Remember me
▼ Content

Well Space X aced another controlled landing. Will be using really low IQ astronuts



Page 1 of 6123>>>
Well Space X aced another controlled landing. Will be using really low IQ astronuts05-03-2021 03:47
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/spacex-starship-prototype-sticks-landing-then-explodes/ar-BB1ed4VN?li=BBnbfcL

So anyone want to argue about the dumbest landing technique in the history of aviation? Will Musky ever ride in his invention
05-03-2021 06:44
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10053)
Swan wrote:So anyone want to argue about the dumbest landing technique in the history of aviation?


I want to argue it.

I claim that the Air Force F-16 pilot who pioneered the habit ... er, ummm, the "technique" of landing upon emerging from a full loop ... until he had to eject because he initiated the loop at too low of an altitude.

He flew a desk from that point thereafter.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
05-03-2021 13:30
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:So anyone want to argue about the dumbest landing technique in the history of aviation?


I want to argue it.

I claim that the Air Force F-16 pilot who pioneered the habit ... er, ummm, the "technique" of landing upon emerging from a full loop ... until he had to eject because he initiated the loop at too low of an altitude.

He flew a desk from that point thereafter.

.


Nah would the pilots of the space x firecracker be desk jockeys after getting toasted?

LOL hardly
05-03-2021 23:59
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:So anyone want to argue about the dumbest landing technique in the history of aviation?


I want to argue it.

I claim that the Air Force F-16 pilot who pioneered the habit ... er, ummm, the "technique" of landing upon emerging from a full loop ... until he had to eject because he initiated the loop at too low of an altitude.

He flew a desk from that point thereafter.

.


Nah would the pilots of the space x firecracker be desk jockeys after getting toasted?

LOL hardly



It wasn't piloted. It was all remotely controlled by a computer. Funny story. When I was in the Navy, they used computers to control the landings of aircraft.
Then the airplane could match the pitch and yaw of the carrier more precisely.
You've probably never watched carrier landings but the planes would be rocking from side to side. They were matching the ships roll.
06-03-2021 01:31
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:So anyone want to argue about the dumbest landing technique in the history of aviation?


I want to argue it.

I claim that the Air Force F-16 pilot who pioneered the habit ... er, ummm, the "technique" of landing upon emerging from a full loop ... until he had to eject because he initiated the loop at too low of an altitude.

He flew a desk from that point thereafter.

.


Nah would the pilots of the space x firecracker be desk jockeys after getting toasted?

LOL hardly



It wasn't piloted. It was all remotely controlled by a computer. Funny story. When I was in the Navy, they used computers to control the landings of aircraft.
Then the airplane could match the pitch and yaw of the carrier more precisely.
You've probably never watched carrier landings but the planes would be rocking from side to side. They were matching the ships roll.


Dude it blew up, total failure. You wanna fly in that piece of shit?

You tell good stories.

Lay off the acid
Edited on 06-03-2021 01:44
06-03-2021 01:51
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:So anyone want to argue about the dumbest landing technique in the history of aviation?


I want to argue it.

I claim that the Air Force F-16 pilot who pioneered the habit ... er, ummm, the "technique" of landing upon emerging from a full loop ... until he had to eject because he initiated the loop at too low of an altitude.

He flew a desk from that point thereafter.

.


Nah would the pilots of the space x firecracker be desk jockeys after getting toasted?

LOL hardly



It wasn't piloted. It was all remotely controlled by a computer. Funny story. When I was in the Navy, they used computers to control the landings of aircraft.
Then the airplane could match the pitch and yaw of the carrier more precisely.
You've probably never watched carrier landings but the planes would be rocking from side to side. They were matching the ships roll.


Dude it blew up, total failure. You wanna fly in that piece of shit?

You tell good stories.

Lay off the acid



And you're a nobody. What's your point? It's a prototype. They anticipate losing their work in this way. It's not unexpected. This helps them to understand what they need to improve upon. That's the cost of research and development.
You're just buying into the headlines while ignoring the real story. Is this within Space X's budget for R & D? If it is, not a problem.
06-03-2021 02:00
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:So anyone want to argue about the dumbest landing technique in the history of aviation?


I want to argue it.

I claim that the Air Force F-16 pilot who pioneered the habit ... er, ummm, the "technique" of landing upon emerging from a full loop ... until he had to eject because he initiated the loop at too low of an altitude.

He flew a desk from that point thereafter.

.


Nah would the pilots of the space x firecracker be desk jockeys after getting toasted?

LOL hardly



It wasn't piloted. It was all remotely controlled by a computer. Funny story. When I was in the Navy, they used computers to control the landings of aircraft.
Then the airplane could match the pitch and yaw of the carrier more precisely.
You've probably never watched carrier landings but the planes would be rocking from side to side. They were matching the ships roll.


Dude it blew up, total failure. You wanna fly in that piece of shit?

You tell good stories.

Lay off the acid



And you're a nobody. What's your point? It's a prototype. They anticipate losing their work in this way. It's not unexpected. This helps them to understand what they need to improve upon. That's the cost of research and development.
You're just buying into the headlines while ignoring the real story. Is this within Space X's budget for R & D? If it is, not a problem.


LOL the starship is just a disguised Apollo style rocket designed to blow up on landing. Perhaps that ocean splashdown actually made sense.

Now you wanna tell us how you landed jets on carriers with your playstation or xbox
Edited on 06-03-2021 02:01
06-03-2021 02:19
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:So anyone want to argue about the dumbest landing technique in the history of aviation?


I want to argue it.

I claim that the Air Force F-16 pilot who pioneered the habit ... er, ummm, the "technique" of landing upon emerging from a full loop ... until he had to eject because he initiated the loop at too low of an altitude.

He flew a desk from that point thereafter.

.


Nah would the pilots of the space x firecracker be desk jockeys after getting toasted?

LOL hardly



It wasn't piloted. It was all remotely controlled by a computer. Funny story. When I was in the Navy, they used computers to control the landings of aircraft.
Then the airplane could match the pitch and yaw of the carrier more precisely.
You've probably never watched carrier landings but the planes would be rocking from side to side. They were matching the ships roll.


Dude it blew up, total failure. You wanna fly in that piece of shit?

You tell good stories.

Lay off the acid



And you're a nobody. What's your point? It's a prototype. They anticipate losing their work in this way. It's not unexpected. This helps them to understand what they need to improve upon. That's the cost of research and development.
You're just buying into the headlines while ignoring the real story. Is this within Space X's budget for R & D? If it is, not a problem.


LOL the starship is just a disguised Apollo style rocket designed to blow up on landing. Perhaps that ocean splashdown actually made sense.

Now you wanna tell us how you landed jets on carriers with your playstation or xbox



I don't play video games unless it's exercises in mathematics. My Sudoku goes from Geometry up to Calculus. I find that more enjoyable. With what you're interested in, it goes back to World War II and the Battle of Leyte Gulf in the Philippines.
It is considered to be the greatest naval battle ever fought. I read that book as well. And I visited the Philippines 3 times and served in the US Navy. I hope you notice these coincidences.
Of course with that battle, the US Navy defeated the Japanese Imperial Navy. That battle essentially ended the Japanese Navy's ability to fight for the rest of that war.
Are you interested in how the US Navy defeated a superior Japanese force? That is a yes or no question. And what allowed the US Navy to win that battle in WW II is what helped aircraft to land on carriers.
And a PlayStation or other electronic device would be too complicated. Something much simpler was used to defeat the Japanese that day. Care to know? You will look stupid when you know the answer. And you will want me to prove that because I served in the Navy.

p.s., while in the US Navy, an officer instructed me never to make a fool of someone because I knew I could. He didn't want me to make an officer look bad.
You're not an officer so I'm game if you are.
06-03-2021 02:22
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
@All, Swan being Swan, he'll be the fool. This will help to show where I learned quite a bit from having served in the US Navy. But the day comes when stupid needs to be made known. After all, you can't fix stoopid (a reference to an Alice Cooper song).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDvQ77JP8nw


@All, this video about it is almost 2 hours long (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=posrOr6jCRQ). What can I say, David got Goliath but it took longer than 2 hours. The book about it is called Last Stand of the Tin Can Sailors. You're local library might have it.
https://www.amazon.com/Last-Stand-Tin-Sailors-Extraordinary/dp/0553381482/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&hvadid=77996737155767&hvbmt=be&hvdev=c&hvqmt=e&keywords=last+stand+of+the+tin+can+sailors&qid=1614990595&sr=8-1
Edited on 06-03-2021 02:30
06-03-2021 02:31
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
IBdaMann wrote:
Swan wrote:So anyone want to argue about the dumbest landing technique in the history of aviation?


I want to argue it.

I claim that the Air Force F-16 pilot who pioneered the habit ... er, ummm, the "technique" of landing upon emerging from a full loop ... until he had to eject because he initiated the loop at too low of an altitude.

He flew a desk from that point thereafter.

.


Nah would the pilots of the space x firecracker be desk jockeys after getting toasted?

LOL hardly



It wasn't piloted. It was all remotely controlled by a computer. Funny story. When I was in the Navy, they used computers to control the landings of aircraft.
Then the airplane could match the pitch and yaw of the carrier more precisely.
You've probably never watched carrier landings but the planes would be rocking from side to side. They were matching the ships roll.


Dude it blew up, total failure. You wanna fly in that piece of shit?

You tell good stories.

Lay off the acid



And you're a nobody. What's your point? It's a prototype. They anticipate losing their work in this way. It's not unexpected. This helps them to understand what they need to improve upon. That's the cost of research and development.
You're just buying into the headlines while ignoring the real story. Is this within Space X's budget for R & D? If it is, not a problem.


LOL the starship is just a disguised Apollo style rocket designed to blow up on landing. Perhaps that ocean splashdown actually made sense.

Now you wanna tell us how you landed jets on carriers with your playstation or xbox



I don't play video games unless it's exercises in mathematics. My Sudoku goes from Geometry up to Calculus. I find that more enjoyable. With what you're interested in, it goes back to World War II and the Battle of Leyte Gulf in the Philippines.
It is considered to be the greatest naval battle ever fought. I read that book as well. And I visited the Philippines 3 times and served in the US Navy. I hope you notice these coincidences.
Of course with that battle, the US Navy defeated the Japanese Imperial Navy. That battle essentially ended the Japanese Navy's ability to fight for the rest of that war.
Are you interested in how the US Navy defeated a superior Japanese force? That is a yes or no question. And what allowed the US Navy to win that battle in WW II is what helped aircraft to land on carriers.
And a PlayStation or other electronic device would be too complicated. Something much simpler was used to defeat the Japanese that day. Care to know? You will look stupid when you know the answer. And you will want me to prove that because I served in the Navy.

p.s., while in the US Navy, an officer instructed me never to make a fool of someone because I knew I could. He didn't want me to make an officer look bad.
You're not an officer so I'm game if you are.


LOL so you used electronics to control the landing of carrier jets in WW2.

Jesus you are a totally confused buffoon

In another line, this is my father in law on Leyte in 1945


https://imgur.com/a/PJ80m0X

My father was on Okinawa, no photos survived

Next
Edited on 06-03-2021 02:32
06-03-2021 02:42
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
Swan wrote:


LOL so you used electronics to control the landing of carrier jets in WW2.

Jesus you are a totally confused buffoon

In another line, this is my father in law on Leyte in 1945


https://imgur.com/a/PJ80m0X

Next



Not to disparage him but Leyte Gulf is on the other side of the island. I post about the Battle of Leyte Gulf and you post a picture of "in Leyte" away from the gulf.
The Battle of Leyte Gulf was in October 1944. And we're back to you playing the fool.


p.s., Hedy Lamar helped to invent cell phone technology during the same time period. https://www.hedylamarr.com/
Please don't tell me that you don't know about her contributions during WW II which are still significant today. I like my smartphone and she allows for it to be more difficult to hack.
And Swan, she was famous as an actress in Hollywood. Just was one of the biggest names there was. Please tell me you know this.
Attached image:


Edited on 06-03-2021 02:44
06-03-2021 03:02
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
The other item is a spinning top.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mekf0oycidk
This allowed for the gyroscope. When a ship rolls in the water, the aim of the turret and the firing of the shell can be accounted for if you know math. The ship isn't stationary so it's roll has to be accounted for.
And when firing from 10 miles away, how do you hit the period at the end of a sentence? Most likely the turret was aimed from a specific roll of the ship. If you consider carpentry, try using a plumb bob. Gravity controls its bottom center. And when a ship rolls, it needs to be exact or you can't hit your target.
Basically, they needed to know when in the roll of the ship to fire. After all, when a turret is moving and there's no computer, when to fire? This would be why the gyro mattered. It narrowed that window.

p.s., both of these combined would help an airplane to land on an aircraft carrier.
And this is where we would get into calculus. That would let us know how many calculations per second are needed for course correction.


Fortunately I just watched this video yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z87WPkRrShE

Am starting to think that you guys don't know history or math.

Attached image:


Edited on 06-03-2021 03:19
06-03-2021 03:17
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:


LOL so you used electronics to control the landing of carrier jets in WW2.

Jesus you are a totally confused buffoon

In another line, this is my father in law on Leyte in 1945


https://imgur.com/a/PJ80m0X

Next



Not to disparage him but Leyte Gulf is on the other side of the island. I post about the Battle of Leyte Gulf and you post a picture of "in Leyte" away from the gulf.
The Battle of Leyte Gulf was in October 1944. And we're back to you playing the fool.


p.s., Hedy Lamar helped to invent cell phone technology during the same time period. https://www.hedylamarr.com/
Please don't tell me that you don't know about her contributions during WW II which are still significant today. I like my smartphone and she allows for it to be more difficult to hack.
And Swan, she was famous as an actress in Hollywood. Just was one of the biggest names there was. Please tell me you know this.


LOL how much quantum entangled cryptography was used in WW2.
06-03-2021 03:19
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
The other item is a spinning top.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mekf0oycidk
This allowed for the gyroscope. When a ship rolls in the water, the aim of the turret and the firing of the shell can be accounted for if you know math. The ship isn't stationary so it's roll has to be accounted for.
And when firing from 10 miles away, how do you hit the period at the end of a sentence? Most likely the turret was aimed from a specific roll of the ship. If you consider carpentry, try using a plumb bob. Gravity controls its bottom center. And when a ship rolls, it needs to be exact or you can't hit your target.
Basically, they needed to know when in the roll of the ship to fire. After all, when a turret is moving and there's no computer, when to fire? This would be why the gyro mattered. It narrowed that window.

p.s., both of these combined would help an airplane to land on an aircraft carrier.
And this is where we would get into calculus. That would let us know how many calculations per second are needed for course correction.


Fortunately I just watched this video yesterday.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z87WPkRrShE


So you controlled a landing plane in WW2 with a gyroscope on the ship.

Seriously you need meds
06-03-2021 03:26
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
Swan wrote:



So you controlled a landing plane in WW2 with a gyroscope on the ship.

Seriously you need meds


You are a serious loser Swan. The US winning WW II was a joke from what you posted. And I guess you are right, it is a joke.
06-03-2021 03:29
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:



So you controlled a landing plane in WW2 with a gyroscope on the ship.

Seriously you need meds


You are a serious loser Swan. The US winning WW II was a joke from what you posted. And I guess you are right, it is a joke.


WW2 is over, now American fighter jets are made in Japan.

Go figure

PS. My father and father in law were both there dude.
Edited on 06-03-2021 03:31
06-03-2021 03:40
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
[quote]Swan wrote:
[quote]James___ wrote:
[quote]Swan wrote:
Edited on 06-03-2021 03:45
06-03-2021 03:43
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:



So you controlled a landing plane in WW2 with a gyroscope on the ship.

Seriously you need meds


You are a serious loser Swan. The US winning WW II was a joke from what you posted. And I guess you are right, it is a joke.


WW2 is over, now American fighter jets are made in Japan.

Go figure

PS. My father and father in law were both there dude.



Your attitude is a joke. Suggests that you might be on drugs. After all, you are the person ridiculing technology that helped the US and its allies to win. And why technology helping the US and its allies to win is because you don't care for who won the war. It is pretty much that simple.
An FYI, my father's country was occupied by the 3rd Reich. Kind of why I don't make fun of the US helping to win that war. Yet for you, it is a joke. An FYI, I'm not an American even though I have an American mother and am from Ohio.
Why is this? Because you are an American.


Look kid you still haven't explained how you landed jets on carriers remotely and matched the landing to the yaw of the ship.

Eagerly awaiting that

Furthermore I have more patriotism in a clipped fingernail than you could ever even try to match.

Bang, what was that?

O shit
Edited on 06-03-2021 03:47
06-03-2021 03:49
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:



So you controlled a landing plane in WW2 with a gyroscope on the ship.

Seriously you need meds


You are a serious loser Swan. The US winning WW II was a joke from what you posted. And I guess you are right, it is a joke.


WW2 is over, now American fighter jets are made in Japan.

Go figure

PS. My father and father in law were both there dude.



Your attitude is a joke. Suggests that you might be on drugs. After all, you are the person ridiculing technology that helped the US and its allies to win. And why technology helping the US and its allies to win is because you don't care for who won the war. It is pretty much that simple.
An FYI, my father's country was occupied by the 3rd Reich. Kind of why I don't make fun of the US helping to win that war. Yet for you, it is a joke. An FYI, I'm not an American even though I have an American mother and am from Ohio.
Why is this? Because you are an American.


Look kid you still haven't explained how you landed jets on carriers remotely and matched the landing to the yaw of the ship.

Eagerly awaiting that



Maybe you're too old to understand? I mean Thank You for settling the West Gramps. That was before 1880, right? Since then we've invented things like the telegraph and the wireless radio.
Have you ever heard of Marconi or Tesla? They invented wireless transmission of electrical signals. Were you in stasis or something? Stasis is where your body is freeze dried like coffee. Then just add hot water and you have coffee again.
Is that what happened to you?
06-03-2021 03:56
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:



So you controlled a landing plane in WW2 with a gyroscope on the ship.

Seriously you need meds


You are a serious loser Swan. The US winning WW II was a joke from what you posted. And I guess you are right, it is a joke.


WW2 is over, now American fighter jets are made in Japan.

Go figure

PS. My father and father in law were both there dude.



Your attitude is a joke. Suggests that you might be on drugs. After all, you are the person ridiculing technology that helped the US and its allies to win. And why technology helping the US and its allies to win is because you don't care for who won the war. It is pretty much that simple.
An FYI, my father's country was occupied by the 3rd Reich. Kind of why I don't make fun of the US helping to win that war. Yet for you, it is a joke. An FYI, I'm not an American even though I have an American mother and am from Ohio.
Why is this? Because you are an American.


Look kid you still haven't explained how you landed jets on carriers remotely and matched the landing to the yaw of the ship.

Eagerly awaiting that



Maybe you're too old to understand? I mean Thank You for settling the West Gramps. That was before 1880, right? Since then we've invented things like the telegraph and the wireless radio.
Have you ever heard of Marconi or Tesla? They invented wireless transmission of electrical signals. Were you in stasis or something? Stasis is where your body is freeze dried like coffee. Then just add hot water and you have coffee again.
Is that what happened to you?


LOL you buy any good telegraph stocks today? The difference between you and I is that you are interested in the past and I am interested in the quantum entangled future. Just added more Google A shares in fact.

Now you explain the first tube transistor
06-03-2021 04:06
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:



So you controlled a landing plane in WW2 with a gyroscope on the ship.

Seriously you need meds


You are a serious loser Swan. The US winning WW II was a joke from what you posted. And I guess you are right, it is a joke.


WW2 is over, now American fighter jets are made in Japan.

Go figure

PS. My father and father in law were both there dude.



Your attitude is a joke. Suggests that you might be on drugs. After all, you are the person ridiculing technology that helped the US and its allies to win. And why technology helping the US and its allies to win is because you don't care for who won the war. It is pretty much that simple.
An FYI, my father's country was occupied by the 3rd Reich. Kind of why I don't make fun of the US helping to win that war. Yet for you, it is a joke. An FYI, I'm not an American even though I have an American mother and am from Ohio.
Why is this? Because you are an American.


Look kid you still haven't explained how you landed jets on carriers remotely and matched the landing to the yaw of the ship.

Eagerly awaiting that



Maybe you're too old to understand? I mean Thank You for settling the West Gramps. That was before 1880, right? Since then we've invented things like the telegraph and the wireless radio.
Have you ever heard of Marconi or Tesla? They invented wireless transmission of electrical signals. Were you in stasis or something? Stasis is where your body is freeze dried like coffee. Then just add hot water and you have coffee again.
Is that what happened to you?


LOL you buy any good telegraph stocks today? The difference between you and I is that you are interested in the past and I am interested in the quantum entangled future. Just added more Google A shares in fact.

Now you explain the first tube transistor



You can't be interested in Google. Both your father and father in law served in WW II. That makes you about 80 years old. And if you were 80, you'd know who Marconi and Tesla were.
You're not even smart enough to know that the car named Tesla was named after Tesla.
Sadly, when you ask
Now you explain the first tube transistor

Why? You don't know what it was. I'll send a pm to Duncan61 giving him the answer.
Edited on 06-03-2021 04:10
06-03-2021 04:08
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2158)
yawn
06-03-2021 04:11
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:



So you controlled a landing plane in WW2 with a gyroscope on the ship.

Seriously you need meds


You are a serious loser Swan. The US winning WW II was a joke from what you posted. And I guess you are right, it is a joke.


WW2 is over, now American fighter jets are made in Japan.

Go figure

PS. My father and father in law were both there dude.



Your attitude is a joke. Suggests that you might be on drugs. After all, you are the person ridiculing technology that helped the US and its allies to win. And why technology helping the US and its allies to win is because you don't care for who won the war. It is pretty much that simple.
An FYI, my father's country was occupied by the 3rd Reich. Kind of why I don't make fun of the US helping to win that war. Yet for you, it is a joke. An FYI, I'm not an American even though I have an American mother and am from Ohio.
Why is this? Because you are an American.


Look kid you still haven't explained how you landed jets on carriers remotely and matched the landing to the yaw of the ship.

Eagerly awaiting that



Maybe you're too old to understand? I mean Thank You for settling the West Gramps. That was before 1880, right? Since then we've invented things like the telegraph and the wireless radio.
Have you ever heard of Marconi or Tesla? They invented wireless transmission of electrical signals. Were you in stasis or something? Stasis is where your body is freeze dried like coffee. Then just add hot water and you have coffee again.
Is that what happened to you?


LOL you buy any good telegraph stocks today? The difference between you and I is that you are interested in the past and I am interested in the quantum entangled future. Just added more Google A shares in fact.

Now you explain the first tube transistor



You can't be interested in Google. Both your father and father in law served in WW II. That makes you about 80 years old. And if you were 80, you'd know who Marconi and Tesla were.
You're not even smart enough to know that the car named Tesla was named after Tesla.
Sadly, when you ask
[url]Now you explain the first tube transistor[/url]
Why? You don't know what it was. I'll send a pm to Duncan61 giving him the answer.


I'm 55, not 80. My father was born in 1917, he was 48 years old when I was born.

I never mentioned Tesla.

Is this a security clearance test?

I typically pass after embarrassing the Bureau pencil pushers
Edited on 06-03-2021 04:15
06-03-2021 04:16
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2158)
Swan wrote:I'm 55, not 80.


I KNEW it! He's not old enough to have seen the ice age!


ANY mask is better than no mask, even if you have to resort to putting a tightly fit plastic bag over your head-COVIDEXPERTGFM

I don't have a GoFundMe, but I do have a PO Box (#666)-COVIDEXPERTGFM
06-03-2021 04:18
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:I'm 55, not 80.


I KNEW it! He's not old enough to have seen the ice age!


Never been to the moon either but I know that there is less gravity.
06-03-2021 04:23
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
Swan wrote:

I'm 55, not 80. My father was born in 1917, he was 48 years old when I was born.

I never mentioned Tesla.

Is this a security clearance test?

I typically pass after embarrassing the Bureau



I'm beginning to agree with GasGuzzler. That doesn't happen often. You asked about the first tube transistor and then you avoid your own question. You don't know what one is, do you?
I'll give you the answer, it was Edison's light bulb. See how easy that was? An LED is a light emitting diode. A light bulb is simply a light emitting tube transistor.
And this is where we're back to YAWN.
06-03-2021 04:27
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2158)
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:I'm 55, not 80.


I KNEW it! He's not old enough to have seen the ice age!


Never been to the moon either but I know that there is less gravity.


Never been to Mexico but I know it's there.



ANY mask is better than no mask, even if you have to resort to putting a tightly fit plastic bag over your head-COVIDEXPERTGFM

I don't have a GoFundMe, but I do have a PO Box (#666)-COVIDEXPERTGFM
06-03-2021 04:31
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:I'm 55, not 80.


I KNEW it! He's not old enough to have seen the ice age!


Never been to the moon either but I know that there is less gravity.


Never been to Mexico but I know it's there.


Never been to Iran but I know it smells
06-03-2021 04:32
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:I'm 55, not 80.


I KNEW it! He's not old enough to have seen the ice age!


Never been to the moon either but I know that there is less gravity.


Never been to Mexico but I know it's there.



You old people are all alike. Sheesh!!
You guys need some Geritol?
06-03-2021 04:34
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:I'm 55, not 80.


I KNEW it! He's not old enough to have seen the ice age!


Never been to the moon either but I know that there is less gravity.


Never been to Mexico but I know it's there.



You old people are all alike. Sheesh!!
You guys need some Geritol?


K2 with D3 beats Geritol every time and keeps me in the hundred mile biking range.

Anytime you want to fall over, just try following
06-03-2021 04:39
GasGuzzlerProfile picture★★★★★
(2158)
Swan wrote:
Anytime you want to fall over, just try following

Little erratic on your line, eh? Understandable why that would be tough to follow.

See a neurologist.


ANY mask is better than no mask, even if you have to resort to putting a tightly fit plastic bag over your head-COVIDEXPERTGFM

I don't have a GoFundMe, but I do have a PO Box (#666)-COVIDEXPERTGFM
Edited on 06-03-2021 04:40
06-03-2021 04:47
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
Anytime you want to fall over, just try following

Little erratic on your line, eh? Understandable why that would be tough to follow.

See a neurologist.


Yawn.....!

Thank you, thank you very much!
Edited on 06-03-2021 04:50
06-03-2021 06:25
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10053)
Swan wrote:Never been to Iran but I know it smells

Of course ... it smells with its nose like everyone else.

.


A Spaghetti strainer with the faucet running, retains water- tmiddles

Clouds don't trap heat. Clouds block cold. - Spongy Iris

Printing dollars to pay debt doesn't increase the number of dollars. - keepit

If Venus were a black body it would have a much much lower temperature than what we found there.- tmiddles

Ah the "Valid Data" myth of ITN/IBD. - tmiddles

Ceist - I couldn't agree with you more. But when money and religion are involved, and there are people who value them above all else, then the lies begin. - trafn

You are completely misunderstanding their use of the word "accumulation"! - Climate Scientist.

The Stefan-Boltzman equation doesn't come up with the correct temperature if greenhouse gases are not considered - Hank

:*sigh* Not the "raw data" crap. - Leafsdude

IB STILL hasn't explained what Planck's Law means. Just more hand waving that it applies to everything and more asserting that the greenhouse effect 'violates' it.- Ceist
06-03-2021 06:34
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:I'm 55, not 80.


I KNEW it! He's not old enough to have seen the ice age!


Never been to the moon either but I know that there is less gravity.


Never been to Mexico but I know it's there.



You old people are all alike. Sheesh!!
You guys need some Geritol?


K2 with D3 beats Geritol every time and keeps me in the hundred mile biking range.

Anytime you want to fall over, just try following



No one bikes K2 so you're obviously stating random thoughts.
https://static.thousandwonders.net/K2.original.13649.jpg

Edited on 06-03-2021 06:38
06-03-2021 07:22
IBdaMannProfile picture★★★★★
(10053)
James___ wrote:No one bikes K2 so you're obviously stating random thoughts.


.
Attached image:

06-03-2021 07:49
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
IBdaMann wrote:
James___ wrote:No one bikes K2 so you're obviously stating random thoughts.


.


And snitches land in ditches son.
06-03-2021 15:17
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:
GasGuzzler wrote:
Swan wrote:I'm 55, not 80.


I KNEW it! He's not old enough to have seen the ice age!


Never been to the moon either but I know that there is less gravity.


Never been to Mexico but I know it's there.



You old people are all alike. Sheesh!!
You guys need some Geritol?


K2 with D3 beats Geritol every time and keeps me in the hundred mile biking range.

Anytime you want to fall over, just try following



No one bikes K2 so you're obviously stating random thoughts.
https://static.thousandwonders.net/K2.original.13649.jpg


K2 is a vitamin that controls the flow of calcium in the body. Anytime pencilneck
06-03-2021 15:47
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:

I'm 55, not 80. My father was born in 1917, he was 48 years old when I was born.

I never mentioned Tesla.

Is this a security clearance test?

I typically pass after embarrassing the Bureau



I'm beginning to agree with GasGuzzler. That doesn't happen often. You asked about the first tube transistor and then you avoid your own question. You don't know what one is, do you?
I'll give you the answer, it was Edison's light bulb. See how easy that was? An LED is a light emitting diode. A light bulb is simply a light emitting tube transistor.
And this is where we're back to YAWN.


LOL wrong again, see Edison's light bulb was just not used in the Atanasoff–Berry computer, which is considered the first known example of the modern gate system of computing. So go watch another youtoob video and claim your brilliance based upon that again.

Now back to the theoretical speed of quantum entangled communications. It is being speculated that quantum entanglement is anywhere from instant to 10,000 times light speed, which brings Einstein's relativity concept into question and has certain physicist debating the reality of the entire Universe.

Oh yea, I forgot you are still amazed by the first light bulb.

Sorry
Edited on 06-03-2021 15:49
06-03-2021 16:06
James___
★★★★★
(5166)
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:

I'm 55, not 80. My father was born in 1917, he was 48 years old when I was born.

I never mentioned Tesla.

Is this a security clearance test?

I typically pass after embarrassing the Bureau



I'm beginning to agree with GasGuzzler. That doesn't happen often. You asked about the first tube transistor and then you avoid your own question. You don't know what one is, do you?
I'll give you the answer, it was Edison's light bulb. See how easy that was? An LED is a light emitting diode. A light bulb is simply a light emitting tube transistor.
And this is where we're back to YAWN.


LOL wrong again, see Edison's light bulb was just not used in the Atanasoff–Berry computer, which is considered the first known example of the modern gate system of computing. So go watch another youtoob video and claim your brilliance based upon that again.

Now back to the theoretical speed of quantum entangled communications. It is being speculated that quantum entanglement is anywhere from instant to 10,000 times light speed, which brings Einstein's relativity concept into question and has certain physicist debating the reality of the entire Universe.

Oh yea, I forgot you are still amazed by the first light bulb.

Sorry



You didn't say what purpose it had to serve.
06-03-2021 16:11
SwanProfile picture★★★☆☆
(571)
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:
James___ wrote:
Swan wrote:

I'm 55, not 80. My father was born in 1917, he was 48 years old when I was born.

I never mentioned Tesla.

Is this a security clearance test?

I typically pass after embarrassing the Bureau



I'm beginning to agree with GasGuzzler. That doesn't happen often. You asked about the first tube transistor and then you avoid your own question. You don't know what one is, do you?
I'll give you the answer, it was Edison's light bulb. See how easy that was? An LED is a light emitting diode. A light bulb is simply a light emitting tube transistor.
And this is where we're back to YAWN.


LOL wrong again, see Edison's light bulb was just not used in the Atanasoff–Berry computer, which is considered the first known example of the modern gate system of computing. So go watch another youtoob video and claim your brilliance based upon that again.

Now back to the theoretical speed of quantum entangled communications. It is being speculated that quantum entanglement is anywhere from instant to 10,000 times light speed, which brings Einstein's relativity concept into question and has certain physicist debating the reality of the entire Universe.

Oh yea, I forgot you are still amazed by the first light bulb.

Sorry



You didn't say what purpose it had to serve.


Yes I did specify the purpose as being a tube transistor.

Too bad you have no clue what that actually is, or was.

Yawning
Edited on 06-03-2021 16:11
Page 1 of 6123>>>





Join the debate Well Space X aced another controlled landing. Will be using really low IQ astronuts:

Remember me

Related content
ThreadsRepliesLast post
Could space debris be a challenge for collecting data on climate change?1023-03-2021 04:28
IQ-s of climate debaters019-09-2020 12:39
Once Again, High Temperature Records Outpace Low by a Wide Margin429-06-2020 21:40
NEW HIGH TEMPERATURE RECORDS CONTINUE TO OUTPACE LOW619-06-2020 22:02
Made a graph of low equilibrium climate sensitivity estimates to show that the IPCC's best estimate o203-03-2020 02:17
▲ Top of page
Public Poll
Who is leading the renewable energy race?

US

EU

China

Japan

India

Brazil

Other

Don't know


Thanks for supporting Climate-Debate.com.
Copyright © 2009-2020 Climate-Debate.com | About | Contact