202 replies to this topic

[TheMacGuffin]

badeskov, on 08 September 2012 - 05:41 PM, said:

We know. You have more than adequately demonstrated an abhorrence towards anything factual and/or rational that tends to go against your ET belief.

There are far more facts on our side than yours, and also far more declassified documents, which you are reluctant to discuss at any time.

[badeskov]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 07:17 PM, said:

There are far more facts on our side than yours, and also far more declassified documents, which you are reluctant to discuss at any time.

Plenty of facts, no, your "side" is just very prone to over-interpretation. That much is obvious. The fact is that you are so prone to say something is not a natural object once a scientist thinks that it may not be a couple of natural objects. Same with that retrograde object that you could not decide whether had a predictable or unpredictable orbit (depending on what argument you were trying to counter).

Frankly, you know nowhere near enough as you would like to, however, your imagination is working much more than you claim it to be. You have demonstrated this over and over again, whether you like it or not...

Cheers,
Badeskov

Edited by badeskov, 08 September 2012 - 07:27 PM.

[TheMacGuffin]

badeskov, on 08 September 2012 - 06:56 PM, said:

Patently false. You, as usual, overlaid it your own biased and flawed interpretation.

Bolding mine. You put words in Michiu Kaku's mouth based on your own beliefs and lack of knowledge. You cannot get around that. You have AGAIN shown your bias and ability to overlay your own beliefs onto unknowns.

No, you are patently false.  The first words out of Kaku's mouth when were "We don't know. We are stumped", and the scientists around the world didn't know what it was.

"Our jaws hit the floor"  

"We are clueless".

"What is it?"  "We're scratching our heads".  That is what he really said on this video, although I don't blame you for not mentioning any of that.  Only then did he say it might be a "once in a lifetime" event of two asteroids colliding, and then he went on about how the dinosaurs were wiped out.

Those are his exact words on this video, but you posted none of them.

[TheMacGuffin]

badeskov, on 08 September 2012 - 07:26 PM, said:

Plenty of facts, no, your "side" is just very prone to over-interpretation. That much is obvious. The fact is that you are so prone to say something is not a natural object once a scientist thinks that it may not be a couple of natural objects. Same with that retrograde object that you could not decide whether had a predictable or unpredictable orbit (depending on what argument you were trying to counter).

Frankly, you know nowhere near enough as you would like to, however, your imagination is working much more than you claim it to be. You have demonstrated this over and over again, whether you like it or not...

Yes, all these documents and UFO cases I post are just things out of my own imagination, just like the words that Kaku used on that video--none of which you mentioned--were all in my imagination too!  LOL

[TheMacGuffin]

bmk1245, on 08 September 2012 - 06:42 PM, said:

And another mishap/misreading on your side: the quote/link says February 10, 2009. Problems with numericals, huh? But hey, you always can put links to my posts to prove your points.

I will have to concede that; I thought you wrote 2010.

[bmk1245]

badeskov, on 08 September 2012 - 07:06 PM, said:

Great posts, BMK. Thanks for the info.

Cheers,
Badeskov

My plesure. Just one last bit for this non ET event (PRE-DISCOVERY OBSERVATIONS OF DISRUPTING ASTEROID P/2010 A2, David Jewitt et al. 2011 The Astronomical Journal 142 28), i.e. summary

Quote

4. SUMMARY
We searched for pre-discovery observations of recently disrupted
asteroid P/2010 A2 to try to understand the long interval
between its disruption (in 2009 February/March) and discovery
(2010 January 6), with the following results.
1. The disruption event in early 2009 occurred at a small solar
elongation (<30◦). The elongation remained <60◦ as seen
from Earth until about 2009 August, explaining the nondetection
of P/2010 A2 by night-time telescopes in this
early period.
2. Observations in the daytime sky using the SOHO and
STEREO solar satellites placed only upper limits on the allowable
brightness. The non-detections require that the differential
size distribution index, extended down to 0.1&mu;m
particle sizes, should be q < 4.1. This is consistent with
the value q = 3.3 ± 0.2 measured in the millimeter-to-centimeter
size range (Jewitt et al. 2010b).
3. The date of eventual discovery, UT 2010 January 6, coincides
with the date of peak apparent brightness as seen
from Earth, showing the importance of observational selection
effects in the discovery.
4. Pre-discovery observations of P/2010 A2 by the LINEAR
survey telescope were identified on UT 2009 November
22 and December 10, 15, and 16. These and later observations
show an object whose integrated brightness varies
primarily in response to the changing observing geometry,
meaning that the total scattering cross-section remained
approximately constant after 2009 November. The absolute
magnitude and its formal uncertainty are V (1, 1, 0) =
14.49 ± 0.04 mag.
5. The fraction of the time spent by P/2010 A2 above the
LINEAR detection threshold is <6%, while intrinsically
fainter analogs of this object would be even less likely to
be detected.We conclude that similar examples of recently
impacted asteroids are common, and will be revealed by
future all-sky surveys in large numbers.

(emphasis mine)

Anyway, thanks to McG.... Seriously, because, probably, I wouldn't be looking for that material.

[badeskov]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 07:30 PM, said:

No, you are patently false.  The first words out of Kaku's mouth when were "We don't know. We are stumped", and the scientists around the world didn't know what it was.

"Our jaws hit the floor"  

"We are clueless".

"What is it?"  "We're scratching our heads".  That is what he really said on this video, although I don't blame you for not mentioning any of that.  Only then did he say it might be a "once in a lifetime" event of two asteroids colliding, and then he went on about how the dinosaurs were wiped out.

Those are his exact words on this video, but you posted none of them.

No, I am not patently false, and it is the flawed interpretation you always make and then you try and weasel your way out of it. Typical believer nonsense. Let me repeat, please - if nothing else, for the newcomer, as I am sure you do not understand. This is what you said:

TheMacGuffin, on 07 September 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

<snip>

In the video, Kaku denied it was an asteroid or comet.  Why did he say that?  Didn't he say that speed was too slow for an asteroid or comet? That's why I posted the video, so Prof. Kaku could tell us that it wasn't a natural object.

Michiu Kaku said no such thing. He merely said that they did not know what it was.

You are the one making the interpretation, so please do not pretend otherwise and make yourself the pathetic victim again. Frankly, your means or argumentation is pathetic.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[TheMacGuffin]

badeskov, on 08 September 2012 - 07:36 PM, said:

No, I am not patently false, and it is the flawed interpretation you always make and then you try and weasel your way out of it. Typical believer nonsense. Let me repeat, please - if nothing else, for the newcomer, as I am sure you do not understand. This is what you said:



Michiu Kaku said no such thing. He merely said that they did not know what it was.

You are the one making the interpretation, so please do not pretend otherwise and make yourself the pathetic victim again. Frankly, your means or argumentation is pathetic.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Once I again, I have posted this video twice, and he said that it was not a star, planet, galaxy or comet.  He says this very clearly, in plain English, and anyone who bothers to listen to the video can hear it.

I have quoted exactly what he said, which you did not.

Only then does he go on the speculate about a possible asteroid collision that has never been seen before.  Nobody has to take my word for that, just listen to the video.  You're the one who is omitting all this information just to prove your point.

[badeskov]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 07:43 PM, said:

Once I again, I have posted this video twice, and he said that it was not a star, planet, galaxy or comet.  He says this very clearly, in plain English, and anyone who bothers to listen to the video can hear it.

I have quoted exactly what he said, which you did not.

Only then does he go on the speculate about a possible asteroid collision that has never been seen before.  Nobody has to take my word for that, just listen to the video.  You're the one who is omitting all this information just to prove your point.

Sigh. You are really that daft, are you?

I have nowhere denied that he stated that he did not know what it was. Did I?

No, what I have pointed out is your flawed interpretation. Let me do it again, for those not able to read:

TheMacGuffin, on 07 September 2012 - 07:21 PM, said:

<snip>

That's why I posted the video, so Prof. Kaku could tell us that it wasn't a natural object.

Now, please tell me exactly where Michiu Kaku stated that it was not a natural object. He didn't period. That was your interpretation.

Cheers,
Badeskov

Edited by badeskov, 08 September 2012 - 07:50 PM.

[TheMacGuffin]

badeskov, on 08 September 2012 - 07:49 PM, said:

Sigh. You are really that daft, are you?

Now, please tell me exactly where Michiu Kaku stated that it was not a natural object. He didn't period. That was your interpretation.

I'm sure you'd prefer to think that and have others think the same thing about me, but it's false.  I noted that Kaku ran out of possible natural explanations for what it could be, except the one that you and BMK are pushing.  That's very predictable, of course, and I would except nothing else.

That's seems to be your job on here, especially when it comes to any UFOs photographed in space.

In fact, this UFO was not like ANY natural object ever seen before, although Kaku deflected the question about whether it was ET and mentioned some theory about colliding asteroids.  That of course became the gospel truth on this case, although as even BMK admits no one ever saw such a collision and they are only guessing about the date.

[bmk1245]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 07:30 PM, said:

No, you are patently false.  The first words out of Kaku's mouth when were "We don't know. We are stumped", and the scientists around the world didn't know what it was.[...]

When he said that, and what paper he had read at that time? If he and some other scientists stumbbled upon event, that doesn't mean other scientists weren't working on that and having some explanations. M.Kaku is theoretician with high math mind winded. Is he an expert on asteroids? Sure he know a lot, but not any near in comparison of those who are working in that field.

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 07:30 PM, said:

[...]  Only then did he say it might be a "once in a lifetime" event of two asteroids colliding, and then he went on about how the dinosaurs were wiped out.[...]

Hmmm... What would happen nowadays with such scenario? Extinct...

Edit: goddamn, edit features are frustratingly annoying and stupid...

Edited by bmk1245, 08 September 2012 - 08:02 PM.

[Sky Scanner]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

I'm sure you'd prefer to think that and have others think the same thing about me, but it's false.  I noted that Kaku ran out of possible natural explanations for what it could be, except the one that you and BMK are pushing.  That's very predictable, of course, and I would except nothing else.

That's seems to be your job on here, especially when it comes to any UFOs photographed in space.

In fact, this UFO was not like ANY natural object ever seen before, although Kaku deflected the question about whether it was ET and mentioned some theory about colliding asteroids.  That of course became the gospel truth on this case, although as even BMK admits no one ever saw such a collision and they are only guessing about the date.

So naturally then, that would also mean that you are guessing that it is ET?

[TheMacGuffin]

Kaku says in this video: "It doesn't fit any profiles of the usual suspects".  He says it is not stars, galaxies, meteors, planets, but that it is about the size of the Rosebowl Stadium.

Then he says again:

"It's not a comet"

"It's not a meteor"

Does he not say these things, or am I just imagining it all?

[badeskov]

TheMacGuffin, on 08 September 2012 - 07:55 PM, said:

I'm sure you'd prefer to think that and have others think the same thing about me, but it's false.

I don't really care.

Quote

I noted that Kaku ran out of possible natural explanations for what it could be,

Did he now? He gave his opinion on two options. That's it.

Quote

except the one that you and BMK are pushing.

I am not pushing anything. I have not offered anything in terms of any explanation, have I? But that said, I do find what BMK is offering is plausible.

Quote

That's very predictable, of course, and I would except nothing else.

Of course, those evil people that actually offer something rational.

Quote

That's seems to be your job on here, especially when it comes to any UFOs photographed in space.

Utter nonsense. When countered and you cannot offer anything in return, pull the pathetic debunker card. Even though I have offered no explanation, just pointed out the flaws in your interpretation.

Quote

In fact, this UFO was not like ANY natural object ever seen before, although Kaku deflected the question about whether it was ET and mentioned some theory about colliding asteroids.  That of course became the gospel truth on this case, although as even BMK admits no one ever saw such a collision and they are only guessing about the date.

So? We continuously discover new stuff in space. And he certainly knows that.

Cheers,
Badeskov

[TheMacGuffin]

The Sky Scanner, on 08 September 2012 - 07:58 PM, said:

So naturally then, that would also mean that you are guessing that it is ET?

They didn't make a broadcast telling me that it was an ET, but even these scientists thought it was something very unique--something that they claimed had never been seen before.

Of course I don't believe the usual debunkers and deniers who will never concede anything on any UFO case, nor do I believe their ridiculous assertions that all facts and science are on their side, while anyone who dares to disagree with them is a lunatic or religious fanatic.  Those are just the usual things they pull out of their little debating bag of tricks, but it doesn't make them right.

Never has and never will.