Satan on a Skateboard.

markjo [29000+] f.m.
sokarul [11000+] f.m.
rabinoz [1500+] f.m.
Mainframes [1500+] f.m.
Jadyyn [1300+] f.m.
Definitely Not Official [900+] f.m.
Frenat [900+] f.m.
getrealzommb [500+] f.m.
Blue_Moon [400+] f.m.
disputeone [100+] f.m. (satanist, like any of these (cock)suckers, but he's not afraid to show us)
NewtSmooth [100+] f.m.
uCantBeSerious [100+] f.m.


WELCOME FREEMASONS. WE'VE WATCHING YOU, IT'S NOT YOU WATCHING US. YOU CAN KISS MY ASS.

What does that even mean?

markjo [29000+] f.m.
sokarul [11000+] f.m.
rabinoz [1500+] f.m.
Mainframes [1500+] f.m.
Jadyyn [1300+] f.m.
Definitely Not Official [900+] f.m.
Frenat [900+] f.m.
getrealzommb [500+] f.m.
Blue_Moon [400+] f.m.
disputeone [100+] f.m. (satanist, like any of these (cock)suckers, but he's not afraid to show us)
NewtSmooth [100+] f.m.
uCantBeSerious [100+] f.m.


WELCOME FREEMASONS. WE'VE WATCHING YOU, IT'S NOT YOU WATCHING US. YOU CAN KISS MY ASS.

Nawww i got a special mention.
Are we going to move this to complete nonsense or are we going to let Papa carry on with his delusions.

We are watching John ;-)

Quote from: JohnRozz on May 15, 2016, 03:19:42 PM

markjo [29000+] f.m.
sokarul [11000+] f.m.
rabinoz [1500+] f.m.
Mainframes [1500+] f.m.
Jadyyn [1300+] f.m.
Definitely Not Official [900+] f.m.
Frenat [900+] f.m.
getrealzommb [500+] f.m.
Blue_Moon [400+] f.m.
disputeone [100+] f.m. (satanist, like any of these (cock)suckers, but he's not afraid to show us)
NewtSmooth [100+] f.m.
uCantBeSerious [100+] f.m.


WELCOME FREEMASONS. WE'VE WATCHING YOU, IT'S NOT YOU WATCHING US. YOU CAN KISS MY ASS.

What does that even mean?

I think it means he has a paranoid schizo affective disorder.

***Mental health is not a joke nor do i find it funny, i say this out of genuine concern***

Quote from: Blue_Moon on May 15, 2016, 04:22:38 PM

Quote from: JohnRozz on May 15, 2016, 03:19:42 PM

markjo [29000+] f.m.
sokarul [11000+] f.m.
rabinoz [1500+] f.m.
Mainframes [1500+] f.m.
Jadyyn [1300+] f.m.
Definitely Not Official [900+] f.m.
Frenat [900+] f.m.
getrealzommb [500+] f.m.
Blue_Moon [400+] f.m.
disputeone [100+] f.m. (satanist, like any of these (cock)suckers, but he's not afraid to show us)
NewtSmooth [100+] f.m.
uCantBeSerious [100+] f.m.


WELCOME FREEMASONS. WE'VE WATCHING YOU, IT'S NOT YOU WATCHING US. YOU CAN KISS MY ASS.

What does that even mean?

I think it means he has a paranoid schizo affective disorder.

***Mental health is not a joke nor do i find it funny, i say this out of genuine concern***

He is the new version of the Intikam FE bot. No match for the original.

markjo [29000+] f.m.
sokarul [11000+] f.m.
rabinoz [1500+] f.m.
Mainframes [1500+] f.m.
Jadyyn [1300+] f.m.
Definitely Not Official [900+] f.m.
Frenat [900+] f.m.
getrealzommb [500+] f.m.
Blue_Moon [400+] f.m.
disputeone [100+] f.m. (satanist, like any of these (cock)suckers, but he's not afraid to show us)
NewtSmooth [100+] f.m.
uCantBeSerious [100+] f.m.


WELCOME FREEMASONS. WE'VE WATCHING YOU, IT'S NOT YOU WATCHING US. YOU CAN KISS MY ASS.

Wait a minute ... You think I'm not a freemason?

Must be doing something wrong.

markjo [29000+] f.m.
sokarul [11000+] f.m.
rabinoz [1500+] f.m.
Mainframes [1500+] f.m.
Jadyyn [1300+] f.m.
Definitely Not Official [900+] f.m.
Frenat [900+] f.m.
getrealzommb [500+] f.m.
Blue_Moon [400+] f.m.
disputeone [100+] f.m. (satanist, like any of these (cock)suckers, but he's not afraid to show us)
NewtSmooth [100+] f.m.
uCantBeSerious [100+] f.m.


WELCOME FREEMASONS. WE'VE WATCHING YOU, IT'S NOT YOU WATCHING US. YOU CAN KISS MY ASS.

So you're going to call in the family! We are shivering in our (concrete) boots.

We are not watching you, we are only concerned with the facts, but you don't seem to have any!


Once you start attacking your opponents and not the facts you've given up! You do know about "ad hominem" attacks.

ad hominem
Ad hominem (Latin for "to the man" or "to the person"), short for argumentum ad hominem, is a logical fallacy in which an argument is rebutted by attacking the character, motive, or other attribute of the person making the argument, or persons associated with the argument, rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself.

I for one have never had the slightest connection with Freemasons!


You might retrieve the situation if you can come up with solid evidence, but I doubt it.

You might notice that a lot of the strong opposition to the Flat Earth comes the Southern Hemisphere. Down here we know that the Flat Earth maps are ridiculously in error.

Free mason, Flat earth society definition:
Argues with facts, logic, reason and empirical evidence. Free mason.

Synonyms: Shill, Sock puppet, dispute.

I posted the quote that provided the context

What context?

F=ma is F=ma; how does 'context' change the fact that you ended up saying that non-zero F can be created when m=0?

It's basic stuff, markjo29000; & you blew it.

So don't swan around making condescending remarks about Newton's Laws any more, you old mountebank.

Now; about Satan, on his shpayze-board, lobbing medicine balls...

Proves what, precisely?

Quote from: markjo on May 15, 2016, 03:04:56 PM

I posted the quote that provided the context

What context?

F=ma is F=ma; how does 'context' change the fact that you ended up saying that non-zero F can be created when m=0?

It's basic stuff, markjo29000; & you blew it.

So don't swan around making condescending remarks about Newton's Laws any more, you old mountebank.

Now; about Satan, on his shpayze-board, lobbing medicine balls...

Proves what, precisely?

I think you missed the point that the mass of atmosphere was not the 'm' in the equation at all and hence could be any value including zero.

I think you missed the point that the mass of atmosphere was not the 'm' in the equation at all and hence could be any value including zero.

I think you are trying to dig your shill-leader markjo out of a hole by lying about what was said.

But intelligent people will have gone & read it for themselves already & concluded markjo is full of shit.

You can keep pretending they haven't if you like, & ramp up the hate-factor some more?

Besides, you didn't even know what a 'force' is until I told you...

Maybe you'd like to deny that, too, just to add some bonus-hate?

Silly little man!

Quote from: markjo on May 15, 2016, 03:04:56 PM

I posted the quote that provided the context

What context?

F=ma is F=ma; how does 'context' change the fact that you ended up saying that non-zero F can be created when m=0?

It's basic stuff, markjo29000; & you blew it.

So don't swan around making condescending remarks about Newton's Laws any more, you old mountebank.

Now; about Satan, on his shpayze-board, lobbing medicine balls...

Proves what, precisely?

Can you please write out your own explanation of what a "strawman argument is"
Please Papa, no trolling just what it means to you.
Toodle Pip.

Yeah, it's what you're doing now.

Ditto the trolling.

Here's the OP, in case you forgot:

...in space, throwing medicine balls.

Proves something about the ability of a Finite amount of gas to create pressure in an Infinite vacuum, according to our noob Oz-shill pal 'disputeone'...

Off you go, 'Ozshillone'; tell us all about it!

The OP should've landed this thread in complete nonsense, but i seem to have scared jroa off for a while, guess we are stuck here.

The infernal prince throwing a medicine ball in space is an example of an action reaction force pair.

A rocket shooting gas out at a high speed is another example of an action reaction force pair

F=ma force equals mass times acceleration, now what does is matter if the outside environment is atmospheric or not?

i seem to have scared jroa off

LOL!!!

A rocket shooting gas out at a high speed is another example of an action reaction force pair

It is not.

Quote from: disputeone on May 16, 2016, 02:17:27 AM

A rocket shooting gas out at a high speed is another example of an action reaction force pair

It is not.

Well, Papa just beat me in intellectual debate, anyone with a PHD in rocket science on? I can't handle the technical questions (sarcasm)

Well, Papa just beat me in intellectual debate

I did.

Still think jroa's scared of you btw, Anton La Ghey?

Quote from: markjo on May 15, 2016, 03:04:56 PM

I posted the quote that provided the context

What context?

This context:

Quote from: Papa Legba on May 03, 2016, 05:58:46 AM

Quote from: Mainframes on May 03, 2016, 05:38:30 AM

rockets work using most simple tenet of conservation of momentum.

No they don't.

They work via the formula Force=Pressure x Area, the Force being created via Newton's 3rd law as the rocket exhaust Presses against the external mass of the atmosphere at the Area of the nozzle exit.

Ergo, No Atmosphere = No Force.

Cool story, bro.  Except that in your beloved F = Pressure x Area, there is no term for mass, so how do you determine how much atmospheric mass the force needs to push against?

F=ma is F=ma; how does 'context' change the fact that you ended up saying that non-zero F can be created when m=0?

Then you shouldn't have any trouble telling us how much atmospheric mass a rocket needs to push against in order to accelerate.

Now; about Satan, on his shpayze-board, lobbing medicine balls...

Proves what, precisely?

That rockets don't really need pressure in order to work. 

Rockets can just as easily use solid objects as the reaction mass and work just fine.

rockets don't really need pressure in order to work.

Never...

Ever...

EVER...

Go full retard.

Everybody knows you never go full retard.

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 05:31:50 AM

rockets don't really need pressure in order to work.

Never...

Ever...

EVER...

Go full retard.

Everybody knows you never go full retard.

Why not?

You did when you said:

They work via the formula Force=Pressure x Area, the Force being created via Newton's 3rd law as the rocket exhaust Presses against the external mass of the atmosphere at the Area of the nozzle exit.

What part of F=pa says anything about mass?

No way I'm getting a ban cos of your utter shitposting madness & incessant trolling, so I'll just leave this gibberish without comment, for intelligent people to be appalled by:

rockets don't really need pressure in order to work.

Quote from: Papa Legba on May 15, 2016, 10:52:11 PM

F=ma is F=ma; how does 'context' change the fact that you ended up saying that non-zero F can be created when m=0?

Then you shouldn't have any trouble telling us how much atmospheric mass a rocket needs to push against in order to accelerate.

Rockets can just as easily use solid objects as the reaction mass and work just fine.

What part of F=pa says anything about mass?

No way I'm getting a ban cos of your utter shitposting madness & incessant trolling, so I'll just leave this gibberish without comment, for intelligent people to be appalled by:

Actually, you're more likely to receive a ban (or at least a warning) for quoting someone without adding a comment.  It's called low content posting because it adds nothing to the discussion.

As everything you say is a lie, I'm gonna just keep leaving your gibberish without comment, for intelligent people to be appalled by:

rockets don't really need pressure in order to work.

Quote from: Papa Legba on May 15, 2016, 10:52:11 PM

F=ma is F=ma; how does 'context' change the fact that you ended up saying that non-zero F can be created when m=0?

Then you shouldn't have any trouble telling us how much atmospheric mass a rocket needs to push against in order to accelerate.

Rockets can just as easily use solid objects as the reaction mass and work just fine.

What part of F=pa says anything about mass?

^This last one's a beauty!

As everything you say is a lie, I'm gonna just keep leaving your gibberish without comment, for intelligent people to be appalled by:

Intelligent people are appalled by your ignorance.

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 05:31:50 AM

rockets don't really need pressure in order to work.

Papa Legba has never heard of an ion thruster.

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 05:31:50 AM

Quote from: Papa Legba on May 15, 2016, 10:52:11 PM

F=ma is F=ma; how does 'context' change the fact that you ended up saying that non-zero F can be created when m=0?

Then you shouldn't have any trouble telling us how much atmospheric mass a rocket needs to push against in order to accelerate.

Again, you show your intellectual dishonesty by ignoring the fact that you are the one who is claiming that a rocket must push against the mass of the atmosphere but refuse to explain how much atmospheric mass your rocket engine must push against.

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 05:31:50 AM

Rockets can just as easily use solid objects as the reaction mass and work just fine.

Papa Legba has also never heard of a mass-driver.

A spacecraft could carry a mass driver as its primary engine. With a suitable source of electrical power (probably a nuclear reactor) the spaceship could then use the mass driver to accelerate pieces of matter of almost any sort, boosting itself in the opposite direction. At the smallest scale of reaction mass, this type of drive is called an ion drive.

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 06:55:24 AM

What part of F=pa says anything about mass?

^This last one's a beauty!

Yes, because it shows that your claim that rocket engines work by pressure pushing against atmospheric mass is utter nonsense.

As everything you say is a lie, I'm gonna just keep leaving your gibberish without comment, for intelligent people to be appalled by:

rockets don't really need pressure in order to work.

Quote from: Papa Legba on May 15, 2016, 10:52:11 PM

F=ma is F=ma; how does 'context' change the fact that you ended up saying that non-zero F can be created when m=0?

Then you shouldn't have any trouble telling us how much atmospheric mass a rocket needs to push against in order to accelerate.

Rockets can just as easily use solid objects as the reaction mass and work just fine.

What part of F=pa says anything about mass?

Quote from: Papa Legba on May 16, 2016, 01:33:31 PM

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 06:55:24 AM

What part of F=pa says anything about mass?

^This last one's a beauty!

Yes, because it shows that your claim that rocket engines work by pressure pushing against atmospheric mass is utter nonsense.

you are the one who is claiming that a rocket must push against the mass of the atmosphere but refuse to explain how much atmospheric mass your rocket engine must push against.

markjo [29000+] f.m.
sokarul [11000+] f.m.
rabinoz [1500+] f.m.
Mainframes [1500+] f.m.
Jadyyn [1300+] f.m.
Definitely Not Official [900+] f.m.
Frenat [900+] f.m.
getrealzommb [500+] f.m.
Blue_Moon [400+] f.m.
disputeone [100+] f.m. (satanist, like any of these (cock)suckers, but he's not afraid to show us)
NewtSmooth [100+] f.m.
uCantBeSerious [100+] f.m.


WELCOME FREEMASONS. WE'VE WATCHING YOU, IT'S NOT YOU WATCHING US. YOU CAN KISS MY ASS.

WTF I'M A FREEMASON NOW??

Well that's something new...

Apparently you think I want to molest you as well. Uh no, thanks.

Oh look, Tesla said it, so it MUST be true! WOOO!!!

As everything you say is a lie, I'm gonna just keep leaving your gibberish without comment, for intelligent people to be appalled by:

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 05:31:50 AM

rockets don't really need pressure in order to work.

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 05:31:50 AM

Quote from: Papa Legba on May 15, 2016, 10:52:11 PM

F=ma is F=ma; how does 'context' change the fact that you ended up saying that non-zero F can be created when m=0?

Then you shouldn't have any trouble telling us how much atmospheric mass a rocket needs to push against in order to accelerate.

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 05:31:50 AM

Rockets can just as easily use solid objects as the reaction mass and work just fine.

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 06:55:24 AM

What part of F=pa says anything about mass?

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 03:44:28 PM

Quote from: Papa Legba on May 16, 2016, 01:33:31 PM

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 06:55:24 AM

What part of F=pa says anything about mass?

^This last one's a beauty!

Yes, because it shows that your claim that rocket engines work by pressure pushing against atmospheric mass is utter nonsense.

Quote from: markjo on May 16, 2016, 03:44:28 PM

you are the one who is claiming that a rocket must push against the mass of the atmosphere but refuse to explain how much atmospheric mass your rocket engine must push against.

I thought the point of this thread was to attack me Papa, why go after markjo?

Are you tired of me making you look ignorant in front of everyone?