Newly discovered supernova may rewrite exploding star origin theories

November 30, 2018, University of Hawaii at Manoa
The top left panel shows a color composite image of the galaxy in which the supernova occured, taken with the Pan-STARRS1 telescope on Haleakalā. The top middle panel is the "reference" image of the same galaxy, without the supernova emission, from the ASAS-SN survey, and the top right panel shows a similar image from NASA's Kepler Space Telescope. The bottom middle and right panels are the corresponding ASAS-SN and Kepler images with the supernova. The bottom left panel is the difference between the two ASAS-SN images, showing only the light from the supernova. Credit: Ben Shappee/ASASSN/NASA

A supernova discovered by an international group of astronomers has provided an unprecedented look at the first moments of a violent stellar explosion. The team, led by the University of Hawaiʻi (UH) Institute for Astronomy's (IfA) Ben Shappee and Carnegie Observatories' Tom Holoien, found a mysterious signature in the light from the explosion's first hours. Their findings are published in a trio of papers in the Astrophysical Journal.

This category of supernova, called "Type Ia," is fundamental to our understanding of the cosmos. Their nuclear furnaces are crucial for generating many of the elements around us, and they are used as cosmic rulers to measure distances across the universe. Despite their importance, the actual mechanism that sets off a Type Ia supernova has remained elusive for decades. 

That's why catching them in the act is crucial. 

Astronomers have long tried to get detailed data at the initial moments of the explosions, with the hope of figuring out how these phenomena are triggered. For the first time, they succeeded in February of this year, with the discovery of a Type Ia supernova called ASASSN-18bt (also known as SN 2018oh).

ASASSN-18bt was discovered by the All-Sky Automated Survey for Supernovae (ASAS-SN), an international network of telescopes headquartered at the Ohio State University, that routinely scans the sky for supernovae and other explosive events. NASA's Kepler Space Telescope was simultaneously able to take complementary data on this event. Kepler was designed to be extremely sensitive to small changes in light for its main mission of detecting extrasolar planets, so it was able to obtain especially detailed information about the explosion's genesis.

"ASASSN-18bt is the nearest and brightest supernova yet observed by Kepler, so it offered an excellent opportunity to test the predominant theories of supernova formation," said Shappee, who is lead author on the discovery and early-time paper. "The Kepler light curve is amazing. We can probe the explosion just hours after it happened."

In addition to the discovery and pre-discovery data from ASAS-SN, two IfA sky surveys also played crucial roles. Pre-discovery data from the Panoramic Survey Telescope and Rapid Response System (Pan-STARRS) and the Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS) helped provided critical information about the color of the brightening supernova. Pan-STARRS even caught ASASSN-18bt within the first day after its explosion. 

Combining data from ASAS-SN, Kepler, Pan-STARRS, ATLAS, and telescopes from around the world, the astronomers realized that ASASSN-18bt looked unusual during its first couple of days. "Many supernovae show a gradual increase in the light they put out," said Maria Drout, assistant professor at the University of Toronto and third author on the discovery paper. "But for this event, you could clearly see something unusual and exciting happening in the early times—some unexpected additional emission."

Type Ia supernovae are thought to originate from the thermonuclear explosion of a white dwarf star—the dead core left over by a sun-like star after it exhausts its nuclear fuel. Material must be added to the white dwarf from a companion star to trigger the explosion, but the nature of the companion star and how the fuel is transferred has long been debated. 

One possibility is that this additional light seen during the supernova's early times could be from the exploding white dwarf colliding with the companion star. Although this was the initial hypothesis, detailed comparisons with theoretical models and follow up observation from the Keck telescope demonstrated that this extra light has a different, unexplained origin.

"While the steep increase in ASASSN-18bt's early brightness could indicate that the explosion collides with another star, the data doesn't quite fit predictions for how this should appear," Holoien said. "Other possibilities, such as an unusual distribution of radioactive isotopes in the exploded star, could also explain what we saw."

Indeed, recent Keck observations looked for the outer layers that would have been stripped from a nearby star by the violent supernova explosion. "If the donor star was there, we would have seen it," says Michael Tucker, a graduate student at the Institute for Astronomy and lead author on the Keck paper. "But we just don't see anything."

This supports a recent hypothesis put forth by visiting-IfA astronomer Maximilian Stritzinger of Aarhus University that there may be two distinct populations of Type Ia supernovae—those that show early emission and those that do not—without the need for a nearby star. 

"We are finding that supernovae explosions are more complicated than we previously thought, and that's half the fun," said Shappee. 

Thanks to ASAS-SN, ATLAS, Pan-STARRS, and other surveys, we are now monitoring the sky every night, so astronomers will find even more new supernovae and catch them at the moment of explosion. As more of these events are found and studied, they will home in on the solution to the longstanding mystery of how these stellar explosions originate.

Explore further: Surface helium detonation spells end for white dwarf

More information: "No Stripped Companion Material in the Nebular Spectrum of the "Two-Component" Type Ia Supernova ASASSN-18bt," M. A. Tucker, B. J. Shappee & J. P. Wisniewski, 2018 Nov. 30, to appear in the Astrophysical Journal Letters arxiv.org/abs/1811.09635

"K2 Observations of SN 2018oh Reveal a Two-Component Rising Light Curve for a Type Ia Supernova," G. Dimitriadis et al., 2018 Nov. 30, to appear in the Astrophysical Journal Letters arxiv.org/abs/1811.10061

"Photometric and Spectroscopic Properties of Type Ia Supernova 2018oh with Early Excess Emission from the Kepler 2 Observations," W. Li et al., 2018 Nov. 30, to appear in the Astrophysical Journal arxiv.org/abs/1811.10056

Related Stories

Surface helium detonation spells end for white dwarf

October 4, 2017

An international team of researchers has found evidence that the brightest stellar explosions in our Universe could be triggered by helium nuclear detonation near the surface of a white dwarf star. Using Hyper Suprime-Cam ...

Search for stellar survivor of a supernova explosion

March 30, 2017

Astronomers have used the NASA/ESA Hubble Space Telescope to observe the remnant of a supernova explosion in the Large Magellanic Cloud. Beyond just delivering a beautiful image, Hubble may well have traced the surviving ...

Evidence found of white dwarf remnant after supernova

August 18, 2017

An international team of space scientists has found evidence of what they believe is a remnant of a type Iax supernova—a white dwarf moving in a way that suggests it was blown across part of the universe by the power of ...

Most-luminous supernova ever discovered

January 14, 2016

A team of astronomers, including Carnegie's Benjamin Shappee, Nidia Morrell, and Ian Thompson, has discovered the most-luminous supernova ever observed, called ASAS-SN-15lh. Their findings are published in Science.

Recommended for you

Team finds evidence for carbon-rich surface on Ceres

December 10, 2018

A team led by Southwest Research Institute has concluded that the surface of dwarf planet Ceres is rich in organic matter. Data from NASA's Dawn spacecraft indicate that Ceres's surface may contain several times the concentration ...

InSight lander 'hears' Martian winds

December 7, 2018

NASA's Interior Exploration using Seismic Investigations, Geodesy and Heat Transport InSight lander, which touched down on Mars just 10 days ago, has provided the first ever "sounds" of Martian winds on the Red Planet. A ...

198 comments

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

RealityCheck
2 / 5 (12) Nov 30, 2018
From article:
..there may be two distinct populations of Type Ia supernovae—...."We are finding that supernovae explosions are more complicated than we previously thought..."
Ever more confirmation of what I have been long pointing out to RNP, EMP-9 etc, regarding the great variation of local ('there') masses, configurational and motional states etc which makes previous simplistic "standard candle" assumptions/interpretations of SN data unreliable/misleading; thus also making the 'Cosmic Distance Ladder' construct simplistic and misleading.

A different case, at...

https://phys.org/...est.html
"With this latest result, we now know a range of star systems cause these important explosions—.........Dr. Tucker said finding out the frequency and distribution of this kind of Type Ia supernova would help to refine the models used in cosmology to estimate the rate of expansion of the Universe.
...further confirms me correct. :)
RNP
4.3 / 5 (12) Dec 01, 2018
@RealityCheck

Ever more confirmation of what I have been long pointing out to RNP, EMP-9 etc,
regarding the great variation of local ('there') masses, configurational and motional
states etc which makes previous simplistic "standard candle" assumptions/interpretations
of SN data unreliable/misleading; thus also making the 'Cosmic Distance Ladder' construct simplistic and misleading.


You incessant compulsion for self-aggrandizement is sickening and is one of the reasons you are so despised here.

In this particular case, the issue of whether SN1a are true standard candles has been a hot topic for years (as you would know if you actually followed real astrophysics). So, even if you have "pointed it out" to me (I do not recall it) I certainly have not disagreed with it.
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (12) Dec 01, 2018
@RNP.
You incessant compulsion for self-aggrandizement is sickening...

In this particular case, the issue of whether SN1a are true standard candles has been a hot topic for years...
Stop being so precious and disingenuous. I was the one trying to get YOU and EMP-9 etc to UNDERSTAND that 'standard candle' assumptions WERE OBVIOUSLY wrong; for the very reasons I said and which YOU/IMP-9 etc DISMISSED and ATTACKED me for! Now mainstream is increasingly confirming me correct in what I pointed out to YOU/IMP-9 etc about the SERIOUS unreliability of 'standard candle' and 'cosmic distance ladder' techniques based on previous simplistic and BB-biased 'interpretations' of both SN and CMB data. And all you can do is downplay and deny.

You insulted, called me names when I tried to tell you what the above article now tells you. Now you try to characterize it as "self-aggrandizement" when I draw your attention to the fact I WAS correct all along. Talk about no-win, RNP! :)
RNP
4.3 / 5 (12) Dec 01, 2018
@RealityCheck
Now mainstream is increasingly confirming me correct ....

you try to characterize it as "self-aggrandizement" when I bring your attention to the fact I WAS correct all along.


You really can't help yourself can you, even when challenged about it? This is a clear indication of a serious personality disorder. I recommend you get help.
cardzeus
4.1 / 5 (13) Dec 01, 2018
Trouble is RC you have consistently demonstrated your lack of scientific knowledge - nobody takes you seriously, and I hope you don't either...
jonesdave
4.3 / 5 (11) Dec 01, 2018
SERIOUS unreliability of 'standard candle' and 'cosmic distance ladder' techniques based on previous simplistic and BB-biased 'interpretations' of both SN and CMB data. And all you can do is downplay and deny.


And you have failed to demonstrate that those methods are wrong. There is more than one way to measure distance.

https://universe-...ndle.htm

jonesdave
3.4 / 5 (5) Dec 01, 2018
Duplicate.

RNP
4.3 / 5 (12) Dec 01, 2018
@RealityCheck
Now mainstream is increasingly confirming me correct

No it is not. If you actually made this claim then you were only quoting mainstream science in the first place.
you try to characterize it as "self-aggrandizement" when I bring your attention to the fact I WAS correct all along.


It is not about whether you were right or not. It is your INCESSANT need to make these self-aggrandizing claims.

I pointed out to YOU/IMP-9 etc about the SERIOUS unreliability of 'standard candle' and 'cosmic distance ladder' techniques


Nobody claims these techniques are perfect. They are however good approximations. You have given NO reasons for anyone to believe in your "SERIOUS unreliability" and observational evidence clearly indicates that you are wrong.
RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (11) Dec 01, 2018
@RNP
@cardzeus.

@RNP:
@RealityCheck
Now mainstream is increasingly confirming me correct ....you try to characterize it as "self-aggrandizement" when I bring your attention to the fact I WAS correct all along.
You really can't help yourself can you, even when challenged about it? This is a clear indication of a serious personality disorder. I recommend you get help.
So, RNP, being correct all along is now "a serious personality disorder" according to you?

I suppose you'll next claim that your dismissing and insulting while being incorrect all along is a "laudable achievement"!

Get off your downplay-and-denial merry-go-round, RNP. I was right. You were wrong to dismiss, insult me. Just admit it and move on. And no hard feelings this end. :)

@cardzeus:
Trouble is RC you have consistently demonstrated your lack of scientific knowledge - nobody takes you seriously, and I hope you don't either...
Which insensible bot-troll gang do you belong to, mate? :)
cardzeus
4.1 / 5 (13) Dec 01, 2018
"Which insensible bot-troll gang do you belong to, mate? :)" - I'm a scientist, mate, unlike you...
RealityCheck
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2018
@jonesdave.
SERIOUS unreliability of 'standard candle' and 'cosmic distance ladder' techniques based on previous simplistic and BB-biased 'interpretations' of both SN and CMB data. And all you can do is downplay and deny.
And you have failed to demonstrate that those methods are wrong. There is more than one way to measure distance.

https://universe-...dle.html

You are hardly in any position to judge what I have or have not demonstrated, jd, since you/your gang's (self-admitted) method/record is: not reading; kneejerking to dismissal; insulting instead of actually considering calmly and fairly what I HAVE long been pointing out about ALL those 'techniques' that depend on BB-dependent/biased PRE-assumptions and 'interpretations' of all SN, CMB and ANYn other techniques applied to distances WELL BEYOND relatively-nearby PARALLAX-friendly limits.

Old/simplistic assumptions/methodologies etc have been (obviously) unreliable/misleading, jd. :)
jonesdave
4.3 / 5 (11) Dec 01, 2018


You are hardly in any position to judge what I have or have not demonstrated, jd, since you/your gang's (self-admitted) method/record is: not reading; kneejerking to dismissal; insulting instead of actually considering calmly and fairly what I HAVE long been pointing out about ALL those 'techniques' that depend on BB-dependent/biased PRE-assumptions and 'interpretations' of all SN, CMB and ANYn other techniques applied to distances WELL BEYOND relatively-nearby PARALLAX-friendly limits.

Old/simplistic assumptions/methodologies etc have been (obviously) unreliable/misleading, jd. :)


Word salad. You have demonstrated nothing. I am quite capable of reading the scientific literature, and nobody is claiming such things. Ergo it can, and will, be ignored. And is.
RealityCheck
2.3 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2018
@cardzeus.
"Which insensible bot-troll gang do you belong to, mate? :)" - I'm a scientist, mate, unlike you
So, my being confirmed correct all along by the above and other PO articles, cuts no ice with you (an alleged "scientist"), mate? And you think that you being wrong all along justifies you in assuming I am "not a scientist" because I am the one being confirmed correct all along? Wow. Just Wow. You are not any sort of OBJECTIVE and HONEST scientist, @cardzeus. More like the type of 'publish-or-perish' HACK 'scientist' just going along with the 'group-think' herd churning out circle-jerking GIGO in 'teams' like that responsible for the so-called "rigorous scientific" Bicep2 GIGO exercise/results/claims. Your one-liner troll post tells that you had NO CLUE of ALL that I have been correctly scientifically logically pointing out for years now; else you would admit that the above article and others confirm ME correct all along. Wise up, read up, and learn, @cardzeus! :)
RealityCheck
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2018
@RNP.
mainstream is increasingly confirming me correct
No it is not. If you actually made this claim then you were only quoting mainstream science in the first place.
Get it straight. The above is NEW WORK which confirms MY longstanding scientifically/logically argued/justified serious questioning of the THEN-mainstream assumptions/interpretations/conclusions being INVALIDLY USED to claim BB/Inflation etc were 'correct'.
you try to characterize it as "self-aggrandizement" when I bring your attention to the fact I WAS correct all along.
It is not about whether you were right or not. It is your INCESSANT need to make these self-aggrandizing claims.
Admit it, you just want me NOT to post 'annoying' CORRECT stuff AT ALL; and stay silent when confirmed correct. :)
I pointed out to YOU/IMP-9 etc the SERIOUS unreliability..
They are however good approximations..
No. They have LULLED generations of astro/cosmo/theorists into BB/Infl fantasies, RNP. :)
RealityCheck
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2018
@jonesdave.
You are hardly in any position to judge what I have or have not demonstrated, jd, since you/your gang's (self-admitted) method/record is: not reading; kneejerking to dismissal; insulting instead of actually considering calmly and fairly what I HAVE long been pointing out about ALL those 'techniques' that depend on BB-dependent/biased PRE-assumptions and 'interpretations' of all SN, CMB and ANYn other techniques applied to distances WELL BEYOND relatively-nearby PARALLAX-friendly limits.

Old/simplistic assumptions/methodologies etc have been (obviously) unreliable/misleading, jd. :)
Word salad. You have demonstrated nothing. I am quite capable of reading the scientific literature,...
Biases and Blinkers are wonderful things for those (like you now) who rely on the "ignorance is bliss' effect to get them through their day, jd. :) Get it straight. I have LONG been pointing out to YOU the FLAWS in that VERY "scientific literature" you rely on. Get it? :)
cardzeus
4 / 5 (12) Dec 01, 2018
@cardzeus.
"Which insensible bot-troll gang do you belong to, mate? :)" - I'm a scientist, mate, unlike you
So, my being confirmed correct all along by the above and other PO articles, cuts no ice with you (an alleged "scientist"), mate? And you think that you being wrong all along justifies you in assuming I am "not a scientist" because I am the one being confirmed correct all along?

The only thing confirmed is your insanity.
jonesdave
4.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2018
Biases and Blinkers are wonderful things for those (like you now) who rely on the "ignorance is bliss' effect to get them through their day, jd. :) Get it straight. I have LONG been pointing out to YOU the FLAWS in that VERY "scientific literature" you rely on. Get it?


Get lost. You are a clueless clown on a comments section. Never been published, never will be. You are a total irrelevance. As any real scientist would tell you.
RealityCheck
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2018
@cardzeus
@cardzeus.
"Which insensible bot-troll gang do you belong to, mate? :)" - I'm a scientist, mate, unlike you
So, my being confirmed correct all along by the above and other PO articles, cuts no ice with you (an alleged "scientist"), mate? And you think that you being wrong all along justifies you in assuming I am "not a scientist" because I am the one being confirmed correct all along?

The only thing confirmed is your insanity.
So, you call ME "insane" while I am being confirmed correct? Wow. That's almost as 'logical' as RNP's characterization of "self-aggrandizement" because I drew his attention to mainstream article confirming me correct! You two must have been 'taught logic' by the same 'downplay-and-deny' troll-logic 'teacher'. Lame. :)
RealityCheck
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2018
@jonesdave.
Biases and Blinkers are wonderful things for those (like you now) who rely on the "ignorance is bliss' effect to get them through their day, jd. :) Get it straight. I have LONG been pointing out to YOU the FLAWS in that VERY "scientific literature" you rely on. Get it?

Get lost. You are a clueless clown on a comments section. Never been published, never will be. You are a total irrelevance. As any real scientist would tell you.
Really, jd....Et tu, Brutus? lol

@Forum.

Wow, the 'gang' now considers being confirmed correct as being:

- self-aggrandizement (from @RNP)

- insanity (from @cardzeus)

- clueless clown (from @jonesdave).

It's just so obvious how 'dismiss-insult-downplay-and-deny' trolls just hate it when I am right....and they not. Lame, hey?
jonesdave
4 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
@Forum.


Talking to yourself is the first sign of insanity.
RealityCheck
2.2 / 5 (10) Dec 01, 2018
@jonesdave.
@Forum.


Talking to yourself is the first sign of insanity.
Newsflash!....you and your 'dismiss-insult-downplay-and-deny' troll 'friends' have been ANSWERING, jd. :)

Really, jd, at this rate, you and your fellow trolls' 'logical thinking' faculties will atrophy due to lack of proper use. Wise up and stop digging, mate. :)
Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
@cardzeus
The only thing confirmed is your insanity.
and Dunning-Krueger, grandiosity, delusion, narcissistic, egotistical, self-perceived authority, martyr-victim complex, obsessive-compulsive, and more

if you think his drivel here is bad, you should see his "book", full of contents from his website!

http/earthlingclub.com

he literally just regurgitated techno-babble while making up sh*t in the sincere hopes that it would sound impressive and rewrite history, which is the end goal of ol' sam fodera as noted herehttp://phys.org/n...fic.html

I am trying to get my solutions into 'presentation' shape in time for the next major International Climate Change Conference sometime this year. ... The Reality-cavalry is coming to the rescue, whether you like it or not, or believe it or not.
for the record: no mention of ol' sam anywhere "coming to the rescue"
RNP
3.9 / 5 (11) Dec 01, 2018
@Captain Stumpy

Thanks for the http://phys.org/n...fic.html link. I haven't had a laugh like that in years.

Not only does he claim that he is going to change the world by solving the climate change problem, he also boasts about his Theory Of Everything. This guy is either an inveterate liar or completely deluded. Maybe even a little of both.

Captain Stumpy
4 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
@RNP
Thanks for the http://phys.org/n...fic.html link
you're welcome

I'm always willing to share a good laugh
This guy is either an inveterate liar or completely deluded. Maybe even a little of both
both, definitely

He's been repeatedly banned from various forums for not only baiting and lying but for his refusal to provide evidence in accordance with the scientific method

he was banned from *literally* one of the most lenient forums on the interwebz! no sh*t!

if you want to see the level of delusion, read the foundation of his TOE: http://earthlingclub.com/

Use an anonymizer or proxy as protection

At first, you will laugh at the bullsh*t he spouts, but if you look deeper and consider his posts here you will see the absolute dedication to his delusions, etc
RealityCheck
2.3 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2018
@Forum.

The intelligent readers who are familiar with the relevant backstory will note how CS (the "TL;DR" troll gang king) repeatedly deliberately dishonestly keeps OMITTING the important fact (which I already explained to him more than once already): ie, that in the lead-up to the Paris Climate Conference my intended submission was OVERTAKEN BY EVENTS which made it prudent to await further developments before proceeding with disclosure and implementation work/investment. Namely, Political changes here in Australia affecting Renewables Projects; as well as Technical Innovations coming through at the time re Solar/Wind/Batteries and Grid infrastructure/management etc necessitated my Rethink for how my own work/inventions could better fit into/integrate with all these other fast-evolving developments and circumstances significantly different from that which applied at the time of my intended submission.

Most Research/Invention projects are subject to 'timing' etc factors. :)
jonesdave
3.7 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2018
It is a known fact that we exhale more carbon dioxide than we inhale. One solution to cutting down on GH emissions, therefore, is for the most useless members of society to stop breathing. Permanently. RC.....?
Da Schneib
4 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
@105LiarRC prefers to whine about process instead of presenting science. On the science forum.

This is as obvious as a 3-year-old with cookie crumbs on its shirt. Or a Mafia boss whining about "traitors." You know, kinda like Trump does.
RealityCheck
2.3 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2018
PS @Forum.

I already completed my reality-based physical ToE work. And my reality-based Axiomatic Maths work is in-progress; for modeling the reality-based physical ToE. Current unreal-Axioms-based maths is inherently incapable of doing so; as demonstrated/admitted by honest physicists who acknowledge that current math dead-end 'unreal results' like "undefined", "infinities", "singularities" etc are serious stumbling blocks when trying to model THE Universal Physical Reality consistently and completely (unlike the loose collection of ad-hoc disjoint/partial conjectures/hypotheses/theories comprising the current Standard Model(s) of cosmology/particle physics). Truly objective physical/mathematical cosmologists have been admitting/bemoaning (in private and in countless programs/interviews) this self-evident fact regarding the 'impasse' in mainstream ToE completion efforts at present.

And what do the C-gang of "TL;DR" trolls do: they deride, attack, lie about ME. Sad losers.
jonesdave
4.1 / 5 (9) Dec 01, 2018
I already completed my fantasy-based physical ToE work.


FTFY.
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
@Forum.

Note this perfect demonstration of @jonesdave lack of maturity, integrity, common sense:
It is a known fact that we exhale more carbon dioxide than we inhale. One solution to cutting down on GH emissions, therefore, is for the most useless members of society to stop breathing. Permanently. RC.....?
Why @jonesdave would even contemplate, let alone actually execute, that lame and juvenile troll attempt to use the deadly serious evolving Climate Change disaster as a trolling 'ploy', is for you, the intelligent readers, to try and fathom. Lame and Juvenile troll is, as Lame and Juvenile troll does, hey folks? Sad.

Yet another demonstration of jd's lame juvenile troll 'credentials':
I already completed my fantasy-based physical ToE work.


FTFY.
Poor jd thinks it funny/Ok to misquote me, then laugh at his own dishonest stupidity. No wonder these incomptentent counter-productive 'science defenders' give the likes of Benni/cantdrive ammunition! Sadder.
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 01, 2018
@105LiarRC, if you hoped anyone would give cred to your support of a popular cause after you lied on 105 threads for your own self-aggrandizement I have no idea. You are a liability not a supporter.
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
@Da Schneib.
@105LiarRC prefers to whine about process instead of presenting science. On the science forum.
The blundering drunken troll is still trying to strawman, frame. Sad DS.
@105LiarRC, if you hoped anyone would give cred to your support of a popular cause after you lied on 105 threads for your own self-aggrandizement I have no idea. You are a liability not a supporter.
It's YOU and CS-gang who incestuously, indiscriminately 'support each other' via mutual 'Bot 5 gang' undeserved 5's. You've long known that I do NOT 'play' in the ratings pages; and that I am scrupulously independent objective intentionally LONE researcher that purposely eschews groups/gangs of ANY kind that would compromise my impartiality, objectivity and research results (because such gangthink/groupthink leads to the kind of atrociously stupid troll-gang mentalities, behaviors on display in your and 'Bot 5 gang's' troll-and-lies posts. Not good, DS.
jonesdave
4.4 / 5 (7) Dec 01, 2018
Poor jd thinks it funny/Ok to misquote me, then laugh at his own dishonest stupidity. No wonder these incomptentent counter-productive 'science defenders' give the likes of Benni/cantdrive ammunition! Sadder.


As they say from where I was dragged up - mate, get over yourself, eh?

Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 01, 2018
@105LiarRC, you mean other than the times you promoted and lied for unscientific theories?

As demonstrated in hundreds of posts I've made five-by-five of you lying.

Maybe you forgot.
jonesdave
4 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
Ahhh well, at least the idiot Benni has disappeared momentarily. Probably still trying to figure out what is causing gravitational redshift around Sgr A*. Probably be back soon, with some impossible woo to explain it. Learned at Janitorial College. Mop mass. Mop mechanics. Mopshift. Or some such.
RealityCheck
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 01, 2018
@jonesdave.
As they say from where I was dragged up - mate, get over yourself, eh?
"Dragged up", is all too sadly apt. Pity they "dropped you" half-way up, jd. As for your "get over yourself" hypocrisy, you would do better to take your own advice there, jd. Just because you are a LOSER TROLL on a comments forum doesn't mean you have to try and 'tar' everyone else with your own LOSER TROLL 'brush', jd. Especially since I have been increasingly confirmed correct by mainstream articles while YOU (and the rest of that LOSER TROLL GANG who 'just believed' that Bicep2 GIGO and 'bashed cranks' with that FLAWED 'work/claims' because YOU DON'T LISTEN) just attack me despite ME being correct and YOU incorrect. Jd, mate, just face it: you and that 'Bot 5 gang' are LOSER TROLLS, nothing more; pretending to 'defend science' while actually doing great harm to the reputation/respect of/for science. You've certainly amply proven you are NO sort of OBJECTIVE scientists/discoursers, jd.
jonesdave
4 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
"Dragged up", is all too sadly apt. Pity they "dropped you" half-way up, jd. As for your "get over yourself" hypocrisy, you would do better to take your own advice there, jd. Just because you are a LOSER TROLL on a comments forum doesn't mean you have to try and 'tar' everyone else with your own LOSER TROLL 'brush',


As Stephen King would say - mad as a shithouse rat. Appropriate.
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
@Forum.

From the self-demonstrated dishonest insensible DS trolling tragic:
@105LiarRC, you mean other than the times you promoted and lied for unscientific theories? As demonstrated in hundreds of posts I've made five-by-five of you lying. Maybe you forgot.
How is it possible that this "@Da Schneib" creature can so blithely pretend to himself/his gang that the proof hasn't already been provided highlighting his insensible blundering, strawmanning and lying about me/my posts? A perfect 'case study' for the astute psychology/psychiatry major there, if ever there was, hey folks!

Now in case DS 'missed it' the first couple of times:
Thread where @104LiarRC claims Rubin said galaxies will implode with out DM and confuses Zwicky with Rubin: https://phys.org/...zzy.html
That was @Benni/others, NOT ME, you crazy-drunk-stupid DS twerp!
Will DS really be so thick/dishonest as to keep evading that (latest) proof of his (latest) blunder? Let's wait and see..
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
@jnesdave.
"Dragged up", is all too sadly apt. Pity they "dropped you" half-way up, jd. As for your "get over yourself" hypocrisy, you would do better to take your own advice there, jd. Just because you are a LOSER TROLL on a comments forum doesn't mean you have to try and 'tar' everyone else with your own LOSER TROLL 'brush',


As Stephen King would say - mad as a shithouse rat. Appropriate.
Who you trying to kid, mate; yourself and your 'Bot 5 gang' of loser trolls, no doubt. Wise up; stop digging yourself deeper into your and your loser gang's own troll-shite, jd. :)
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 01, 2018
Axiomatic Mathematics

RealityCheck
.....................Reading through your comments
Axiomatic Mathematics - In mathematics, an axiomatic system is any set of axioms from which some or all axioms can be used in conjunction to logically derive theorems. A theory consists of an axiomatic system and all its derived theorems -
Disregarding the inherent Axiomatic problems
that aside
the Axiomatic problems
are also your current problems
and your current problems
to use an Americanism
have become a mind set
a self fulfilling mind set
in a self gratulatory mind set
where the mind sets of mind set
that have become part of your psyche
a holier than thou mind set
and that my friend
nobody but yourself can cure that one
Because it is in the Axiomatic Mathematics
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 01, 2018
All in the mathematics

RealityCheck
.....................It never takes me long
It seems like only yesterday
you appeared on the horizon
and in that time
as your diplomatic problems became apparent
word was heard of your Toe
it became apparent
you had a theory
not a theory of propulsive propulsion
not a theory of light radius stars
more esoteric than these
this theory was esoterically minded
and as I perused
your texturally inky texting
it became apparent on reading
Axiomatic Mathematics
and from that moment
it became apparent
your problems
your gripes
your continual barracking and annoyance
was all in the mathematics
Axiomatic Mathematics
jonesdave
4 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
Who you trying to kid, mate; yourself and your 'Bot 5 gang' of loser trolls, no doubt. Wise up; stop digging yourself deeper into your and your loser gang's own troll-shite, jd. :)


Jeez. mate, like I said - get over yourself, eh? Not Australian, are you? Lol. Thornhill is Australian. Complete wazzock. As is the moron Crothers. Another loon. Seem to have your fair share of f***wits over here, eh?
jonesdave
4 / 5 (8) Dec 01, 2018
@jnesdave.
"Dragged up", is all too sadly apt. Pity they "dropped you" half-way up, jd. As for your "get over yourself" hypocrisy, you would do better to take your own advice there, jd. Just because you are a LOSER TROLL on a comments forum doesn't mean you have to try and 'tar' everyone else with your own LOSER TROLL 'brush',


As Stephen King would say - mad as a shithouse rat. Appropriate.
Who you trying to kid, mate; yourself and your 'Bot 5 gang' of loser trolls, no doubt. Wise up; stop digging yourself deeper into your and your loser gang's own troll-shite, jd. :)


Strewth. What a wanker. Eh? I'm guessing all Australian universities f...ed you off, eh? Ditto as NZ and UK ones would have done. Talking shite, aren't you woo boy? All mouth, no trousers. We had a word for people like you in NZ - wankers. Probably applies elsewhere.
RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 01, 2018
@jonesdave.
As Stephen King would say - mad as a shithouse rat. Appropriate.
Who you trying to kid, mate; yourself and your 'Bot 5 gang' of loser trolls, no doubt. Wise up; stop digging yourself deeper into your and your loser gang's own troll-shite, jd. :)
Strewth. What a wanker. Eh? I'm guessing all Australian universities f...ed you off, eh? Ditto as NZ and UK ones would have done. Talking shite, aren't you woo boy? All mouth, no trousers. We had a word for people like you in NZ - wankers. Probably applies elsewhere.
That you would drag posters' nationality into it and make such patently flawed generalizations from same, tells the intelligent readers that you are not objective and impartial, jd. That self-demonstrated fact, plus the drunken foulmouthed loser-gang 'conversation' between you and DS in another thread, just further tells the intelligent readers you are here to troll and insult from your ignorance and drunken malice. Sober up and wise up, jd.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 01, 2018
I'm tellin' you, @105LiarRC is a mormon. You can smell them; they always whine about people being "drunks."
RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 01, 2018
@Forum.
I'm tellin' you, @105LiarRC is a mormon. You can smell them; they always whine about people being "drunks."
Note how this DS troll drunkenly implies that anyone not approving of or not joining him in his drunken stupor "must be Mormon". What makes it beyond tragic is the fact everyone, including the DS troll itself (when it is sober enough to think/recall straight) knows by now that I am Atheist since age 9. Pity the insensibly drunken DS troll, folks.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 01, 2018
Go screw some 12-year-old girls, you fake mormon.
RealityCheck
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2018
@Forum.
Go screw some 12-year-old girls, you fake mormon.
And there you have it, folks; the last desperate cry from the sicko DS tragic's drunken unconscious betraying his 'projected' secret penchant for little girls, as well as for the 'tipple' which has addled his grey matter to the point that he still hasn't 'recalled' that I am Atheist since age 9....as every 'old hand' here at PO has known for years now. Pity him, folks.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
No, this is the start of a new thing, @12YORaping105LiarRC. You got a whole new nickname. I warned you about keeping up with the "drunk" lies. Now you get it all.

Have you stopped raping 12-year-old girls?
Steelwolf
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
Ya know RC, the lengths that the few idiots in the 5-star vote bot club go to make them selves look like total arses is amazing.

Does DS not understand that others reading this will see that his own BS is only sticking to Him, and not to his target?

The standard reader is going to like at his crud and go "Hmmm, obviously a case of projectionism and some serious closet deviancy in this DS fellow," and same with jd who has never a clean post.

Dont worry about them slamming you, they are going to cuss and hop up and down anyways. Point out they are dead wrong and note that all the crud THEY are trying to bring up is actually legally considered Libel and Slander as far as British Commonwealth and European laws on Online interaction as well as US laws on wire fraud, slander and mischievous online acts. And yes, they can track thru TOR etc. Recent anti-bullying regulations cover such.

Let em project their grotesque stuff, it sticks only on them, til they get busted bigtime.
Steelwolf
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
Besides, all of those posts that DS points to actually shows more of a history of his abuse of others here, he, Stump and RNC, jd and a few of their scattered sock puppets, like the one of jd's calling itself a scientist. That was too easy jd, like see through.

The article here states, Again, that we have to reconsider SuperNovae as 'standard candles', at first they thought them all the same, then classed into 1 and 2, now there are at least 4 or 5 classes and subclasses of SuperNovae type and even Kilonova now. And they keep finding more.

That AMPLY Proves what RC had stated, that perhaps there are differing Supernova types and that the 'Standard Candle' is possibly not so standard. That was proven and proven and proven again since.

So I can see how the jd, RNC and DS crowd are severely chastened, and since they are just WRONG haters, they are gonna hate you all the more for having been RIGHT all along.

I know, I have similar fun all the time, and their heads pop.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
@Steelwolf thinks it's next.
RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2018
@Forum.
No, this is the start of a new thing, @12YORaping105LiarRC. You got a whole new nickname. I warned you about keeping up with the "drunk" lies. Now you get it all.

Have you stopped raping 12-year-old girls?
Note DS's desperate and unconsciously self-betraying 'projection' of his inner sicko penchant for little girls; and DS's continuing insensibility as demonstrated by his lack of awareness that his lame and incompetent lying campaign has already been well-exposed over the last few days. Where are DS's TRUE friends; those who care enough about his well-being to do an "intervention" and take him aside and get help for him. Surely he must have at least ONE TRUE friend who can do this for him? Surely.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
@12YORaping105LiarRC, another five for your delectation:

Thread where @105LiarRC makes conflicting claims within ten posts and gets caught: https://phys.org/...ome.html
Thread where @105LiarRC lies about how long it takes a shockwave to move through a giant molecular cloud: https://phys.org/...cal.html
Thread where @105LiarRC lies about dark matter existing inside stars: https://phys.org/...ion.html
Thread where @105LiarRC makes up stories about another poster: https://phys.org/...ars.html
Thread where @105LiarRC lies about "inconsistencies" it claims exist in the Big Bang model: https://phys.org/...ack.html
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2018
@Forum.

And the DS tragedy grinds on towards its inevitable denouement. Poor DS never listens or learns. He apparently has no true friends that would take him aside and counsel him to stop digging and sober up. How low can he go, folks? We can only wait and see...
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@steel
I've never had a sock here, so repeating a lie just makes you look stupid
...as well as US laws on wire fraud, slander and mischievous online acts
it is not wire fraud
https://www.law.c.../18/1341

Whoever, having devised or intending to devise any scheme or artifice to defraud, or for obtaining money or property by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises...
however, given the definition, rc can be charged with wire fraud considering his earthling club
is actually legally considered Libel and Slander
nope. sorry
ignoring your ignorance regarding libel and slander

it can't be held to be defamation if it's factually correct

Moreover, it's neither capable of the "intent of harming the reputation of" considering sam's reputation nor is it "made to someone other than the person defamed"
til they get busted bigtime
feel free to litigate

I recommend it

just be very sure of yourself first
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@steel cont'd
Recent anti-bullying regulations cover such
yes and no
it depends on where the victim and perpetrator are located and the jurisdiction

not all US states have anti-bullying laws as some states don't need said laws due to other stronger and more active laws

your state may not have the coverage you think it does

Britian and Oz have laws that can get sam in a sh*tload of trouble, however, from fraud, wire fraud and assault to libel and bullying [Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)]

yes, according to Oz law, because of sam's baiting, libel, pseudoscience on a science site and refusal to abide by the guidelines, he can be held accountable under Oz law as a bully because his actions are offensive and promote bullying and the site refuses to moderate
I have similar fun all the time
whoops
there goes any case you may want to have as you just admitted to trolling

thanks for that one
RealityCheck
1.9 / 5 (9) Dec 02, 2018
@Forum.

There it is again, folks; the growing CS-self-delusional 'versions of reality' which this CS-malignancy makes up and wraps up in his inimitable brand of 'layer caking and sprinklings' of unwitting irony, unabashed hypocrisy and malice aforethought. Poor insensible delusional vexatious internet troll. Pity.
cardzeus
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
It is a known fact that we exhale more carbon dioxide than we inhale. One solution to cutting down on GH emissions, therefore, is for the most useless members of society to stop breathing. Permanently. RC.....?

...It's how we lose weight, conservation of mass and all...
Steelwolf
2.3 / 5 (9) Dec 02, 2018
No, the only Admitted trolls are jd, stumpy, DS, RNP and the Other illegals abusers of this forum for pushing their own hatred of other individuals with different science view. for whom Interpol are going to be rather interested.

When they start referring to various religious cults to try to classify you, use constant profanity and demean the individuals and constant attacks to try to make the person seem like an insane mass law breaker of radical religious fringe nut, is all a mass group conspiracy to upvote yourself, they always downvote certain individuals no matter the post.

The FACT that one particular group of individuals dues this makes them a lying cabal that have self-selected themselves as THE ONLY Legitimate voices on this forum, and so we get incessant profanity laced screeds, without math itself, instead of reasoned conversation.

You can find the criminal code act, and yet you cannot figure out toxic waste laws, even under your bright red nose.
jonesdave
4 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2018
^^^^^Scientifically illiterate loon.
RNP
3.7 / 5 (9) Dec 02, 2018
@Steelwolf
all a mass group conspiracy to upvote yourself, they always downvote certain individuals no matter the post.


Good grief man! What do votes matter? And to suggest that there is some sort of conspiracy!
You obviously take a silly comments section in a science aggregate site FAR more seriously than you should.

Besides, you would do better trying to understand the science that these people (who are far more qualified and experienced in real science than the people with which they argue) are trying to explain than railing against them. You might learn something for once.
Captain Stumpy
4.4 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2018
@RNP
You obviously take a silly comments section in a science aggregate site FAR more seriously than you should
it's all about the promotion of his ideology and beliefs, so any criticism will be taken seriously by him

He actually believes he's being the rational, critical thinker here

some of his conspiracist ideation
https://phys.org/...ric.html

he rejects science to advocate for the electric woo
https://phys.org/...ins.html

Sound familiar?
https://journals....rintable

you would do better trying to understand the science
not going to happen anytime soon, IMHO
Captain Stumpy
4.4 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2018
@steel
for whom Interpol are going to be rather interested
nope
Interpol will forward any complaints to the requisite local authorities if they do anything
and the LEO's aren't going to prosecute anyone who isn't breaking any laws
When they start referring to various religious cults to try to classify you
when an ideology develops "a social group with socially deviant or novel belief(s) and practices" and rejects proven, validated reality for the purpose of defending those beliefs, then it is officially a cult, especially when said cult presents a religious-like fervour for said deviant beliefs
instead of reasoned conversation
if you could provide reasoned conversation you would be able to quote where the gov't created a law to incinerate HAZ waste by burning it in commercial and military jets, per your claim, without resorting to delusional beliefs and conspiracy based upon *your interpretation* of reality

say HI to Lothar Wagner at Interpol for me
RNP
5 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2018
@Captain Stumpy
https://journals....rintable


Another great link. Fascinating.

Thank you again.
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@RNP
Another great link. Fascinating.

Thank you again.
I am honestly surprised that you've not seen that one yet!

I hope you enjoy it

There have been a few others that examine related issues underlying the problems of accepting science and evidence on a subject, like cultural cognition
https://scholarsh...ications

http://www.iarm.c...9864.pdf

have you seen this Arstechnica article?
https://arstechni...nformed/

jonesdave
4.4 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2018
I failed to get my review published, for some reason. It was entitled, "Cranks are f***wits."
Cambridge University Press never got back to me on it. Disappointed.
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@Jonesd
I failed to get my review published, for some reason. It was entitled, "Cranks are f***wits."
Cambridge University Press never got back to me on it. Disappointed.
try Yale or U of Oklahoma!

jonesdave
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@Jonesd
I failed to get my review published, for some reason. It was entitled, "Cranks are f***wits."
Cambridge University Press never got back to me on it. Disappointed.
try Yale or U of Oklahoma!



I think that failing to capitalise 'f***wits' may have cost me. Also, the title, abstract, main body and conclusions were all composed of the same three words. I was feeling lazy.
RealityCheck
2.5 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2018
@RNP.
:What do votes matter? And to suggest that there is some sort of conspiracy!.....Besides, you would do better trying to understand the science that these people...
RNP, your response to @Steelwolf misses (willfully ignores?) FACTS:

(1 )DS, CS, jd et al OPENLY URGED 'gang' members to COME to PO comments EN MASSE for CONCERTED CAMPAIGN to drive out those 'the gang' cannot abide.....even when a 'target' is one (me) who is being increasingly confirmed CORRECT by mainstream!

A BLATANT 'open conspiracy', RNP; which either 'conveniently escaped your notice' OR you 'conveniently forgot'? :)

(2) "these people" you 'laud' are the VERY SAME biased/stupid PEOPLE who FELL for Bicep2 crap and attacked DESPITE me being CORRECT all along!

Why do you STILL 'laud' them, RNP?

(3) CS-gang been CORRUPTING/PLAYING RATINGS SYSTEMS OF SCIENCE SITES (as publish-or-perish BB/INFLATION HACKS corrupted/played publishing/citing system for DECADES)!

It's time you 'woke up', RNP.

Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@Jonesd
I think that failing to capitalise 'f***wits' may have cost me
Hmm... You may have something there
I know many a grammar nazi who would repudiate the legitimacy of the statement for that
Also, the title, abstract, main body and conclusions were all composed of the same three words. I was feeling lazy.
facts don't need to be elaborate or verbose

maybe we should work together on it?

.

.

@RNP
Thank you again
I didn't address this above. sorry
You're very welcome

I hope you get a lot of information from the other links as well

Oh, and there is going to be a membership drive for a gang I know if you're interested
We will have colours, secret handshakes, leathers, a charter and chocolate if you're interested
[I should probably note that this is humour, otherwise, certain idiots might report me to Interpol!]
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
one (me) who is being increasingly confirmed CORRECT by mainstream!
Another self-aggrandizing lie by @12YORaping105LiarRC. Disgusting.
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@steelWolf,
they always downvote certain individuals no matter the post
You ignore the possibility that every post they make appears to be wrong. And the fact we tell how, and then get a bunch of politics like you present here.

If you want to be taken seriously, at least try to make some scientifically plausible posts. For extra credit, ask a question about something you think is wrong. Then think about the answer and ask another. Try not to make your questions about things that are implausible given the evidence. That means look up the evidence, and not merely that which you wish to hear. In fact, you should look up what you do not wish to hear and evaluate it carefully. This is what I do. I can give you no better advice.

I say this to you because you appear to be frustrated, not self-aggrandizing like @12YORaping105LiarRC. Tell me what frustrates you and I will try my best to answer it without fear or favor. I will tell you what I know and what I don't.
Benni
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
I failed to get my review published, for some reason. It was entitled, "Cranks are f***wits."
Cambridge University Press never got back to me on it. Disappointed.


They considered the source & took it into account.
RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2018
PS to @RNP:

I trust you are reasonable/objective enough to update your impressions re CS, DS and 'gang' after you've seen the facts I reminded of in my post above regarding atrocious 'CS-gang' and their malevolent activities on forum(s).

I now further draw your attention to their objectivity-absent 'gang mentality' trolling just above: note how CS, jd, DS JOKE about their malevolent trolling behavior/conspiracy: which has been all too evident for years for it to be so lamely 'joked away' pretending 'it never happened'.

Only 'industrial strength' INSENSIBILITY and/or MALICE explains why they would be so stupid as to think it 'a good idea' to FURTHER INSULT thus the smarts of the intelligent readers.

Also note especially: how DS is so madly driven by troll-ego that he again fails to realize this very thread's article is confirming me correct; hence making DS's self-serving attempts rationalizations/mischaracterizations/excuses just more lame troll driveling.

Thanks. :)

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@RealityCheck
I see that you are still expecting a different outcome from these fools in this website. I assure you that none of them will give you the adulation and praise that you seem to look for in each and every article/forum where you choose to say and bring attention to what you believe to be correct all along.
Surely you should know by now that these cretins don't wish for you to be correct in anything - least of all in scientific research. They are here mostly for one purpose - and that is to be seen and to make known their nasty opinion of those who would try to emulate mainstream scientists.
In this science website - it is the rule that only mainstream scientists/researchers have the possibility of ever being correct - unless, of course, it is one of the physorg 1-raters that is making a statement on science and gets rated 5 from all their buttbuddies.
You already know all of their names - so stop hitting your head against a brick wall and put their names on IGNORE.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@Steelwolf
all a mass group conspiracy to upvote yourself, they always downvote certain individuals no matter the post.


Good grief man! What do votes matter? And to suggest that there is some sort
You obviously take a silly comments section in a science aggregate site FAR more seriously than you

Besides, you would do better trying to understand the science that these people (who are far more qualified and experienced in real science than the people with which they argue) are trying to explain than railing against them. You might learn something for once.

says RNP

What you claim :
"these people (who are far more qualified and experienced in real science than"

is very highly debatable. I have caught some of them in incorrect and downright wrong or incomplete opinions/hypotheses, but chose not to correct them after having researched their comments.
Votes don't matter, expect to newcomers who see the "1" and skim over what was said
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
@ YEC_SEU, how would you know if any of it's right or wrong? Osmosis? 'Cause you sure don't know any physics. You can't figure out whether there's mass or not. As demonstrated.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
Just so we're clear:
But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time.
This idiot says there both is and is not mass. In the same breath.

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
Da Jerk is Wrong as usual. You still are proving that reading skills/comprehension in your monkey rain are seriously lacking when you could not even understand that what I was saying is IF THERE IS NO MASS, THEN GRAVITY HAS NOTHING TO WORK ON, SINCE GRAVITY REQUIRES MASS.
Comprende? No? Too bad. Maybe jones can explain it to you..
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
Double post
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
Reference: https://phys.org/...ins.html

As for being wrong, you said it. Are you contending you didn't?
cantdrive85
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
They observed a cosmic electric discharge, that why it doesn't fit their predictions.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
Uhhh what part of this from my post do you not comprehend, Da Jerk???
"But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick"

Are you reading it as saying that there is Mass and there is Gravity? When it clearly says that there is NO Mass and NO Gravity.
You really need to see an ophthalmologist and a psychiatrist, Da Jerk.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
You said there was no mass available, then invoked stars and planets. You said:
But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time.
Here: https://phys.org/...ins.html

Now what part of your post do you not comprehend?

Oh, and noted you're lying about your own post. Typical YEC.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
Full reading comprehension and a good grasp of the English language is necessary for any English-speaking website. But those proven idiots like Da Jerk will try to wheedle something out of the apparent meaning in a sentence, and make false accusations. All because Da Jerk ABSOLUTELY HATES to be wrong.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
You said there was no mass then you started talking about stars and planets. It's what you said. You can deny it all you like but it's all there in black and white. And the more you deny it, @YEC_SEU, the more like a troll you look.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
LOL Electromagnetism was a separate issue - separate from Mass and Gravity - as any body with even half a brain would recognise readily.

It seems that Da Jerk has been itching for a long time to tangle with my comments - and this was his day. Or so it seemed. LOL
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.6 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
Mass that is missing means that gravity has nothing to act upon, you idiot. LEARN TO F*CKING READ.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
You just said stars and planets have no mass.

I learned to read. Apparently you didn't.

I merely waited until you said something stupid. It didn't take long.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
NOPE I NEVER SAID THAT. So now you find it necessary to lie and make up shiit to make yourself look good to your buttbuddies, eh?
Apparently, you are getting sent as I and others have caught you in some very egregious moments of miscomprehension's of other people's comments.
So this is not the first time you have done this.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time.


https://phys.org/...ins.html

It's exactly what you said and you're lying about your own words. You said it, now own it.

Trolls always try that one. It never works.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
You mean this?
Surveillance_Egg_Unit1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 01, 2018
Poor poor rrwilliejoe - for some strange reason is still thinking there are some who are denying the "universal power" of gravity. Nobody is denying it, rrwilliejoe. It's all in your mind.
Gravity requires the presence of Matter - otherwise known as MASS in order for gravity to make known its own presence and strength - at whatever level that strength may be. And once gravity is at work with Mass, other phenomena such as EM can take over. It is seen happening on Earth.
But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time. Why does this happen? Very well, I shall tell you. EM is a conduit for information.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
Fine by me. You can start explaining how there's no mass in stars and planets now.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
Apparently, Schniebo is growing senile and has lost the ability to read a full paragraph that makes perfect sense to others, but not to Shniebo. Could be that Schinbone is also suffering from Alzheimers - which can only get worse as the days, months and years go by. Schinbone is already exhibiting the early signs of the disease. His poor family will soon have to change his diapers and spoonfeed him. Sad
ROFLOL
Da Schneib
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
You said it. Like all trolls you now deny it.

You said:
But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time. p


Here: https://phys.org/...ins.html

You said planets and stars don't have mass.

And you are worming, squirming, whining, and lying to try to get out of it.

3-year-old with cookie crumbs on its shirt. Pitiful.
Captain Stumpy
4.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@egg-tarded creationist troll
But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time
dafuq?
ROTFLMFAO

so... wait a minute: you say "what if there is no Mass" and then explain what will happen by saying "whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars"

seriously?

you do realise that this means you are *literally* saying planets and stars have no mass, right?
https://en.wikipe...iki/Dash

the use of the em dash makes your comment parenthetical and thus ties it to the beginning

LMFAO

Full reading comprehension and a good grasp of the English language is necessary for any English-speaking website, so what's your excuse?
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
ROFLOL Schinbone's buttbuddy rides in to the rescue, but has forgotten to read the part where I said that "But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick", which MEANS that IN THE ABSENCE OF MASS - GRAVITY HAS NOTHING TO WORK ON.
Did you read that, Dumpy? Were you able to comprehend the meaning? No? Too bad. Perhaps YOU are also suffering the onset of senility or ALZHEIMER'S - like Da Schinbone.
Sad.
ROFLOL
WHY are you in this science website anyway, Dumpy? Don't you have some trees to chop and some fires to start in northern California? Best get to work now instead of wasting your time trying to pretend that you have scientific knowledge while goading commenters into revealing what they are working on.
Yeah
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
You said it. Like all trolls you now deny it.

You said:
But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time. p


Here: https://phys.org/...ins.html

You said planets and stars don't have mass.

And you are worming, squirming, whining, and lying to try to get out of it.

3-year-old with cookie crumbs on its shirt. Pitiful.
says the senile Schinbone

Show me the evidence where I said that.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
Already done. Quoted and linked.

Not only that you quoted it yourself.

Worming, squirming, trolling, and lying.
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
@egg-tarded troll
Schinbone's buttbuddy rides in to the rescue
you have an unhealthy fascination with everyone else's butt

I thought that was a stoning offence in your cult?
but has forgotten to read the part where I said that "But what if there is no Mass available?
actually, no - you're just not literate

there are three ways to look at what you wrote:

1- if you meant to use an en dash ([typo above] explanation linked) which is "a break in a sentence or to set off parenthetical statements". this means your comment directly ties your EM linking stars and planets to not having gravity

2- if you meant to use a hyphen ( https://en.wikipe...i/Hyphen ) then you're grammatically incorrect - no change in interpretation

3- if you f*cked up and should have used a period it still asks the same question and directly ties planets and stars to not having gravity simply because you didn't segregate the paragraph nor qualify the specific statement

2Bcont'd
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
Nope - you still haven't provided your evidence that I ever said that "planets and stars have no mass". You are a LIAR and belong in HELL with your buttbuddy.

Again - this is what I said:
"The woohucksters have never produced an original idea or working technology despite their outlandish claims!
Surveillance_Egg_Unit1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 01, 2018
Poor poor rrwilliejoe - for some strange reason is still thinking there are some who are denying the "universal power" of gravity. Nobody is denying it, rrwilliejoe. It's all in your mind.
Gravity requires the presence of Matter - otherwise known as MASS in order for gravity to make known its own presence and strength - at whatever level that strength may be. And once gravity is at work with Mass, other phenomena such as EM can take over. It is seen happening on Earth.
But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic f
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (8) Dec 02, 2018
@Surveillance_Egg_Unit.

I hardly seek/expect "adulation/praise" from TROLLS when drawing attention to where mainstream confirming me correct. I am simply EXERCISING MY FORUM RULES RIGHTS to point that out to THOSE who PREVIOUSLY TROLLED and INSULTED me DESPITE ME being correct; and THEY wrong/ignorant to call me names, make false accusations and carry out sustained 'CS-troll-gang bot-voting-and-lying campaigns' against me.

My posting record here (and OLD PhysOrg/physforum) shows I seek, and encourage, polite, on-science/logic discourse.

To that end, I REFUSED to get drawn into TROLL-GAMES in RATINGS PAGES/ OPEN FORUM....on ANY 'side'. That is why the troll gangs ON ALL SIDES "hated" me; because I would not 'play ratings games' FOR ANY troll/gang sides' benefit.

Being strictly objective and impartial, I take ANY 'side' to task whenever the behavior/assertions are EGREGIOUSLY WRONG or UNFAIR, whatever the personal cost to me.

And I DEFEND VIGOROUSLY when TROLLED. :)
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
Sure I have. You just don't want to admit what you said. Like all trolls. Here it is, and you better know you'll never get away from it:

But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time.


https://phys.org/...ins.html
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
@eggy TROLL
which MEANS that
yelling about your lack of education doesn't make your situation more clear
in point of fact, it underscored a valid argument repeatedly made here on PO: clear communication requires proper use of English, Science and jargon

and as you, yourself noted already: "Full reading comprehension and a good grasp of the English language is necessary for any English-speaking website"

Honest question: were you going for irony, hyperbole or just attempting to underscore your own limitations?
WHY are you in this science website anyway
studying idiots, cranks, pseudoscience believers, conspiracy theorists and religious nutters like you

Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
This obviously means that "Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magic when there is no Mass available". Apparently Da Sschniebo still can't comprehend English, and neither can his buttbuddy, Stumptydumpty.

And where is the evidence from the lying cheating moron, Stumpydumpty who claimed that he has "far far far more experience working with evil than I have had". and how does Stumpy know what kind of experiences I've had in the first place.
ROFLOL
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
"When there is no mass available" and "Stars and planets" are in deep conflict. Are you seriously so stupid you can't see that?
Captain Stumpy
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
@egg-tarded TROLL
And where is the evidence
Ah, so your comment "Full reading comprehension and a good grasp of the English language is necessary for any English-speaking website" was to underscore your literacy problems!

Thank you for clarifying that for us all so succinctly!
I appreciate it

I've passed on your clarification

as a side note, and because I know you need help not being able to read and all, please show this link to a friend who can ensure you get your courses started: http://www.readingbear.org/

good luck
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
All Stumptydumpty has to do to find the idiot, crank, pseudoscience believer, conspiracy theorists and religious nutters (Wakinyan Tanka) is to look in the mirror. All-in-one.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 02, 2018
And the idiot crank pseudoscience believer, conspiracy theorist, and religious nutter is you, @YEC_SEU.

But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time.


https://phys.org/...ins.html

RealityCheck
2.1 / 5 (7) Dec 02, 2018
@Surveillance_Egg_Unit.

What seems to be the problem between you and DS? I 'took' your relevant passage to apply ONLY to the SPACE BETWEEN the stars and planets......and NOT AT the locations OCCUPIED by the mass of said stars and planets....whose MASS you already acknowledged. Was there any other meaning implied by that relevant passage?
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 02, 2018
@Surveillance_Egg_Unit.

I hardly seek/expect "adulation/praise" from TROLLS when drawing attention to where mainstream confirming me correct. I am simply EXERCISING MY FORUM RULES RIGHTS to point that out to THOSE who PREVIOUSLY TROLLED and INSULTED me DESPITE ME being correct; and THEY wrong/ignorant to call me names, make false accusations and carry out sustained 'CS-troll-gang bot-voting-and-lying campaigns' against me.

My posting record here (and OLD Ph

To that end, I REFUSED to get drawn into TROLL-GAMES in RATINGS PAGES/ OPEN FORUM....on ANY 'side'. That is why the troll gangs ON ALL SIDES "hated" me; because I would not 'play ratings games..

Being strictly objective and impartial, I take ANY 'side' to task whenever the behavior/assertions are EGREGIOUSLY WRONG or UNFAIR,
says RealityCheck

I agree. And I also recognise that these two idiots are a waste of time and characters who are attempting to remove me (and you) from this website. I will remain here.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
2.3 / 5 (6) Dec 03, 2018
@Surveillance_Egg_Unit.

What seems to be the problem between you and DS? I 'took' your relevant passage to apply ONLY to the SPACE BETWEEN the stars and planets......and NOT AT the locations OCCUPIED by the mass of said stars and planets....whose MASS you already acknowledged. Was there any other meaning implied by that relevant passage?
says RealityCheck

Nope. My meaning was just as you understood it to be. Without Mass, gravity has nothing to act upon. In which case, Electromagnetism is readily available (under certain conditions) to connect planets to stars, as has been observed by scientists.

Depending on the amount of Mass, gravity acts upon it at graduating levels - the further away from Mass, the smaller effect gravity has on that Mass.

DS and CS are two very big arseholes who tend to LIE and accuse for their own entertainment.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2018
@YEC_SEU, doesn't matter how many times you lie about it. Here's what you said:

But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time.
Here's where you said it: https://phys.org/...ins.html

There's not much else to say. You don't believe in gravity; you just denied planets and stars have any.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2018
ROFLOL The obviously very senile old man, Da Schnibone still clings to his lies that were brought on by his diseased brain/mind - which can no longer fully comprehend what I had said - but chooses to supplant my original comments with his own FALSE version.

LOL TOO TOO FUNNY.
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2018
Hope you like that quote. You're gonna see a lot of it. I said you don't know squat about physics and that proves it.

And it ain't false. You quoted it yourself. Like all lying YEC trolls, you always try to lie to worm and squirm your way out.
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2018
And with that - it is time to take the dog for a walk.
And to RC - I get it. And I will keep Da Schithead and the other Schithead on IGNORE from not until doomsday....which shouldn't be too far off now. ROFLOL
Da Schneib
4.2 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2018
LOL, troll tries to cover up the nasty stinky lie with its dog. Cats at least bury it.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2018
@Egg-tarded trolling creationist POS TROLL
And to RC - I get it
they have shots for that now
I recommend medical treatment
And I will keep ... on IGNORE
you already promised this and you never did keep that promise

of course, that won't keep anyone on ignore from pointing out the idiocy of your stupid comments either
And with that - it is time to take the dog for a walk
is that a euphemism?
LMFAO
RealityCheck
1.6 / 5 (7) Dec 03, 2018
@Da Schneib.
@SEU..
Poor poor rrwilliejoe- for some strange reason is still thinking there are some who are denying the "universal power" of gravity.

NOBODY IS DENYING IT, rrwilliejoe. It's all in your mind.
Gravity requires the presence of Matter - otherwise known as MASS in order for gravity to make known its own presence and strength - at whatever level that strength may be. AND ONCE GRAVITY IS AT WORK WITH MASS, other phenomena such as EM can take over. It is seen happening on Earth.

But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time.
Here's where you said it: https://phys.org/...ins.html
Please note the FULL post and context by S_E_U , DS. I 'capitalized' the relevant CONTEXT you omitted. He obviously DID NOT DENY Gravity existed. Ok?
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2018
No. Not "Ok," @12YORaping105LiarRC. Troll says, "But what if there is no mass available?" Then says "magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars[sic]."

Kinda like you with your "drunk" stuff.

OK?
granville583762
not rated yet Dec 03, 2018
RealityCheck

I RealityCheck
already completed
my reality based physical Toe
my reality-based
axiomatic mathematical work in progress
modeling reality based physical Toe
current unreal axioms based mathematics
inherently incapable doing of so
demonstrably admitted by honest of physicists
acknowledging current math dead end unreal of result
undefined infinities of singularities
serious stumbling of blocks
when trying to model
universal physical reality of consistently completely
unlike loose collection
ad hoc disjoint partial conjectures of hypotheses of theories
comprising current Standard Models cosmology particle of physics
truly objective physical mathematical cosmologists
admittance of bemoaning
in private
in countless interviews of programs
this self-evident fact regarding of impasse
in mainstream Toe completion efforts
and what do
this C-gang
of TL DR trolls
do
they deride
attack
lie
about
RealityCheck
Sad losers
granville583762
not rated yet Dec 03, 2018
The art of diplomacy despite me being of correct

RealityCheck
Surveillance_Egg_Unit
I hardly seek
expect
adulation of praise
from trolls
when drawing attention of confirming me correct
I am simply
exercising forum
rules of right
to point that out to those trollians
insulted me despite me being of correct
wrongly ignorantly to call me of name
make false accusations
carry out sustained
CS troll gang bot voting lying of campaign
against of me
my posting of record here
shows I seek
encourage
polite
science of logic discourse.
to that end
refuse to get drawn
into troll of games
in rating of page
open of forum
on any side
is why these troll of gangs
on side of all
hated of me
because
I would not
ratings games their play
troll gang side of benefit
being strictly impartial of objective
I take any side
to task
whenever
behavior
assertions
are egregiously wrong
unfair
what so ever personal cost
defend vigorously when trolled
granville583762
not rated yet Dec 03, 2018
The art of diplomacy despite me being of correct

RealityCheck
when drawing attention of confirming me correct
insulted me despite me being of correct
The art of diplomacy despite me being of correct

RealityCheck
when one
in their intellect
of superior
axiomatic mathematics
axiomatic mathematica of Toe
superior of knowledge
intellectually
in the infinite vacuous vacuum of eternity
of RealityCheck
where in his infinite wisdom
no matter not
no matter what
under that bridge
in your world RealityCheck
your fantastical world
of demons
of dragons
in their lairs
of trolls
under their bridges
as they utter
in their foul trollian utterances
in this evil world RealityCheck
your imaginative imagination
no knows bounds
in this Beelzebub's fires of eternity
doth yourself RealityCheck
conjure up these evil imaginations
and in this fantastical quantum world
your reality comes true
RealityCheck despite me being of correct
Always
granville583762
not rated yet Dec 03, 2018
To prove you are always right

RealityCheck
in this evil world RealityCheck
your imaginative imagination
nows knows bounds
in this Beelzebub's fires of eternity
doth yourself RealityCheck
conjure up these evil imaginations
and in this fantastical quantum world
your reality comes true

We all Hate to say this RealityCheck
you have created these monsters in your imagination
in this imaginary world
in this internet world of imagination
you have created fictitious characters
such as simply stumps da shieb rnp jonesdave
straight from this other world
in this inter web of fantasy
as your fantastical imagination
has created the evil in these characters
who do not exits
except in your imagination
on this other worldly inter web
because
my friend
RealityCheck
to prove
to your imagination
to prove your axiomatic theory
to prove your Toe
but ultimately
RealityCheck
To prove you are always right

granville583762
not rated yet Dec 03, 2018
Bright Young Sparks Cometh
Apparently, Schniebo is growing senile and has lost the ability to read a full paragraph that makes perfect sense to others, but not to Shniebo. Could be that Schinbone is also suffering from Alzheimers - which can only get worse as the days, months and years go by. Schinbone is already exhibiting the early signs of the disease. His poor family will soon have to change his diapers and spoonfeed him. Sad
ROFLOL

SEU as the trollian grow old with age
from another age
suffer indignities of fin rot
under their bridge
as they age
as they wither
in senility they age
as their trollian bones
in age crumble
they are
from
an age
that now is a dying age
as the bright lights of modernity
shines on these decrepit
ancient dinosaurs
the dying trollian language of old
no longer spoken
except to this ancient decrepit breed
now reaching in fingers of one hand
So senile they know not they are extinct
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 03, 2018
In Memory of Captain Stumpy

In days of old
when simply stumps
in full flush of youth
master stumps
in assemblies of old
in choir
master stumps in voice
reached those heavenly notes
those crescendos
that only in youth
in vocal chord
can youth
cry out in song
but as the years
proceedeth
master stumps
entered another world
a world
a far cry from his youth
a world
that master stumps knew not of existence
as stumps golden world of old
has dissappeared
in the mists of youth
never to return
replaced
by a world
a sordid world
a senility of world
a chain of simply stumps
a chain of stumps own making
as when simply stumps
reacheth that age
that senility no longer effects
simply stumps will remember master stumps
as the golden memories flood back
as all stumps will remember
those days in his heavenly choir
then stumps simply will regret
most
strongly
his chain
of all his wasted years
As he maketh peace with his God
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Dec 03, 2018
@gran
As he maketh peace with his God
I bow to no imaginary deities

your poetry needs a little work

I highly recommend checking out some writers forums as well as English courses in your local college

EDIT:
when the wife returns, I will ask her to recommend some of the better poetry and writing forums as she's not only an author but also a poet with several publications in multiple nations
granville583762
not rated yet Dec 03, 2018
In Memory of Captain Stumpy
I look forward to this news
In the meantime
We all hope "in memory" is extremely premature
RealityCheck
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2018
@RNP, and @all reasonable objective fairminded observers/posters in PO.

Just above DS's post (of 17 hours ago), I posted PROOF that DS omitted to read crucial context in the S_E_U post which DS quoted. When the full S_E_U post is 'read' as intended IN full CONTEX, it is obvious that DS's assertions had NO BASIS in fact.

Now, does DS admit his error that was (again) obviously due to his own (unfortunately too-usual) 'out-of-context' misconstruings? Sadly and dishonestly, no. Instead, DS comes back with more insensible troll blather, thus:
No. Not "Ok," @12YORaping105LiarRC. Troll says, "But what if there is no mass available?" Then says "magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars[sic]."

Kinda like you with your "drunk" stuff. OK?
So, @RNP, @all, I ask you to judge: Does DS's above response (after being clearly shown HIS error) square with what DS previously claimed about himself?...namely, that he [DS]: "Always admit when I [DS] have erred".
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (2) Dec 03, 2018
You said it, @12YORaping105LiarRC. You own it.
RealityCheck
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 03, 2018
@RNP et al.

And again you see for yourselves the 'calibre' of mind and character this DS troll brings to PO. Namely, and piteously, his [DS's] unheeding insensibility and ego-driven trollish behavior; even when clearly confronted with his own [DS's] errors/insults due only to his own [DS's] 'habit' of NOT reading and understanding properly in CONTEXT:
You said it, @12YORaping105LiarRC. You own it.
Who (or should that be "What") else but a mindless troll-bot would come back with such one-liner denial-driven-drivel in lieu of facing up to his own [DS's] errors, and to responsibilities to objective science discourse and impartial fairness?
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (2) Dec 03, 2018
@12YORaping105LiarRC, you said it, you own it. You prove it or you lied. Simple as that. Considering your track record of admitting to raping 12-year-old girls and lying over 10,000 times on105 threads on this site, you'll need some much more cogent arguments than "Nyahh nyahh you can't prove it."

RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Dec 03, 2018
@RNP et al.

In what "Scientific Method" and/or "Scientific Discourse Circles" is the following lying insanity from DS troll 'acceptable' in any way shape or form as "excusable"?...
@12YORaping105LiarRC, you said it, you own it. You prove it or you lied. Simple as that. Considering your track record of admitting to raping 12-year-old girls and lying over 10,000 times on105 threads on this site, you'll need some much more cogent arguments than "Nyahh nyahh you can't prove it."

Now you can see in full 'splendor', just how insidiously corrupting of DS's mind/character has been the 'CS-bot-5s-gang' malignant trolling/lying campaigns on the internet forums. Anyone here who is NOT 'too far gone' under that malignant 'CS-bot-5s-gang' influence can readily see it clearly now, even if they had not done so before now. Sad.
Da Schneib
5 / 5 (3) Dec 03, 2018
@12YORaping105LiarRC is sorrier than a broke-dick dog.

You had every chance and every warning to quit your course of action and you are so arrogant you thought it would never hurt.

Now it hurts. And now you're a hurter.
RealityCheck
1.7 / 5 (6) Dec 03, 2018
@RNP et al.

How much more evidence does any objective fair minded observer need than the above series of DS trolls, evasions and lies; to see clearly that DS is just a troll without any real respect for either science or humanity? This latest example...
@12YORaping105LiarRC is sorrier than a broke-dick dog.

You had every chance and every warning to quit your course of action and you are so arrogant you thought it would never hurt.

Now it hurts. And now you're a hurter.
....further demonstrates DS's juvenile delinquent mentality and disregard for truth at any level.

Anyone now attempting to make excuses for, or further enable, such DS-troll lying insanity, will be just as responsible for DS's further self-degradation as is DS himself AND the 'CS-bot-5s-gang' which has manipulated/used DS to the point of his self-destruction of mind and character that you see playing out before your very eyes above and for years now. Truly a sad day for internet forums. Tragic.
hat1208
5 / 5 (3) Dec 05, 2018
Just so we're clear:
But what if there is no Mass available? Gravity is at a loss and can't work its magick - whereby the power of Electromagnetism makes itself known by producing magnetic fields that connect planetary bodies and Stars for a brief amount of time.
This idiot says there both is and is not mass. In the same breath.



@DS I think maybe it's a denseness issue.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (5) Dec 05, 2018
@hat1208.
@DS I think maybe it's a denseness issue.
Before again 'blindly' flowing/approving DS's misdirected trolling again, please get all the facts re DS's blatant usual misconstruings-based trolling (of_S_E_U in this instance); ie, please read my last few posts addressed to @RNP et al above, outlining/proving how it is DS that was the "dense" troll in this instance. Regardless of personal/other preconceptions/biases, it remains in science, as in humanity, that 'objective is objective' and fair is fair'. Yes? Thanks.
granville583762
not rated yet Dec 06, 2018
Trollian Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
hat1208.> DS I think maybe it's a denseness issue

RealityCheck> Before again 'blindly flowing/approving DSs misdirected trolling again please get all the facts re DSs blatant usual misconstruing based trolling of_S_E_U in this instance ie please read my last few posts addressed to @RNP et al above outlining/proving how it is DS that was the dense" troll in this instance Regardless of personal/other preconceptions/biases, it remains in science, as in humanity that objective is objective and fair is fair Yes? Thanks

It matters not RealityCheck
you cannot go round telling everyone they are a troll
firstly you're breaking the first rule of trolls
Do not feed the trolls
you're inflammatory language
is feeding these imaginary trolls
your fictitious entity
"RealityCheck"
has created these trolls
as you
talk trollian
you feed your imaginative trolls
you are suffering
Trollian Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 06, 2018
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder

RealityCheck
the classic symptom of OCD
is washing hands
as an excuse is required
to
continue
this
compulsive habit
so
as
the
sufferer goes to dry their hands
imaginary dirt falls on their hands
so they go back and continue washing their hands
and so they continually fulfil their compulsion
as they justify their compulsion
in their mind
that dirt dirtied their hands
so to the sufferer it does not appear compulsive but logical
and so
Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
or
as
in
your
case
RealityCheck
Trollian Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
granville583762
not rated yet Dec 06, 2018
The Dense Troll
RealityCheck> the "dense" troll

As an aside RealityCheck
in a long lost commenter
who coined the phrase
The Dense Aether Model
out
of
Curiosity
what is
The Dense Troll
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Dec 06, 2018
ROTFLMFAO

@granville583762
Trollian Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
epic new psyche term for trolls like rc: TOCD

I fully intend on stealing this, but I promise to give you credit

RNP
3.7 / 5 (6) Dec 06, 2018
@RealityCheck
@RNP et al....
Whinge, whinge, whine, whine..............


If you want to keep embarrassing yourself with these self-indulgent whines, please address them to someone else. I have no interest.
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Dec 06, 2018
@RNP.
@RealityCheck
@RNP et al....
Whinge, whinge,.......
If you want to keep embarrassing yourself with these self-indulgent whines, please address them to someone else. I have no interest.
@RNP, you have just TACITLY ADMITTED that YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW the FACTS IN EVIDENCE.

POSTERITY WILL NEVER LET YOU LIVE DOWN this day of SHAME, @RNP.

You 'don't want to see' recorded facts about BLATANT trolls whom YOU 'favor' (because they belong to the CS-gang you obviously now have joined by that very revealing response to the record of evidence against DS's trolling).

You call it "whining" when that evidence is being thrust under your very nose here and in other threads.

@RNP, you PREFER to WILLFULLY BLIND YOURSELF to INCONVENIENT FACTS IN EVIDENCE being thrust under your very nose.

Well, @RNP, so much for your claims to be 'defending objective science etc'...LIAR and COWARD.

You're a DISGRACE to TRUE OBJECTIVE SCIENCE and HUMANITY, @RNP.

SHAME, @RNP!
jonesdave
5 / 5 (3) Dec 06, 2018
You're a DISGRACE to TRUE OBJECTIVE SCIENCE and HUMANITY, @RNP. SHAME!


Hahahahaha! And WTF would you know about that, you loon?
RealityCheck
1.8 / 5 (5) Dec 06, 2018
@Da Schneib.
@12YORaping105LiarRC is sorrier than a broke-dick dog.
DS, the level of 'intellect' displayed by you there is now down to 'minimal'...ie, one step above 'lithic'.
You had every chance and every warning to quit your course of action and you are so arrogant you thought it would never hurt.
That, from a troll accusing others of "trying to be boss here". That clinches it, DS, you *really are* SO insensible that you did not see how hypocritically stupid that was for you to write.
Now it hurts. And now you're a hurter.
Projecting your 'troll-pain' again, DS. Never mind (more and more apparently literally in your case), DS; just take a few more swigs of that '"favorite tipple" you've been 'recommending' of late to your fellow drunkards in the CS-gang, maybe the 'troll-pain' will subside (at least until you make another hypocritically stupid troll post, anyway). Pitiable.
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Dec 06, 2018
@jonesdave.
You're a DISGRACE to TRUE OBJECTIVE SCIENCE and HUMANITY, @RNP. SHAME!
And WTF would you know about that, you loon?
And up pipes @RNP's and DS's fellow CS-gang member to prove the point/observation I just made re @RNP and @DS above. Mate, jd, when @RNP tacitly ADMITS that he is "not interested" in facts posted in evidence under his very nose, then what LEG HAVE YOU TO STAND ON while adding your own shameful 'hypocritically stupid troll-post in support' of THEIRS already in evidence above? None, jd; NONE, you shameful foulmouthed twerp.
.

@Forum. The intelligent readers will have by now realized WHY the distrust of science is what it has been of late; BECAUSE SUCH AS THESE (JD, RNP, DS, CS-gang) HYPOCRITICAL STUPIDS KEEP GIVING AMMUNITION to the likes of @Benni and @cantdrive85 et al.....ESPECIALLY as these STUPIDS TACITLY and OVERTLY ADMIT TO NOT WANTING TO KNOW THE FACTS even as they try to pretend they're "defending science". Poor LOSERS. Pitiful.
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Dec 06, 2018
@Forum.

Now you can see for yourselves how the CS-troll gang generate and dump their ever-smelly TROLL SHITE in attempts to BURY interesting discussions/threads that they cannot abide because it proves ME correct and THEY stupidly, foulmouthedly WRONG....even as they have incessantly trolled me from their OWN ego-driven ignorance and malice.

Now practically every other day some Supernovae etc observations/reviews confirm ME correct all along. And these poor hypocritically stupid WRONG trolls have been trying to delay the day they will inevitably have to start EATING THEIR OWN TROLL SHITE they've been dumping onto these forum floors for decades.

How these CS-loser-troll-bot-voting-gang of self-demonstrated nincompoops must "hate" me for being correct all along. Obviously. :)
RealityCheck
2 / 5 (4) Dec 06, 2018
@granville583762.
cannot go round telling everyone they are a troll
Proving they are trolls is allowed by the rules, granville. This is a SCIENCE SITE after all, where evidence is ARBITER of who are/are not "trolls". Follow the evidence provided, granville.
you're breaking the first rule of trolls
Do not feed the trolls
Defending against concerted campaigns (by the REAL self-evident CS-BOT-VOTING-and-INSULTS-GANG of TROLLS) is not only allowed by site rules, but it is a DUTY of fairminded objective intelligent members to confront/expose these INSIDIOUS ANTI-SCIENCE and ANTI-HUMANITY gangs of ego-driven trolls who CARE NOT A WHIT about EITHER science OR humanity; while they troll INDISCRIMINATELY based on PERSON NOT FACTS IN EVIDENCE; they have self-evidently trolled all too often thus to now be denied, excused or rationalized away.
you are suffering
Trollian Obsessive Compulsive Disorder
No, mate: I am "suffering from" Objectivity and Impartiality. :)
granville583762
not rated yet Dec 06, 2018
If only your disclosers were true RealityCheck
you cannot go round telling everyone they are a trolls

RealityCheck> Proving they are trolls is allowed by the rules, granville. This is a SCIENCE SITE after all, where evidence is ARBITER of who are/are not "trolls"

But your disclosures are false RealityCheck
As you well know RealityCheck
because
RealityCheck
you
go
round
falsely
accusing
and
holding
up to your monster forum
your false monster
this is what always happen to those with good intentions
they fall on their sword of truth
You have fallen on your sword of truth
RealityCheck
Benni
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 06, 2018
This is a SCIENCE SITE after all, where evidence is ARBITER of who are/are not "trolls". Follow the evidence provided, granville.


......but not this chatroom, it is a social gathering site.

If you want pure almost unadulterated solutions in Science & Engineering, you need to sign onto the Forums section of this website where the editor is formatted completely different from this chatroom. I'm in the Forum section, often providing complex electronic circuit solutions & nothing else but under a different moniker.

It is laughable when obvious wannabes troll their way into trying to convince others they have advanced science degrees when they won't even engage in a cogent discussion of their background in math, for instance, like jonesy who has told us he took Differential Equations in an Algebra course in High School, now tell me that's not laughable?

RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
@granville583762.
Proving they are trolls is allowed by the rules, granville. This is a SCIENCE SITE after all, where evidence is ARBITER of who are/are not "trolls"

But your disclosures are false RealityCheck
As you well know RealityCheck
because
RealityCheck
you
go
round
falsely
accusing
and
holding
up to your monster forum
your false monster
this is what always happen to those with good intentions
they fall on their sword of truth
You have fallen on your sword of truth
RealityCheck
Better on the RealityCheck 'sword of truth' than on the CS-bot-voting-gang-trolls 'sword of ignorance and malice' like you seem to be making excuses for lately, granville.

Anyhow, mate, look to your own failings; you seem to be way out of your depth, uninformed, naive and 'nonsensical on purpose'. Be careful not to accidently stick yourself too deeply with your 'keen sword of nonsense' there, granville. :)
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 07, 2018
Better on the RealityCheck sword of truth

Really RealityCheck
its alright
RealityCheck
for
you
to
go
round
falsely
accusing
and
holding
up to your monster forum
your false monster
because it is better one false innocent falls on your sword of truth
when all your trolls are still here making your life a nightmare RealityCheck
we all like your twisted sense of righteousness RealityCheck
your
twisted
logic
is
against
the very law of the land
Benefit of the Doubt
It is better a 1000 guilty go free
For just one person found guilty
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 07, 2018
You cannot go round calling everyone a troll RealityCheck

If RealityCheck
you
had completed
a
thorough
investigation
on your on your suspicions RealityCheck
you would
not
have
ended
up
holding up your false monster
to your monster forum
but
unfortunately
in your sword of truth campaign you held your false monster to your monster forum
your sword of truth has to end
because there is another discriptive for your campaign as your are a lone.....
and you have become immune
to
the
******the lying phrase you are being called
as you do not even realise anymore this is not a phrase that can be mentioned on a public forum
As it goes against all sense all dignity against the age group so described
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 07, 2018
RealityCheck

Your magic carpet flybys have to end
they are the source
of your RealityCheck always being of right
we do not want see your magic carpet flapping in the wind
because
as
you
correct
our
comments
it is inevitable we are always wrong and you RealityCheck are always right
in fact RealityCheck
you do not appear and simply make a comment on the article concerned
you appear
and comment on others comments
and/in-a@disjointed!WAY[]that=is()strange*to&say%the~the least
This RealityCheck is how on first glance your comments have become
It maybe the artist in us but your comments have become punctuated in such a way
They appear disjointed
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 07, 2018
And As If To Prove
RealityCheck > Anyhow, mate, look to your own failings; you seem to be way out of your depth, uninformed, naive and 'nonsensical on purpose'. Be careful not to accidently stick yourself too deeply with your 'keen sword of nonsense' there, granville. :)

Whatever the reason
whoever observes
whatever any one says
irrespective of false monsters
no matter how many false prophets
as
it
is
always
with those of truth of sword
as even as they fall on their sword of truth

RealityCheck Is Always Right
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 07, 2018
And so RealityCheck
your
brief
respite
Cometh to an end
as even as your words are comparable
there are some of your expletives
that in my comments they have been censored
so as you continue you're false monsters
my poetry
of
persuasion
will not
always
be
there
at the opportune time
be there
to
instil
a calming
influence
so welcome to the club
you have become the mole in whacker mole
run rabbit run
Merry Christmas Whacker mole
Benni
2 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
Better on the RealityCheck 'sword of truth' than on the CS-bot-voting-gang-trolls 'sword of ignorance and malice' like you seem to be making excuses for lately, granville.

Anyhow, mate, look to your own failings; you seem to be way out of your depth, uninformed, naive and 'nonsensical on purpose'. Be careful not to accidently stick yourself too deeply with your 'keen sword of nonsense' there, granville. :)


Again RC, so what? When will you get it through your thick head that discussions about scientific accuracy is not what THIS CHATROOM is about?

I'll say it again, do all your postings over in the Forum where math for ACTUAL solutions are resolved. The purpose of this chatroom is INTENDED to be a place for exactly the kind of name calling, squabbling & quibbling you don't like, you won't see jonesy, RNP, CS, schneibo, etc there, they don't know anything of enough substance whereby they can post something of computational value.

Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (2) Dec 07, 2018
@benji-TROLL
is not what THIS CHATROOM is about?
this ain't a "chatroom", you idiot

learn to internet

.

.

.

@illiterate fraudulent pseudoscience sam the TOCD troll
CS-bot-voting-gang
fraudulent claim; libel; ACORN and ISP notified

there is no gang - there is only a sh*tload of people who dislike you, personally, for your idiocy

8,335 posts and still no evidence

reported

.

.

PS- since I know you have TOCD, you will continue to spam and troll because you think being the "last poster" to actually say something gives you some kind of "win"

just know that all additional posts after this will be reported
FOAD
Benni
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
Again RC, so what? When will you get it through your thick head that discussions about scientific accuracy is not what THIS CHATROOM is about?


Now again RC, do you see what I mean by the Comment CS left right above? It's not about SCIENCE, it NEVER is......you see a long litany of name calling, squabbling & quibbling from an oddball character who wants us to know about a specific nature of his stubby "down there". So why does he think we should care is the question you should ask yourself? It's because this is a social gathering chatsite about the things that are most important to HIM, and it has nothing to do with science, Capiche? No, probably you don't but The Stub does,
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
@granville583762.
RealityCheck Is Always Right
Granville, you could have saved your fingers a lot of typing by stopping at that and leaving out the rest. :)

And you are RIGHT to say that; since I'm the ONLY ONE HERE who predicted exactly what mainstream PO articles now increasingly confirming:

- Dark Matter NOT 'exotic', but ORDINARY, and being found everywhere we look now with better scopes; with latest vast quantities being discovered being only the TIP OF THE ICEBERG.

- CMB is NOT from BigBang, but from UBIQUITOUS ORDINARY ONGOING processes, all over, all the time, in infinite epoch universe.

- 'Standard candle' Supernovae are NOT as "standard" as previously simplistically assumed; hence Inflation/Expansion NOT 'supported' as previously claimed.

- Slit/Groove experiments now being explained by PLASMONIC effects of energy buildup/re-emission at/from MATERIAL SURFACES and INTERSTICES where 'plasmonic sea' facilitates such phenomena.

Bang on there, granville! :)
jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
Dark Matter NOT 'exotic', but ORDINARY, and being found everywhere we look now with better scopes; with latest vast quantities being discovered being only the TIP OF THE ICEBERG.


Nope, not a single real scientist is claiming that. You made it up.

RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
@jonesdave.
Dark Matter NOT 'exotic', but ORDINARY, and being found everywhere we look now with better scopes; with latest vast quantities being discovered being only the TIP OF THE ICEBERG.


Nope, not a single real scientist is claiming that. You made it up.

Their recent and ongoing discoveries/reviews EFFECTIVELY "say that"; but they have not yet 'connected all the dots' because they are still blinkered/biased by BB etc fantasies and so loathe to admit error all this time....just like you, jonesy. Give it up, mate; I am the one being confirmed correct all along; and you and the rest of that CS-bot-voting troll gang of malignant ignoramus 'just believers/defenders' of old/simplistic mainstream BB, exotic-DM, 'exotic'-DE and 'other assorted fantasies' being confirmed GULLIBLE EGO-DRIVEN LYING LOSER TROLLS all along. Wise up and face the reality for a change, jonesy. :)
jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
Their recent and ongoing discoveries/reviews EFFECTIVELY "say that"


No they don't. You are making it up.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
@jjonesdave.
Their recent and ongoing discoveries/reviews EFFECTIVELY "say that"


No they don't. You are making it up.
Still 'in denial' mode, I see, mate. And still incapable of 'connecting all the new/old dots' for yourself. Oh well, at least you finding sense enough to snap out of your usual 'foulmouthed-in-denial' mode. Baby steps, mate; baby steps. :)
jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
@jjonesdave.
Their recent and ongoing discoveries/reviews EFFECTIVELY "say that"


No they don't. You are making it up.
Still 'in denial' mode, I see, mate. Oh well, at least you have sense enough to snap out of your usual 'foulmouthed-in-denial' mode. Baby steps, mate; baby steps. :)


Nope, there is zero evidence for your claims. You are making them up. Zero evidence. All they are finding is 'missing' baryonic matter, that is already factored into the calculations for DM.

https://en.wikipe..._problem
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
@jonesdave.
@jjonesdave.
Their recent and ongoing discoveries/reviews EFFECTIVELY "say that"
No they don't. You are making it up.
Still 'in denial' mode, I see, mate. Oh well, at least you have sense enough to snap out of your usual 'foulmouthed-in-denial' mode. Baby steps, mate; baby steps. :)
Nope, there is zero evidence for your claims. You are making them up. Zero evidence. All they are finding is 'missing' baryonic matter, tHat is already factored into the calculations for DM.
Now you're just being silly, jd. They COULDN'T have "factored in" ANYTHING, since they had NO IDEA what was out there when they MADE UP all those BB-DEPENDENT "missing baryon' etc etc 'problems'. Now they ARE finding it all; and slowly, but inevitably, being forced by evolving discovery/review reality to RECONSIDER EVERYTHING PREVIOUSLY ASSUMED from THEIR IGNORANCE and BB-BIASES. That's what latest PO articles have been ADMITTING, jd; but you WON'T 'see' it. Not good.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
Now you're just being silly, jd. They COULDN'T have "factored in" ANYTHING, since they had NO IDEA what was out there when they MADE UP all those BB-DEPENDENT "missing baryon' etc etc 'problems'. Now they ARE finding it all; and slowly, but inevitably, being forced by evolving discovery/review reality to RECONSIDER EVERYTHING PREVIOUSLY ASSUMED from THEIR IGNORANCE and BB-BIASES. That's what latest PO articles have been ADMITTING, jd; but you WON'T 'see' it.


Nope, you are talking sh!t again. And you have no evidence for the aforementioned sh!t. Not a single scientist agrees with you.
jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
That's what latest PO articles have been ADMITTING, jd; but you WON'T 'see' it.


Nope, that is a lie. I doubt you've even read the papers. Or understood them if you did.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
@jonesdave.
Now you're just being silly, jd. They COULDN'T have "factored in" ANYTHING, since they had NO IDEA what was out there when they MADE UP all those BB-DEPENDENT "missing baryon' etc etc 'problems'. Now they ARE finding it all; and slowly, but inevitably, being forced by evolving discovery/review reality to RECONSIDER EVERYTHING PREVIOUSLY ASSUMED from THEIR IGNORANCE and BB-BIASES. That's what latest PO articles have been ADMITTING, jd; but you WON'T 'see' it.


Nope, you are talking sh!t again. And you have no evidence for the aforementioned sh!t. Not a single scientist agrees with you.
So the mainstream research/results reported re previously simplistic assumptions re 'standard candle' Supernovae (and other previously simplistic assumptions re CMB and other 'light' info received from far distant sources in all directions) is just 'fake news' from 'cranks' as far as you are concerned, jd? Can you be THAT lost in bias and denial, mate? Seems so.
granville583762
not rated yet Dec 07, 2018
How's the fin rot progressing?
RealityCheck Is Always Right

RealityCheck> Granville, you could have saved your fingers a lot of typing by stopping at that and leaving out the rest

Any luck with your false monsters
Ousted any trollian's lately
There does not appear to any difference since September 24, 2007
All our false monsters appear to present and correct
Happy trolling RealityCheck
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
@granville583762.
How's the fin rot progressing?
Nice and sunny in the open air here, granville; so no "fin-rot" problems here, mate. Perhaps you would do better to ask that question of the patently-rotting CS-troll-gang still residing under their bridge and making stinking-troll forays into PO with their foulmouthed malignancy that started all the 'personal feuds' and nasty "bot-voting-mindlessness' here and in other forums for years, granville. :)
RealityCheck Is Always Right
Yes, the trolls "hate" that. Obviously. :)
Granville, you could have saved your fingers a lot of typing by stopping at that and leaving out the rest
Ousted any trollian's lately
There does not appear to any difference since September 24, 2007
All our false monsters appear to present and correct
The POINT is INTELLIGENT READERS NOW KNOW what CS-bot-voting-gang of NASTIES have been up to for years, granville. :)
Happy trolling
No. Troll-exposing, mate. 'Twill suffice. :)

jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
So the mainstream research/results reported re previously simplistic assumptions re 'standard candle' Supernovae (and other previously simplistic assumptions re CMB and other 'light' info received from far distant sources in all directions) is just 'fake news' from 'cranks' as far as you are concerned, jd? Can you be THAT lost in bias and denial, mate? Seems so.


And supernova observations are the only one used for cosmic distance measurements? You are obfuscating. Lying, in other words. Not a single scientist agrees with you.
Captain Stumpy
5 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
LOL -so, a known fraud, liar and pseudoscience spammer stated
Their recent and ongoing discoveries/reviews EFFECTIVELY "say that"; but they have not yet 'connected all the dots' because they are still blinkered/biased by
which "EFFECTIVELY "say that" " if you believe in his conspiracy then you'll see the dots connected, to which the scientifically literate replies
Nope, there is zero evidence for your claims. You are making them up
stunned by the scientifically literate's refusal to just jump on the idiot TOCD* bandwagon, the Trolling idiot replies
Still 'in denial' mode
and
Now you're just being silly
so, like he's done for 8,340 posts, he avoids specifics, refuses to produce evidenced and argues that because we can't see his delusion then we're the crazy ones!
LMFAO

I need to tell ACORN that their nut is still cracked
https://www.acorn.gov.au/

* Trollian Obsessive Compulsive Disorder - thanks Gran for that gem!
jonesdave
5 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
The POINT is INTELLIGENT READERS NOW KNOW what CS-bot-voting-gang of NASTIES have been up to for years, granville


Nope. I have an IQ in the top 1 percentile, and two degrees. I think you are talking shit. And I'm not the only one.

RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
@jonesdave.
So the mainstream research/results reported re previously simplistic assumptions re 'standard candle' Supernovae (and other previously simplistic assumptions re CMB and other 'light' info received from far distant sources in all directions) is just 'fake news' from 'cranks' as far as you are concerned, jd? Can you be THAT lost in bias and denial, mate? Seems so.


And supernova observations are the only one used for cosmic distance measurements? You are obfuscating. Lying, in other words. Not a single scientist agrees with you.
How is it possible for you, an otherwise intelligent human, to be so OBTUSE-in-denial, jd?

Can't you get it?

Try to focus: It's the PREVIOUS SIMPLISTIC ASSUMPTIONS/INTERPRETATIONS etc (based on BB etc fantasies) that 'manufactured' all those 'problems' in the first place.

Get it?

There WERE NO SUCH 'problems' UNLESS BB etc fantasies were treated as if they had anything at all to DO with REALITY.

It started the ROT, jd.
granville583762
not rated yet Dec 07, 2018
Under your Bridge
RealityCheck> Nice and sunny in the open air here, granville

So its true
Straight from the mouth of Trollian RealityCheck
Under his bridge
The Ugly Troll's Bridge
Trollian RealityCheck freely admits
Nice and sunny in the open air here
Under his bridge
His fin rot improves on sunny days
When it's nice and sunny in the open air
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
@granville583762.
Under your Bridge
RealityCheck> Nice and sunny in the open air here, granville

So its true
Straight from the mouth of Trollian RealityCheck
Under his bridge
The Ugly Troll's Bridge
Trollian RealityCheck freely admits
Nice and sunny in the open air here
Under his bridge
His fin rot improves on sunny days
When it's nice and sunny in the open air
You don't appear to know the important difference between the "open air" permanent residential situation (where RealityCheck resides) and the "under-Trolls-bridge" permanent residential situation where the CS-troll-gang nasties reside and make stinking-forays into PO from, granville. Learn the difference quickly; so as not to tiring out your typing fingers unnecessarily in future with your increasingly 'mistaken prose', granville. :)
jonesdave
5 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
Can't you get it?

Try to focus: It's the PREVIOUS SIMPLISTIC ASSUMPTIONS/INTERPRETATIONS etc (based on BB etc fantasies) that 'manufactured' all those 'problems' in the first place.

Get it?

There WERE NO SUCH 'problems' UNLESS BB etc fantasies were treated as if they had anything at all to DO with REALITY.

It started the ROT, jd.


Word salad. Zero evidence. Wanker.
.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Dec 07, 2018
@jonesdave.
The POINT is INTELLIGENT READERS NOW KNOW what CS-bot-voting-gang of NASTIES have been up to for years, granville


Nope. I have an IQ in the top 1 percentile, and two degrees. I think you are talking shit. And I'm not the only one.

Do you even have any inkling how lame and self-serving that 'response' is, jd? IT is YOUR obvious RATIONALIZATION for YOUR BETRAYAL OF your INTELLIGENCE, rather than any objective counter to the obvious conclusion to be drawn from your continuing obtuseness, bias and denial. Next thing you'll be claiming that NO INTELLIGENT Person can EVER BE BIASED, OBTUSE or IN-DENIAL due to FLAWED CHARACTER and FAILURE TO READ and UNDERSTAND FAIRLY IN CONTEXT irrespective of the person/source., jd. Look to yur own failures of intellect, jd; before again attempting to deny the evolving reality which is increasingly being made apparent by PO reports from mainstream itself. Good luck, jd. :)
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (4) Dec 07, 2018
@jonesdave.
Can't you get it?

Try to focus: It's the PREVIOUS SIMPLISTIC ASSUMPTIONS/INTERPRETATIONS etc (based on BB etc fantasies) that 'manufactured' all those 'problems' in the first place.

Get it?

There WERE NO SUCH 'problems' UNLESS BB etc fantasies were treated as if they had anything at all to DO with REALITY.

It started the ROT, jd.
Word salad. Zero evidence. Wanker.
Ahhh, the "Word Salad" gambit from those who DO NOT READ AND UNDERSTAND PROPERLY IN CONTEXT...or more correctly, DON'T WANT TO READ; because their biases and denials wont allow it (a psychological self-defense measure automatically 'triggered' in those who cannot stand the pain of being proven wrong all along and me correct all along).

Trolls with such 'fragile egos' as you and CS-gang should be more careful whom you troll in future, jd.

Better still, jd: DON'T TROLL; OR DENY reality evolving under your very nose all along (as I tried to point out for you all these years).

Try, jd.
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 07, 2018
Trollian RealityCheck

Tis the festive season
As it seems also Trollian RealityCheck's nightly confessional
RealityCheck> You don't appear to know the important difference between the "open air" permanent residential situation

As Trollian RealityCheck
In his nightly confessional
Freely admits
Under his bridge
This Ugly Troll's Bridge
Is a open air permanent residential situation
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (2) Dec 07, 2018
@granville583762.
Trollian RealityCheck

Tis the festive season
As it seems also Trollian RealityCheck's nightly confessional
RealityCheck> You don't appear to know the important difference between the "open air" permanent residential situation

As Trollian RealityCheck
In his nightly confessional
Freely admits
Under his bridge
This Ugly Troll's Bridge
Is a open air permanent residential situation
Oh dear, granville; your 'mistaken prose' will soon be the 'trademark' of your fast-failing venture into the "PO-prose" pages. Good luck anyway, granville. :)
granville583762
5 / 5 (2) Dec 08, 2018
Strange choice of phrase, Residential situation
Trollian RealityCheck> You don't appear to know the important difference between the "open air" permanent residential situation (where RealityCheck resides)

What does this mean?
"Permanent residential situation where RealityCheck resides"
as in
Residential situation where RealityCheck resides
or more precisely
"Situation"
why
Trollian RealityCheck have you used the word "Situation"
because in the context of suffering Trollian obsessive compulsive disorder
A classic symptom of OCD
is the word - Situation -
as the OCD sufferer is always trying to get out of this Situation
so Trollian RealityCheck
are you in residential accommodation to enable you to get out this situation
as in Trollian obsessive compulsive disorder
Your strange choice of phrase, Residential situation!
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (2) Dec 08, 2018
@
Strange choice of phrase, Residential situation....
What does this mean?
In the context of "place" where one resides; as per dictionary:
situation |ˌsi ch oōˈā sh ən|
noun
1 a set of circumstances in which one finds oneself; a state of affairs...
2 the location and surroundings of a place : the situation of the town is pleasant.
3 formal a position of employment; a job.
Obviously, I used "situation" as for context No. 2.

That you were confused by, and had to ask about, such a contextually obvious usage of "situation" by me above, granville, implies strongly to the intelligent PO readers that the English language was NOT your 'first language', granville. Is that so; or were you just using any excuse to post more of your fast-failing "mistaken prose" to clutter up the thread?

Either way, granville, your 'trademark' is 'tarnishing rapidly' from your 'overuse and abuse' of both the English language and PO site bandwidth. Do "better", not "more", granville. :)
jonesdave
5 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2018
@jonesdave.
Can't you get it?

Try to focus: It's the PREVIOUS SIMPLISTIC ASSUMPTIONS/INTERPRETATIONS etc (based on BB etc fantasies) that 'manufactured' all those 'problems' in the first place.

Get it?

There WERE NO SUCH 'problems' UNLESS BB etc fantasies were treated as if they had anything at all to DO with REALITY.

It started the ROT, jd.
Word salad. Zero evidence. Wanker.
Ahhh, the "Word Salad" gambit from those who DO NOT READ AND UNDERSTAND PROPERLY IN CONTEXT...or more correctly, DON'T WANT TO READ;

Try, jd.


I've read these papers, you uneducated loon. The difference is that I understand them, and you don't. Check with the authors if you disagree. So, I still call word salad. And 'wanker' looks to be still accurate.
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2018
@jonesdave.
@jonesdave.
Can't you get it?

Try to focus: It's the PREVIOUS SIMPLISTIC ASSUMPTIONS/INTERPRETATIONS etc (based on BB etc fantasies) that 'manufactured' all those 'problems' in the first place.

Get it?

There WERE NO SUCH 'problems' UNLESS BB etc fantasies were treated as if they had anything at all to DO with REALITY.

It started the ROT, jd.
Word salad. Zero evidence. Wanker.
Ahhh, the "Word Salad" gambit from those who DO NOT READ AND UNDERSTAND PROPERLY IN CONTEXT...or more correctly, DON'T WANT TO READ;

Try, jd.


I've read these papers, you uneducated loon. The difference is that I understand them, and you don't. Check with the authors if you disagree. So, I still call word salad. And 'wanker' looks to be still accurate.
What 'value' in your 'claim', if YOU (like your mates in the BIASED-DENIALIST-CS-gang of bot-voting NON-READING self-made-ignoramuses) do not read and understand properly and in context, jd? None, jd.
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 08, 2018
Trollian RealityCheck's Nightly Confessional

All the comments are in the context of Trollian RealityCheck
As in the context of OCD, TOCD
Which your strange choice of phrase, Residential situation
All houses, apartments, bungalows…
Are residential
But one does not describe their house
as
a permanent residential situation where RealityCheck resides
you do not say
Permanent residential situation where RealityCheck resides
Because we are talking to RealityCheck, you do not say your name
You say
I live in a detached house, if of course it is a detached house
Benni
2.3 / 5 (3) Dec 08, 2018
I've read these papers, you uneducated loon. The difference is that I understand them, and you don't. Check with the authors if you disagree. So, I still call word salad. And 'wanker' looks to be still accurate.


..........I see why you only got a degree in Anthropology, always wandering around out tin the weeds looking for rotting & decayed stuff in the dirt.
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 08, 2018
Trollian RealityCheck's Nightly Confessional

Trollian RealityCheck
RealityCheck does not exist
RealityCheck does not RESIDE anywhere
RealityCheck is a fictitious entity
You have clearly lost touch with reality
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 08, 2018
Trollian RealityCheck in Dark Matter
Trollian RealityCheck> Dark Matter NOT 'exotic', but ORDINARY, and being found everywhere we look now with better scopes; with latest vast quantities being discovered being only the TIP OF THE ICEBERG.

Are we to take your statement Trollian RealityCheck?
Dark Matter is not a rare exotic substance
so consequently is as common as muck
because it is common as muck
it is found everywhere we look
or
Trollian RealityCheck
in your convoluted punctuated style
You actually mean something completely different?
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (2) Dec 09, 2018
@granville583762.
Which your strange choice of phrase, Residential situation
All houses, apartments, bungalows…
Are residential
But one does not describe their house
as
a permanent residential situation where RealityCheck resides
you do not say
Permanent residential situation where RealityCheck resides
Because we are talking to RealityCheck, you do not say your name
You say
I live in a detached house, if of course it is a detached house
You again miss the meaning of "situation" in the context I already pointed out to you:

ie: the "location and surroundings of a place".

That's why I said my residential situation was "Nice and sunny in the open air".

In contrast to the dark and damp situation where the nasty trolls live; under their troll bridges and suffering "fin rot" (as you put it).
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (2) Dec 09, 2018
@granville583762.
RealityCheck does not exist
RealityCheck does not RESIDE anywhere
RealityCheck is a fictitious entity
You have clearly lost touch with reality
Have you heard of the French term "Nom de Plume", granville? It means "Pen Name" in English. For example, "Mark Twain" was the "Nom de Plume" of Samuel Clemens, the American writer. Just because he wrote as "Mark Twain", it didn't mean he, as the real person Samuel Clemens, did not exist and reside somewhere in reality. So, likewise, just because I post here as "RealityCheck", it doesn't mean that I, as the real person, do not exist and reside somewhere in reality (ie, in a residential situation that is "nice and sunny in the open air", as I already said).
RealityCheck
1 / 5 (2) Dec 09, 2018
@granville583762.
RealityCheck> Dark Matter NOT 'exotic', but ORDINARY, and being found everywhere we look now with better scopes; with latest vast quantities being discovered being only the TIP OF THE ICEBERG.
Are we to take your statement Trollian RealityCheck?
Dark Matter is not a rare exotic substance
so consequently is as common as muck
because it is common as muck
it is found everywhere we look
or
Trollian RealityCheck
in your convoluted punctuated style
You actually mean something completely different?
Your first "take" is as I meant it, granville; and no other "or" inference should be made.

And as for "convoluted" text, granville, have you had a good look at your own "style" lately? If one was feeling uncharitable, one might even say your posting "style" AND "content" were approaching that of some CHAT-BOT out on "beta-testing" excursion here at PO. If so, may I ask if "granville" is ALSO the name of your owner-programmer or just your chat-bot "handle"?
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 09, 2018
Mere babes in arms, this nether convoluted imaginary world
RealityCheck> Your first "take" is as I meant it, granville; and no other "or" inference should be made.
And as for "convoluted" text, granville, have you had a good look at your own "style" lately? If one was feeling uncharitable, one might even say your posting "style" AND "content" were approaching that of some CHAT-BOT out on "beta-testing" excursion here at PO. If so, may I ask if "granville" is ALSO the name of your owner-programmer or just your chat-bot "handle"?

These textual scrubbings were not evolved
for the mere
babes in arms like your self
and
your
saintly nemesis's
They evolved for much sterner adversaries, RealityCheck!
As what you now see is only a mere shadow
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 09, 2018
These textural scribings were not evolved, this eternal three minute rule and MS Words idea of correcting spelling
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 09, 2018
RealityCheck
RealityCheck> You again miss the meaning of situation in the context I already pointed out to you my location and surroundings of a place is why I said my residential situation was Nice and sunny in the open air

When in Trollian RealityCheck context and discussion one has to take note of how ones words are worded as in the context of TOCD Trollian RealityCheck so that no inference in reference to OCD can be inferred
If as you claim RealityCheck, you're as pure as the driven snow you have to take how you word your textural scribing so that your nemeses cannot find a loop hole in lunacy to find your weak spot
So begone all your over punctuated scribing as they reduce your character limit leaving less worldly textual words as this is the reason your words are cramped and truncated
Look for TOCD in your scribing and delete them, RC!
Count my punctuations RC and your depunctuated quote
Less punctuation is more endless infinite text
granville583762
5 / 5 (1) Dec 09, 2018
Trollian RealityCheck

RealityCheck, your new pen name Trollian RealityCheck has a priestly air about it, almost saintly connotation
as monks in their monastery call each Brother James although not originally intended
Trollian RealityCheck
has risen to heavenly heights not seen in the fabled nursery rhyme so as this is the festive season with its rebirth of human kind in babes of arm
look kindly at your Nom de Plume and take pride as Trollian RealityCheck
because
Trollian RealityCheck
hunter of trolls
Trollian RealityCheck
strikes
terror
in those trolls
as
Trollian RealityCheck
is
on
those trollian tails
just
remember
Trollian RealityCheck
no blows below the belt
no foul language
and Definitely
Do not mention that tender feline age related group ever again
Trollian RealityCheck

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.