Alton Sterling shooting: Video of deadly encounter with officers sparks outrage

[CuteOldGuy]

Jim, I respectfully submit to you that you are an idiot. Are you saying we don't have the ability to launch rockets into space? Seriously?

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Jim, I respectfully submit to you that you are an idiot. Are you saying we don't have the ability to launch rockets into space? Seriously?

Insulting me doesn't make me wrong. What it indicates is you don't know. So do your own research.

Jim

[i'va biggen]

LMAO

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Insulting me doesn't make me wrong. What it indicates is you don't know. So do your own research.

Jim

Research done. We've sent thousands of rockets into space. Now, tell me how that did not happen.

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Research done. We've sent thousands of rockets into space. Now, tell me how that did not happen.

We've all seen a rocket on a launch pad spewing out a gas from combustion nozzles at the bottom of the rocket and then there's lift off. That's really all you see. The only reason why that rocket actually leaves the ground is because the expansion of gas is actually pushing against our atmosphere which is around 15-20 psi. producing propulsion. Now once that same rocket enters the vacuum of space the gasses are now open to a vacuum. The gasses will expand and escape but without doing any work. So in 1969 when you saw the LEM taking off from the lunar surface you saw what looked like a gas expanding and produce propulsion which is work, to lift the LEM off the lunar surface to then rendezvous with the CM. That scenario is scientifically unsound. Gas exposed to a vacuum cannot sustain a reactionary force to do work. So no, we didn't go to the Moon in 1969 or beyond.

Jim

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

We've all seen a rocket on a launch pad spewing out a gas from combustion nozzles at the bottom of the rocket and then there's lift off. That's really all you see. The only reason why that rocket actually leaves the ground is because the expansion of gas is actually pushing against our atmosphere which is around 15-20 psi. producing propulsion. Now once that same rocket enters the vacuum of space the gasses are now open to a vacuum. The gasses will expand and escape but without doing any work. So in 1969 when you saw the LEM taking off from the lunar surface you saw what looked like a gas expanding and produce propulsion which is work, to lift the LEM off the lunar surface to then rendezvous with the CM. That scenario is scientifically unsound. Gas exposed to a vacuum cannot sustain a reactionary force to do work. So no, we didn't go to the Moon in 1969 or beyond.

Jim

You simply can't be serious. That is the the most stupid thing ever posted. The laws of physics work in a vacuum. So there's been no Sputnik, no Voyager? The Juno probe is not now orbiting Jupiter? There was no Mercury, Gemini or Apollo program? Elon Musk and Richard Branson are spending millions of dollars on commercial space travel that is impossible. Tang was never invented?


The gas in the rocket is expanding. It escapes through the easiest route, the nozzle of the rocket. That creates thrust. It's not pushing against anything. Newton's Law says that if there is a force going one way, there must be a force going in the opposite direction. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO PUSH AGAINST ANYTHING! The reason Challenger exploded was because there was a weakness in an O ring, creating a point of low resistance that wasn't at the nozzle. Then it exploded. It didn't push a different direction.


Rockets are a controlled explosion. When you shoot a gun, and feel that "kick", that's what happens on a much larger scale in a rocket. The bullet doesn't "push" against the air to get to the target.


You are a flat earth fool. The Bible is not a science book.

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

You simply can't be serious. That is the the most stupid thing ever posted. The laws of physics work in a vacuum. So there's been no Sputnik, no Voyager? The Juno probe is not now orbiting Jupiter? There was no Mercury, Gemini or Apollo program? Elon Musk and Richard Branson are spending millions of dollars on commercial space travel that is impossible. Tang was never invented?


The gas in the rocket is expanding. It escapes through the easiest route, the nozzle of the rocket. That creates thrust. It's not pushing against anything. Newton's Law says that if there is a force going one way, there must be a force going in the opposite direction. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO PUSH AGAINST ANYTHING! The reason Challenger exploded was because there was a weakness in an O ring, creating a point of low resistance that wasn't at the nozzle. Then it exploded. It didn't push a different direction.


Rockets are a controlled explosion. When you shoot a gun, and feel that "kick", that's what happens on a much larger scale in a rocket. The bullet doesn't "push" against the air to get to the target.


You are a flat earth fool. The Bible is not a science book.

Nothing you have said is back by anything scientific. You don't understand the concept of Coefficient of Friction, Newton's Third Law, or free expansion. Which all come into play in space travel. Nothing has been put out past Earths Orbit, which there still is a degree of air density however slight. Rocket propulsion is designed to work in the presence of air without it they don't work, it's that simple. If you think the Government lies to us well NASA is a Government Agency. They sell space travel. We believe them because, hey their NASA. Space travel outside Earth's Orbit isn't possible with todays technology.

Jim

[CuteOldGuy]

No reputable physicist supports you. You're the one who has no concept of the laws of physics. Post a link to your source for this shit.

[Mr MojoRisin]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

No reputable physicist supports you. You're the one who has no concept of the laws of physics. Post a link to your source for this shit.

Do you know any reputable Physicist? If you do show him my post.


Jim

[LexusLover]

Speaking of laws ...OP: "More police brutality in Louisiana" ......

Had "Mr. Sterling" simply turned around and put his hands behind his back and complied with the requests of the officers who responded to citizen complaints, "Mr. Sterling" would be alive today ..... granted he would probably be in jail after having been arrested for a "felon in possession of a firearm," but that is the kind of "gun control" LIBERALS WANT! Keeping firearms out of the possession of people who are not "qualified" to possess them, i.e. convicted felons.

"Mr. Sterling":
Simple battery (dismissed) (Nov. 24, 1996)
Simple battery – dismissed (Oct. 28, 1997)
Simple burglary of inhabited dwelling (May 5-15, 2005) request for arrest warrant
Felony theft (May 5-15, 2005) request for arrest warrant
Simple burglary (amended to illegal possession of stolen things – guilty plea) (May 24, 2005)
Aggravated battery (amended to simple battery – guilty plea) (March 6, 2006)
Simple criminal damage to property – guilty plea (March 6, 2006)
Unauthorized entry of an inhabited dwelling (amended to disturbing the peace – guilty plea) (March 6, 2006)
Expired driver’s license (March 21, 2008)
Driver’s license issue (hard to read document) (2008)
Domestic abuse battery – pleaded guilty (March 31, 2008)
Illegal carrying weapons with controlled dangerous substance – pleaded guilty (May 29, 2009)
Felon in possession of a firearm – dismissed (May 29, 2009)
Contempt of court – (Aug. 10, 2009) – Guilty plea
Fail to use seat belt (Feb. 5, 2014)
Fail to renew registration (Feb. 5, 2014)
Failure to comply with sex offender registration (Aug. 11, 2015) – Forfeiture
Possession of a schedule 1 XXXX, (April4-5, 2016) – no conclusion
Possession of XXXXXXXXXXX first offense. (April 5, 2016) – no conclusion

Arrest – probable cause affidavits:
Trespassing (Aug. 25, 1996)
Damage to property (2 counts) (Aug. 25, 1996)
Criminal mischief (Aug. 25, 1996)
Illegally possess weapon (Aug. 25, 1996)
Aggravated burglary (Aug. 27, 1996)
Public intimidation, 2 counts (April 24, 2000)
Criminal damage to property (March 4, 2006)
Simple robbery (March 4, 2006)
Theft under $500 (March 4, 2006)
Possession of marijuana (March 4, 2006)
Misrepresentation during booking (March 4, 2006)
Simple battery (March 4, 2006)
Aggravated burglary (March 4, 2006)
Resisting an officer by force (May 29, 2009)
Possession marijuana (May 29, 2009)
Possess stolen things (May 29, 2009)
Possess firearm with drugs (May 29, 2009)
Simple assault (May 29, 2009)
Offense too illegible to read in the record (May 29, 2009)

[Jackie S]

Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

Nothing you have said is back by anything scientific. You don't understand the concept of Coefficient of Friction, Newton's Third Law, or free expansion. Which all come into play in space travel. Nothing has been put out past Earths Orbit, which there still is a degree of air density however slight. Rocket propulsion is designed to work in the presence of air without it they don't work, it's that simple. If you think the Government lies to us well NASA is a Government Agency. They sell space travel. We believe them because, hey their NASA. Space travel outside Earth's Orbit isn't possible with todays technology.

Jim

With all due respect, what differentiates a Rocket from a Jet is a Rocket carries it's own oxygenizer. It can function in the vacuum of space just as easily as it does in an atmosphere containing oxygen.

In fact Rockets are even more efficient in a total vacuum because of the lack of any external friction of an atmosphere.

A Rocket, or a Jet Engine for that matter, needs nothing to "push against". The law of "for every action, there is a opposite and equal reaction" is all that is in play.

I feel a little silly explaining this, thinking perhaps you are being facetious. This is 6th grade science stuff.

[i'va biggen]

It is plain to see jim ain't no rocket scientist. Must be a JW.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by Jackie S

This is 6th grade science stuff.

You had to wait until the 6th grade ....

.....before your mommy would let you shoot fireworks?

What a sheltered little boy!

[i'va biggen]

Originally Posted by LexusLover

You had to wait until the 6th grade ....

.....before your mommy would let you shoot fireworks?

What a sheltered little boy!

Not every mommy told their kid to go play in the street like yours did.

[LexusLover]

Originally Posted by i'va biggen

Not every mommy told their kid to go play in the street like yours did.

How old were you when your mommy let you get off the curb?