up.......so how the fook does a guy who works in IT answer it in 17 minutes with a very thorough post??
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

Practice. To be fair, I had looked up a couple of points earlier, as I was interested in the idea of the plant experiment, and how that might work.

this has now completely made my mind up that agent 74444 is indeed NSA/NASA et al......without a doubt...
I mean just look at those replies and supporting data/links....
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

You don't have to work for NASA to use search engines and type fast. It just takes practice. And regardless if I worked for NASA/NSA or not, it doesn't make my points any less valid.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

I have followed this thread from day 1, there is no way an IT guy could have made that reply in that timescale unaided.
Impossible.....I don't need to say any more on this subject imo agent 74444.
anyone intelligent can look at the content of that reply you made and see that you would need a very high level of the subject matter at hand......a very high level, even to research on the web and find the relevant articles in that time frame....then there are parts of your post which have been made by intelligence not cut'n'paste....

I think you have finally given your game away agent 74444
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

You are entitled to your opinion. There is no way I can prove to you that I did what I did, that fast (again with a bit written in advance) without any aid from government sources or shady cabals. And its just plain old me.

I thank you for the compliment, however backhanded.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25613995
United Kingdom
10/16/2012 04:38 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
AA posted these questions at 12:04

at 12:21 agent 74444 answered all of them with a post that would have taken a very knowledgeable scientist probably 15 minutes to answer including typing and separating all the quotes up.......so how the fook does a guy who works in IT answer it in 17 minutes with a very thorough post??
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

Practice. To be fair, I had looked up a couple of points earlier, as I was interested in the idea of the plant experiment, and how that might work.

this has now completely made my mind up that agent 74444 is indeed NSA/NASA et al......without a doubt...
I mean just look at those replies and supporting data/links....
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

You don't have to work for NASA to use search engines and type fast. It just takes practice. And regardless if I worked for NASA/NSA or not, it doesn't make my points any less valid.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

I have followed this thread from day 1, there is no way an IT guy could have made that reply in that timescale unaided.
Impossible.....I don't need to say any more on this subject imo agent 74444.
anyone intelligent can look at the content of that reply you made and see that you would need a very high level of the subject matter at hand......a very high level, even to research on the web and find the relevant articles in that time frame....then there are parts of your post which have been made by intelligence not cut'n'paste....

I think you have finally given your game away agent 74444
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

You are entitled to your opinion. There is no way I can prove to you that I did what I did, that fast (again with a bit written in advance) without any aid from government sources or shady cabals. And its just plain old me.

I thank you for the compliment, however backhanded.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

& I thank you for showing your true hand agent 74444

saved me a lot of time from now on, that page/post is now bookmarked for future use when you are on top shilling form agent 74444.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25613995
United Kingdom
10/16/2012 04:42 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
Very well. A *proper* rebuttal. You know, with *sources.*
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

I don't understand....
I have tried twice to reply to this post by agent 74444, but on both occasions the text above from his post appears as if I have posted it when I reply to that specific post.....hmmm

not sure what will happen here when I cut all the other text out and just reply with that text only in?? let's see...

this has never happened to me before on glp on any thread/post....hmmm
I definetly didn't make a mistake as I tried it twice (this being the 3rd time without the full body of text). I wasn't messing about with the quotes in those previous 2 replis just a straight 'reply with quote' and my text at the end...

a very big hmmm.....
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 25613995

The quote functions here have always been awfully touchy.
The thing that gets me all the time is the closing bracket, but the preview button is pretty helpful with that.

It could be tags left over in my post that make it messy, but allow my post to be all right. I just use the preview to check on it, and if it looks the way I want, off it goes.

Hope that is helpful to you.
Quoting: Anonymous Coward 74444

never had a problem in the 6 years I have been on glp (& before it was owned by Trinity et al, whom I'm sure you know very well)

I only ever get problems on this thread.....I have been IP banned several times for no reason, page errors, unable to reply to any post sometimes only on this thread, & now this latest issue etc.
hmmm....
AnonPhysicist
User ID: 1709374
United States
10/16/2012 09:43 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
Agent 74444 works out of the NSA Pine Gap outpost in Australia and is simply the man who fronts for them here. They learned through experience I suppose that the multi pronged 'pinata' type attack was obvious and ineffective, and they have at their disposal computers which can generate rebuttals without aid of human interface.

As most of you know , whatever level of technology we know about is at least 15 to 20 years behind what actually exists, and I seriously doubt if agent 74444's replies are ever generated by a single man, it is several men and computers working in unison. I have pointed this out before to be fair but it fell on deaf ears for the most part.

To me the most important consideration and most interesting fact if all was that he did NOT answer a single question posed to him despite his many references in the manner I suggested using empirical proofs.

Theory is not proof, no matter how many people appear to agree, and one of the most striking realities is that if you read his many sources you will plainly see that not only do they have differing opinions and explanations, NONE of them agree in a single one of the subjects involved, explaining it in even remotely the same matter, And the quantum debate goes on and on with theory built upon shaky theory, with no solid foundation in reality or empiricism, which is the enemy of atheistic quantum pseudoscience.. AT one time they burned you at the stake for claiming the Earth was not the center of the universe.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25677550
India
10/16/2012 10:44 AM
Report Abusive Post
Re: WARNING: SOLAR DATA PAGE COMPLETELY CENSORED,DATA ON OTHER SOURCES BEING FABRICATED!
Good Morning Everyone,

SO has not put out the news this morning, however, he has put out a video on our changes we are all witnessing and feeling.

Take care all,stay safe and balanced.

Quoting: Tiny Trink

AA- Pls comment
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 25677550
India
10/16/2012 10:44 AM
Report Abusive Post