A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Others » Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old December 9th 17, 05:25 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Sarah Ehrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:37:19 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:48:05 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:03:48 -0800 (PST), palsing
wrote:

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from
your reference point on earth.

Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A lot
faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4 degrees
per minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across, it takes
the moon about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the sky... so
someone pointing an antenna at it would have to re-adjust that
antenna quite often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the whole
world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV, along with
everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and all have failed,
every question has been answered. If you say otherwise, that would be
an extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof would be on *you*.
The video you offer is laughable. Got any 'real' proof? I didn't
think so...

LOL. Poor old delusional Bast. All her references come from old
sci-fi TV shows and cartoons.





I am trying to dumb things down so even you and Hagar can try
understand.


No one believes you, Bastie, your broken english aside. You're a
conspiracy whacko on the Internet and Hagar and I are both engineers.


Good for you.


Caught you in your lie, Bastie.

NO NAVY! Beat Army!

  #22  
Old December 9th 17, 05:32 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Sarah Ehrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:48:58 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:52:51 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:57:34 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:47:16 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:03:29 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:

Perhaps he can still learn something, and let his hemorrhoids
heal up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUZr0Wr0v-s

If you still miss the point hags,.....NASA faked Apollo

That is a lie. And I'm still waiting for your response to the
nagging radio signals to and from the moon which have become your
personal inconvient truth.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-laser-funding


snip


Another fail for you Bast.


Oh **** facepalm,....that even reads like a fairytale, or a harry
potter novel. Maybe Lord Voldemort helped them aim the antenna ??

I don't see you refuting anything, Bastie ..... Maybe if you didn't
live in a fantasy land?

You write a few lines of crap that you are virtually claining is
verified by SNOPES ?

Nope. Stop lying Bast.

You do realize that even if I swallow your version of events, you
just made my argument for me, don't you ?

I'll give you a little hint, Bastie: I know all about satellites.
But go on....

If you have a moving satellite (closer) or the moon (farther away)
Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from
your reference point on earth.

This is all simple enough to sort out.

Your claim is about a moving satellite in space.

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

I anxiously await your answer to my question.

Are you really that dumb that you don't think the military has their
own satellites ?


Good question Bastie! Let's try this again since the info on the
comsat's I'm asking about in 1969 is NO LONGER CLASSIFIED:

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

And no one outside of the military knows where they are ,


Bastie, any good collegiate Astronomy class can track the satellites
in space. There is a University in the UK who takes great pride in
tracking all the satellites in space.



Riiggghhhht.


I'm not seeing any answer to my question, Bastie.

And I'm sure they even track all the steath aircraft in the world, and sell
that information to those bad ol' Ruskies.

And BTW,.....did they have this wonderful database ALREADY ESTABLISHED BACK
IN THE 1960'S ?


The info on the satellites in orbit in 1969 is readily available on
the web. I'm hard pressed to see why you keep stalling and don't
produce an answer to my question. I'm beginning to think you're
nothing but a liar and a fraud. smirk

Geez,.....no wonder the Iraqis were able to hide all those W.M.D from
us,....The damn British /POL Geeks . sold us out.


WMD's are stealthy?

Are you this desperate to wiggle out of answering a simple question?
Again?

You really are a piece of work aren't you


Time for you to flounce off again?

  #23  
Old December 9th 17, 09:05 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:37:19 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:48:05 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:03:48 -0800 (PST), palsing
wrote:

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from
your reference point on earth.

Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A
lot faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4
degrees per minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across,
it takes the moon about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the
sky... so someone pointing an antenna at it would have to
re-adjust that antenna quite often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the
whole world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV, along
with everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and all have
failed, every question has been answered. If you say otherwise,
that would be an extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof
would be on *you*. The video you offer is laughable. Got any
'real' proof? I didn't think so...

LOL. Poor old delusional Bast. All her references come from old
sci-fi TV shows and cartoons.





I am trying to dumb things down so even you and Hagar can try
understand.

No one believes you, Bastie, your broken english aside. You're a
conspiracy whacko on the Internet and Hagar and I are both engineers.


Good for you.


Caught you in your lie, Bastie.

NO NAVY! Beat Army!






In your mind, I'm sure you "caught" me at least a dozen times.
But if you are that shallow that you can delude yourself into "winning" a
debate you lost decades ago, against a poor immigrant Kekistani meme farmer.
Then knock yourself out.
Who knows ?, maybe NASA will see what a great job you are doing to sell
their lies, and put you in charge of urinal pucks in the new Werner von
Braun executive bathroom

.....You ARE special, and don't let those kids who drive to school in the
long busses, tell you any different


  #24  
Old December 9th 17, 09:09 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:48:58 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:52:51 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:57:34 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:47:16 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:03:29 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:

Perhaps he can still learn something, and let his hemorrhoids
heal up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUZr0Wr0v-s

If you still miss the point hags,.....NASA faked Apollo

That is a lie. And I'm still waiting for your response to the
nagging radio signals to and from the moon which have become
your personal inconvient truth.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-laser-funding


snip


Another fail for you Bast.


Oh **** facepalm,....that even reads like a fairytale, or a harry
potter novel. Maybe Lord Voldemort helped them aim the antenna ??

I don't see you refuting anything, Bastie ..... Maybe if you didn't
live in a fantasy land?

You write a few lines of crap that you are virtually claining is
verified by SNOPES ?

Nope. Stop lying Bast.

You do realize that even if I swallow your version of events, you
just made my argument for me, don't you ?

I'll give you a little hint, Bastie: I know all about satellites.
But go on....

If you have a moving satellite (closer) or the moon (farther away)
Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from
your reference point on earth.

This is all simple enough to sort out.

Your claim is about a moving satellite in space.

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

I anxiously await your answer to my question.

Are you really that dumb that you don't think the military has their
own satellites ?

Good question Bastie! Let's try this again since the info on the
comsat's I'm asking about in 1969 is NO LONGER CLASSIFIED:

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

And no one outside of the military knows where they are ,

Bastie, any good collegiate Astronomy class can track the satellites
in space. There is a University in the UK who takes great pride in
tracking all the satellites in space.



Riiggghhhht.


I'm not seeing any answer to my question, Bastie.

And I'm sure they even track all the steath aircraft in the world, and
sell that information to those bad ol' Ruskies.

And BTW,.....did they have this wonderful database ALREADY ESTABLISHED
BACK IN THE 1960'S ?


The info on the satellites in orbit in 1969 is readily available on
the web. I'm hard pressed to see why you keep stalling and don't
produce an answer to my question. I'm beginning to think you're
nothing but a liar and a fraud. smirk

Geez,.....no wonder the Iraqis were able to hide all those W.M.D from
us,....The damn British /POL Geeks . sold us out.


WMD's are stealthy?

Are you this desperate to wiggle out of answering a simple question?
Again?

You really are a piece of work aren't you


Time for you to flounce off again?





If you can come up with secret UK Universities that know everything that
happens in the cosmos.
.....I can "flounce" anytime I want. Though , unlike you, at least I won't do
it in public.





  #25  
Old December 9th 17, 09:45 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Sarah Ehrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 03:05:54 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:37:19 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:48:05 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:03:48 -0800 (PST), palsing
wrote:

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from
your reference point on earth.

Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A
lot faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4
degrees per minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across,
it takes the moon about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the
sky... so someone pointing an antenna at it would have to
re-adjust that antenna quite often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the
whole world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV, along
with everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and all have
failed, every question has been answered. If you say otherwise,
that would be an extraordinary claim, and the burden of proof
would be on *you*. The video you offer is laughable. Got any
'real' proof? I didn't think so...

LOL. Poor old delusional Bast. All her references come from old
sci-fi TV shows and cartoons.





I am trying to dumb things down so even you and Hagar can try
understand.

No one believes you, Bastie, your broken english aside. You're a
conspiracy whacko on the Internet and Hagar and I are both engineers.

Good for you.


Caught you in your lie, Bastie.

NO NAVY! Beat Army!


In your mind, I'm sure you "caught" me at least a dozen times.


I'm referring to your lie that you are an engineer.
You've never been right in this thread and dozens of others.

  #26  
Old December 9th 17, 09:48 AM posted to alt.astronomy
Sarah Ehrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 03:09:51 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:48:58 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:52:51 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:57:34 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:47:16 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:03:29 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:

Perhaps he can still learn something, and let his hemorrhoids
heal up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUZr0Wr0v-s

If you still miss the point hags,.....NASA faked Apollo

That is a lie. And I'm still waiting for your response to the
nagging radio signals to and from the moon which have become
your personal inconvient truth.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-laser-funding


snip


Another fail for you Bast.


Oh **** facepalm,....that even reads like a fairytale, or a harry
potter novel. Maybe Lord Voldemort helped them aim the antenna ??

I don't see you refuting anything, Bastie ..... Maybe if you didn't
live in a fantasy land?

You write a few lines of crap that you are virtually claining is
verified by SNOPES ?

Nope. Stop lying Bast.

You do realize that even if I swallow your version of events, you
just made my argument for me, don't you ?

I'll give you a little hint, Bastie: I know all about satellites.
But go on....

If you have a moving satellite (closer) or the moon (farther away)
Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring re-aiming,
where the moon farther away would not appear to move quickly from
your reference point on earth.

This is all simple enough to sort out.

Your claim is about a moving satellite in space.

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

I anxiously await your answer to my question.

Are you really that dumb that you don't think the military has their
own satellites ?

Good question Bastie! Let's try this again since the info on the
comsat's I'm asking about in 1969 is NO LONGER CLASSIFIED:

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

And no one outside of the military knows where they are ,

Bastie, any good collegiate Astronomy class can track the satellites
in space. There is a University in the UK who takes great pride in
tracking all the satellites in space.


Riiggghhhht.


I'm not seeing any answer to my question, Bastie.

And I'm sure they even track all the steath aircraft in the world, and
sell that information to those bad ol' Ruskies.

And BTW,.....did they have this wonderful database ALREADY ESTABLISHED
BACK IN THE 1960'S ?


The info on the satellites in orbit in 1969 is readily available on
the web. I'm hard pressed to see why you keep stalling and don't
produce an answer to my question. I'm beginning to think you're
nothing but a liar and a fraud. smirk

Geez,.....no wonder the Iraqis were able to hide all those W.M.D from
us,....The damn British /POL Geeks . sold us out.


WMD's are stealthy?

Are you this desperate to wiggle out of answering a simple question?
Again?

You really are a piece of work aren't you


Time for you to flounce off again?



If you can come up with secret UK Universities that know everything that
happens in the cosmos.


I never said they were "secret" UK universities.

See how you so easily lie, Bast.


  #27  
Old December 9th 17, 01:13 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 03:05:54 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:37:19 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:48:05 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:03:48 -0800 (PST), palsing
wrote:

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring
re-aiming, where the moon farther away would not appear to move
quickly from your reference point on earth.

Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A
lot faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4
degrees per minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across,
it takes the moon about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the
sky... so someone pointing an antenna at it would have to
re-adjust that antenna quite often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the
whole world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV,
along with everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and
all have failed, every question has been answered. If you say
otherwise, that would be an extraordinary claim, and the burden
of proof would be on *you*. The video you offer is laughable.
Got any 'real' proof? I didn't think so...

LOL. Poor old delusional Bast. All her references come from old
sci-fi TV shows and cartoons.





I am trying to dumb things down so even you and Hagar can try
understand.

No one believes you, Bastie, your broken english aside. You're a
conspiracy whacko on the Internet and Hagar and I are both
engineers.

Good for you.

Caught you in your lie, Bastie.

NO NAVY! Beat Army!


In your mind, I'm sure you "caught" me at least a dozen times.


I'm referring to your lie that you are an engineer.






My degrees say you are full of ****.
And if you actually were a working professional engineer, you wouldn't even
be arguing that point

Apollo was a lie.
And you are either a NASA shill or and idiot. Either way, your opinion is
worthless.



  #28  
Old December 9th 17, 01:21 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Bast[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,917
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 03:09:51 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:48:58 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:52:51 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:57:34 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:47:16 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:03:29 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:

Perhaps he can still learn something, and let his hemorrhoids
heal up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUZr0Wr0v-s

If you still miss the point hags,.....NASA faked Apollo

That is a lie. And I'm still waiting for your response to
the nagging radio signals to and from the moon which have
become your personal inconvient truth.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-laser-funding


snip


Another fail for you Bast.


Oh **** facepalm,....that even reads like a fairytale, or a
harry potter novel. Maybe Lord Voldemort helped them aim the
antenna ??

I don't see you refuting anything, Bastie ..... Maybe if you
didn't live in a fantasy land?

You write a few lines of crap that you are virtually claining is
verified by SNOPES ?

Nope. Stop lying Bast.

You do realize that even if I swallow your version of events, you
just made my argument for me, don't you ?

I'll give you a little hint, Bastie: I know all about satellites.
But go on....

If you have a moving satellite (closer) or the moon (farther
away) Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring
re-aiming, where the moon farther away would not appear to move
quickly from your reference point on earth.

This is all simple enough to sort out.

Your claim is about a moving satellite in space.

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities
you claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered
and tracked.

I anxiously await your answer to my question.

Are you really that dumb that you don't think the military has
their own satellites ?

Good question Bastie! Let's try this again since the info on the
comsat's I'm asking about in 1969 is NO LONGER CLASSIFIED:

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

And no one outside of the military knows where they are ,

Bastie, any good collegiate Astronomy class can track the
satellites in space. There is a University in the UK who takes
great pride in tracking all the satellites in space.


Riiggghhhht.

I'm not seeing any answer to my question, Bastie.

And I'm sure they even track all the steath aircraft in the world,
and sell that information to those bad ol' Ruskies.

And BTW,.....did they have this wonderful database ALREADY
ESTABLISHED BACK IN THE 1960'S ?

The info on the satellites in orbit in 1969 is readily available on
the web. I'm hard pressed to see why you keep stalling and don't
produce an answer to my question. I'm beginning to think you're
nothing but a liar and a fraud. smirk

Geez,.....no wonder the Iraqis were able to hide all those W.M.D from
us,....The damn British /POL Geeks . sold us out.

WMD's are stealthy?

Are you this desperate to wiggle out of answering a simple question?
Again?

You really are a piece of work aren't you

Time for you to flounce off again?



If you can come up with secret UK Universities that know everything
that happens in the cosmos.


I never said they were "secret" UK universities.

See how you so easily lie, Bast.





You also did not /could not give a name, or a location, or contact
information on the web.
That sounds pretty SECRET to me.
Or perhaps, you simply made it all up





  #29  
Old December 9th 17, 11:04 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Sarah Ehrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 07:21:11 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 03:09:51 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:48:58 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:52:51 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:57:34 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 18:47:16 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 01:03:29 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:

Perhaps he can still learn something, and let his hemorrhoids
heal up

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BUZr0Wr0v-s

If you still miss the point hags,.....NASA faked Apollo

That is a lie. And I'm still waiting for your response to
the nagging radio signals to and from the moon which have
become your personal inconvient truth.

https://www.theguardian.com/technolo...-laser-funding


snip


Another fail for you Bast.


Oh **** facepalm,....that even reads like a fairytale, or a
harry potter novel. Maybe Lord Voldemort helped them aim the
antenna ??

I don't see you refuting anything, Bastie ..... Maybe if you
didn't live in a fantasy land?

You write a few lines of crap that you are virtually claining is
verified by SNOPES ?

Nope. Stop lying Bast.

You do realize that even if I swallow your version of events, you
just made my argument for me, don't you ?

I'll give you a little hint, Bastie: I know all about satellites.
But go on....

If you have a moving satellite (closer) or the moon (farther
away) Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring
re-aiming, where the moon farther away would not appear to move
quickly from your reference point on earth.

This is all simple enough to sort out.

Your claim is about a moving satellite in space.

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities
you claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered
and tracked.

I anxiously await your answer to my question.

Are you really that dumb that you don't think the military has
their own satellites ?

Good question Bastie! Let's try this again since the info on the
comsat's I'm asking about in 1969 is NO LONGER CLASSIFIED:

The burden of proof is therefore on you to name, specifically, the
satellite(s) we have in orbit in 1969 which had the capabilities you
claim in your argument?

And be specific, Bast. All satellites are named and or numbered and
tracked.

And no one outside of the military knows where they are ,

Bastie, any good collegiate Astronomy class can track the
satellites in space. There is a University in the UK who takes
great pride in tracking all the satellites in space.


Riiggghhhht.

I'm not seeing any answer to my question, Bastie.

And I'm sure they even track all the steath aircraft in the world,
and sell that information to those bad ol' Ruskies.

And BTW,.....did they have this wonderful database ALREADY
ESTABLISHED BACK IN THE 1960'S ?

The info on the satellites in orbit in 1969 is readily available on
the web. I'm hard pressed to see why you keep stalling and don't
produce an answer to my question. I'm beginning to think you're
nothing but a liar and a fraud. smirk

Geez,.....no wonder the Iraqis were able to hide all those W.M.D from
us,....The damn British /POL Geeks . sold us out.

WMD's are stealthy?

Are you this desperate to wiggle out of answering a simple question?
Again?

You really are a piece of work aren't you

Time for you to flounce off again?


If you can come up with secret UK Universities that know everything
that happens in the cosmos.


I never said they were "secret" UK universities.

See how you so easily lie, Bast.


You also did not /could not give a name, or a location, or contact
information on the web.


Of what? Civilian tracking of satellites? We have a satellite
tracking dish on our house. We track 5 satellites at one time.

It's called DirecTV.

Here are two US Universities who track satellites

1. Univ. Of Texas

The site was created by James Yoder, an electrical and computer
engineering student at the University of Texas at Austin.

Read mo
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencete...#ixzz50no9S14f
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

2. Univ. Of Arizona

https://uanews.arizona.edu/story/stu...ack-satellites

I'm not doing the research for you bast, you lazy Lezbo.

That sounds pretty SECRET to me.


That's because you're not very bright.
  #30  
Old December 9th 17, 11:05 PM posted to alt.astronomy
Sarah Ehrett
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 119
Default Hagar still willingly bending over to let NASA do it to him

On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 07:13:24 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Sat, 9 Dec 2017 03:05:54 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 18:37:19 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Fri, 8 Dec 2017 12:48:05 -0500, "Bast"
wrote:



Sarah Ehrett wrote:
On Thu, 7 Dec 2017 19:03:48 -0800 (PST), palsing
wrote:

On Thursday, December 7, 2017 at 4:57:35 PM UTC-8, Bast wrote:

Of course a signal from a satellite will keep requiring
re-aiming, where the moon farther away would not appear to move
quickly from your reference point on earth.

Just how quickly do you think the moon travels across the sky? A
lot faster than you think... since the Earth rotates through 4
degrees per minute, and the moon is only about 1/2 degree across,
it takes the moon about 2 minutes to move its own diameter in the
sky... so someone pointing an antenna at it would have to
re-adjust that antenna quite often.

Man went to the moon, that has been accepted as fact across the
whole world for more than 50 years now. I saw it live on TV,
along with everyone else. Many have tried to disprove this, and
all have failed, every question has been answered. If you say
otherwise, that would be an extraordinary claim, and the burden
of proof would be on *you*. The video you offer is laughable.
Got any 'real' proof? I didn't think so...

LOL. Poor old delusional Bast. All her references come from old
sci-fi TV shows and cartoons.





I am trying to dumb things down so even you and Hagar can try
understand.

No one believes you, Bastie, your broken english aside. You're a
conspiracy whacko on the Internet and Hagar and I are both
engineers.

Good for you.

Caught you in your lie, Bastie.

NO NAVY! Beat Army!


In your mind, I'm sure you "caught" me at least a dozen times.


I'm referring to your lie that you are an engineer.


My degrees say you are full of ****.


You don't have any degrees so there goes your argument. Again.




 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
FR Bending of Light -- Proof oriel36[_2_] Amateur Astronomy 0 January 25th 10 09:14 PM
FR Bending of Light philippeb8 Astronomy Misc 221 December 8th 09 07:31 PM
A question about the bending of light. brian a m stuckless Policy 0 May 1st 06 11:46 PM
A question about the bending of light. brian a m stuckless Policy 0 May 1st 06 04:53 PM
A question about the bending of light. brian a m stuckless Astronomy Misc 0 May 1st 06 04:53 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:28 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.