Heiwas lack of understanding in everything and his obsession with poop

  • 2134 Replies
  • 274315 Views
*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #330 on: May 17, 2017, 06:58:15 PM »


I have my reasons to distrust Heiwa. I can share them if you like.

He actually is an engineer also which furthers my suspicions.

Please tell me about your distrust.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #331 on: May 17, 2017, 08:25:40 PM »
Testing nuclear weapons seem only to be footage of FLASHES followed by no destruction of any kind.
??? ??? ???  Are you saying that you've never seen films of tests like these?



Of course I have seen it! So the footage proves that instant militart destrcutive fission, i..e. a-bombs work? But it is just trick film! Like everything else shown about a-bombs in the 1940/50's. It was produced to scare you. Nothing else. IMO it proves what I say. Nuclear weapons are fake from the start. Just propaganda.
Why do I get the feeling that you still wouldn't believe in atomic bombs even if you were vaporized by one? ::)
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

disputeone

  • 24826
  • Or should I?
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #332 on: May 17, 2017, 08:34:36 PM »


I have my reasons to distrust Heiwa. I can share them if you like.

He actually is an engineer also which furthers my suspicions.

Please tell me about your distrust.

You raise a very valid and relevant point here.

Quote
The engineers find it difficult to believe the government’s claim that scattered fires brought about such an orderly collapse. Failure of heat-weakened steel would show “large deflection, asymmetric local failure, and slow progress,” David Scott, C.Eng., a chartered consulting structural engineer in the UK, told colleagues at the Institution of Structural Engineers in the UK. It’s “a gradual process,” agrees Anders Björkman, and “cannot be simultaneous everywhere.” A Swedish naval architect and marine engineer working in France, Björkman maintains that failures “will always be local and topple the mass above in the direction of the local collapse.”

http://www.ae911truth.org/news/199-news-media-events-60-structural-engineers.html

You are, of course, correct.

You then go on to discredit everything you say by claiming the towers were holgrams / cgi.

Furthermore you destroy any credibility you have left by parroting demonstrably incorrect physics in your "moon landing challenge." Also going on about the impossibility of sex in shpayze.

I'm not even going to touch your "nuclear challenge"

So in my eyes you make a totally correct statement, then you go in to destroy your credibility (a lot of posters would say on purpose.) And the credibilty of your arguments.

Why do it? It seems to me like you are doing a great job of making any alternative hypothesis look as stupid as you make yourself look.

That is all, fault my logic, if you like.
Quote from: Stash
I'm anti-judaism.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl
Whose narrative is it to not believe the government?

Quote from: Wolvaccine
speech should be a privilege. Not a right.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #333 on: May 17, 2017, 10:37:17 PM »


I have my reasons to distrust Heiwa. I can share them if you like.

He actually is an engineer also which furthers my suspicions.

Please tell me about your distrust.

You raise a very valid and relevant point here.

Quote
The engineers find it difficult to believe the government’s claim that scattered fires brought about such an orderly collapse. Failure of heat-weakened steel would show “large deflection, asymmetric local failure, and slow progress,” David Scott, C.Eng., a chartered consulting structural engineer in the UK, told colleagues at the Institution of Structural Engineers in the UK. It’s “a gradual process,” agrees Anders Björkman, and “cannot be simultaneous everywhere.” A Swedish naval architect and marine engineer working in France, Björkman maintains that failures “will always be local and topple the mass above in the direction of the local collapse.”

http://www.ae911truth.org/news/199-news-media-events-60-structural-engineers.html

You are, of course, correct.

You then go on to discredit everything you say by claiming the towers were holgrams / cgi.

Furthermore you destroy any credibility you have left by parroting demonstrably incorrect physics in your "moon landing challenge." Also going on about the impossibility of sex in shpayze.

I'm not even going to touch your "nuclear challenge"

So in my eyes you make a totally correct statement, then you go in to destroy your credibility (a lot of posters would say on purpose.) And the credibilty of your arguments.

Why do it? It seems to me like you are doing a great job of making any alternative hypothesis look as stupid as you make yourself look.

That is all, fault my logic, if you like.
Thanks for clarifications.
Re 911 I only suggest that a small, weak top A of a structure cannot by gravity crush the intact, solid, strong bottom part C, which keeps it in place even after dropping A on C. I have shown it scientifically. So I suggest that any footage showing A crushing C is fake (even if plenty people are running around in the footage while A crushes C). Footage is easy to fake. Part B is a small part between top A and bottom C. It fails so A drops by gravity on C.

Same with men on the Moon. All footage of men on the Moon is fake and produced in studios on Earth! Easy to fake! And then you back it up with

You see how easy it is!

Same with nuclear weapons:



Easy as a pie!

You were mentioning 911!



Just because something is mentioned on the first page of a newspaper, it doesn't mean that it happened.

See what I mean?
« Last Edit: May 18, 2017, 12:00:55 AM by Heiwa »

*

disputeone

  • 24826
  • Or should I?
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #334 on: May 17, 2017, 10:40:34 PM »
Yes yes, everything is cgi, you do your thing man.
Quote from: Stash
I'm anti-judaism.

Quote from: Space Cowgirl
Whose narrative is it to not believe the government?

Quote from: Wolvaccine
speech should be a privilege. Not a right.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #335 on: May 17, 2017, 10:53:05 PM »
Yes yes, everything is cgi, you do your thing man.

No, my thing is to explain how you fake reality by propaganda. I have done it myself when I was in the military. 1970 I told representatives of the enemy how clever we were to beat them. And they never attacked us. I didn't use cgi to do it.

Anyway, it seems plenty people with funny names at this forum are totally brainwashed by propaganda of all types.

*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #336 on: May 17, 2017, 11:34:18 PM »



Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

*

Bullwinkle

  • The Elder Ones
  • 21053
  • Standard Idiot
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #337 on: May 17, 2017, 11:43:17 PM »
. . . my thing is to  . . . fake reality by propaganda.


?

Kami

  • 1160
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #338 on: May 18, 2017, 04:50:15 AM »
If anyone ever asks me for an example of circular reasoning I will link them to heiwa. A-bombs do not exist. Therefore the footage is faked. Therefore A-bombs do not exist. Excellent piece of logic.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • The Elder Ones
  • 42529
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #339 on: May 18, 2017, 05:38:09 AM »
Anyway, it seems plenty people with funny names at this forum are totally brainwashed by propaganda of all types.
How do you tell the difference real news and propaganda?

How do you know that you aren't the one brainwashed by your own propaganda?
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #340 on: May 18, 2017, 05:44:52 AM »
If anyone ever asks me for an example of circular reasoning I will link them to heiwa. A-bombs do not exist. Therefore the footage is faked. Therefore A-bombs do not exist. Excellent piece of logic.

? End 1944 USA started terror fire bombing Japanese towns of no real military value. By end July 1945 or seven months later >60 big Japanese towns had been burnt down. But by chance USA Army had forgotten to wipe out the big ports of Nagasaki and Hiroshima with their important military industrial complexes. This is the official story established afterwards.
But then USA had developed and tested their a-bombs and ... they were used to vaporize both Hiroshima and Nagasaki in  nano-seconds August 1945. It was the first and last time nuclear weapons have been used in war according official history established by winner (and loser).
IMHO official history is just propaganda. Nagasaki and Hiroshima were fire bombed already spring 1945 but to cover up the fact that a-bombs don't work, they were used as official a-bomb targets August 1945. Footage of fire bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki were later used as evidence (LOL) that a-bombs work.

Only brain washed people believe/love a-bombs and manned space travel and arabs landing in NY skyscrapers. I just feel sorry for these fools.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #341 on: May 18, 2017, 05:56:38 AM »
Anyway, it seems plenty people with funny names at this forum are totally brainwashed by propaganda of all types.
How do you tell the difference real news and propaganda?

How do you know that you aren't the one brainwashed by your own propaganda?

Thanks for asking.

I personally check the records, verify any scientific research and ask people involved.

Re instantaneous, military fission that transforms pure metal into radiation in a FLASH (the a-bomb) that lasts nanoseconds, it is pure pseudoscience, IMO. Fission is something completely different. Friends of mine were involved in that fake business building a bombs for Sweden and Stalin. Anyway ... after 8/1945 no a-bombs have been used in battle. 1000's of fake tests have been done ... all propaganda.

Re manned space travel it was a very popular business late 1950's, early 1960's with 1000's of people getting involved to make money out of it. We were all told it was a piece of cake to fly in space. But then everything became military secret for national security reasons and manned space travel became a closed shop for some fanatics. The only result was propaganda of successful trips ... of no value at all just costing a lot of money.


Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #342 on: May 18, 2017, 05:58:17 AM »
Heiwa why do you say such stupid things?  ???
Stupid? Anyone stating she/he has been in space is a silly, lying fool paid like a prostitute. Human space travel is as fake as nuclear weapons.
Use your brains if any.
Prove it.  Back up your statements here, where you made them not on your obnoxious website.

Have you ever seen anything destroyed by a nuclear weapon in peace (testing) and war (to win it)?
I have not personally seen it, but there were plenty of witnesses that survived the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts.  There were also plenty of military personnel who witnessed above ground tests in the '40s and '50s.

Testing nuclear weapons seem only to be footage of FLASHES followed by no destruction of any kind.
??? ??? ???  Are you saying that you've never seen films of tests like these?



Of course I have seen it! So the footage proves that instant militart destrcutive fission, i..e. a-bombs work? But it is just trick film! Like everything else shown about a-bombs in the 1940/50's. It was produced to scare you. Nothing else. IMO it proves what I say. Nuclear weapons are fake from the start. Just propaganda.
Prove it or shut up.  You have failed again.

Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #343 on: May 18, 2017, 06:01:36 AM »
If anyone ever asks me for an example of circular reasoning I will link them to heiwa. A-bombs do not exist. Therefore the footage is faked. Therefore A-bombs do not exist. Excellent piece of logic.

? End 1944 USA started terror fire bombing Japanese towns of no real military value. By end July 1945 or seven months later >60 big Japanese towns had been burnt down. But by chance USA Army had forgotten to wipe out the big ports of Nagasaki and Hiroshima with their important military industrial complexes. This is the official story established afterwards.
But then USA had developed and tested their a-bombs and ... they were used to vaporize both Hiroshima and Nagasaki in  nano-seconds August 1945. It was the first and last time nuclear weapons have been used in war according official history established by winner (and loser).
IMHO official history is just propaganda. Nagasaki and Hiroshima were fire bombed already spring 1945 but to cover up the fact that a-bombs don't work, they were used as official a-bomb targets August 1945. Footage of fire bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki were later used as evidence (LOL) that a-bombs work.

Only brain washed people believe/love a-bombs and manned space travel and arabs landing in NY skyscrapers. I just feel sorry for these fools.
You just did it again.  No evidence, just you making a claim.
More failure by you.  Sad really

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #344 on: May 18, 2017, 06:45:01 AM »
Heiwa why do you say such stupid things?  ???
Stupid? Anyone stating she/he has been in space is a silly, lying fool paid like a prostitute. Human space travel is as fake as nuclear weapons.
Use your brains if any.
Prove it.  Back up your statements here, where you made them not on your obnoxious website.

Have you ever seen anything destroyed by a nuclear weapon in peace (testing) and war (to win it)?
I have not personally seen it, but there were plenty of witnesses that survived the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts.  There were also plenty of military personnel who witnessed above ground tests in the '40s and '50s.

Testing nuclear weapons seem only to be footage of FLASHES followed by no destruction of any kind.
??? ??? ???  Are you saying that you've never seen films of tests like these?



Of course I have seen it! So the footage proves that instant militart destrcutive fission, i..e. a-bombs work? But it is just trick film! Like everything else shown about a-bombs in the 1940/50's. It was produced to scare you. Nothing else. IMO it proves what I say. Nuclear weapons are fake from the start. Just propaganda.
Prove it or shut up.  You have failed again.
Yes - I have seen the movie! The house catches fire and flies away. I see it. Very strange. It is suggested that an a-bomb exploded on the other side of the street but ... I didn't see it. Not even the camera caught the exploding a-bomb.
I have always wondered who took the film and why he/she + camera were not v a p o r i z e d! I am told that a-bombs vaporize everything in the vicinity and that the r a d i a t i o n  kills everyone hanging around.

Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #345 on: May 18, 2017, 09:01:47 AM »
Heiwa why do you say such stupid things?  ???
Stupid? Anyone stating she/he has been in space is a silly, lying fool paid like a prostitute. Human space travel is as fake as nuclear weapons.
Use your brains if any.
Prove it.  Back up your statements here, where you made them not on your obnoxious website.

Have you ever seen anything destroyed by a nuclear weapon in peace (testing) and war (to win it)?
I have not personally seen it, but there were plenty of witnesses that survived the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts.  There were also plenty of military personnel who witnessed above ground tests in the '40s and '50s.

Testing nuclear weapons seem only to be footage of FLASHES followed by no destruction of any kind.
??? ??? ???  Are you saying that you've never seen films of tests like these?



Of course I have seen it! So the footage proves that instant militart destrcutive fission, i..e. a-bombs work? But it is just trick film! Like everything else shown about a-bombs in the 1940/50's. It was produced to scare you. Nothing else. IMO it proves what I say. Nuclear weapons are fake from the start. Just propaganda.
Prove it or shut up.  You have failed again.
Yes - I have seen the movie! The house catches fire and flies away. I see it. Very strange. It is suggested that an a-bomb exploded on the other side of the street but ... I didn't see it. Not even the camera caught the exploding a-bomb.
I have always wondered who took the film and why he/she + camera were not v a p o r i z e d! I am told that a-bombs vaporize everything in the vicinity and that the r a d i a t i o n  kills everyone hanging around.
Fine.  Prove it's fake.  Just another failure.

*

Pezevenk

  • 15363
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #346 on: May 18, 2017, 10:48:04 AM »
Heiwa why do you say such stupid things?  ???
Stupid? Anyone stating she/he has been in space is a silly, lying fool paid like a prostitute. Human space travel is as fake as nuclear weapons.
Use your brains if any.
Prove it.  Back up your statements here, where you made them not on your obnoxious website.

Have you ever seen anything destroyed by a nuclear weapon in peace (testing) and war (to win it)?
I have not personally seen it, but there were plenty of witnesses that survived the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts.  There were also plenty of military personnel who witnessed above ground tests in the '40s and '50s.

Testing nuclear weapons seem only to be footage of FLASHES followed by no destruction of any kind.
??? ??? ???  Are you saying that you've never seen films of tests like these?



Of course I have seen it! So the footage proves that instant militart destrcutive fission, i..e. a-bombs work? But it is just trick film! Like everything else shown about a-bombs in the 1940/50's. It was produced to scare you. Nothing else. IMO it proves what I say. Nuclear weapons are fake from the start. Just propaganda.
Prove it or shut up.  You have failed again.
Yes - I have seen the movie! The house catches fire and flies away. I see it. Very strange. It is suggested that an a-bomb exploded on the other side of the street but ... I didn't see it. Not even the camera caught the exploding a-bomb.
I have always wondered who took the film and why he/she + camera were not v a p o r i z e d! I am told that a-bombs vaporize everything in the vicinity and that the r a d i a t i o n  kills everyone hanging around.

That's like watching underwater footage and saying "That's fake! People need air and cameras don't work under water!".
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)

*

Dog

  • 1162
  • Literally a dog
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #347 on: May 18, 2017, 02:29:09 PM »
(....) IMO (....)

Whew. It sure is a good thing science doesn't care about your opinion.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #348 on: May 19, 2017, 07:58:47 PM »
Heiwa why do you say such stupid things?  ???
Stupid? Anyone stating she/he has been in space is a silly, lying fool paid like a prostitute. Human space travel is as fake as nuclear weapons.
Use your brains if any.
Prove it.  Back up your statements here, where you made them not on your obnoxious website.

Have you ever seen anything destroyed by a nuclear weapon in peace (testing) and war (to win it)?
I have not personally seen it, but there were plenty of witnesses that survived the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts.  There were also plenty of military personnel who witnessed above ground tests in the '40s and '50s.

Testing nuclear weapons seem only to be footage of FLASHES followed by no destruction of any kind.
??? ??? ???  Are you saying that you've never seen films of tests like these?



Of course I have seen it! So the footage proves that instant militart destrcutive fission, i..e. a-bombs work? But it is just trick film! Like everything else shown about a-bombs in the 1940/50's. It was produced to scare you. Nothing else. IMO it proves what I say. Nuclear weapons are fake from the start. Just propaganda.
Prove it or shut up.  You have failed again.
Yes - I have seen the movie! The house catches fire and flies away. I see it. Very strange. It is suggested that an a-bomb exploded on the other side of the street but ... I didn't see it. Not even the camera caught the exploding a-bomb.
I have always wondered who took the film and why he/she + camera were not v a p o r i z e d! I am told that a-bombs vaporize everything in the vicinity and that the r a d i a t i o n  kills everyone hanging around.

That's like watching underwater footage and saying "That's fake! People need air and cameras don't work under water!".

You are right! Sending an underwater craft to 10 000 m below water is probably fake too like all manned flights in space. You have to verify the details of the claims. Do not rely on some flimsy footage of anything, e.g. a lunar lander on the Moon. It is much easier to do it in a studio on Earth.

?

Twerp

  • Gutter Sniper
  • Flat Earth Almost Believer
  • 6540
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #349 on: May 20, 2017, 12:10:04 AM »
Heiwa why do you say such stupid things?  ???
Stupid? Anyone stating she/he has been in space is a silly, lying fool paid like a prostitute. Human space travel is as fake as nuclear weapons.
Use your brains if any.
Prove it.  Back up your statements here, where you made them not on your obnoxious website.

Have you ever seen anything destroyed by a nuclear weapon in peace (testing) and war (to win it)?
I have not personally seen it, but there were plenty of witnesses that survived the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts.  There were also plenty of military personnel who witnessed above ground tests in the '40s and '50s.

Testing nuclear weapons seem only to be footage of FLASHES followed by no destruction of any kind.
??? ??? ???  Are you saying that you've never seen films of tests like these?



Of course I have seen it! So the footage proves that instant militart destrcutive fission, i..e. a-bombs work? But it is just trick film! Like everything else shown about a-bombs in the 1940/50's. It was produced to scare you. Nothing else. IMO it proves what I say. Nuclear weapons are fake from the start. Just propaganda.
Prove it or shut up.  You have failed again.
Yes - I have seen the movie! The house catches fire and flies away. I see it. Very strange. It is suggested that an a-bomb exploded on the other side of the street but ... I didn't see it. Not even the camera caught the exploding a-bomb.
I have always wondered who took the film and why he/she + camera were not v a p o r i z e d! I am told that a-bombs vaporize everything in the vicinity and that the r a d i a t i o n  kills everyone hanging around.

That's like watching underwater footage and saying "That's fake! People need air and cameras don't work under water!".

You are right! Sending an underwater craft to 10 000 m below water is probably fake too like all manned flights in space. You have to verify the details of the claims. Do not rely on some flimsy footage of anything, e.g. a lunar lander on the Moon. It is much easier to do it in a studio on Earth.

Can you point to anywhere in DNO's quote that he specified a depth of 10, 000 m?

Why do you say such stupid things?
“Heaven is being governed by Devil nowadays..” - Wise

*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #350 on: May 20, 2017, 01:00:57 AM »

Can you point to anywhere in DNO's quote that he specified a depth of 10, 000 m?

Heiwa denies the reality of the Trieste expedition to the Marianas Trench. He does this mostly by saying "It's a fake". Therefore everything is fake because plenty reasons.

Quote
Why do you say such stupid things?

Because he's an idiot who exists in a delusional fantasy world.
Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #351 on: May 20, 2017, 02:59:43 AM »

Can you point to anywhere in DNO's quote that he specified a depth of 10, 000 m?

Heiwa denies the reality of the Trieste expedition to the Marianas Trench. He does this mostly by saying "It's a fake". Therefore everything is fake because plenty reasons.

? Plenty people claim plenty things, like Alexander Humboldt. Ever heard of him? He lived >200 years ago around the corner from me at Freiberg, when I lived there.
Alexander suggested he and a friend had  climbed Aconcagua and many other high mountains 200 years ago - they were the astronuts of their times - but media was not there to check anything. Media just reported it as ... FAKE NEWS!
Yes, Alex & Co had seen the mountains from afar ... and that was it.

*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #352 on: May 20, 2017, 04:49:04 AM »
See what I mean?
Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

*

Pezevenk

  • 15363
  • Militant aporfyrodrakonist
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #353 on: May 20, 2017, 04:57:46 AM »
Heiwa why do you say such stupid things?  ???
Stupid? Anyone stating she/he has been in space is a silly, lying fool paid like a prostitute. Human space travel is as fake as nuclear weapons.
Use your brains if any.
Prove it.  Back up your statements here, where you made them not on your obnoxious website.

Have you ever seen anything destroyed by a nuclear weapon in peace (testing) and war (to win it)?
I have not personally seen it, but there were plenty of witnesses that survived the Hiroshima and Nagasaki blasts.  There were also plenty of military personnel who witnessed above ground tests in the '40s and '50s.

Testing nuclear weapons seem only to be footage of FLASHES followed by no destruction of any kind.
??? ??? ???  Are you saying that you've never seen films of tests like these?



Of course I have seen it! So the footage proves that instant militart destrcutive fission, i..e. a-bombs work? But it is just trick film! Like everything else shown about a-bombs in the 1940/50's. It was produced to scare you. Nothing else. IMO it proves what I say. Nuclear weapons are fake from the start. Just propaganda.
Prove it or shut up.  You have failed again.
Yes - I have seen the movie! The house catches fire and flies away. I see it. Very strange. It is suggested that an a-bomb exploded on the other side of the street but ... I didn't see it. Not even the camera caught the exploding a-bomb.
I have always wondered who took the film and why he/she + camera were not v a p o r i z e d! I am told that a-bombs vaporize everything in the vicinity and that the r a d i a t i o n  kills everyone hanging around.

That's like watching underwater footage and saying "That's fake! People need air and cameras don't work under water!".

You are right! Sending an underwater craft to 10 000 m below water is probably fake too like all manned flights in space. You have to verify the details of the claims. Do not rely on some flimsy footage of anything, e.g. a lunar lander on the Moon. It is much easier to do it in a studio on Earth.

Sigh.

I guess that's why I'm not a millionaire. I'm not THAT dense.
Member of the BOTD for Anti Fascism and Racism

It is not a scientific fact, it is a scientific fuck!
-Intikam

Read a bit psicology and stick your imo to where it comes from
-Intikam (again)

Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #354 on: May 20, 2017, 06:43:12 AM »

Can you point to anywhere in DNO's quote that he specified a depth of 10, 000 m?

Heiwa denies the reality of the Trieste expedition to the Marianas Trench. He does this mostly by saying "It's a fake". Therefore everything is fake because plenty reasons.

? Plenty people claim plenty things, like Alexander Humboldt. Ever heard of him? He lived >200 years ago around the corner from me at Freiberg, when I lived there.
Alexander suggested he and a friend had  climbed Aconcagua and many other high mountains 200 years ago - they were the astronuts of their times - but media was not there to check anything. Media just reported it as ... FAKE NEWS!
Yes, Alex & Co had seen the mountains from afar ... and that was it.
Back to your lack of knowledge on orbital mechanics.  Can you support any of your claims about space travel with actual evidence?  Can you show such evidence here, in this forum where you made those claims without linking to your pathetic website?
Or will simply fail again.

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #355 on: May 20, 2017, 07:32:31 AM »

Can you point to anywhere in DNO's quote that he specified a depth of 10, 000 m?

Heiwa denies the reality of the Trieste expedition to the Marianas Trench. He does this mostly by saying "It's a fake". Therefore everything is fake because plenty reasons.

? Plenty people claim plenty things, like Alexander Humboldt. Ever heard of him? He lived >200 years ago around the corner from me at Freiberg, when I lived there.
Alexander suggested he and a friend had  climbed Aconcagua and many other high mountains 200 years ago - they were the astronuts of their times - but media was not there to check anything. Media just reported it as ... FAKE NEWS!
Yes, Alex & Co had seen the mountains from afar ... and that was it.
Back to your lack of knowledge on orbital mechanics.  Can you support any of your claims about space travel with actual evidence?  Can you show such evidence here, in this forum where you made those claims without linking to your pathetic website?
Or will simply fail again.
Thanks. There is no lack of orbital mechanics knowledge on my part! It is simple rocket science, as you know.
I explain my claims since many years at http://heiwaco.com/moontravel.htm , i.e. humans cannot travel in space. It is a big site. Very popular. Downloaded 100 000's of times.

You have to study it. If you think I am wrong I pay you €1M at http://heiwaco.com/chall.htm . My famous CHALLENGE.

I know plenty people say they have travelled or can travel in space but they have all failed my CHALLENGE. I think they simply lie or are totally brain washed. They cannot explain how it is done or how they did it.

What do you think?

Do you think?

Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #356 on: May 20, 2017, 07:49:54 AM »

Can you point to anywhere in DNO's quote that he specified a depth of 10, 000 m?

Heiwa denies the reality of the Trieste expedition to the Marianas Trench. He does this mostly by saying "It's a fake". Therefore everything is fake because plenty reasons.

? Plenty people claim plenty things, like Alexander Humboldt. Ever heard of him? He lived >200 years ago around the corner from me at Freiberg, when I lived there.
Alexander suggested he and a friend had  climbed Aconcagua and many other high mountains 200 years ago - they were the astronuts of their times - but media was not there to check anything. Media just reported it as ... FAKE NEWS!
Yes, Alex & Co had seen the mountains from afar ... and that was it.
Back to your lack of knowledge on orbital mechanics.  Can you support any of your claims about space travel with actual evidence?  Can you show such evidence here, in this forum where you made those claims without linking to your pathetic website?
Or will simply fail again.
Thanks. There is no lack of orbital mechanics knowledge on my part! It is simple rocket science, as you know.
I explain my claims since many years at http://heiwaco.com/moontravel.htm , i.e. humans cannot travel in space. It is a big site. Very popular. Downloaded 100 000's of times.

You have to study it. If you think I am wrong I pay you €1M at http://heiwaco.com/chall.htm . My famous CHALLENGE.

I know plenty people say they have travelled or can travel in space but they have all failed my CHALLENGE. I think they simply lie or are totally brain washed. They cannot explain how it is done or how they did it.

What do you think?

Do you think?
I think you have failed yet again to post any evidence to support your claims.  By the way, no one is interested in your fake challenge.  Just show your evidence here where you are making your claims.
Why is this so hard for you to understand?  Are you really so stupid that you can't grasp that concept or is it that you can't produce the evidence?

*

onebigmonkey

  • 1623
  • You. Yes you. Stand still laddie.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #357 on: May 20, 2017, 08:18:40 AM »
If you think I am wrong I pay you €1M

I think you are wrong. Pay up.
Facts won't do what I want them to.

We went from a round Earth to a round Moon: http://onebigmonkey.com/apollo/apollo.html

*

Heiwa

  • 10394
  • I have been around a long time.
Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #358 on: May 20, 2017, 08:26:13 AM »
Orbital mechanics, or rather dynamics – the objects are moving – is very simple at least in our part of the Universe.  Just look at the Moon. There must be both an attractive force and a repulsive force acting between us on Earth and the Moon. The strength of each one is maybe dependent on gravity and the distance between the Earth and the Moon. It seems the Moon orbits Earth elliptically in space. Don't ask me to prove it. Just look up!

On Wikipedia it says the perigee of the Moon is ~362 000 km and the apogee is ~405 000km with the midpoint of this elliptical orbit being ~384 000km from Earth.

Let’s start out at this midpoint with the moon having momentum leading it away from Earth in its orbit. As the Moon gets farther away from Earth beyond 384 000km, the attractive force comes to dominate the repulsive force. Meaning the Moon begins to be net pulled towards the Earth. First the momentum away from the Earth is decelerated until the Moon no longer has any momentum moving away from the Earth at the apogee ~405 000km.

As the attractive force is still dominant at this distance, the Moon begins gaining momentum moving towards Earth in its orbit. Until it builds up some good momentum and passes through the midpoint distance of 384 000km once again, but this time going the other way. You can see it yourself by looking up on the Moon. Use your eyes.

As the Moon travels closer to Earth, now the repulsive force begins to dominate. And gradually the repulsive force chips away at the Moon's momentum towards Earth. Until at ~362 000km the repulsive force has brought the Moon's momentum towards Earth to 0. And now the Moon begins to gain momentum moving away from Earth again. It is a simple example or orbital dynamics!

With this the Moon can remain in orbit of Earth for millions or billions of years. Kepler has explained it. One question remains; wouldn't this going back and forth between repulsive and attractive locations of force in orbit, eventually center the Moon at the midpoint distance. For this, I think the rotation of Earth, and the movement of Earth away from its own midpoint away from the Moon, will keep the Moon from achieving a resting midpoint. Another possibility is the action of other bodies like the Sun on the Earth-Moon system, will keep the system from rest distances. Yet another possibility is the idea of a tendency towards stability is based on observing things on Earth, where there is resistance like air resistance, which that tendency might not be true in space.
Anyway, the easiest way to understand orbital mechanics is to look out of the window and watch the Moon.
Our Solar System was, if you believe what you are told at school or by Wikipedia, formed 4.6 billion years ago from the gravitational collapse of a giant interstellar molecular cloud. Imagine that! It was long before I was born and I am sorry I cannot prove it.

However, if you today, 4.6 billion years later, look further away from the tip of your nose and our Universe or Solar System and study other solar systems or galaxies in the sky above,  you will find that they do not orbit anything and pop up and disappear into nothing at regular intervals not following any rules of gravity and orbital dynamics.

Don't blame me for it.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2017, 08:29:36 AM by Heiwa »

Re: Heiwas lack of understanding in orbital mechanics
« Reply #359 on: May 20, 2017, 08:31:39 AM »
Orbital mechanics, or rather dynamics – the objects are moving – is very simple at least in our part of the Universe.  Just look at the Moon. There must be both an attractive force and a repulsive force acting between us on Earth and the Moon. The strength of each one is maybe dependent on gravity and the distance between the Earth and the Moon. It seems the Moon orbits Earth elliptically in space. Don't ask me to prove it. Just look up!

On Wikipedia it says the perigee of the Moon is ~362 000 km and the apogee is ~405 000km with the midpoint of this elliptical orbit being ~384 000km from Earth.

Let’s start out at this midpoint with the moon having momentum leading it away from Earth in its orbit. As the Moon gets farther away from Earth beyond 384 000km, the attractive force comes to dominate the repulsive force. Meaning the Moon begins to be net pulled towards the Earth. First the momentum away from the Earth is decelerated until the Moon no longer has any momentum moving away from the Earth at the apogee ~405 000km.

As the attractive force is still dominant at this distance, the Moon begins gaining momentum moving towards Earth in its orbit. Until it builds up some good momentum and passes through the midpoint distance of 384 000km once again, but this time going the other way. You can see it yourself by looking up on the Moon. Use your eyes.

As the Moon travels closer to Earth, now the repulsive force begins to dominate. And gradually the repulsive force chips away at the Moon's momentum towards Earth. Until at ~362 000km the repulsive force has brought the Moon's momentum towards Earth to 0. And now the Moon begins to gain momentum moving away from Earth again. It is a simple example or orbital dynamics!

With this the Moon can remain in orbit of Earth for millions or billions of years. Kepler has explained it. One question remains; wouldn't this going back and forth between repulsive and attractive locations of force in orbit, eventually center the Moon at the midpoint distance. For this, I think the rotation of Earth, and the movement of Earth away from its own midpoint away from the Moon, will keep the Moon from achieving a resting midpoint. Another possibility is the action of other bodies like the Sun on the Earth-Moon system, will keep the system from rest distances. Yet another possibility is the idea of a tendency towards stability is based on observing things on Earth, where there is resistance like air resistance, which that tendency might not be true in space.
Anyway, the easiest way to understand orbital mechanics is to look out of the window and watch the Moon.
Our Solar System was, if you believe what you are told at school or by Wikipedia, formed 4.6 billion years ago from the gravitational collapse of a giant interstellar molecular cloud. Imagine that! It was long before I was born and I am sorry I cannot prove it.

However, if you today, 4.6 billion years later, look further away from the tip of your nose and our Universe or Solar System and study other solar systems or galaxies in the sky above,  you will find that they do not orbit anything and pop up and disappear into nothing at regular intervals not following any rules of gravity and orbital dynamics.

Don't blame me for it.
Prove it.  Show us these celestial bodies acting in some random fashion.  Show examples of what you are claiming.  Show some actual EVIDENCE.  Again, you fail.