Merged DDWFTTW in a “Real” Wind

[humber]

No kidding? holy moly, imagine them waiting for a wind that they might be able to track without running into any big rocks, the cheaters.

Cheating the wind has a more legitimate meaning.

The bulk of the time the, CV is not employed tracking the cart.
From the 60MB of total garbage, was extracted a slice of Heaven around 588960
It is not that there were so many successful runs, and the best chosen, but that only one the came even close to plausible.

 

[humber]

I wish Humber would give us an example of a record which was achieved using his warped requirements. It is difficult even to think about what he is saying. I guess no record can exist if any attempt is worse than any prior attempt? Another Humberdox. What is a record then? I guess only your best attempt as long as all attempts get progressively better. Any failed attempt I assume means permanent disqualification? Sports cannot exist in the Humberverse.

He knows everyone is laughing at him but no matter how many analogies like the dragster others post Humber stumbles blindly on saying the same silly things.

The game is up. They failed the urine test. ( but passed the dope test)

 

[jduffy77]

Cheating the wind has a more legitimate meaning.

The bulk of the time the, CV is not employed tracking the cart.
From the 60MB of total garbage, was extracted a slice of Heaven around 588960
It is not that there were so many successful runs, and the best chosen, but that only one the came even close to plausible.

Of course all the people who are familiar with the data know that this is a lie.

All the other people, even folks who know nothing about the cart, would say, so what is the problem then?

If I wished to establish a record, any record, why on earth would it matter to the judges how many times I failed before I succeeded? You are not making any sense.

 

[humber]

Oh the shame (and RCP's genius).

JB

Time has already told. We're right, he's wrong and nothing will change.

JB

Sure. Bluff it out. The TM will be all the more hilarious.

 

[humber]

The bulk of the data is the cart sitting still.

There are 8 full runs, 1 aborted run (when the wind fell to around 5 mph), 8 tow backs and several repositions.

There are even a smaller number of runs to choose from the 3 hours of trying to guess when the wind will change at just the right time,
that do not tell of enormous wind changes "Sorry, Bob, but we can't use that one.... the wind changed, and you know how honest we are about ddw"

 

[jduffy77]

The game is up. They failed the urine test. ( but passed the dope test)

When you say the game is up, what do you mean exactly. Will there be any way for others to tell the game is up or is it just in your mind? Some examples would be one of the magazines publishing a story about the hoax and apologizing, NALSA retracting the record and posting an apology on their web page, etc.

 

[humber]

When you say the game is up, what do you mean exactly. Will there be any way for others to tell the game is up or is it just in your mind? Some examples would be one of the magazines publishing a story about the hoax and apologizing, NALSA retracting the record and posting an apology on their web page, etc.

OJ chose a jury of peers.

 

[jduffy77]

OJ chose a jury of peers.

I am not sure what you mean, isn't Harold your only peer?

 

[humber]

I am not sure what you mean, isn't Harold your only peer?

Pier
A structure used to support thick planks above the water line.

 

[jduffy77]

Pier
A structure used to support thick planks above the water line.

Umm, Humber you should stick to the cart when showing you don't make sense. At least Harold and RP don't understand the cart either. If you keep not making sense about things other than the cart I am afraid even they will desert you.

 

[jduffy77]

There are even a smaller number of runs to choose from the 3 hours of trying to guess when the wind will change at just the right time,
that do not tell of enormous wind changes "Sorry, Bob, but we can't use that one.... the wind changed, and you know how honest we are about ddw"

FIFY: Sorry, Bob, but we can't use that one.... the wind changed, and you know that our cart performs best ddw.

 

[humber]

Umm, Humber you should stick to the cart when showing you don't make sense. At least Harold and RP don't understand the cart either. If you keep not making sense about things other than the cart I am afraid even they will desert you.

I told Bob Dill, that I would not post any analysis until he first had time to comment, and I am going to stick with that.

 

[humber]

FIFY: Sorry, Bob, but we can't use that one.... the wind changed, and you know that our cart performs best ddw.

" We can't put a vane on the cart, because it reads 1mph in favor of the cart"

NALSA Report:
"To resolve any reasonable doubts, the TAD team developed an effective and
sophisticated system for measuring the wind field. Wind speed measurements from the craft itself were
not used, as the TAD team had previously identified a roughly 1 mph favorable bias in wind speed
measured at the front of the craft."

Read "a vane on the cart would instantly tell of the changing wind. Force it onto the CV, and then it won't be seen there and then. When all is forgotten, produce data.
To best hide a needle in a haystack, make a big haystack"

"Sophisticated system"

 

[jduffy77]

I told Bob Dill, that I would not post any analysis until he first had time to comment, and I am going to stick with that.

Makes sense.

 

[jduffy77]

FIFY: Sorry, Bob, but we can't use that one.... the wind changed, and you know that our cart performs best ddw.

" We can't put a vane on the cart, because it reads 1mph in favor of the cart"

Makes no sense.

 

[humber]

Makes no sense.

Pier
Thick planks supported by a rotting pylons

 

[spork]

humber's current argument is that:
A) the wind was not absolutely perfectly steady in speed and direction
B) We spent a lot of our time waiting for the best wind.

Clearly it's only possible to set a record if the wind is ALWAYS perfectly steady, and we're ALWAYS going directly downwind faster than the wind. It's not at all like every single other record in the world - in which you just have to do it once under proper conditions.

 

[recursive prophet]

Why do you think it is open for reasonable debate? I think that is an absurd position. It is definitely absurd to characterize it as arbitrary as it was anything but. The experts who created it did so to absolutely preclude any possibility of taking advantage of tacking forces. They did so by calling on an immense knowledge base of tacking sail craft. To call it arbitrary is ridiculous.

Do tell. So when will Spork's Law be entered into the aerodynamics lexicon Duff? Can you explain to a layman like myself how NALSA's maths and analysis led to the precise figure of 10% variation in wind direction equaled directly? Why not 20%? What is the tacking effect at either? How does one determine at exactly what point tacking becomes consequential? Has it already been a scientifically recognized standard for ddw? To be added to sailing terms like broad reach? All based on 2 days of first time ever tests by a sports club? Yes they are the best available, but hard to believe they got everything right on their first try. Who knows what the next one will reveal?

Perhaps I'm just having another Rip Van Winkle moment. Maybe science has simply become a lot less stodgy since my day. It used to take many duplicate tests before anyone would be talking about absolutes. I'm sure NALSA did their best, but will be interested to see how Bob Dill responds to Humber's latest request for information. I would think they would welcome any questions about how the test was conducted and the data compiled. The hostility level Humber's nonsense seems to unleash here and at TR does make an old skeptic wonder. If he is merely the lolcow many claim, what's not to like? And of course, ...

 

[spork]

I wish Humber would give us an example of a record which was achieved using his warped requirements.

I think maybe a few thousand pages of trolling might qualify.

 

[jduffy77]

Do tell. So when will Spork's Law be entered into the aerodynamics lexicon Duff? Can you explain to a layman like myself how NALSA's maths and analysis led to the precise figure of 10% variation in wind direction equaled directly? Why not 20%? What is the tacking effect at either? How does one determine at exactly what point tacking becomes consequential?

I don't know what you mean by Spork's law. Your post sounds like a child who strings words he has heard adults using together in a way that sounds impressive to other children but makes the grown ups smile. The 10% figure is precise in the sense that it is a nice round number that is positively , absolutely within tolerance. Let me use an analogy you might understand. If one planned to set a record which required temperatures below zero it would not make sense to set -.02 degrees Celsius as the maximum temperature when requiring temperature of at least -5.0 degrees Celsius would satisfy all but the crankiest of cranks. Everything about when tacking becomes consequential is completely known to everyone involved with NALSA. Although as you have been told before it always hinders the BB.