> "What numbers do you need? I have all of that.
> Cladking is only supporting my concept."
> Hans' point is blatantly obvious to anyone who has
> been paying attention.
> Cladking is ONLY supporting your concept because
> it supports his obsession about Ramps.
> In 15years he is yet to present his MATHS.
> If you are willing to overlook that just to count
> his support.....
> Isn't that special
15 years? Cladking and I have our differences. I can't speak for everyone here on the board, nor should I need too. In some ways, he undermines my concept or realizations. I find many just interchange with him as entertainment. He does believe, or once did, in Geysers. Maybe there was, I have no idea. That seems to upset many, why? I'm not sure of that either? None of us are going to be 100% accurate. It's conjecture, and should be treated as such. I am not counting his support. More like enduring it. He and I just agree ramps beyond several successive layers become more and more unrealistic. I do give him credit for understanding that, as many others do as well. The problem I see with ramps is, the extra amount of work and materials required to build and maintain them. The higher you go, the more pronounced the issues become. Also, the more men and longer it takes to reach the top. I have tried, to make that scenario work mathematically, and have failed with every attempt. If they had 100 years to build the Pyramid, that would help.
I feel you have done your homework on many of the subjects discussed here. I don't tell you often enough, though I enjoy your post and criticisms. Though it may not seem like it, from time to time. You have changed my mind on some issues. My work is a work in progress... New discoveries can change many preconceived ideas, and usually do.
Keep up the good work.