Off Topic Dark Matter and other Astronomy information.

I'll leave you two to your little off topic huddle. You are feeding off of each other, it's almost, gay.

 

I know you dont like it when I ask for evidence but that is general the scientific method by which you claim yo have much faith in yet clearly dont appear to understand.

PS i could do a scientific study of your posts to back up my claim that you dont understand it but I cant be arsed as you would claim that as some sort of conspiracy.

 

please log in to view this image

 

Brilliant , a great graph of an unrelated topic ( we are on earthquakes now) feck it, who needs a scientific study, when people see your dodging of direct questions they will have enough evidence to judge for themselves.

 

Arctic summer ice increase 3 years running, highest level in a decade despite "man made global warming"
http://ocean.dmi.dk/arctic/old_icecover.uk.php

please log in to view this image

Greenland’s ice gains increasing despite "man made global warming"
http://beta.dmi.dk/en/groenland/maalinger/greenland-ice-sheet-surface-mass-budget/

please log in to view this image

#science

 

Any chance of earthquake stuff?

if you want I will still accept the "more right wing terrorist murders since 9/11" stuff as some sort of substitute.

 

I provided you with 34 citations to scientific papers AFTER you played you little game with Astro. You have no business discussing science

Seeing as you brought it up
This video of the plane is a fake, it is impossible to track an object at 100 miles an hour with a hand held camera, this video supposedly tracks and keeps exactly centred an object travelling at an impossible 500 miles an hour given the plane's tecnical specifications say the plane cannot travel faster than 360 miles an hour at that altitude because the air is too thick, that again is science for you.

Yet this man with a hand held tracked an object and kept it dead centre of the viewer at 500 mph. Impossible, it is fake and if this video is fake then.. what else is fake. What I am saying is not debatable, it is also impossible to record this like this and also have no blur and frame loss

please log in to view this image

#impossiblerole

 

To back that up.
______________
Retired NASA Senior Executive Dwain Deets published his concerns on the matter at the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA) as follows:

A Responsibility to Explain an Aeronautical Improbability
Dwain Deets
NASA Dryden Flight Research Center (Senior Executive Service - retired)
AIAA Associate Fellow

The airplane was UA175, a Boeing 767-200, shortly before crashing into World Trade Center Tower 2. Based on analysis of radar data, the National Transportation and Safety Board reported the groundspeed just before impact as 510 knots. This is well beyond the maximum operating velocity of 360 knots, and maximum dive velocity of 410 knots. The possibilities as I see them are: (1) this wasn’t a standard 767-200; (2) the radar data was compromised in some manner; (3) the NTSB analysis was erroneous; or (4) the 767 flew well beyond its flight envelope, was controllable, and managed to hit a relatively small target. Which organization has the greater responsibility for acknowledging the elephant in the room? The NTSB, NASA, Boeing, or the AIAA? Have engineers authored papers, but the AIAA or NASA won’t publish them? Or, does the ethical responsibility lie not with organizations, but with individual aeronautical engineers? Have engineers just looked the other way?
_________________________________________________________________________________________

Dwain Deets credentials and experience
http://www.nasa.gov/centers/dryden/news/NewsReleases/1996/96-10.html
Dwain Deets
MS Physics, MS Eng
Former Director, Aerospace Projects, NASA Dryden Flight Research Center
Served as Director, Research Engineering Division at Dryden
Recipient of the NASA Exceptional Service Award
Presidential Meritorious Rank Award in the Senior Executive Service (1988)
Selected presenter of the Wright Brothers Lectureship in Aeronautics
Associate Fellow - American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics (AIAA)
Included in "Who's Who in Science and Engineering" 1993 - 2000
Former Chairman of the Aerospace Control and Guidance Systems
- Committee of the Society of Automotive Engineers
Former Member, AIAA Committee on Society and Aerospace Technology
37 year NASA career



I guess this NASA guy is a conspriacy theorist

#research

 

debunk that

 

Statistics 101, one of my favourites

please log in to view this image

Or here's an oil related one, conspiracy theorists love oil related stuff

please log in to view this image

 

So what has this got to do with predicting earthquakes or anything else on this thread for that matter (I haven't read it all)

Is this this more related to the posts about your drug use?

 

I'll debunk it. I watched the second plane hitting the World Trade centre on live television. Are you suggesting that the British media, notably the BBC were in on this supposed conspiracy? As for that utter bollocks you've just posted to be correct they'd have to be.

The amount of bullshit you swallow is frightening

 

Debunk it then because you havent?

You are giving me your opinion nothing more I am not suggesting anything I am merely pointing out two facts, you have debunked neither, and also I watched it too mate.

So debunk it, tell me how a plane that cannot travel faster than 360knots max speed travelled at 510 knots, the plane requires 6 times the power it has to travel 510 knots at that altitude.

That's science and engineering mate, cannot be debunked by opinion

 

I've given a fact that you simply can't counter. I watched the ****er on live tv, were they all in on it then, the BBC? Sky? The cameramen? The eye witnesses? Counter that.

 

Not quite as frightening as that cum swallowing video but nearly, what is weirder is that its totally unrelated to the thread, although that is his typical MO; copy and paste unrelated stuff.

 

So you use 9 year correlations to "debunk 130 years of scientifically correlated realted data" using two two different unrelated things, as in, you can go search all the stats in the world and correlate to completely unrelated things given there are so many stats.

This is why you cannot be taken seriously, also doesn't your post throw the same accusation at temp CO2 correlation?

 

That's equally mental.......there's a consistent theme to his 'belief' system....

 

That doesn't actually mean anything Tobes, you are telling me what you say and ignoring physics. You say the impossible is possible because the BBC showed you something.

 

It's funny that you three are all teamed up and all of you are **** at this three ignorant insecure individuals trying to be internet warriors

 

Those ****s broke the airspeed safety regulations?

They need to be banned from flying planes ever again.