Brad Guth wrote:
Robert Juliano,

1.) In essence, you're telling us you have no proof, just protestations
of competence.

In essence you're a serious LLPOF sort of brown-nosed guy that'll
deserve being nuked by the likes of Osama bin Laden. Of course, I
don't have the necessary proof of shuch will happen but, lo and behold
I have a good amount of faith as based upon perfectly rational logic
that's telling me that for good reasons it should happen.

What's "protestations" wrong against your incessant naysayism about the
truth and nothing but the truth?

What's "protestations" wrong against your incessant naysayism about the
regular laws of physics?

What's "protestations" wrong against your incessant naysayism about the
hard-science of others?

Where's the supposed "lack of any proof" that your incessant naysayism
speaks of?

Where's your observationology proof-positive as equal or better
examples that establishes my image interpretations of Venus are bogus?

How the hell are you going back to the moon with better than a 60:1
ratio of liftoff/payload of getting such tonnage into lunar orbit,
especially with the likes of such an inert massive rocketship to start
with?

BTW; I've posted more proof-positive than all of your brown-nosed
collective had to offer on behalf of your NASA/Apollo ruse of the
century.
-
Brad Guth


Bradley-old-"small sticks" (look it up),

1.) you have yet to prove that you are speaking the truth.
2.) hard science requires repeatable facts
3.) I did a quick search on the web for "obserationology." other than
your screeds, there is no mention of it as a scientific discipline.
4.) I never said I was going back to the moon with a 60:1 ratio.
5.) the challenge was for you to post material after 19 FEB 2006. As you
have gone off on yet another side track, I'll accept your tacit
admission of failure as an indirect statement of you stating you have
been lying all along.
6.) as you have failed in this challenge, when can we expect:
6.1.) your framed apology to this group?
6.2.) your seeking professional help for your delusions of adequacy?
6.3.) your exit from this group?

I was having a somewhat down day, and your desperate attempts to sound
intelligent, not to mention learned, have given me a pick up. Sadly, I
still despise you. I give you fair warning that I wish to never meet you
in real life, as your posts for demonstrated that you are possibly a
danger to yourself and other, and therefore I would feel compelled to
use reasonable force to prevent you from harming myself, or those I
would be with.

Looking forward to an NG without brad guth, unless he somehow comes up
with testable evidence that would stand up in court.

Bob