Dave S.
We in wind are used to
this: People claim new knowledge in wind energy, always dredging
up old ideas like say a "spiralairfoil" which is not only an oxymoron,
but a well-known false step made by DaVinci in his nonworkable
"helicopter" design. If anyone dares to honestly respond with the
facts, they are an instant "bad person" and the truth loses its place
in the discussion. This forum is allegedly for discussing design
ideas in airborne wind energy. Therefore if an idea is put forth
for discussion, it is proper to actually discuss it. Maybe you
should be in an outcome-based special class where everyone just gets an
automatic gold star to bolster their self esteem.
We're used to
discussions of wind energy by outsiders always turning into a personal
attack on the truth-teller. Do you have any IDEA HOW MANY TIMES
people have come to me wanting to argue about how they are gonna change
the world with yesterday's disproven ideas they think are somehow new?
They
usually have the same old well-worn response: "Well we have some REALLY
SMART PEOPLE that have put this together!", stated more as a threat
than optimism. That is where it gets emotional, as they insist on
how smart the people are and how THAT SMARTNESS is gonna save their
dumb ideas. As a last resort, they bring out the credentials.
Doesn't matter - even credentials won't save dumb ideas.
You mischaracterize what I write all the time.
Par for the course - non-wind people always do that:
If
someone puts forth an old disproven idea and asks for feedback and we
tell them it is an old and disproven idea, they balk and accuse us of
personally attacking them, while THEY personally attack us!
Unbelievable I know, but that is what always happens! (I keep
saying, we're used to it.)
For people who can't understand wind
energy, it's all nothing but a big personality contest, a battle of
empty boasting, or a war of the credentials.
Your characterizations
of what I wrote are mostly LIES, as you mis-characterize my words to
try and make people believe that I am against them, so as to make YOU
seem a more "popular" person, in your typical endless effort to convert
an engineering assignment to a personality contest.
I will give
you one example. You try to say I said something against Cristina
Archer. No that is not accurate. That is you twisting my
words around. What I said, besides that I like Cristina, is that
people like YOU believing that you can delay your own lack of progress
by endlessly mentioning more and more people with "credentials",
explaining mundane and ancient, well-known facts, like wind is stronger
at higher heights, will somehow change the fact that you can't seem to
make any progress.
It goes like this:
The wind newbie states
that they are a genius, with a "new" idea, and that it will outperform
those evil "tower-based" wind turbines, or whatever. In
your latest case, you recently called wind turbines "windtowers", as
though somehow coming up with your own vocabulary, your own word
definitions, is a sign of superior knowledge.
So the real wind
people respond by pointing out the existing standards of the industry
and ask you newbies to meet those standards. (reliable, economic
power generation) That is where you newbies start with the personal
attacks. You try to blame your lack of knowledge, lack of
progress, lack of output, on those who merely comment accurately on
your own statements.
Think of me like a mirror,
revealing what you actually look like, and you don't like what you see,
so you attack the mirror. Sounds like a fairy tale, and it
is. A very old one that gets repeated often.
Wind newbies
have always been in a perpetual fantasy world, citing for example that
airborne wind energy is a "new baby" while simultaneously dredging up
countless references of patents and actual attempts dating back not
just to last century, but to the century before that! Nobody can
make this stuff up! Ignorance and willful self-delusion, to the
umpteenth power!
But we in windenergy are completely
used to it. No, AWE is not new, your ideas are not new, almost
nothing on here is new, and most of it is dumb. Sorry but those
are just the facts, It is all old news to us, including the
attempts to refocus your failure on how "bad" we wind energy people and
our actual working turbines are. Sorry, it won't work.
I
see one good idea having come from you recently, and that is the notion
that blue tarps might be a great starting material for kites. I
think that is a great idea. Thanks for that.
Yer buddy,
Doug
:)
---In AirborneWindEnergy@yahoogroups.com, <santos137@...
Its not a proper Forum use to willfully bait folks for your own
amusement. The actual credentialist problem is your relentless
targeting of AWE academics for crude abuse. Whenever you stray from
this obsession to cyberbully non-credentialed friends, like Dan'l, you
get the same social correction. So its no defense of credentialism to
defend our talented friends from your blind attacks*. It was quite
alarming when you unfairly pissed on DavidN a couple of years ago, and
then you went person by person, amassing a long list of victims. Lately
you even smear the work of Reinhart and Cristina.
AWE's Rocket Scientists, as listed, are career achievers far beyond
your lay-person attacks or apparent ability. Lang worked on Apollo,
Bolonkin under Korolyov, and Ockels is a PhD astronaut. Carlin worked
for Boeing/NASA on large scale HAWTs, in the seventies, already at a
far larger scale than any wind turbines you are associated with. We
struggle in vain to see you as a proper "real wind person", since your
own record is so modest, and your social conduct so unprofessional. We
look to Coy, Fort, and MikeO as our "real" wind heroes, PhD or not. We
are proud to count these named figures as close mentors and friends,
not your un-named Edward's AFB supporters (Carlin is our Edward's man).
For us, history, not you, decides winners and losers, and we have
hardly begun our historic quest for upper wind. All teams carefully
building AWEs prowess are progressing, and those who do not are lost.
Its a fine race to the top for the healthy teams. After a fine silence,
your latest innovation is to manufacture off-topic trivia as a
launching pad for tedious ProfC ranting. Once again, you have no
personal progress to share, but the Net Troll's rotting garden of
worn-out taunts and misleading statements for correction. You are
falling further and further behind the pack of serious players by only
mounting emotional distractions,
daveS
* Keep in mind your case is progressively weakened by an ongoing lack
of honest effort or demonstrated merits to match your grandiose
inventive claims. Trollish posts merely remind us of the lack of
positive work.
--------------------------------------------
