Debunking teh Space Universe

a reply to: oddscreenname

Try to make a coherent argument.

Going by your thread title alone, are you proposing that 42 is not the meaning of life, the universe, and everything? If so, what is the correct answer?

Still waiting for someone to post a relevant response. Go ahead.

originally posted by: MkayUltra
a reply to: neutronflux

The typical random rambling of someone who knows he cant win the actual argument. So that's basically teh Space Universe debunked on page 1. No opposition whatsoever. As expected of course.

I see now. You are part of this universe therefore you have debunked yourself. Good one proving you do not in fact exist, at least by your own reasoning.

Thank you for playing.

a reply to: MkayUltra
Well, I say it is and I am not chatting with you per se. You don't own the right to my attention either.

What's the point of this thread? Tell us. You can still turn the ship around if you had something smart, but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and is tackled BY a duck (an insider joke, you won't get it), then it most certainly IS a duck.

A lame one on top of it. So what's the point of this thread if not asking loaded questions where you already have the answer but want people to comment so you can disagree and move goal posts ad infinitum?

What sense does it make?

a reply to: TDDAgain

So now you are just confirming once more that you have no clue. We already established that. The right course of action would have been an apology followed by silence and a lesson learned.

originally posted by: MkayUltra
a reply to: neutronflux

The typical random rambling of someone who knows he cant win the actual argument. So that's basically teh Space Universe debunked on page 1. No opposition whatsoever. As expected of course.

Not arguing anything. Just pointed out there is a practical application that uses the very principles you want to argue.

The Rocksim software can and is used to see if rocket motors are undersized for a persons designed model rocket of a certain size and weight to overcome gravity.

Can you please go into detail how the software is erroneous in some way.

a reply to: MkayUltra
An objects weight is determined by the gravity and mass that is pulling on it. You showed in your first post that you do not understand this concept. So it's either this, that you are doing by intent, or you are what you accuse me off.

Your attitude is what gave it away btw. Now we are on page 4 on a thread with 0 flags, something very very seldom on ATS. People see what you do, your OP gives it away and your attitude too.

And then asking for an apology, that's the icing on the cake, you're clearly trolling and won't last long here. I look forward to the moment I see the stats under your name are gone, honestly.

Double post

originally posted by: MkayUltra
9.8+ N to accelerate from rest to movement.

Yes.

So what's the point ?

a reply to: TDDAgain

Amazing. Here you are rambling about weight again. Still not grasping the point and still denying the fact that kg is a unit of mass. Come on now this is embarassing.

Oh my what a surprise. I see nothing changed here.

*** Closed ***

Pending staff review