Latest activity

Short update: I've implemented all missing checks except one: a Spanish Virtual Observatory (VOSA) specific query that I just couldn't figure out. But the impact of that query is small, so I'll just mark it as not done. I haven't tested the new...

Incomprehensible to you. Zaine has proposed an explanation for the clouds misalignment, for which you have none (or a hypothetical additional dero that doesn't hold water). There has been a lot of interesting points in the discussion, but you...

I don't think its surprising that someone has taken the same data, followed the same methods, and ended up with the the same results. All that does is verify the process, but it doesn't validate the conclusions. What would be much more positive...

I don't think its surprising that someone has taken the same data, followed the same methods, and ended up with the the same results. All that does is verify the process, but it doesn't validate the conclusions. What would be much more positive...

We should be cognisant that every reply Mick makes is also for the "invisible audience", people who might not be vocal but watch the conversation and see the tone of accusations and the replies.

Since AARO isn't telling the "believers" what they want to hear, then naturally it must be part of an alleged "conspiracy". Source: https://x.com/PostDisclosure/status/2012646432864391344 This persistent line of questioning Mick's income...

Short update: I've implemented all missing checks except one: a Spanish Virtual Observatory (VOSA) specific query that I just couldn't figure out. But the impact of that query is small, so I'll just mark it as not done. I haven't tested the new...

We should be cognisant that every reply Mick makes is also for the "invisible audience", people who might not be vocal but watch the conversation and see the tone of accusations and the replies.

I don't think its surprising that someone has taken the same data, followed the same methods, and ended up with the the same results. All that does is verify the process, but it doesn't validate the conclusions. What would be much more positive...

I don't think its surprising that someone has taken the same data, followed the same methods, and ended up with the the same results. All that does is verify the process, but it doesn't validate the conclusions. What would be much more positive...

I don't think its surprising that someone has taken the same data, followed the same methods, and ended up with the the same results. All that does is verify the process, but it doesn't validate the conclusions. What would be much more positive...

I don't think its surprising that someone has taken the same data, followed the same methods, and ended up with the the same results. All that does is verify the process, but it doesn't validate the conclusions. What would be much more positive...

We should be cognisant that every reply Mick makes is also for the "invisible audience", people who might not be vocal but watch the conversation and see the tone of accusations and the replies.

I don't think its surprising that someone has taken the same data, followed the same methods, and ended up with the the same results. All that does is verify the process, but it doesn't validate the conclusions. What would be much more positive...

I don't think its surprising that someone has taken the same data, followed the same methods, and ended up with the the same results. All that does is verify the process, but it doesn't validate the conclusions. What would be much more positive...