10 Jul 17
4 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBHWhere did I say/imply anything about "NASA"?
The fact that you have not even the foggiest of ideas who and what NASA relies on ...
I didn't even mention the word "NASA" nor say/imply anything about "what NASA relies on" so you must be hallucinating conversations from me that I never gave and thus I have absolutely no idea what your are talking about. Your whole post is both totally irrelevant and complete gibberish with your gibberish talk about "donkey"; what the HELL are you on? Keep off the crack.
10 Jul 17
Originally posted by humyIt's hard for you, understood.
Where did I say/imply anything about "NASA"?
I didn't even mention the word "NASA" nor say/imply anything about "what NASA relies on" so you must be hallucinating conversations from me that I never gave and thus I have absolutely no idea what your are talking about. Your whole post is both totally irrelevant and complete gibberish with your talk about "donkey"; what the HELL are you on? keep of the crack.
Just go back one page and you'll see how the whole thing fits together.
10 Jul 17
8 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBHEXACTLY how does your complete gibberish talk of "donkey" all "fits together" together with it? Exactly what has "donkey" got to do with it? What the HELL are you on? -whatever it is, I don't want it.
Just go back one page and you'll see how the whole thing fits together.
It's hard for you, understood.
Yes, it is hard for me to understand complete gibberish from the ranting and ravings from a hallucinating mad man who hallucinates whole conversations that never took place; I said ABSOLUTELY NOTHING whatsoever about "NASA" so that conversation NEVER took place, and "donkeys" have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with it.
Originally posted by humyHis delusions go deeper than even I thought. It looks like he doesn't believe in ANY science or scientist that even vaguely derides his puppet masters flat Earth nonsense.
EXACTLY how does your complete gibberish talk of "donkey" all "fits together" together with it? Exactly what has "donkey" got to do with it? What the HELL are you on? -whatever it is, I don't want it.It's hard for you, understood.
Yes, it is hard for me to understand complete gibberish from the ranting and ravings from a hallucinating m ...[text shortened]... that conversation NEVER took place, and "donkeys" have ABSOLUTELY [b]NOTHING to do with it.[/b]
It looks to me, and of course I am speaking to Humy and friends. He refuses to answer me which is just fine with me.
This whole 'how fast do we move' bit is designed to make us 'think' about what science and NASA are deluding us about.
This is like a person raised in the 15th century trying to convince us of ANYTHING in century 21.
Originally posted by humyI'll parse it out for you, give you the play-by-play.
EXACTLY how does your complete gibberish talk of "donkey" all "fits together" together with it? Exactly what has "donkey" got to do with it? What the HELL are you on? -whatever it is, I don't want it.It's hard for you, understood.
Yes, it is hard for me to understand complete gibberish from the ranting and ravings from a hallucinating m ...[text shortened]... that conversation NEVER took place, and "donkeys" have ABSOLUTELY [b]NOTHING to do with it.[/b]
1. KZ challenged me with the following question:
Here's a brain teaser for you, Freaky. How do you think scientists predict solar eclipses?
2. I countered the brain teaser with:
Good question.
Ask NASA how ol' Freddie "predicts" theirs.
HINT: You're barking up the wrong paddle.
3. Four minutes later, you jumped in with:
So how do you think scientists predict solar eclipses?
4. About an hour later, I responded with:
Read it again, do a modicum of research to determine how "scientists" at NASA predict theirs.
5. Much later, you continued the line with:
the fact that they can and do predict solar eclipses contradicts your weird assertions.
[Which would lead a reasonable person to conclude you understood the topic involves NASA and predictions of eclipses]
6. My next response contained the (rightful) claim that you had no idea how NASA predicts eclipses.
It also contained the assertion that you were talking out of your ass; although, in keeping with my commitment to be nicer than I have in the past, I used "donkey" as a substitute for "ass," as most people who have a minimum amount of exposure to English parlance would recognize the meaning.
7. a. Inexplicably, your next reply revealed your confusion related to NASA's interjection into the conversation:
Where did I say/imply anything about "NASA"?
I didn't even mention the word "NASA" nor say/imply anything about "what NASA relies on" so you must be hallucinating conversations from me that I never gave and thus I have absolutely no idea what your are talking about.
7. b. Also in this response, you expressed your bewilderment over the use of the term "donkey" clearly indicating you failed to make the connection between it and "ass," which is what you are making out of yourself.
8. I entreated you to simply go back a page and re-read the exchanges since you'd evidently lost the chain of thought:
It's hard for you, understood.
Just go back one page and you'll see how the whole thing fits together.
9. Unwilling to do that relatively easy task, I was forced to recreate the salient points here for you.
Clearly, you either do not speak English as your first language, are a child, or perhaps an adult with rapidly deteriorating clarity issues.
This isn't rocket science.
The question remains: how does NASA--- an organization which reportedly is chock-full of scientist-type folks--- predict eclipses?
10 Jul 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHShow us wrong predictions then. Put your money where your mouth is. Are you saying the total eclipse passing straight through the US on August 21 is bogus? We should be looking in South America instead? If the predictions are correct, what is your bitch?
I'll parse it out for you, give you the play-by-play.
1. KZ challenged me with the following question:Here's a brain teaser for you, Freaky. How do you think scientists predict solar eclipses?
2. I countered the brain teaser with:
[quote]Good question.
Ask NASA how ol' Freddie "predicts" theirs.
HINT: You're barking up the wrong p ...[text shortened]... an organization which reportedly is chock-full of scientist-type folks--- predict eclipses?[/b]
10 Jul 17
3 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBH
I'll parse it out for you, give you the play-by-play.
1. KZ challenged me with the following question:Here's a brain teaser for you, Freaky. How do you think scientists predict solar eclipses?
2. I countered the brain teaser with:
[quote]Good question.
Ask NASA how ol' Freddie "predicts" theirs.
HINT: You're barking up the wrong p ...[text shortened]... an organization which reportedly is chock-full of scientist-type folks--- predict eclipses?[/b]
[Which would lead a reasonable person to conclude you understood the topic involves NASA and predictions of eclipses]
No, it would lead a moron to think I was talking about that topic because I said nothing about "NASA".
I used "donkey" as a substitute for "ass,"
In other words, you neither understand nor speak English.
10 Jul 17
1 edit
Originally posted by humyThe topic at the time, the conversation to which you were responding... was NASA.
[Which would lead a reasonable person to conclude you understood the topic involves NASA and predictions of eclipses]
No, it would lead a moron to think that because I said nothing about "NASA".I used "donkey" as a substitute for "ass,"
In other words, you don't speak English.
Clearly and unequivocally.
It matters not what you claim now you had in mind, as you didn't deviate from the topic: no segue, no diversion.
You were continuing what was being discussed, and that was how NASA predicts eclipses--- whether you explicitly mentioned it or not, the agency's predictive model was in the direct and specific spotlight.
And you can't answer that question.
My ability to both understand and speak the English language isn't in question: yours is in serious doubt, however.
Now, if you can set aside your silly insults and answer the question, this is a good time to do so.
Otherwise, have a nice day.
10 Jul 17
3 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBHno, it was some scientists predicting ellipses; don't cure where they work from (NASA, UK, China ...who cares ) because that is totally irrelevant to them being able to predict ellipses. You should have worked that out from my question "So how do you think scientists predict solar eclipses?"; I CLEARLY didn't say scientists specifically at NASA.
The topic at the time, the conversation to which you were responding... was NASA..
The scientists make such prediction via applying knowledge about planetary motion and the equations for ellipses and gravity.
Not sure what your claim is here; do you deny that they CAN make such predictions? Are you saying their said predictions are all a hoax? -Or what, exactly?
10 Jul 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHAnd we ask you right back, are you accusing NASA of making bad predictions? If so, show us the bad predictions. If not, what is your REAL beef?
The answer of which I know that you know that I know, also of which you are afraid to answer.
[b]HOW does NASA predict eclipses?[/b]
11 Jul 17
2 edits
Originally posted by humyEclipses are highly regular and thus predictable by merely using the record of previous eclipses and various equations derived from those. That is what he is getting at. He discovered that NASA does not use equations of planetary motion, but merely look up eclipses in a table (for eclipses by our moon, obviously they can't do that so easily for other eclipses) .
Not sure what your claim is here;
He is being very cagey about it because:
1. He is not as confident as he makes out.
2. he doesn't want the conversation to move on to his other nonsense.