I have three degrees in aeronautics and astronautics, including fluid physics, atmospheric physics, and applied physics. I have actually worked on the problem. The physics works, as demonstrated repeatedly by products that rely on them (e.g., aircraft, missiles, radar, lasers, launch vehicles, satellites).
Since I have apparently more understanding of physics than your screed would suggest, I don't think you win this argument.
I have a degree in communications so when I say you're a faggot shill, I mean it, and have the credentials to back it up.
I'm also an amateur Ether physics enthusiast so eat shit. You don't know anything about the physics that were conveniently omitted from the physics books. The michelson morley experiment was based on a false premise of a dynamic Ether when in is in fact a static Ether when in the vicinity of Earths electric field, and dynamic in open space when not under the influence of electric fields. Do you realize the implications of something that works that way?
So, I beat you in relevant degrees 3 to 1. You can say what you want, but you would still be wrong.
An "amateur ether physics enthusiast"? It sounds like you don't know any of the physics that were not omitted. You invoke ideas about the Michaelson-Morely experiment that are not substantiated. Why don't you swim with the pros at the Journal of Galilean Electrodynamics, where ideas like this are fleshed out with pure physics analysis? I'm no friend of Einsteinian Relativity, but it's going to take more than "enthusiasm" to provide a replacement theory. My own view is that we need to reconsider what we define as the "speed" of light, since a photon, in its own "reference frame" takes no time at all to go from one place to another, being in both places at the same time. This poses a problem in defining cause and effect.
So, you can be an amateur enthusiast declaring a triple-degreed engineer to not know physics---and on the basis of your ignorance you declare me a "faggot shill." I don't think so. Your further comments on weather control are no more than fancies.
That fact that you think having more degrees makes you better in some way, absolutely proves you're 100% faggot.
The fact that you keep repeating to me, and everyone else on these forums which degrees you have proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you're 100% a gigantic fag. Can you stop being such a faggot for once in your life. I bet you look like a faggot IRL too.
No. It only means that I know my subject matter and can offer credentials. I don't believe in the egalitarianism of the internet, where anyone's uninformed opinion is supposed to count equally with informed knowledge.
What happens is almost now a routine. The party that cannot offer any credentials or basis for expertise takes umbrage at their disadvantage and deploys the final argument of defeat: name-calling. You might concede some ignorance, ask questions for education, and behave like a gentleman.
I have three degrees in aeronautics and astronautics, including fluid physics, atmospheric physics, and applied physics. I have actually worked on the problem. The physics works, as demonstrated repeatedly by products that rely on them (e.g., aircraft, missiles, radar, lasers, launch vehicles, satellites).
Since I have apparently more understanding of physics than your screed would suggest, I don't think you win this argument.
I have a degree in communications so when I say you're a faggot shill, I mean it, and have the credentials to back it up.
I'm also an amateur Ether physics enthusiast so eat shit. You don't know anything about the physics that were conveniently omitted from the physics books. The michelson morley experiment was based on a false premise of a dynamic Ether when in is in fact a static Ether when in the vicinity of Earths electric field, and dynamic in open space when not under the influence of electric fields. Do you realize the implications of something that works that way?
So, I beat you in relevant degrees 3 to 1. You can say what you want, but you would still be wrong.
An "amateur ether physics enthusiast"? It sounds like you don't know any of the physics that were not omitted. You invoke ideas about the Michaelson-Morely experiment that are not substantiated. Why don't you swim with the pros at the Journal of Galilean Electrodynamics, where ideas like this are fleshed out with pure physics analysis? I'm no friend of Einsteinian Relativity, but it's going to take more than "enthusiasm" to provide a replacement theory. My own view is that we need to reconsider what we define as the "speed" of light, since a photon, in its own "reference frame" takes no time at all to go from one place to another, being in both places at the same time. This poses a problem in defining cause and effect.
So, you can be an amateur enthusiast declaring a triple-degreed engineer to not know physics---and on the basis of your ignorance you declare me a "faggot shill." I don't think so. Your further comments on weather control are no more than fancies.
That fact that you think having more degrees makes you better in some way, absolutely proves you're 100% faggot.
The fact that you keep repeating to me, and everyone else on these forums which degrees you have proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that you're 100% a gigantic fag. Can you stop being such a faggot for once in your life. I bet you look like a faggot IRL too.
No. It only means that I know my subject matter and can offer credentials. I don't believe in the egalitarianism of the internet, where anyone's uninformed opinion is supposed to count equally with informed knowledge.
What happens is almost now a routine. The party that cannot offer any credentials or basis for expertise takes umbrage at their disadvantage and deploys the final argument of defeat: name-calling. You might concede some ignorance, ask questions for education, and behave like a gentleman.