Originally Posted by
Vessbot
I don't have as pessimistic of an outlook of it as you do. I think he is actually engaging in honest argumentation.
I think you are badly mistaken, Vessbot. Can you point to anyplace, either here or on other forums where he has shown even the slightest indication that he is willing to understand how he might be mistaken? I certainly can't.
Let's back up a step and consider in broad terms what he is claiming: That a soaring bird can extract a net energy gain by maneuvering within a uniform moving air mass (ie: not crossing wind gradients as in real dynamic soaring) This is as fundamentally at odds with the basic tenets of physics as is the idea that a ball could bounce higher and higher off an unaccelerated surface with each successive bounce, or perhaps more similarly, a bicyclist, without pedaling, can go faster and faster by repeatedly coasting up and down a hill. That, in a nutshell is what his theory proposes. Yet, he makes absolutely no attempt to understand why this is either impossible, or a refutation of basic principles of physics accepted for centuries. He just keeps reiterating that his theory " is based on the laws of Newton".