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

REAL EYES or REAL LIES, it's up to you. THINK FOR YOURSELF and turn against the evil that is using you

You are not a scientist by the largest stretch to which one could extend ones mind.

How are you making out with your home brew tachyon detector?

I will once again make my offer...if you post pictures of your "instruments" I will leave the thread for ever and I will not bother you ever again.

I know you won't because you don't have any and your bragging that you can make a tachyon detector proved that.

I will say it is of course attractive to believe that the evil doers in the world will get justice but great cleansings are not something I can hang my hat on.

Your stereotyping of all people of Jewish blood is not right for there is NO tribe of any kind that is all good.

In a way when I see so many things that are just plain wrong and sickening in the world I too almost wish god would clean it up

Please, take your plaything and put it on someone else's thread. And by the way Nancy Leider turned out to be a NASA employee.

Nancy Leider has never been a NASA employee.

You read some whacked out web sources and take them as true

For all I know you could have started that rumor yourself

Did I talk to you, jerk ?


.

Please reference my post where i claimed to attempt to construct a tachyon detector. I don't even believe there is a such thing, why would I try to detect it?//////////////////////////////////////////////////// As for you blanket statement that I am not a scientist, I have this retort: NO ONE who subscribes to mathematical based theoretic physics like quantum mechanics, SR and GR is a real scientist, they are writers of complex and paradoxical fiction understood by no one including themselves.. A realscientist is one who utilizes empirical observation and experimentation to draw conclusions , and by that measure I am most certainly a scientist, because a real scientist is oe who concentrates his study singularly towards these ends, and yes you fucking jew sucking liar I am a scientist.

It does when you claim a between 98.5 and 99.98 percent chance of being right, and ignore all contrary data -- and then make up excuses *after the fact.*

And it isn't statistically insignificant: One test of a specific claim made by you yielded a specific result. There are *so few* specific claims by you, and the lesson you have learned is *not to give any more specific claims.*

That doesn't represent any scientific methodology I've ever read.




Okay, *that* one made me howl. I have yet to *see* you apply the scientific method in all the time we've engaged. You haven't. Not *once.*

Give ways to falsify your conclusions? Propose experiments that can falsify your hypothesis? Alter your hypothesis in the light of differing on contrary evidence? Give what information could change your opinion? You do none of these things.

You are many things, IDW/A.A. But I don't think a scientist numbers among them.





Yes. December 21st demonstrated that quite well.

Dammit dont forget about his december 25th hurricane.

There are still plenty of us that are able to do that AA.

Disqualify my theory of electromagnetic radiation. There are an almost unlimitted number of ways to falsify it, bit not of it is right
That isn't my problem. ALL of the empirical observations and evidence support it and none of it disqualifies it, however I can disqualify the existence of the photon using he basic laws of physics and the definition of kinetic energy.

If I am right about this, I am probably right about Apollo being a hoax, and that is why you are here, to protect the web of interlaced lies.

I never claimed there was hurricane. I said there was a unusual cyclonic storm that produced hurricane force downdraft winds and there was. I was here, I saw it, I heard it, and sawed up the tree branches that fell all over my yard while the power was out for over a day. I gave you several references and you even provided some yourself claiming trees and power poles were snapped like twigs. Snow doesn't do that and there WAS NO ICE , so what did it dipshit? Why did the power outages and damage PRECEED the freezing weather

Here you go dumbass, hour by hour wind reports with freezing rain and snow all recorded by lda. Explain the data.

Wichita Falls
[link to www.weatherbase.com]

sheppard air force base

sherman:
[link to www.weatherbase.com]

North Texas Regional Airport

paris:
[link to www.weatherbase.com]

Cox Field Airport


Mount Pleasant:
[link to www.weatherbase.com]

Mount Pleasant Regional Airport

I think these cheap tricks are despicable and the acts of desperate child like mentalities with mental issues. Leave my posts as I wrote them.

How? Be VERY specific. Give an *experiment you would accept,* step by step, line by line, that would disqualify the theory *to you.* You have never done this.

And, given that the December 21st cleansing was a prediction of that theory, that seems to be falsifying it right there.

I believe I already did explain it , this being the fourth time. Ammeters measure wind speeds and though they can measure wind speeds coming from any direction horizontal to the ground , they cannot and do not measure downdraft winds accurately. Looking at one it is easy to see why. Airports measure wind speeds using ammeters.
During normal thunderstorm activity we frequently have hurricane force winds not associated with tornadoes, but with downdrafts. If the area of downdraft is large enough, it will produce horizontal winds in excess of hurricane strength, and this is quite common in the spring, summer and early fall months.

If the downdrafts are localized, they DO NOT produce horizontal hurricane force winds because they dissipate as they hit the ground and spread out.

Did I not point out that these are all LDA facilities? The information was reported by laser doppler anemometer instrumentation. So explain again, i went by YOUR preferred method.

the prediction I made had absolutely no connection to the electromechanical theory of electromagnetic radiation.

Here is a simple experiment to disqualify and falsify my theory. If light really is electrons vibrating in a passive osculation to an oscillating magnetic field, they will exert pressure on an object they strike. Do they?

Does light possess kinetic energy and momentum? If it does it has mass, if it doesn't my theory is wrong.

Can light of all wavelengths be used to produce a flow of electrons (think transducers, photovoltaic cells, radio waves, thermocouples etc etc) If it can't then you have falsified my theory. Can it? I could go on and on and on and on, but that is your job. I have given you proof there are ways to falsify my theory if it is indeed false. APOLLO WAS A HOAX, and the guy who explained the wave particle paradox of light knows it. That's why you are here, isn't it?

The problem form your point of view is not that there is no way to falsify my theory if it is incorrect, the problem is there is no way to disqualify it because it is correct.

Have a nice night now.

Show your references to these "facts" and your data.

I happen to know the Mount pleasant airport and the Paris airport don't even have towers , much less lase doppler instrumentation. You are a bullshiter thinking I won't take the time to call you because I am fielding several coordinated and unrelated attacks from your group. Ypu were wrong, and you are FULL OF SHIT

There you go in all your googling glory not realizing that tachyons cannot be detected because they are only a hypothetical "particle" yet you said you could learn to build one but it wouldn't be cheap.

You are if nothing else entertaining

I think I made it quite clear that I did not believe there was a unique particle "tachyon" and that attempts to detect it were actually detecting an already discovered particle. There should be no trouble detecting these. You are an idiot and have the reading comprehension ability of a third grader, and you are in the wrong fucking business.

These airports use AWX using fully automated information recieved from NADI which happens to include doppler weather information for wind sheer readings.

Also to dispute your claim that snow cant cause outages, directly from the power company:

[link to www.ksla.com]

AA uses ammeters to measure wind speed though

Then I stand corrected. I was using information provided by the FAA's site that stated doppler information was provided through the automated system for windsheer information.

Still doesnt explain how this cyclone produced downdrafts of hurricane force winds as the center passed, because as most are aware at the center of a cyclone air is rising not the opposite, and the winds are verticle as the air spins up.

More attempted ass covering that makes no sense.

There is no such thing as a tachyon so how can you detect one?

It doesn't make a bit of difference if it as different manifestation of a "known" particle there is no way to detect a particle that only travels faster than SOL.

Ah. Very well.




They do possess momentum, they don't possess mass. The one does not follow the other.

The correct relativistic equation is this:
Momentum = M0 * v / sqrt( 1 - v^2 / c^2 )
where M0 is the "relativistic mass".

Photons don't have ordinary mass, but they do have "relativistic mass". That equation is p = E/c.

And, sorry, but experimentally that seems to predict quite well. Tell me, how would yours predict *differently?* How does your idea predict *better?*




I don't see how your theory *differs* from the traditional model, here. The behavior of photovoltaic cells doesn't seem to give professional physicists any pause at all. I do notice you also conveniently seem to forget that photons are not affected by magnetic fields, which seems to demonstrate they behave much differently than electrons.

Do you want to go back to my 'Green plants in the dark' experiment of your theory? Why shouldn't it work, according to your ideas (assuming you remember it, I could repost)? What is your objection to my experiment?





That's not the way science works. You should be able to propose experiments that WILL fail if your theory is true. People forget the Morley experiment, itself a failure, proved a great deal.

I would like to make a small addition to my last post.


While I *do* believe time travel is possible (we are in fact traveling through time at the moment), I do not believe it is possible to go back in time.

I believe time moves in a infinite circular pattern with all moments in time continuously reoccurring, and I believe that some day in the not so distant future it may be possible to accelerate our perception of time or take a "short cut" to a position on that circle of time in the future.

For reasons I find difficult to explain other than to say if it were possible alterations in the circle of time would be possible and the creator would not allow this for obvious reasons, I do not believe it is possible to go back in time nor communicate with beings or people from the past.

I believe we may experience visions or manifestations of past events, but that we can have no effect on them nor effectively interact with them.

These are native american spiritual beliefs by the way, everything on this post is save my prediction that forward time travel may some day be possible.

We do possess a fundamental spiritual belief that we all have visions of future events, in fact it is central to our spiritual beliefs. Indians do not have religious beliefs other than the existence of the prime creator and actions and deeds in this life effect future manifestations of the spirit...

LOL I wonder how many amps per MPH

I see that AA doesn't know the difference between laser doppler anemometers and doppler weather radar.

I am glad you finally brought up the laser anemometer as it too is directional and not omni directional as AA boasted it is.