Originally posted by golemina
... Signifying nothing.
A perfect description of your bluster and posturing .
What is the fuss there IA?
No fuss , the catalogue of your evasions , dishonesty and refusal to even look at the facts , and most importantly
It is no longer about you – I never did care , I pegged you from the get go as a troll
Now I am going to stick this out so that every one else will see you for what you really are .
If all of the hardware is in place... Shouldn't be that big a deal to actually use it for it's intended purpose... Of course, available to
public scrutiny.
It is used , on a nightly basis , by the scientists qualified to use it .
Your strident demand for “ public scrutiny “ is noting more than a red herring – an empty bluster – demonstrated by your point blank refusal
to actually take any steps yourself to facilitate such “ inspection “
You still have not answered SHP`s question , nor have you publicly taken any steps to “ make it happen “ – why is that ?
Go to Hawaii? Or whereever... some of us might be able to afford it.
Oh really ,
So , a challenge to you , fill in these forms and apply to visit the apache point observatory :
application
application_01
Be sure to state nature of visit correctly , there the ball is in your court – if you actually
want to visit – make a legitimate
application to do so .
Oh – and fill in a separate copy for each member of your” team” , the instructions are clear – but you still have not told SHP what the exact
wording of the question you wish him / her to submit to the director of the McDonald facility on your behalf is yet .
Speaking of nothing... The objections being raised by the NASA disciples are more those the actions of someone trying to defend what doesn't
exist/never occurred...
No our exasperations are more to do with the fact that you keep moving the goal posts , and demanding increasingly irrelevant information , and
expecting us to spoon feed you
If
you ACTUALLY want to visit an observatory , and have a “ team “ as you claim , and the means / opportunity / funding to fly to Hawaii
at the drop of a hat – as you claim
Why are you singularly incapable of doing anything for yourself ?????
You know... being able to reproduce a result.
The results have been reproduced , to the satisfaction of scientists world wide
Why do you insist on appointing yourself sole judge of validity ??
A bit fooking arrogant is it not .
Especially as you have demonstrated no legitimate qualification for this status .
I'm... challenging... YOU... to... reproduce... the... range... finding... tests... /results...
I cannot , because
i do not work at an observatory – but you know this – and are simply trolling for cheep points
Thousands of rangings have been made – and scrutinized by experts – their validity assured – they have been published – and the data
correlated to show that the moon is receding from the earth at a different rate to that previously thought
The results are also published in print journals [ several peer review publications [ where they are scrutinized by eminently qualified scientists
from around the world
And none , raise any doubts or objection .
But now you have elected yourself as supreme arbiter of the validity of this program – and demand that only you can pronounce it legitimate , and
only be personal inspection
Though you still have failed to demonstrate any qualification which renders you fit for this assignment .
So just re iterate – what is your actuall problem with reading web published data – its not the validity – you are just throwing random
obstacles in the track to justify the fact that you do not want to look at it .
In... the... REAL... WORLD. …………………… Not... on... some... 'web site'.
What is you
honest objection to the web ?
apache_results
Gives concise and detailed experimental data , and has been downloaded and reviewed by scientists around the world – and none have questioned its
validity .
If you are so convinced that your objections to this projects validity are correct – why have you not published your “damming critique “ < sic >
in a legitimate astronomy journal or professional venue ???
Despite the fresh claim that you have a “ team “ now – you have done nothing to show that you have any qualification to rationally analyse the
data presented , or be accepted as legitimate observes at a scientific institute
Research laboratories are not venues for public spectacle – so stop demanding that you have an automatic right to view such inner workings , just
because you want to .
The real world dos not work that way --
I'm sorry if you can't seem to understand that difference... The premise of a SHOW ME strategem.
I understand only to well , your “ show me premise “ is the bluster of a dishonest charlatan who refuses to look at perfectly valid data
And arrogantly concludes that he , and he alone is worthy , and capable of determining the validity of an experiment – and that he must do this in
person
Which also begs a further question...
Why the animosity?
Why ? your willfull ignorance , trollish attitude , unbelievable arrogance and plain refusal to honestly approach the issue .
One other tiny little point... Among other things, my team will do it's own system integrity tests...
Hmmm , you have a “ team “ , what are the qualifications of your “ team “ – you have refused to divulge yours . so how about them – are
they anonymous armchair experts – as you seem to be ?
Who are they , if we are going to peruse this further – we need to know the caliber of the “ team “ we may be dealing with . call it a “ show
me strategy “
So who are they , names , occupations , relevant qualifications . ??
So don't you worry your little self about that... And other little things like research facilities having 'names, locations, directors,
budgets'.
Some of us might be a little more equipped to deal with those little facts...
OK?
If you were “ equipped “ to deal with this situation, in any way shape or form – you would not need us would you ???
The bottom line is if you
wanted to personally check on these experiments , you would have done so already – or atleast laid the groundwork
for your attempt .
The fact that you are here , on an web forum demanding “answers “ while simultaneously claiming that web published data does not meet your
criteria for validity speaks volumes .
PS – SHP is waiting the text of the questions you wish to be forwarded to the McDonald facility .