and i explained that i don't accept that as the instruments that measure air speed are not as accurate at higher altitude and the list you "provided" by a military propaganda site so that probably receives Military funding so i tend to not blindly believe lists on the internet especially when they come from you who couldn't tell the difference between ABC and a ABC Troll Company , so till i see actual evidence with own eyes, i'll pass on your link. One thing i think we can agree on is that link is definitely a graph, perhaps if it had a few more circles and arrows we could agree on something else.

Now that i re explained for the retard again though, you have no excuses for the 15 questions of mine that you've dodge, answer them or piss off you worthless sod.

This post was edited by card_sultan on May 17 2017 09:07pm

Let's try having the same conversation here. Instruments measuring the air speed of an aircraft through the air have nothing at all to do with the speed of sound through the air. The question was about the speed of sound at varying altitudes. I answered the question. I EVEN wrote "Do you accept this as proof that the speed of sound at high altitude is lower than at sea level? Yes or no?" Now unless you can tell me what aircraft air speed instrumentation has to do with the speed of sound, you have not now, nor ever, told me whether my answer to YOUR QUESTION answered your question.

The answer is a clear no. Instruments measuring the air speed of an aircraft have everything to do with its speed, and telling you it just a % of mach is how they fool you, I know your to stupid to understand this.

For the third time i've answered your stupid question, and for the 10th time you dodged every single one of mine cause your completely intellectually dishonest so when the fuck will you man up and stop dodging the 15 questions i asked you, is it that you are such a little crying bitch and need to dodge?

Answer the questions or admit you can't cause your stupid or just fucking leave like the bitch you are, make a choice girly man. Stop being so pathetic.

This post was edited by card_sultan on May 18 2017 12:33pm

Russian Physicist admits Flat Earth

First of all, the guy is a mathematician in the area of economics. His expertise lies in predicting and analyzing stock prices. Not exactly relevant to the topic at hand.
Secondly, in the video he states that he doesn't believe in space flight, and he doesn't believe in nuclear bombs. He actually doesn't think nukes exist. According to this guy, the bombing of Heroshima and Nagasaki never happened, the thousands of atomic tests never happened, and nukes are a lie used by super-powers to control everyone. So... yeah....

So your saying he doesn't agree with State propaganda and you as a statist are offended, cool.

If you claim his opinion is not relevant, then clearly your opinion is super irrelevant so thanks for pointing that out.

What is your proof that hes just a mathematician in economics? And why can only state sponsored rocket scientists give opinions about rockets?

That's like saying only the police can monitor police brutality, so not surprised you have a commie authoritarian statist view on relevancy.

This post was edited by card_sultan on May 18 2017 04:26pm

My proof is his own bio.
https://www.ieac.ru/index/teachers/boyarshinov_b.html

I never said I was offended. I said his opinion is not very relevant. I can go film 100 bums on the street saying the earth is round, and 100 more saying it's a pyramid, and another 100 saying its shaped like a cupcake with a piece bitten off. I guess to you that's convincing proof.

I like how you completely avoided the fact that he thinks nukes aren't real. Do you think nukes are real?

You're getting ahead of yourself. Before we can talk airspeed of aircraft, we have to establish the goddamned speed of sound. Baby steps dude. Your first question was a fucking question about the speed of SOUND, not air speed. So no, you haven't made known that you can even have this conversation, much less jump around to answers that haven't been given yet. The very first thing you said way back in post 1467, and I quote:



So that's the first step. I provided you with both a table giving the different speeds at which sound travels at different altitudes, as well as an explanation WHY sound moves slower at colder, higher altitudes. Do you agree or disagree that sound moves slower at high altitudes. That was the step. Not air speed. Air speed can be the very next step of the process, but I goddamned need to know if you accept or deny that sound travels more slowly at high altitude before we cover one more motherfucking point.

I translated that page and it turns out your completely full of it as usual

Boyarshinov Boris Sergeevich
The department of mathematics, informatics, natural sciences and information technology
Professor
Candidate of Physical and Mathematical Sciences,
Associate Professor
Education
Engineer-physicist specialty "Experimental Nuclear Physics", seniority 40 years teaching experience of more than 20 years.
Graduated from the Department of Experimental and Theoretical Physics, Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, received qualification of engineer-physicist in "experimental nuclear physics."

you should really give up the trolling, you're not very good at it.



nice dodge, answer the questions dodgetard or troll elsewhere!

This post was edited by card_sultan on May 18 2017 06:11pm

Not even one dodge by me. Do you agree or disagree that the speed of sound is slower at higher altitudes? We can totally move on to your next question just as soon as we determine that your pitiful brain can wrap itself around the topic.