Seems 3 people dont understand the word evidence.
Not so, if the offered evidence is invalidated, it ceases to be evidence. Here's the definition of the word evidence:
Alright then, I have to come clean. I was abducted by Aliens and taken to the base on the backside of the moon. They told me all about how NASA faked the moon landings. They heard Kennedy say that they were going to go to the Moon, so they sent a visitation to him and told him what would happen if they invaded their peaceful unpolluted planet. Do you remember when strange flying objects were seen over the nuclear missile silos and shut them down?
Ha so!! There was method to your madness not as we were beginning to suspect madness to your method.
Rubbish.
That was in reply to where I said that there was pressure under the module. I think you need to have a look at this because it seems that you don't understand what pressure is. The module would not be able to decelerate without pressure on it, which naturally needs to be underneath it to decelerate it.
More proof if it was needed of your difficulty with understanding the English language.
That is of course only true after you came on!
That is wrong by such a massive margin that I don’t know how to even begin correcting you.
Most normal people think that's a good thing. That's why they're going to vote for him. You're in denial about what's going on at the moment. The old agendas are finished. Most people have had enough of them. The Brexit vote was the start. The more the establishment has tried to deny it, the more momentum the anti-establishment movement gathers. It's now got to an overwhelming point. You're going to see something momentous in the European elections and again shortly after that in the general elections, just like what happened in Alberta yesterday. The polls showed them nearly level. The result was 63 to 24 against the old regime, which had previously had a majority of 52 to 25. Basically, the old social justice and globalisation regime got annihilated. Nobody wants that anymore. Time to move on. Sorry for your bad news. I hope it doesn't spoil your Easter day (that's if you're allowed to celebrate it).
That's completely wrong. I love all the opinions here. Why else would I be here? When have I ever tried to shut them up?That is of course only true after you came on!
And after all ,you are only present because you don't like the opinions being expressed here and hope to hog the limelight and disrupt the debate.
You're not the first and no doubt won't be the last.
You haven't been reading my posts, just seeing what you want to as many do.
The diversion you have been providing with your nonsense is a pretty standard technique, it simply makes you look foolish and obstructive,and comments that show your scorn for the opinions expressed is another one.
You're going to kick yourself!
Isn't it the case that any pressure behind a jet or rocket engine reduces the velocity of the expelled mass and renders it less efficient than in a vacuum? (Not that a jet can operate in a vacuum.)That is wrong by such a massive margin that I don’t know how to even begin correcting you.
I’ll try to make a start by saying that the principal of gas pressure acting on the body of a space craft in order to control it does not exist in any form. All forces on a space craft to to control the six axis of freedom are generated by the acceleration of mass, usually gasses. Jet engines work on the same mass acceleration principle, they accelerate a mass of air over the distance between the intake and exhaust nozzle. Of course they cease to work in a vacuum, so rocket motors with their own supply of oxidisation agents are used. But the idea of accelerating a mass stays the same.
If what you are saying were correct, it would be possible to lift a wardrobe by climbing inside it and jumping up and down.
Well..... think about it. Imagine you're naturally a UKIP kind of person and they had a vote to say if we should leave the EU - and the vote came out to leave.
