Thierry Legault, we salute you.

threadworm

Graduate Poster
threadworm
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
1,832
Over at Clueless they are so stupid that they think the ISS is a special plane with lights shining on it carrying out nightly charades to fool the general public.

The 'special' people there are so smug in their self-righteous indignation and so certain of their own superiority that, on seeing a montage of ISS images against the solar surface during a partial eclipse taken by well known astrophotographer Thierry Legault, they decided to challenge him. No doubt they were convinced they would take him down and expose him as a fraud.

They demanded that he explain himself, and here is his reply

http://cluesforum.info/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=720&start=1170#p2395097

I have printed a copy of it, just in case it ever disappears down Mr Shack's rabbit hole.

It's too long to reproduce in its entirety here, but after likening them to religious fanatics and calling them scientifically illiterate ignorant dunces, his parting shot is this:

You have chosen to spend your life denying reality; I have chosen to spend my life enjoying it, and that’s what I am going to do right now, skiing in the afternoon and tonight showing to friends a nice passage of the ISS and beautiful Iridium flares. I had a funny moment reading your pathetic efforts to demonstrate at any price that the ISS does not exist, but now I will forget you whatever you can say or think about me. Farewell.
Click to expand...

Bravo Monsieur Legault, Bravo.
 
*drops mic, walks off stage


I just commented in the stundies thread how this man is my new hero. His post is epic. Made my day.
 
threadworm said:
Over at Clueless they are so stupid that they think the ISS is a special plane with lights shining on it carrying out nightly charades to fool the general public.
Click to expand...


Sweet Jesus, what a bunch of irredeemable knuckleheads. Great post from Thierry Legault, though. Bon travail!
 
I like the way he answers the questions and then they say he didn't answer the questions. They not only confuse altitude and distance but they confuse when a question is answered and when the answer is not comprehended.
 
Biscuit said:
*drops mic, walks off stage


I just commented in the stundies thread how this man is my new hero. His post is epic. Made my day.
Click to expand...

I agree, a wonderful post. I liked this part in particular:

You could have a little bit of legitimacy to laugh at them if you had high skills or if you had achieved something remarkable in your life. But your technical or scientific skills are null and you have achieved nothing except staying under cover behind your keyboard, taking no risk, thinking that you are smarter than the rest of the world and inventing conspiracies and absurd theories. What you do is just a shame.
Click to expand...
 
That was great. :)

ETA - Wow, I looked around that forum a little more while I was there. Holy ****! What a bunch of ignorant creeps. It seems they're incapable of making their points without buckets full of sarcasm to dress up their obvious damnfool statements. And the disrespect they show victims of crimes and disasters is straight-up sociopathic. Not a word I throw around lightly.

I feel ill. I couldn't hang out there if someone paid me. Disgusting. :boggled:
 
Last edited:
Simonshacks response is utterly priceless and already stundied.

snip...As for my first (less important) question (which you dismiss as a "non-problem"), I can only wonder why on earth (pun intended) you would use an equatorial camera mount in Sevilla (37°22′38″N)? Surely, the equator is quite a bit further south....snip
Click to expand...
 
Biscuit said:
Simonshacks response is utterly priceless and already stundied.
Click to expand...

Symptomatic of CTers. They see a term/phrase they probably haven't seen before or they may have seen but really don't know what it means, instead of looking up the meaning of the term/phrase they guess and usually guess wrong.
 
What I like best of all is the response by the questioner who provoked his post in the first place. He's not satisfied with the response to his question about why two photographers would record ISS transits of the sun lasting different lengths of time, because he still fails to grasp the very basic geometry involved.

"you claim to have shot the ISS from a distance of 765km, this places you only 140km further away (from the ISS) than Dazza. How this minuscule 140km difference (out of 150 million km) could possibly cause "Dazza's ISS" to appear to travel three times faster than "your ISS" cetainly is - I will readily admit - way beyond my comprehension / and calculation abilities... Besides, your failure of even mentioning Dazza - or much less his stated 625km-distance - suggests that you didn't take my question seriously, or worse, that you fully realized that it was utterly unanswerable..."


It's simply delicious imagining that some day, in order to explain the anomaly to someone, he'll draw it on a piece of paper and suddenly realise what a dolt he's been all along.
 
The burn. Brilliant.

But to these boneheads nothing changes. They don't even lose stride in their follow up posting.
 
isissxn said:
And the disrespect they show victims of crimes and disasters is straight-up sociopathic. Not a word I throw around lightly.
Click to expand...


I've felt that way for a while now. When it comes to long-term, "hardcore" Conspiracy Theorists, they don't seem to be naive but ultimately well meaning people who've simply gotten hold of the wrong end of the stick, they tend to be genuinely malign human beings. That's not quite the ad hom it may appear to be as there was at least one recent study that came to a similar conclusion. Fortunately for the human race CTists also tend to be epically stupid and unmotivated, which means they are usually nothing more than a nuisance. Usually.

Jack by the hedge said:
It's simply delicious imagining that some day, in order to explain the anomaly to someone, he'll draw it on a piece of paper and suddenly realise what a dolt he's been all along.
Click to expand...


I wouldn't count on it.
 
Last edited:
Jack by the hedge said:
What I like best of all is the response by the questioner who provoked his post in the first place. He's not satisfied with the response to his question about why two photographers would record ISS transits of the sun lasting different lengths of time, because he still fails to grasp the very basic geometry involved.

"you claim to have shot the ISS from a distance of 765km, this places you only 140km further away (from the ISS) than Dazza. How this minuscule 140km difference (out of 150 million km) could possibly cause "Dazza's ISS" to appear to travel three times faster than "your ISS" cetainly is - I will readily admit - way beyond my comprehension / and calculation abilities... Besides, your failure of even mentioning Dazza - or much less his stated 625km-distance - suggests that you didn't take my question seriously, or worse, that you fully realized that it was utterly unanswerable..."


It's simply delicious imagining that some day, in order to explain the anomaly to someone, he'll draw it on a piece of paper and suddenly realise what a dolt he's been all along.
Click to expand...
They can't google 'equatorial mount', I doubt they will go to all the trouble to draw an accurate picture.
 
Spindrift said:
They can't google 'equatorial mount', I doubt they will go to all the trouble to draw an accurate picture.
Click to expand...

To be perfectly fair to the estimable Simon Shack, he does seem to know what an equitorial mount is. His post continues:
...and surely, it would make more sense if you astronomical photographers posted / presented your images to the public (of events such as this latest solar eclipse) just as you saw the event from earth with your own eyes - and not tilted at 90°? There may not be any up or down in space, as you say, but I can see no rational motive for rotating any imagery as captured from the surface of earth.
Click to expand...

So, yes, his comment about being far from the equator was just stupid. And his idea that the only natural angle is from the perspective of the photographer is also stupid. But it seems that he actually knows what the equatorial mount means, even if he hasn't a clue[1] in other respects.

[1] No play-on-words intended, honest.
 
phiwum said:
To be perfectly fair to the estimable Simon Shack, he does seem to know what an equitorial mount is. His post continues:


So, yes, his comment about being far from the equator was just stupid. And his idea that the only natural angle is from the perspective of the photographer is also stupid. But it seems that he actually knows what the equatorial mount means, even if he hasn't a clue[1] in other respects.

[1] No play-on-words intended, honest.
Click to expand...

I think he understands it's a type of mount but I don't think he understands what/how/why one would use one.
 
Biscuit said:
I think he understands it's a type of mount but I don't think he understands what/how/why one would use one.
Click to expand...

It's clear that he doesn't understand why one would use one. He more or less explicitly says that.
 
Did anyone notice the idiocy about the twins and old photos of same on p.78 of the posts? These guys are clearly incompetent tools, fools and wipers of other people's arses.
 
fuelair said:
Did anyone notice the idiocy about the twins and old photos of same on p.78 of the posts? These guys are clearly incompetent tools, fools and wipers of other people's arses.
Click to expand...
I don't know. It seems to me most of that crowd couldn't find their own asses with both hands, let alone wipe someone else's butt.
 
Looks like Mr. Legault has posted again as well as two other new members who are correcting simonshock's math and explaining equatorial mounts to him. If they keep this up they will all be banned soon.

ETA: On another note I was driving home past the University of Arizona on Friday and someone had taken a large piece of cardboard and in black marker written "GOOGLE SEPTEMBER CLUES" and stapled it to a roadside telephone poll. I am tempted to create another sign to put below it, "No."
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom