Warning to the user bradguth-gasa-ieis

Well done Bart!! getting rid of that Lunatic, maybe now we all can get back to normal amateur astronomy without his views being rammed down our throats.

Ronan (GAC)

In the middle of that nuts rantings I came across this news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/3746583.stm Too scared to post it in case it encouraged him. Suppose its safe now :wink:

Hi,

As one of the moderators that has recieved some less than kind words from this user I though I would post a final response to this.

From his website:

May 28, 2004; Sorry for the delay. I was stuck in another rut, this time it was the overflowing space toilet rut of irishastronomy.org and of their version of dog-wagging hype, spin and damage control on behalf of sucking up to NASA/NSA/DoD or bust. In spite of all that, I've posted a few testy sorts of things that their moderators didn't much like, and so much so upsetting their space-time-continuum that their internet plug was pulled. In spite of all their warm and fuzzy flak, I,ve gotten around to learning a few things and of updating my "Photons at Rest Having Mass" argument, while plugging along with the notions of the Ashen Light aspects of Venus being anything but earthshine.

The phrase "Photons a Rest Having Mass"is a link so I decided to peruse it.

Hubble photon mass = 5.81e-66 gram (as per multiple qualified sources)

People who followed the thread here will know that I asked for references to this mass, which he had claimed he derived himself in another thread. After several posts he provided 3 links which he found through google. www.irishastronomy.org/boards/viewtopic.php?t=546
One of these papers is www.journals.uchicago.edu/ApJ/journal/is...v452n2/5273/5273.pdf this paper describes the calculation of the mass of a specific binary star and makes no reference to photon mass, so one reference he gave he didnt even bother to read.
The other two papers are in fact the same one, published in the Journal of Theoretics, and `independent` journal that wile it claims to be peer reviewd does not list the reviewers, it is also not a recognised scientific journal. Leaving aside the merits or otherwise of the paper, it does come to conclude a theoretical mass of a photon at rest, this is clearly shown from their calculations as theoretical and not implying that there are lots of photons sitting out in the universe doing nothing as Brad would have us believe. For those wishing to study the possible mass issues of the photon arising from string theory I refer you to search at adsabs.harvard.edu/abstract_service.html though be warned the mathematics are in most cases very intense.

From Brads statement and the results of one query put to him we have established that.
1. He is a liar. Citing multiple sources on his webpage and claiming here that he had determined the values he claimed.
2. That he resorts to throwing abuse rather than rational scientific argument. Browse the forum.
3. That he is unaware of the science behind his claims, and also of some basic physics.

All other users here have an understanding of what makes a good post and what does not, so I dont think guidelines need to spelt out again. Just look thorough Brads posts - thats how not to conduct yourself online!

Cheers,
~Albert

Hi Albert,
I also had a look at his website, and talk about complete unreadible crap. :roll:

on behalf of sucking up to NASA/NSA/DoD or bust

He says we suck up these organisations, does he not realise were in a different country and couldn't give a toss about his "DoD'

Nuttier then a fruit case, to put it politely.

Well done Bart, Albert, Brian, Seanie and everybody else who was downright insulted by this unpleasant character. We don't need this sort of behaviour, does this person somehow qualify for the Guinness book of records?
Keith..

Hey! - We got a couple of free links on Brad's site. All the better for the google pagerank.... the .com site even got a mention;

BTW; somehow my words of wisdom about Venus and of the possibility that we've been overlooking some other life, this notion apparently placed their irishastronomy.org mainframe into cardiac arrest. I've managed to re-post somewhat within their less sophisticated irishastronomy.com version, although the official flak started flying within before I could even effectively respond. Thus apparently Irish astronomy folks are NOT so much interested in the truth and nothing but the truth, but rather in sustaining their cozy mainstream status quo, and of apparently doing such at all cost, even if that includes shutting down their entire program. I'm withholding a few analogies for this over-reaction, although at this point there may not be a future of public access into their version of the past, nor of the future to worry about.

Seems that I'm less sophisticated than you lot. Sorry about that. :lol: By the way, you've got to show me your mainframe sometime Bart...

Actually, I found a great post in google newsgroups where Brad is convinced that the US government altered the Google 'kernel code' to block his posts. I've got to stop my bitching now, but here's the link for your amusement;

email bashing with virus conspiracy theory

John.