Page 29 of 29 FirstFirst ... 19272829
Results 841 to 849 of 849

Thread: I'm back with a vengeance and undeniable proof of the Moon Hoax.

  1. #841
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Perthshire, UK
    Posts
    222
    Quote Originally Posted by grant hutchison View Post
    Yeah, I think we have another rich source of confusion.

    ...

    I'm reminded of our family globe of the Earth, which had the ecliptic marked on it as if it were a constant plane relative to the Earth's surface. When, at the age of eight, I asked my father (the aviator) about it, I inadvertently found myself commited to carrying the globe around a lamp in the middle of the darkened living room (while my mother retired to the kitchen to read), so that I could fully appreciate why the ecliptic marking was deeply misleading.
    Based on his failure to understand the relationships of planes, axes and orbits, or indeed the "3D-ness" of it, I'd say it's likely that Tim has never had a globe, and certainly not looked at one long enough to think about the Earth as a spherical body in space.
    Days spent at sea are not deducted from one's alloted span...
    (Phoenician proverb)

  2. #842
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    15,015
    I have tried to keep a list of things Tim asks to show/claims there is no source for, but still have been shown here, often by himself:

    -TLI lasted 6 minutes: in his own log link but he claims it ends after 1 minute
    -Orbital corrections during TLI: in his own log link but he claims it ends after 1 minute
    -Correct angle through the VABs: in his own links but he ignores them
    -Corrected drawings: countless times by everyone in this thread but he ignores them
    -BAUT calculations on radiation doses: he ignores them, claims to have never seen them, even when he has replied-with-quote to them

    I know the list is incomplete, for example the whole wrong radiation dose during Apollo based on a number calculated from...radiation doses during Apollo.

    The point I'm making is: failing to understand is one thing, but these 29 pages here have nothing to do with failing to understand. It is well documented ignoring for whatever reason.

  3. #843
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Posts
    3
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas View Post

    The point I'm making is: failing to understand is one thing, but these 29 pages here have nothing to do with failing to understand. It is well documented ignoring for whatever reason.
    He did the same thing at Apollohoax(.)net which has racked up over 200 pages of similar behavior. Not likely he'll return to it after his claims of having served aboard nuclear subs didn't survive scrutiny.
    Last edited by grapes; 2018-Apr-29 at 12:15 AM. Reason: Fixed quote

  4. #844
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    716
    Quote Originally Posted by Nicolas View Post
    I have tried to keep a list of things Tim asks to show/claims there is no source for, but still have been shown here, often by himself:

    -TLI lasted 6 minutes: in his own log link but he claims it ends after 1 minute
    -Orbital corrections during TLI: in his own log link but he claims it ends after 1 minute
    -Correct angle through the VABs: in his own links but he ignores them
    -Corrected drawings: countless times by everyone in this thread but he ignores them
    -BAUT calculations on radiation doses: he ignores them, claims to have never seen them, even when he has replied-with-quote to them

    I know the list is incomplete, for example the whole wrong radiation dose during Apollo based on a number calculated from...radiation doses during Apollo.

    The point I'm making is: failing to understand is one thing, but these 29 pages here have nothing to do with failing to understand. It is well documented ignoring for whatever reason.
    Add 200 pages on apollohoax and who knows how many on facebook.

  5. #845
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    3,129
    Quote Originally Posted by Abaddon View Post
    Add 200 pages on apollohoax and who knows how many on facebook.
    Let's not forget asserting that the only thing keeping orbiting rockets from plunging Earthward is if they keep thrusting. (post 811)

  6. #846
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Posts
    45
    Quote Originally Posted by TimFinch View Post
    he claims bremsstrahlung interactions in the aluminum shielding is shielded by the very same aluminum shielding which is ridiculous at all levels.
    Wrong. Depending on the energy levels of the gamma rays and thickness of the shielding, they could easily be shielded to almost 100%.
    Quote Originally Posted by TimFinch View Post
    He shows a curved path through the VAB which is a blatant fabrication.
    You have been shown many times and many ways that the path WAS curved. You not being able to understand that does not affect the veracity of that fact.
    Quote Originally Posted by TimFinch View Post
    He clains that no electron flux penetrates the aluminum shielding which is a total disregard for the truth
    For lower energy electrons, 100% shielding by even 1mm of aluminum is in fact the truth.

  7. #847
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by TimFinch View Post
    gravity pulls the object toward the earth and only rocket thrust will keep it in orbit.
    That has got to be the funniest comment on this thread.

  8. #848
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Posts
    1,675
    TimFinch, Direct Question: does an orbit require continuous thrust?

    (Just to head off an expected waffle, I mean hypothetical orbit in vacuum; don't bother fishing for station-keeping thrusters and all that rot, this is specifically about whether a rocket has to fire every few seconds or go flying off into space).

  9. #849
    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    The beautiful north coast (Ohio)
    Posts
    47,883
    TimFinch is gone for the next two weeks (or longer) so he won't be answering questions soon.

    I'm going to close this thread, but if he returns and wants to continue his claims, he will have to answer all these questions.
    At night the stars put on a show for free (Carole King)

    All moderation in purple - The rules

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •