Just keep spreading the lies Hamster. Everyone else does. If you ever get the urge to ask a real question, I will be happy to reply. Since you seem not to know how to phrase an intelligent question, I recommend reading the post by mercaptan in the thread in question. He models proper scientific thought and behavior quit admirably.
Especially you. You stated in your masturbation thread you will not respond to demands when asked a perfectly reasonable question that would disprove your theory. Hmm, odd that.
lol Oh, the Happeh Theory is actually supposed to be a real theory? I thought you guys were joking! So Happeh, in theory, should look like this: http://i36.photobucket.com/albums/e37/AmishRakeFight/Happeh.jpg (I'm sorry, you have to save the picture to view it full size. For some reason this picture won't get any bigger.)
More lies huh? I said I would not respond to demands from abusive, dictatorial people whose only interest are playing submission/dominance games. If you are honest, try me. Ask a question in a polite and courteous manner. Or even just a plain old friendly and curious manner. You might be surprised at the result.
Shouldn't you be telling us how you know for a fact that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was real? Oh. That's right. It was proved that you are a blowhard who talks with no idea of what he is saying.
liar. i know for a fact that snakelord repeatedly asked you to provide a link to your claims. you have yet to provide anything verifiable
Your absolutely correct. I made a mistake about the Gulf of Tonkin incident. This is old news. And if you'll check the thread, I never remember saying "for a fact" anywhere. In fact, I actually said "I have never met a person who told me what you just told me." Which is obviously true, as my statement about the incident was incorrect. Therefore, you lose again. Honestly Happeh, I don't enjoy debating you into the ground, but as far as I can tell, your Happeh Theory is unsubstantiated and thoroughly lacking in evidence. I am going to ask you a honest, polite, courteous, friendly, AND curious question: Please explain to me your Happeh Theory and show me the evidence, experiments, and surveys that back it up.
you are wasting your time amish. we have, for the last month, tried to coax something from him to no avail.
I have to agree with leopold here , this happeh is a 1st prize asswhole , after reading his first 2 threads I didnt bother engaging the idiot in any form of debate . You are wasting time , his mind is locked tighter than a steel drum meaning debate with this fruitcake is impossible .
I digress. Happeh, best of luck to you convincing the masses that the next evolutionary stage will entail a crooked-headed, heart-malfunctioning, blind existence. AmishRakeFight
dkb218: You have chosen not to receive private messages, so here is a public message for you. An offensive post from you in this thread has been deleted. It was inappropriate on several levels: 1. Personally insulting. 2. Obscene. 3. Anti-semitic. Since this is a first offence, this is a friendly warning. Next time, you will receive a temporary ban from sciforums.
This is true. This is false. No experiments necessary. No surveys necessary. What will you accept as evidence? I use photos to demonstrate that people are crooked, not straight according to the design specifications of the body. People seem to believe that pictures of other people that show they are crooked means nothing in terms of the health of the person. I don't understand it myself, but that is what they believe. Let me know what you will accept as proof and I will be happy to give it to you if I can.
I don't understand you. You have no allies here. I offered advice to you to stop the cussing. I feel that you would have more impact with your arguments. Now for some reason, you are making posts like this to me. I think this is the second or third one. It makes no sense. I do not post to you or in your threads. I do not know what your problem is. Do you have a mental problem? Drinking? Anger? Stress? That kind of attitude of yours is not normal. I have barely spoken to you and you are saying things like this about me.
Thats because you made 2 unprovoked attacks on me , you enjoined into a debate I was having with others and made an unprovoked attack about my posting , so I am just doing the same to you . And Here again
No, Happeh, I'm here. I just got back from having a life. For some reason I've made some enemies by stepping on toes, so I'm here to clear this up between you and me. I have no bias against you, but the things I've heard and your logic process hasn't impressed me. The things I will accept as evidence of your Happeh Theory is simple: anything that will prove to me that your Happeh theory has a chance of being possible. I'll even give you the benefit of the doubt on this one; that's how much I don't think that the Happeh theory is true. Best of luck to you AmishRakeFight P.S. I consider Brian Foley an intelligent member and "ally", whether he remotely feels the same or not (as if there are factions among us Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! ) . His views differ from mine, but he still displays the facts and argues intelligently with proper logic.
I feel the same about you Amish I enjoy your debates we cant agree on everything but that is what makes it enjoyable . And I will buy you a glass of ice cold Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! I got deep pockets when I shout Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
The AirPhone system that uses conventional cellphone technology broadcasts with less power than a regular cellphone, because altitude and line of sight to cellphone masts mean longer contacts can be made from planes, than in urban environments. I've made 8Km contacts with a 0.5w radio, thanks to altitude, and clear line of sight. So, I don't see why it wouldn't work, if the flight is over land, where you could pick up a signal on the ground normally. Please refer to my earlier reply to Mars13 about the time available to contact a base station too. 45 seconds. Easy. Broadcasting 10km. Easy. What's the technical issue?