Addressing Gl Arguments Regarding Noc Tech Paper Options

[rob balsamo]

Looks like there is only one reply so far, out of much noise being generated at the GL site... so we'll address the first "legit" reply to our NoC paper...

Didn't 911files show that the radii PfT was using in their last video were fudged? Looks like they're still using those same radii in this paper.

ETA: Why, yes, he did...

CODE

http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=4324901&postcount=8

Actually, no, he didnt.

1. It appears Farmer cherry picked one "radius" for his claim, not "radii". Yet refuses to show exactly which "radius" he feel is "fudged".

2. Based on Farmers final arithmetic for our alleged "fudged" radius, Farmer calculated his alleged G Load based on bank angle which Farmer claims is accurate -

Farmer calculates G load for given bank...

Banking angle = 62 degrees
g-force = 1.9

Its far from accurate...

First, Farmer doesnt specify speed to obtain such a bank angle.

Second, Farmer's arithmetic is wrong regarding G load for a given bank angle.

Every pilot from a student onward knows the rule of thumb that a 60 deg bank is 2.0G. How does Farmer calculate less G load for a higher bank? I'll tell you why, its because Farmer doesnt understand basic vector analysis as outlined in the paper, doesnt understand how to calculate a sag of an arc, nor is he able to determine a proper radii.

Looks like Farmer needs the chart as his "maths" is pathetic.

http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum//index....&p=10761451

Or perhaps he will actually learn something from the tech paper regarding vector analysis.

n = 1/cos(62)

n = 2.13 G's

Farmer is more than 10% off with his "maths".

[rob balsamo]

JayDuh continuing to live up to his Duh...

It is also quite apparent that some who read these threads concerning the math do not understand that Farmer was calculating the lateral g load

Apparently, as many of the GL's bought his numbers hook, line and sinker. Even Farmer himself didnt understand it and thought his numbers were off due to NM length and "conversion factor". What an idiot. Its about time you realized your errors and that you and Farmer were wrong! It only took our release of the tech paper and diagram for JayDuh and Farmer to understand the vectors.

These same persons seem to not actually fully understand how the formulae they used are derived, thus their confusion.

Agreed, GL's dont have a clue when it comes to properly applying vector analysis for the proper vector. That is until we drew a diagram for Farmer and JayDuh..

It is one thing to apply a formula, it is another entirely to fully comprehend how that formula is derived and when, and when not, to apply it.

Agreed, thats why we found it so hilarious Farmer numbers we so far off and he kept thinking he was applying his derived formula's properly. When obviously, he was not. We just sat back and let you bury yourself more. But you got it eventualy. After we drew a diagram for you.

This time they managed to apply the physics correctly despite not fully comprehending the principles

It is JayDuh and Farmer who didnt fully understand the "principles" until we had to draw a diagram for them.

but had to twist the statements of the CiT witnesses in order to produce a flyable flight path.

Twist? Twist? You mean like this "Twist" from your buddy "Reheat"? (who has lived up to his alias "ReTreat" since our release...)

(IMG:http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f178/myphotos1960/ReTreatUnReasonablePath.jpg)

Remember, we put the above ReTreat calcs next to ours and the witness drawings... in our video... and let the viewer decide who "twists" their statements...

Witness Drawings based on their observations

(IMG:http://i47.photobucket.com/albums/f178/myphotos1960/AllGroupsMap.jpg)

Who exactly is "twisting" here?

JayDuh, you live up to the "Duh" in your name every time you post. Either that, or your initial intellectual dishonesty is so blatant you have no choice but to go full blown "Duh".

Its good you guys figured it out finally.. Glad to be of service... So i take it Farmer no longer thinks his numbers were off due to NM distance or "conversion factor"? (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/laughing1.gif)

Now Farmer just has to understand how to apply Sag properly and come up with proper radii and you'll all be up to speed. (IMG:http://pilotsfor911truth.org/forum/style_emoticons/default/smile.gif)