Author Topic: Gardum's thread  (Read 2153 times)

Offline Geordie

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 89
  • Suspendisse enim veni; remaneat cognitio
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #75 on: September 12, 2017, 01:11:26 PM »
You don't see that "children that pick on line breaks or grammar" is saying you're childish for noticing?  Okay.

So that makes at least two people at this board who seem to be incapable of distinguishing between noticing something and picking on someone for something, and one of them claims to have worked as a proofreader.
You're splitting a very fine hair. What's the point? He very clearly is stating that everyone who has posted in response to him is either (a) a scientist, or (b) a child. And he's not sure that there are any scientists here, which leaves, in his analysis, only children.

He's not "noticing" that posters here are children; they are not children. He is picking on them, if I may borrow the phrase.

But that's not all--more rudeness:
Quote from: Gardum
[...] getting pulled around on an inflatable 3 person Stingray (Oh to make this clear as you people jump onto anything not made clear it's not a real Stingray ok it's a blow up one, have to make sure I dot the T's and cross the I's ;)

All of "you people"(myself included) can't tell the difference between an inflatable 3 person stingray and a real stingray.

That's an insult, or "picking on", whatever you want to call it.

And it goes on:
Quote from: Gardum
I get the impression most of you are more the Children and whining little suckers at that [...]

And on (this one is incoherent--except for the insult at the beginning):
Quote from: Gardum
Lets try for some scientific responses please and fault my logic for scientific practice in real life as they can't repeat the experiment now themselves and probably won't till 2025 from all the articles I am reading.

[minorly edited]

« Last Edit: September 12, 2017, 01:16:53 PM by Geordie »
.           She's on fire\  And she burns through the night at the speed of light\
             She's on fire\  With the heat of the beat right beneath her feet\
              She's on fire\  And the name of the game is to fuel her flame\
               She's on fire, fire, fire, fire, fire!

Offline Abaddon

  • Jupiter
  • ***
  • Posts: 712
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #76 on: September 12, 2017, 01:53:27 PM »
Wow.

Everyone is falling head over heels for Gardum's obvious gambit.

I think we as a group are just a smidgin better than that.

Offline sandopan

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #77 on: September 12, 2017, 02:20:01 PM »
I guess that you are getting into semantics a bit.

I've never heard of any semantics in which "to notice" and "to pick on" mean the same thing.

"Picking on" generally means criticizing or punishing someone repeatedly.

If that's the definition, then Gardum was picked on.  Whether this picking is justified or not, reasonable or not, childish or not - those are different questions.

However, it is Gardum that is complaining of being picked on.

Yes, that is correct.

Gillianren has already quoted the line, so there's no point in re-quoting it.

As of the time that I am writing, Gillianren has not quoted anything from anyone in this thread.  Subsequent to Gardum's complaint of being picked on, Gillianren made a statement about "being cognizant", which is irrelevant to Gardum's complaint.  She subsequently made the post that I quoted, in which she made the false statement "Gardum accused people of being childish for noticing his errors."

To be honest, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here?

There is no deep hidden meaning to my posts here.  The statement that "Gardum accused people of being childish for noticing his errors." is false.  I posted a question, rather than a statement, in case I missed something somewhere.  Two posters responded with Gardum's complaint of being picked on, apparently being completely unaware of the obvious difference between his actual statement and Gillianren's false characterisation of it, even with it staring them in the face.

So I highlighted a false statement, and pointed it out that it is false.  I am astounded how controversial this appears to be.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2017, 02:48:57 PM by sandopan »
Don't commit terrorism.  Washington hates competition.

Offline sandopan

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #78 on: September 12, 2017, 02:23:53 PM »
You're splitting a very fine hair.

In my opinion, the hair that divides statements that are true from statements that are false, is very coarse, not very fine.

What's the point?

My point is incredibly simple.  Someone posted a statement, "Gardum accused people of being childish for noticing his errors", that is false; I pointed out that it is false.

He very clearly is stating that everyone who has posted in response to him is either (a) a scientist, or (b) a child. And he's not sure that there are any scientists here, which leaves, in his analysis, only children.

He's not "noticing" that posters here are children; they are not children. He is picking on them, if I may borrow the phrase.

But that's not all--more rudeness:
Quote from: Gardum
[...] getting pulled around on an inflatable 3 person Stingray (Oh to make this clear as you people jump onto anything not made clear it's not a real Stingray ok it's a blow up one, have to make sure I dot the T's and cross the I's ;)

All of "you people"(myself included) can't tell the difference between an inflatable 3 person stingray and a real stingray.

That's an insult, or "picking on", whatever you want to call it.

And it goes on:
Quote from: Gardum
I get the impression most of you are more the Children and whining little suckers at that [...]

And on (this one is incoherent--except for the insult at the beginning):
Quote from: Gardum
Lets try for some scientific responses please and fault my logic for scientific practice in real life as they can't repeat the experiment now themselves and probably won't till 2025 from all the articles I am reading.

[minorly edited]

As none of this has anything to do in the slightest with the truth or falsehood of the statement "Gardum accused people of being childish for noticing his errors", whatever point you are trying to make appears to be completely unrelated to my point.

If my pointing out the falsehood of Gillianren's statement is somehow distracting everyone from the collective goal of arguing with Gardum, then I would suggest a) not making statements that are false, and b) if someone violates a), then don't get one's knickers in a twist when someone else points out that a) has been violated.  Recognise the misstatement, and move on.

Good grief, this is allegedly a debunking site.  What do you expect someone to do when there are false statements made?  Just ignore them, because they're made about someone peddling bunk?


« Last Edit: September 12, 2017, 02:36:53 PM by sandopan »
Don't commit terrorism.  Washington hates competition.

Offline sts60

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #79 on: September 12, 2017, 02:28:31 PM »
Hi, Gardum, welcome to the board.

Will you address your errors of fact, such as asserting the Shuttle mission success rate was "nowhere near" 100%, or claiming that the equipment hadn't been tested in a Lunar environment?  (I've personally performed spacecraft testing in Chamber B at JSC, where decades earlier Lunar Module environmental testing was done.)

Clearing up such elementary mistakes would be a good start, then we can talk about heat transfer.

Offline jfb

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 30
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #80 on: September 12, 2017, 03:24:48 PM »
Hello,

I couldn't post before hand as my account had never been authorised so I am here as a noob and first time poster.

Speaking as a relative n00b myself, wilkommen, bienvenue, c'mon in...

Quote
Funny thing is I have found the opposite in the sense that I have found truther's to make fake accounts to make out as though there are more believers or promoting the same so called evidence or confirmation.

For example?  Which accounts do you believe are sockpuppets?  How would you prove it? 

Quote
I have found quite a few people that are believers that just make up stories left and right that go against the transcripts as well as equipment lists provided by NASA and easily found from the NASA site.

On this site?  Who are not themselves conspiracy theorists?

Quote
I also see a lot of SPECIAL being flouted by believers with no link to what the SPECIAL is.
Made up stories about SPECIAL battery packs, where as the truth is as explained by NASA of the shelf technology was used where ever possible and batteries were one of the off the shelf items used.

And you have links or copies of documentation for this assertion?  I can't think of much OTS tech used in the Apollo program - it was almost all custom built.  The tooling to build that custom equipment was custom built, that's part of why the program cost so damned much.

Quote
Every truther makes out they know for fact how temperatures work in space and on the Moon, yet NASA states complete opposite views as they seem to have results from experiments done in space and on the Moon showing temperatures.

Remember that "temperature" and "heat" are not the same thing.  You can stick your hand in a 100C oven for several seconds and nothing bad will happen; your hand will get warm, but not much more than that.  Stick your hand in a 100C pot of water and you'll be severely burned.  There's more heat in the pot of water than in the oven, even though they have the same temperature.  The concept of "temperature" doesn't really apply to a vacuum, but "heat" does (technically, "heat" is the flow of thermal energy from a hotter to cooler system).

Yes, any object on the lunar surface (or in orbit) will have a temperature - during the lunar "day" it's absorbing heat radiated from the Sun and warming up, while during a lunar "night" it's radiating that heat back out to space and cooling down.  In a vacuum, you don't have conduction to move heat around, so things will heat up and cool down more slowly than they would in air or water. 
Quote

Ask any truther and temperature works like magic in space and on the Moon,


More like, it works the way we expect it to work anywhere else; you just don't have convection to move heat around as effectively as you would on Earth.

Quote
NASA states below 56C in the shade which would make any Film unusable but of course Silver Anodising stops anything from getting hot or cold as truthers will say.

So much garbled information in such few words.

The film used on the Moon was designed for use in a vacuum with extremes of temperature.  Instead of using the usual acetate base (which would have warped), it used a polyester base that could tolerate wide temperature swings. 

Storing the film in highly reflective magazines reduced the amount of heat that the film was exposed to.  Again, in a vacuum, you don't have convection moving things around.  As the rolls were kept in protective magazines (which themselves weren't constantly exposed to the Sun), they didn't get anywhere near as hot as anything left out on the surface.     

Quote
Leave an item on the Moon in the shade for 8 hours and truthers say no problems it won't get to cold, what temperature it does get none of them say but it's not bad as otherwise it would go against the possibility of certain things being possible.

In a vacuum, the only ways for an object to cool off are through radiation and conduction via the surface it's on.  That's slower than if you have convection working for you.  The exact rates of cooling will depend on the material, the surface area, its starting temperature, etc.  Shiny objects will cool off more slowly than black objects, stuff with lots of surface area to volume will cool off more quickly than cubes or spheres, etc. 

Quote
NASA states 123C in the Sun on the Moon at the minimum because of the time they landed.
Funny thing is from all scientific sites I could find once the Sun shines on anything in space and on the Moon it doesn't matter what time of day it is as there is no atmosphere for the Sun to go through to lesson it's effects.

The angle of the Sun relative to the surface absolutely makes a difference.  Morning is cooler than midday which is warmer than evening.  The Apollo missions landed in the lunar "morning". 

Quote
Any object in direct Sun can reach a temperature of 250C which is what happens and again proof from ISS
Astronauts and Shuttle crew explaining the problems they have whilst outside in space with tools getting so hot they need to use insulation wraps or blankets.

Yup. Insulation, wraps, reflectors, shades, active cooling, etc.  All of which were used on Apollo.

Quote
This was easily found by a couple Google checks from NASA missions from the ISS and Shuttle Crew.
Yet when it comes to the Moon it's all SPECIAL no metal objects get to hot or too cold, must have been the Goldilocks time of day on the Moon each time.

Or, more likely, the equipment was designed to account for those temperature extremes.

Quote
Not one of you people look at the video and see them moving in slow motion and have one problem with it, all you get is well they wouldn't move fast as the ground has sharp rocks and they could cut their suit or something similar, yet truth shows them falling let right and centre doing weird movements to get back up, not once do you hear any of them talking as though at any second they could die.

1/6th gravity means you don't hit the ground as hard.  And the suits were pretty robust (had to be). 

Quote
First people on the Moon never done before never landed a manned vehicle on the Moon all first time events as none of the equipment they used had ever been tested in a Lunar environment.

First, that's not true.  Apollo 9 and 10 were flown to shake out the LM both in Earth and Lunar orbit.  By the time Neil and Buzz flew the Eagle, its performance characteristics in a lunar environment were pretty well known.

Secondly, they simulated the hell of out landing, both in ground simulators and the LLRV.  The wonderful thing about physics is that it works the same no matter where you are, and you can predict how things will perform ahead of time. 

Apollo 11 wasn't the first thing we landed on the Moon, either; a number of unmanned probes preceded it and helped characterize the lunar surface environment.  They weren't flying blind.  They knew (largely) what to expect (the boulder field that Neil had to fly past was a bit of a surprise). 

Quote
Yet they went from a less than 60% success rate to a 100% for every man1ned mission.

Apollo 13 was a loss of mission (LOM) - they didn't land on the Moon.  They managed not to lose the crew (LOC) or the vehicle (LOV), but it was a failed mission, putting the success rate at 8/9, or about 88%.  If we count Apollo 1 (LOC/LOV), then the success rate goes down to 80%. 

Quote
Years later they couldn't get close to this with the Shuttle missions.

Shuttle flew 135 missions with 3 losses.  STS-51-F aborted to orbit for LOM, STS-51-L resulted in the destruction of Challenger on launch for LOM and LOC/LOV, and STS-107 resulted in the destruction of Columbia on re-entry for LOC/LOV.  That gives the STS program a success rate of 132/135, or about 98%. 
« Last Edit: September 12, 2017, 05:03:41 PM by jfb »

Offline Geordie

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 89
  • Suspendisse enim veni; remaneat cognitio
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #81 on: September 12, 2017, 03:57:44 PM »
[A bunch of stuff that I said]
As none of this has anything to do in the slightest with the truth or falsehood of the statement "Gardum accused people of being childish for noticing his errors", whatever point you are trying to make appears to be completely unrelated to my point.
  Quid infantes sumus?

  Perhaps a careful re-reading of Gardum's posts would be appropriate, (excepting the first, as I don't need a headache;)

  Here he implies exactly what you are looking for, that everyone here is a child--for pointing out his formatting and grammatical errors:
Quote from: Gardum
Any scientists here or just children that pick on line breaks or grammar ?
  And here he calls "most of [us] children" and, for good measure, "whining little suckers," for their responses, some of which were pointing out his errors:
Quote from: Gardum
From the responses I see I get the impression most of you are more the Children and whining little suckers at that, we aren't at school any more so please try and grow up or don't bother responding if all you can do is petty age games.
Q.E.D. ;)

[minorly edited]
« Last Edit: September 12, 2017, 04:41:01 PM by Geordie »
.           She's on fire\  And she burns through the night at the speed of light\
             She's on fire\  With the heat of the beat right beneath her feet\
              She's on fire\  And the name of the game is to fuel her flame\
               She's on fire, fire, fire, fire, fire!

Offline Obviousman

  • Earth
  • ***
  • Posts: 249
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #82 on: September 12, 2017, 05:01:06 PM »
To be honest, I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here?

Yeah, me three. I thought it was plain as day.

Offline Geordie

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 89
  • Suspendisse enim veni; remaneat cognitio
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #83 on: September 12, 2017, 05:04:03 PM »
  Quid infantes sumus? Mea máxima culpa, as I first came to this board for the schadenfreude of entertaining hoax believers. That notwithstanding I stayed for the wealth of professional information and experience.

  Thanks to those who share such information and experience, and thanks to those who, like myself, are less informed but who ask intelligent and pertinent questions. I get a lot out of both. Thanks again.

  Oh and thanks to the person or persons who keep this site rolling along.
.           She's on fire\  And she burns through the night at the speed of light\
             She's on fire\  With the heat of the beat right beneath her feet\
              She's on fire\  And the name of the game is to fuel her flame\
               She's on fire, fire, fire, fire, fire!

Offline sandopan

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #84 on: September 12, 2017, 11:15:40 PM »
  Perhaps a careful re-reading of Gardum's posts would be appropriate, (excepting the first, as I don't need a headache;)

I've already read them carefully, and none of them contain a statement that matches what Gillianren claims s/he said.

  Here he implies exactly what you are looking for,

No, here s/he states something that is different than what I am looking for.

I've already pointed that out.  Several times.  Gardum did complain that people were picking on his/her errors; s/he did not complain that people were noticing his errors.

But thank you for pointing out that you are not capable of understanding the simple distinction between those two statements, even after having it explained to you several times.

Q.E.D. ;)

More like Q.E.N.D.
« Last Edit: September 12, 2017, 11:34:54 PM by sandopan »
Don't commit terrorism.  Washington hates competition.

Offline Geordie

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 89
  • Suspendisse enim veni; remaneat cognitio
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #85 on: September 13, 2017, 01:06:23 AM »
  Perhaps a careful re-reading of Gardum's posts would be appropriate, (excepting the first, as I don't need a headache;)

I've already read them carefully, and none of them contain a statement that matches what Gillianren claims s/he said.

  Here he implies exactly what you are looking for,

No, here s/he states something that is different than what I am looking for.

I've already pointed that out.  Several times.  Gardum did complain that people were picking on his/her errors; s/he did not complain that people were noticing his errors.

But thank you for pointing out that you are not capable of understanding the simple distinction between those two statements, even after having it explained to you several times.

Q.E.D. ;)

More like Q.E.N.D.

I guess I'm just not as good as you when it comes to splitting hairs, coarse or fine. Your posts have become uninteresting, but...

Congratulations!

You win the cup!
.           She's on fire\  And she burns through the night at the speed of light\
             She's on fire\  With the heat of the beat right beneath her feet\
              She's on fire\  And the name of the game is to fuel her flame\
               She's on fire, fire, fire, fire, fire!

Offline sandopan

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #86 on: September 13, 2017, 01:26:03 AM »
I guess I'm just not as good as you when it comes to splitting hairs, coarse or fine. Your posts have become uninteresting, but...

Congratulations!

You win the cup!

If you took that attitude sooner, we might never have gotten to the part where Gardum asked whether the form is full of children.
Don't commit terrorism.  Washington hates competition.

Offline smartcooky

  • Saturn
  • ****
  • Posts: 1393
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #87 on: September 13, 2017, 01:38:49 AM »
  Perhaps a careful re-reading of Gardum's posts would be appropriate, (excepting the first, as I don't need a headache;)

I've already read them carefully, and none of them contain a statement that matches what Gillianren claims s/he said.

  Here he implies exactly what you are looking for,

No, here s/he states something that is different than what I am looking for.

I've already pointed that out.  Several times.  Gardum did complain that people were picking on his/her errors; s/he did not complain that people were noticing his errors.

But thank you for pointing out that you are not capable of understanding the simple distinction between those two statements, even after having it explained to you several times.

Q.E.D. ;)

More like Q.E.N.D.

Being picky and pedantic about who said what gets us nowhere.

If Gardum wants us to take him seriously he will be expected as a minimum standard to post in a manner that is comprehensible. His first few posts have been anything but, and frankly, I had trouble working out exactly what it is he is saying (and I still do).

He makes things more difficult on himself by going off on irrelevant tangents about jetskiing and his hobbies... WE DON'T CARE... Quite simply, we are not interested in his hobbies or what he does in his spare time. The onus is on HIM to make sure his posts stick to the point and are able to be understood, its NOT on the members here to try to decipher his jibber-jabber.

sandovan, you are new here so you are probably not aware that the regular users of this forum forum are well versed in recognizing the Conspiracy Theorist's "tricks of the trade". These include

Poorly formatted posts
Very poor grammar, punctuation, sentence structure
Inability to understand the quote function and how to edit posts accordingly
Diverting off on tangents about personal life
Abuse of other posters, including Ad Hominem attacks

Those last two especially show up when CTs are confronted with criticism, find their claims are not accepted, and are asked to provide evidence in support of their assertions. IMO, these are simply diversionary tactics that they employ in an a attempt to draw attention away from their lack of supporting evidence.

Now, Gardum has already exhibited a few of these traits, and he's only posted three times. This makes us very suspicious because we have see all this before.
« Last Edit: September 13, 2017, 01:41:56 AM by smartcooky »
► What you can assert without evidence, I can dismiss without evidence
► When you argue with idiots you risk being dragged down to their level and beaten with experience.
►"Conspiracism is a shortcut to the illusion of erudition

Offline sts60

  • Mars
  • ***
  • Posts: 374
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #88 on: September 13, 2017, 01:44:19 AM »
Will you ladies and/or gentlemen kindly take the discussion of who's noticing and complaining about whatever to its own thread in the General subforum?

I'd like to hear Gardum address the errors we've identified for him, so we can move on to heat transfer.

Offline sandopan

  • Venus
  • **
  • Posts: 27
Re: Gardum's thread
« Reply #89 on: September 13, 2017, 03:13:24 AM »
Being picky and pedantic about who said what gets us nowhere.

I think being intellectually dishonest gets us nowhere, and simply gives people like Gardum an opportunity to accuse the board of hypocrisy.

Bull**** is bull**** no matter who says it.  If everyone wants to pile up on Gardum because s/he posts bull****, then blubber like babies because someone called them on their own bull****, then they might want to get used to being called children, because it's going to happen a lot.

Everyone likes me and thinks I'm great
In my safe space (my safe space)
People don't judge me and haters don't hate
In my safe space (your safe space)

Bully-proof windows
Troll-safe doors
Nothing but kindness in here

You might call me a pussy
But I won't hear you
In my safe space (my safe space)
(Bully-proof windows)

If you do not like me
You are not allowed
In my safe space (my safe space)

Look and you will see
There's a very select crowd
In your safe space (my safe space)

People that support me
Mixed in with
More people that support me
And say nice things
Rainbows all around me
There is no shame in my safe space (my safe space)
(Bully-proof windows)


Source

Don't commit terrorism.  Washington hates competition.