..."OK, RF, you've convinced me."..
FD. I was by no means trying to convince anyone of anything. My own position on these matters remains, hopefully, open minded. I neither believe nor disbelieve. Just to clarify.
comet NEAT consumed by monster flare
by blackguard 36 Replies latest jw friends
-
-
blackguard
Hey funkyderek, Now you've got me confused; you mean to say you're not a jokemeister? The chain of reasoning was provided by yourself, i.e "plagiarism is a serious offense"---remember? Aren't rape and murder serious offenses?
Now seeing that plagiarism is a serious offense for you, how have you been expressing your outrage over the Tony Blair plagiarized Iraq dossier affair? Have you written the PM? The US state department over General Powell's use of the plagiarized material?
In regards the links you failed to find: You asked for evidence which is referenced on the links I provided. You have to make effort to scour the links if you genuinely need to stoke the flames of outrage over this "serious offense". Stop being lazy---I'll not post anymore links!
-
funkyderek
Hey funkyderek, Now you've got me confused; you mean to say you're not a jokemeister? The chain of reasoning was provided by yourself, i.e "plagiarism is a serious offense"---remember? Aren't rape and murder serious offenses?
I'll try to make this simple. "Serious" does not always mean "as serious as murder", the same as "big" does not always mean "as big as an elephant". Got it? Or are you still confused? I'm not sure I can dumb it down any more.
Now seeing that plagiarism is a serious offense for you, how have you been expressing your outrage over the Tony Blair plagiarized Iraq dossier affair? Have you written the PM? The US state department over General Powell's use of the plagiarized material?
I don't recall ever expressing an opinion on that matter. Im not sure why you're bringing it up. Using one example of plagiarism which you seem to think is unacceptable (?) to make the point that plagiarism is not serious just doesn't make any sense. Maybe you should start a separate thread on the subject.
In regards the links you failed to find: You asked for evidence which is referenced on the links I provided. You have to make effort to scour the links if you genuinely need to stoke the flames of outrage over this "serious offense". Stop being lazy---I'll not post anymore links!
I'm not sure why you're so reluctant to provide clear references to support your claims. Perhaps you view making unsupported allegations with the same flippancy as you view the theft of someone else's work, I don't know. The links you posted contained a lot of "information", mostly risible nonsense. You never said which one proved your allegation of plagiarism. I eventually found a claim by James McCanney that NASA had stolen his work (something he seems to think is a serious offence even if you don't). This is the closest to evidence of plagiarism I could find (and it's a long way off.) Here's the email he sent them:
To be posted on many web pages and e-groups ...
Here is the quote taken from the soho page.
"We are, of course, also hoping for a nice Coronal Mass Ejection (CME) off the west limb around perihelion time, to put the icing on the cake for this movie! "
URL is http://sohowww.nascom.nasa.gov/hotshots/2003_02_12/
It's about time you clowns at NASA started giving credit to the person who gave you the idea that comets are interacting with the Sun. That's me ... Jim McCanney ... Remember when many times in the past I pointed this out to you and every time there was a response that it was just "coincidence". Now, as with the standard NASA "Creeping Crud", you are sliding my theoretical work piece at a time into your page. Well the entire world is watching and is on to your cheap little game.
This email is going to be posted world wide right now so in real time the entire world can see NASA stealing my material.
Way to go NASA boys!
jim mccanney -I went to the link quoted here, and for the life of me, I cannot see anything on the page that could possibly even qualify as plagiarism. Apparently McCanney thinks he was the first person to discover that comets interact with the sun, and that NASA stole this idea from him. I've personally known for decades that comets interact with the sun. It's not a secret nor has it ever been.
Now earlier you said:
NASA has obviously been plagiarizing McCanney's work and I can only suppose this is why he is so upset. Why would NASA plagiarize MCanney's work and quote it if they're content with their dirty snowball comet theory?
which is what started this whole debate. What part of McCanney's work did NASA plagiarise? (Strangely, you seem to understand that McCanney might be upset at being plagiarised.) The link McCanney quoted holds to the "dirty snowball comet theory" or didn't you read it?Don't worry, here's a quote from it:
Comets can be seen by SWAN because their water ice evaporates as they are heated by the Sun. The water in turn is split into oxygen and hydrogen by the radiation from the Sun.
Now to me, that seems entirely consistent with the long-held view that comets are balls of ice and frozen gases and owes nothing to McCanney's peculiar brand of nonsense.
Now if you want to insist that NASA has plagiarised McCanney's work, you're going to need to provide real evidence.
Incidentally, for future reference, unless I put some sort of smiley at the end of a sentence, I'm probably not joking. You should probably assume instead that you've just misunderstood - again.
-
blackguard
Hey funkyderek, Did you go to night school to learn how to become a bonehead, or does it come natural? The links I provided gave me the information to evidence that NASA agents appear to be plagiarizing McCanney's work. Why is it you can't find them? Is it you prefer not to?
You're the one that claims plagiarism is a serious offense. You're the one that failed to qualify what you meant, and now find it convenient to cry, 'I'm misunderstood'.
Again I remind you--- it's you that's on a moral crusade for plagiarism. My links should take you to evidence you're seeking, but your hand is in the salad bowl and you need someone to help you take it out. What takes priority in your crusade: loss of innocent lives or hurt feelings? Which in your opinion is a more serious offense; the Blair plagiarism affair leading to a war and the untimely deaths of thousands of innocent Iraqis or my allegation that McCanney is miffed? You're disinterested in the Blair lies based upon plagiarized material, but McCanney's, or my allegation of NASA's plagiarism of McCanney's work, while secondary, is more important to you than the early and unrighteous demise of poor Iraqis. Do you see your own incongruity here, thus leading one to suspect your true hypocritical position on plagiarism morality?
-
Satanus
Blair plaigerism is irrelavent to the subject. Wasn't it something about a comet??
SS
-
blackguard
Hi ss, You're quite correct, plagiarism is tangential and irrelevant to this issue. Poster funkyderek inserted himself as a moral authority knowing what is real science and wacky conspiracy and spearheading his plagiarism crusade.
-
Pleasuredome
blackguard
is there anything new on comet NEAT? i know pics from the SOHO satalite were being published up until the CME from the sun, but i've seen nothing since then.
McCanney says that because of the gravity of comet neat, the matter created by the gaseous reactions in its tail fall back on the comet therefore increasing its size. because of it's size, being the biggest comet to enter our solar system and its increase in size, i cant believe there's no media coverage of it. the silence is deafening.