ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 14th January 2019, 01:33 AM   #161
Bjarne
Illuminator
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,176
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
14 January 2019 Bjarne: Insane insults when my post uses Bjarne's deluded equation
Bjarne's deluded equation gives that there will be a "resulting force acting on the particle the speed of the particle will correspond to the force" in the LHC. Thus:
11 January 2019 Bjarne: An insane statement that no deceleration will happen at LHC, etc. according to his delusions!
Now I am confused

Are you saying that 10 Newton minus 1 Newton NOT is insane deluded = +9 Newton, - but rather paronoid minus 1 Newton ?
Or ar you saying that Newtons 2nd law is a deluded insane idiotic law about the insane resulting force, and that this law is a LIE
Or are you simply just saying you long ago just missed the lesson about Newtons lesson idiotic insane deluded law about the resulting force?
Bjarne is offline   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
Old 14th January 2019, 01:47 AM   #162
Mojo
Mostly harmless
 
Mojo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 30,692
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Now I am confused

Now?
__________________
"You got to use your brain." - McKinley Morganfield

"The poor mystic homeopaths feel like petted house-cats thrown at high flood on the breaking ice." - Leon Trotsky
Mojo is offline   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
Old 14th January 2019, 12:54 PM   #163
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,512
Thumbs down "Now I am confused" stupidity when he has been absolutely confused for years

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Now I am confused
15 January 2019 Bjarne: "Now I am confused" stupidity when he has been absolutely confused for more than 10 years !

It is very clear that Bjarne wrote an insane statement of no deceleration in particle accelerators such as the LHC when Bjarne's deluded equation gives deceleration!
It is very clear that insults do not make his statement less insane.

Thus:
11 January 2019 Bjarne: An insane statement that no deceleration will happen at LHC, etc. according to his delusions!
14 January 2019 Bjarne: Insane insults when my post uses Bjarne's deluded equation

And in this post:
15 January 2019 Bjarne: Insanity about 10 and 1 Newtons, Newton's 2nd law and his usual insults.

Bjarne's deluded RR equation gives a deceleration of -7070 of m/s^2 of LHC particles. F=ma means that we could convert this to Newtons of force on a proton. There is nothing to add or subtract .
Reality Check is offline   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
Old 14th January 2019, 05:17 PM   #164
Tanalia
Scholar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Posts: 75
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
An object orbiting Earth will spend equal times "over" and "under" the ecliptic, because it is orbiting Earth's center. It can't be only 5%(or 40% as he seems to amend it later) in one of the hemispheres.

Actually, this isn't true. Although for nearly circular orbits such as the ISS the difference is negligible, high eccentricity such as a Molniya orbit can get considerable "hang time" -- a 12 hour orbit gets 8 hours of easily usable visibility at high (northern) latitudes, with over 10 hours of the orbit "north" of the equator.

This, however, in no way endorses Bjarne's gibberish.
Tanalia is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 12:29 AM   #165
Bjarne
Illuminator
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,176
Originally Posted by Tanalia View Post
Actually, this isn't true. Although for nearly circular orbits such as the ISS the difference is negligible, high eccentricity such as a Molniya orbit can get considerable "hang time" -- a 12 hour orbit gets 8 hours of easily usable visibility at high (northern) latitudes, with over 10 hours of the orbit "north" of the equator.

This, however, in no way endorses Bjarne's gibberish.


RR is a reversible process. This means that if no force pushes / pulls an object (further) towards the RR direction (see principle 4), the object will decelerate.
The RR affecting an object can be compared to a retracted arrow.
All that is required for the retracted, potential, kinetic energy of the arrow to be released is that the force of the string is released (which also illustrates that motion opposite DFD will cause less RR, also simple to calculate based on the Lorentz equation).
Release of Retracted Potential Kinetic Energy (in short RRPKE) will affect any object moving more or less away from DFD (or any other RR affected direction) , depending on the angle of movement away from DFD.

This was written 3 years ago, - source : http://www.internationalskeptics.com...highlight=edfa
Claiming anything different is a LIE
  • Everybody even a insane idiotic deluded paranoid person should be understand that if you have a 10 Newton force pulling SOUTH and a 1 newton force pushing NORTH , the resulting force according to Newton’s second law, Must be + 9 newton.
  • Everybody even a insane idiotic deluded paranoid person should be understand that if you have a 1 Newton force pulling SOUTH and a 1 newton force pushing NORTH , the resulting force according to Newton’s second law, Must be 0 newton. Furthermore if you cancel out the force pulling the object south the object will move north.
  • Furthermore an insane idiotic deluded paranoid person should be understand if the 10 Newton force pulling south, should vanish (or be counteracted), then you have left only a 1 Newton force pointing NORTH.
  • Everybody even an insane idiotic deluded paranoid person should be understand It’s the exact same principle that must apply for the LHC, - if a tiny little insignificant force is counteracting the HUGE force of the LHC, and hence the speed of a particle just a tiny bit less as expected…
  • Everybody even an insane idiotic deluded paranoid person should be understand It’s the exact same principle that must apply any orbit orbiting the Earth etc...
  • Everybody even an insane idiotic deluded paranoid person should be understand such small forces can easy hide without to be discovered.

Last edited by Bjarne; 15th January 2019 at 02:23 AM.
Bjarne is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 12:30 AM   #166
Bjarne
Illuminator
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,176
Originally Posted by Tanalia View Post
Actually, this isn't true. Although for nearly circular orbits such as the ISS the difference is negligible, high eccentricity such as a Molniya orbit can get considerable "hang time" -- a 12 hour orbit gets 8 hours of easily usable visibility at high (northern) latitudes, with over 10 hours of the orbit "north" of the equator.

This, however, in no way endorses Bjarne's gibberish.
Yes off course
I need software to plug in RRPKE, and we will see that the following phenomena is all caused by RRPKE
  • Mercuryís perihelion precession anomaly
  • Flyby Anomalies
  • Oumuamua flyby anomaly.
If anyone can advise which I would be very happy.
Bjarne is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 04:35 AM   #167
steenkh
Philosopher
 
steenkh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denmark
Posts: 5,424
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Yes off course
I need software to plug in RRPKE, and we will see that the following phenomena is all caused by RRPKE
  • Mercuryís perihelion precession anomaly
  • Flyby Anomalies
  • Oumuamua flyby anomaly.
If anyone can advise which I would be very happy.
You have not made any calculations, and yet you have already declared victory?

MS Excel is probably what you want.

There are also online graph calculators, such as the one from Desmos
__________________
Steen

--
Jack of all trades - master of none!
steenkh is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 04:52 AM   #168
Bjarne
Illuminator
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,176
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
You have not made any calculations, and yet you have already declared victory?
Sooner or later, you have to give victory to either to common down to earth sense , or to Aliens interference, - its up to you..

Quote:
MS Excel is probably what you want.
There are also online graph calculators, such as the one from Desmos
It have to be a program for example such as ESA or NASA is using for launching spacecraft into orbit.

Last edited by Bjarne; 15th January 2019 at 04:53 AM.
Bjarne is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 05:05 AM   #169
halleyscomet
Philosopher
 
halleyscomet's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: 9,138
Originally Posted by steenkh View Post
You have not made any calculations, and yet you have already declared victory?



MS Excel is probably what you want.



There are also online graph calculators, such as the one from Desmos


Heís been consistently proud of not having done any of the math to support his claims. He has made it clear he thinks the actual work is beneath him. I sincerely doubt he has ANY comprehension of how much math and how many calculations Einstein did to support Special and General relativity. He seems to think the layman friendly thought experiments Einstein wrote to be the total sum of the theory and its support.

Thatís the baseline and framework weíve been working with here. We ask for the calculations, he claims a child could do them, he declares victory. If anyone does any calculations that donít support his fantasy he declares them too stupid to understand his theories and declares victory again.

Lather.
Rinse.
Repeat.
__________________
Look what I found! There's this whole web site full of skeptics that spun off from the James Randy Education Foundation!
halleyscomet is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 06:28 AM   #170
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,647
Originally Posted by Tanalia View Post
Actually, this isn't true. Although for nearly circular orbits such as the ISS the difference is negligible, high eccentricity such as a Molniya orbit can get considerable "hang time" -- a 12 hour orbit gets 8 hours of easily usable visibility at high (northern) latitudes, with over 10 hours of the orbit "north" of the equator.

This, however, in no way endorses Bjarne's gibberish.
We were specifically talking about the ISS, where the mentioned 4% is ridiculous. I'm quite aware that a highly eccentric plus highly tilted orbit can do this, but I did not feel inclined to try to explain that to the same person who earlier claimed that the moon does not really orbit Earth.

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 06:30 AM   #171
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,647
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
It have to be a program for example such as ESA or NASA is using for launching spacecraft into orbit.

No, that won't do since those programs obviously DON'T show what you want to find. If they did, it would have already been known.

I suggest MS Word or any other text editor. Those are the best suited for writing fiction.

Hans

Edit: But, OK, I feel charitable today so ... here you go: https://space.stackexchange.com/ques...ation-software

And if you want me to give you a crash course in searching with google, do say so....
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.

Last edited by MRC_Hans; 15th January 2019 at 06:35 AM.
MRC_Hans is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 06:47 AM   #172
Bjarne
Illuminator
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,176
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
No, that won't do since those programs obviously DON'T show what you want to find. If they did, it would have already been known.

I suggest MS Word or any other text editor. Those are the best suited for writing fiction.

Hans
It’s much too complex calculation that is necessary because
Nothing follows a simple geodetic path, - the true paths even planets follows its beast to calculate..

The same sets of equation must demonstrate how Oumuamua and other flyby anomalies and even the strange anomaly of Mercury all are caused by the overlooked forces that the MTR describes.

Today many conclusions are based on calculation + observation.
Calculation are often done based on how we belive distances between objects "must be".
However you cannot really meassure the distance between fx the Sun and the earth.
Flyby anomalies, as well as Oumuamua are all broad hints showing that we have a lot more to learn, - all calculation we are using are much too simple, because these not included the forces we are discussing.

On the larges scale such as galaxy orbits and inclinations, - included so called dark matter, - are indeed also evidences showing that we got it all totally wrong...
Bjarne is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 07:03 AM   #173
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,647
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
It’s much too complex calculation that is necessary because
Nothing follows a simple geodetic path, - the true paths even planets follows its beast to calculate..
Yet it is well mastered and has been for decades.

Quote:
The same sets of equation must demonstrate how Oumuamua and other flyby anomalies and even the strange anomaly of Mercury all are caused by the overlooked forces that the MTR describes.
Well, that is for you to prove. Or do you really, really expect to find some already available algorithm that can do that? In that case, I must admit that I have overestimated your rationality.

Quote:
Today many conclusions are based on calculation + observation.
Calculation are often done based on how we belive distances between objects "must be".
Nonsense. Where did you get that idea?

Quote:
However you cannot really meassure the distance between fx the Sun and the earth.
Nonsense. Where did you get that idea?

ETA: https://www.quora.com/How-did-they-c...th-and-the-sun
(You REALLY should learn to use Google)

Quote:
Flyby anomalies, as well as Oumuamua are all broad hints showing that we have a lot more to learn, - all calculation we are using are much too simple, because these not included the forces we are discussing.
I'm afraid half of that does not parse in any language I know, but the various anomalies are generally due to the fact that we do not have a complete data set, not that the methods or physical laws we use are flawed.

Quote:
On the larges scale such as galaxy orbits and inclinations, - included so called dark matter, - are indeed also evidences showing that we got it all totally wrong...
Not at all. It is evidence that we don't have all the data.

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.

Last edited by MRC_Hans; 15th January 2019 at 07:07 AM.
MRC_Hans is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 08:46 AM   #174
Bjarne
Illuminator
 
Bjarne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,176
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
Yet it is well mastered and has been for decades.
Hans
Only if you prefer to be blind for all the orbit anomalies and kinematic mysteries we have observed.
Bjarne is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 12:43 PM   #175
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,647
Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Only if you prefer to be blind for all the orbit anomalies and kinematic mysteries we have observed.
Nonsense. They are all one-time events, where we simply don't have all the data.


Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 01:19 PM   #176
sts60
Illuminator
 
sts60's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,112
Originally Posted by MRC_Hans View Post
To Bjarne's defence, "south", "north", "under", and "over" are actually valid expressions when describing an object's position relative to the ecliptic..,
Sure. Iíve been a space systems engineer for over a quarter-century. I was just asking him what he meant by those terms.

Unfortunately, his reply didnít answer the question. (And also used ďreversibleĒ incorrectly in whatever he was talking about.). Oh, well. Iím not really interested in pursuing it.
sts60 is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 01:46 PM   #177
MRC_Hans
Penultimate Amazing
 
MRC_Hans's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 21,647
Originally Posted by sts60 View Post
Sure. Iíve been a space systems engineer for over a quarter-century. I was just asking him what he meant by those terms.

Unfortunately, his reply didnít answer the question. (And also used ďreversibleĒ incorrectly in whatever he was talking about.). Oh, well. Iím not really interested in pursuing it.
Can't blame you. It ain't nice to contemplate.

Hans
__________________
If you love life, you must accept the traces it leaves.
MRC_Hans is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 03:10 PM   #178
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,512
Thumbs down Ignorance about a "simple geodetic path" and decade old delusion

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Nothing follows a simple geodetic path,...
16 January 2019 Bjarne: Ignorance about a "simple geodetic path" and decade old delusion
Geodetic paths are earth science, especially surveying.
GR which actually explains the "anomaly of Mercury" has geodesic paths.
We have been observing and calculating the paths of planet for centuries - it is textbook orbital mechanics !

Bjarne's decade old delusion that spewing out a increasing list of ignorant, unsupported fantasies is science.

Last edited by Reality Check; 15th January 2019 at 03:13 PM.
Reality Check is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 03:18 PM   #179
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,512
Thumbs down Insanity that the distance between the Sun and the Earth cannot be measured

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
However you cannot really meassure the distance between fx the Sun and the earth.
16 January 2019 Bjarne: Insanity that the distance between the Sun and the Earth cannot be measured
This is the Astronomical Unit which was measured accurately enough that in 2009 that IAU defined it as exactly 149597870700 metres.
Reality Check is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 03:22 PM   #180
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,512
Thumbs down Ignorant delusions about "galaxy orbits and inclinations"

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
On the larges scale such as galaxy orbits and inclinations, - included so called dark matter, - are indeed also evidences showing that we got it all totally wrong...
16 January 2019 Bjarne: Ignorant delusions about "galaxy orbits and inclinations"
There are no problems with galaxy orbits and inclinations. Dark matter has nothing or little to do with galaxy orbits and inclinations. The closest is the 1930's discovery that the dynamics of galaxies inside galaxy clusters means that there is invisible mass (dark matter) in them.
Reality Check is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 03:30 PM   #181
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,512
Thumbs down A stupid comment when we are not blind to his ignorant delusions

Originally Posted by Bjarne View Post
Only if you prefer to be blind for all the orbit anomalies and kinematic mysteries we have observed.
16 January 2019 Bjarne: A stupid comment when we are not blind to his ignorant delusions about "orbit anomalies and kinematic mysteries".

The flyby anomaly exists. We have rational, physical proposed explanations.

A decade of ignorant delusions from someone who cannot do high school level arithmetic does not explain anything.
10 January 2019 Bjarne: v^2/c^2 is < 1 for v < c so what is 1 - v^2/c^2? The square root? The reciprocal? 1 - that?
10 January 2019 Bjarne: Explain how an equation producing negative values is plotted as positive values in a graph
11 January 2019 Bjarne: An insane statement that no deceleration will happen at LHC, etc. according to his delusions!

11 January 2019 Bjarne: Idiocy of a "kinder garden math to figure out" post with no math at all !
31 July 2018 Bjarne: Repeats a lie that he can explain anything with delusions about elastic space.
31 July 2018 Bjarne: A insane "brainwashed fools" insulting rant.
31 July 2018 Bjarne: Back to the stupid lie that the solved Pioneer Anomaly was swept under the carpet.
31 July 2018 Bjarne: Ignorant agreement with an obviously wrong statement about GR.

7 January 2019 Bjarne: Usual delusion that merely repeating your delusions makes them correct.
7 January 2019 Bjarne: ʻOumuamua insanity and ignorance.
7 January 2019 Bjarne: An insane "0,01 ns SR anomaly" question and lie when he is ignorant about the orbits of Galileo 5 & 6 and cannot make a prediction.
7 January 2019 Bjarne: Basically lies about the 'Oumuamua is a solar sail speculation.
7 January 2019 Bjarne: A "many other scientist disagree" lie about the origin of 'Oumuamua.
7 January 2019 Bjarne: "Oumuamua strange acceleration simply just is caused by EDFA" delusions and a graphic from his web site on the trajectory of 'Oumuamua.

9 January 2019 Bjarne: A delusion that the valid explanation of the Pioneer anomaly is related to 'Oumuamua.
9 January 2019 Bjarne: Ignorance about the source of and 'Oumuamua solar sail speculation.
9 January 2019 Bjarne: Lies again that his delusions explain the pioneer anomaly.
9 January 2019 Bjarne: Usual gibberish and then a deep "EXACTLY what MTR predict" delusion.
9 January 2019 Bjarne: 10? years of this insanely wrong equation!
9 January 2019 Bjarne: A spate of his usual gibberish ends in a stupid delusion of 'Oumuamua returning.
9 January 2019 Bjarne: Gibberish, a lie and abysmal ignorance about 'Oumuamua.

11 January 2019 Bjarne: Abysmal ignorance about 'Oumuamua is becoming insane ignorance ('Oumuamua was not, is not and never will be in orbit around the Sun).

14 January 2019 Bjarne: Insane insults when my post uses Bjarne's deluded equation
14 January 2019 Bjarne: An inanely lying question when special relativity has the cause-effect of time dilation (cause = speed, effect = time dilation).
14 January 2019 Bjarne: A "RRKE was predicted" lie when all he had and still has is yet another delusion.
14 January 2019 Bjarne: Some "potential of Dark Flow RRKE" suddenly released stupidity.
14 January 2019 Bjarne: A "We can conclude" lie about his RRPKE delusion
14 January 2019 Bjarne: Repeats his stupid "good right to claim" lie when all he has is delusions.
14 January 2019 Bjarne: A stupid question - because his delusions do not exist and so his "speed increment per orbit" is just another fantasy.
14 January 2019 Bjarne: More lying RRPKE delusions about the Flyby anomaly
15 January 2019 Bjarne: Insanity about 10 and 1 Newtons, Newton's 2nd law and his usual insults.

Last edited by Reality Check; 15th January 2019 at 04:00 PM.
Reality Check is offline   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
Old 15th January 2019, 04:02 PM   #182
dropzone
Master Poster
 
dropzone's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 2,020
Originally Posted by Reality Check View Post
16 January 2019 Bjarne: Insanity that the distance between the Sun and the Earth cannot be measured
This is the Astronomical Unit which was measured accurately enough that in 2009 that IAU defined it as exactly 149597870700 metres.
But only for a moment. I hate ellipses.
dropzone is offline   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
Old Yesterday, 06:37 PM   #183
Reality Check
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 23,512
A Billion Years In Interstellar Space: What We Know Today About ‘Oumuamua
Reality Check is offline   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
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:38 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.