News from Fair Weather Current

[dalemiller]

It crossed the boundary of being supported by physics. It's one thing to ask questions about physics, but if you are going to insist that physics itself is wrong, you get moved to speculations.

 

OK. I give up unless we can get down to specifics. There is no way I can think that physics is wrong. I think that my understanding of certain manifestations of physics could set you free from some misinterpretations of the laws of physics that hamper your comprehensions. You have been consistently standing in my way, and you have all of the chips. You seem more concerned over the tone I have used rather than specific technical details. My own misguidance in attempting to draw out some astrophysicist into debate has merely agitated you whom I hoped might simply referee.

 

Your misunderstanding of the electrical performance of closed conductors is the key thing with which I could help you if you would permit. You have confessed to have no indulgence for theories coming from people you deem to be beneath you. I shouldn't seem to complain because I have less reason than you to be humble.

 

You have at certain instances acknowledged that in a Faraday cage there would be transient fields while charged particles were undergoing repositioning, but slough such exceptions to your mantra of absolute isolation because of the time limitations of transients. It is only during such transients (which can last for years) that the effects I assert take place. Once all charged particles have reached their goals, there are no more fields within the closed conductor. You fail to acknowledge that incidental to correcting your garbled explanation of dynamic fusion, I discovered what brings on sunspots. You didn't thank me for correcting the erroneous direction of rotation that you entertained for the earth. How can you be in contempt for what I can offer?

[swansont]

OK. I give up unless we can get down to specifics. There is no way I can think that physics is wrong. I think that my understanding of certain manifestations of physics could set you free from some misinterpretations of the laws of physics that hamper your comprehensions. You have been consistently standing in my way, and you have all of the chips. You seem more concerned over the tone I have used rather than specific technical details. My own misguidance in attempting to draw out some astrophysicist into debate has merely agitated you whom I hoped might simply referee.

 

I'll decline your offer of setting me free, but thanks for offering.