View Single Post
Old 17th October 2019, 09:13 PM   #216
jonesdave116's Avatar
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 4,307
Originally Posted by Sol88 View Post
So we all agree the RSI experiment is infallible!

Great, so where has Patzold gone wrong in the following statement. Remember you agreed the RSI experiment is solid gold (otherwise Einstein is wrong).

Joensdave116, please point out where you think Patzold is in error.
Given that all the instruments, including ground based and those on other spacecraft all have the water production rate within a factor of a few, then he is obviously doing something wrong. Probably underestimating the fallback mass. And I fail to see what this has got to do with your failed 'model'. Assuming there is a model? I don't think there is. I don't think anybody associated with EU has got the foggiest clue about any of the relevant science. And you cannot explain the water production rates. As measured. By multiple instruments. You don't even have an explanation for why there is water being produced at all. Do you? Your woo is dead. Why are you still here?
“There is in every village a torch - the teacher; and an extinguisher - the priest.” - Victor Hugo

“Never argue with an idiot. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.” - George Carlin
jonesdave116 is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top