FYI Bio zoom ZZZZZZZZ

"BobR" wrote in message
s.com...
It is a very simple concept, if you claim a WORLD RECORD which is what
Cambell clearly stated in the bio, it should be verifiable by a
recognized World Athority.

There's another simple concept -- opinions are like anuses, everyone has one
and in the case of the RAH Gaggle, they all stink.

BTW, when did the NAA or FAI start keeping track of microlight records?



Dan wrote:
Juan Jimenez wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
"DABEAR" wrote in message
oups.com...
snipped

FWIW, I don't recall Zoom claiming his 'record' was recognized by
anyone.
Then it's not a record.
Sorry, but that's wrong too. A record is a record if you document it
to a
sufficient level that it can be verified. Whether or not the person
chooses to submit it to the FAI does not change that. An "FAI Record"
is
only such if it is recognized by the FAI. Two different statements.

The problem is cambell provides no disinterested documentation.

Sorry, but no. Wrong answer.

Have you asked him? Never mind, I already know the answer.

The simple, incontrovertible fact is that you have no evidence to reach
such
a conclusion. No one here does.

He hasn't yet provided proof in any publication. If you have such
proof provide it. As for asking him, why should I? It's up to him to
provide proof especially since he's on record about lying about other
accomplishments.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"Dan" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
http://www.aero-news.net/news/featur...B643&Dynamic=1

Gee, he lost his chase plane according to your cite. No witnesses
no
record.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Still trying to prove intelligence? Notice the word "barograph" in the
article? chuckle Get over it.
Yawn, is there an unbiased party who who verified calibration of said
barograph, sealed said barograph, placed said barograph in the aircraft
and verified that said barograph remained sealed with its original seal
and verified the maximum altitude upon completion of the attempt?

Go ask Jim. That is, assuming you can muster the cojones to do so, given
no
one else around seems to have any when it comes to going to the source.
All
bark, no bite.

My point is he made a claim and has yet to prove it. If he wants to be
taken seriously on this point he should have submitted it to a
controlling
authority. It really isn't that difficult to understand.

I don't think he really gives a damn what anyone else here thinks of what
he
did or didn't do, Dan. If you haven't figured that out yet, here's your
chance.

Juan

As a publisher he should care what people think of him.

Perhaps he doesn't care what YOU think.

On the other hand you criticize people who question his claims without
providing any proof of your own.

What makes you think I care what you think about what I post here, Dan?




--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"DABEAR" wrote in message
ups.com...
Juan Jimenez wrote:

Go ask Jim. That is, assuming you can muster the cojones to do so, given
no
one else around seems to have any when it comes to going to the source.
All
bark, no bite.

The last time somebody went to the source, the source was last seen
running "DOWN" the "UP" elevator, cowardly piece of filth that he is.

Oh, please, take your prepubescent postings somewhere else. Last time I saw
someone go up to "the source" there were plenty of people around Campbell
and most of them have more aviation experience in their pinkies than you can
muster in your lifetime, Mark. I happened to be with him at the XPrize Cup.
Where were you? Toilet?

mercy snip



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"DABEAR" wrote in message
ups.com...

Juan Jimenez wrote:


Sorry, but that's wrong too. A record is a record if you document it to a
sufficient level that it can be verified. Whether or not the person
chooses
to submit it to the FAI does not change that. An "FAI Record" is only
such
if it is recognized by the FAI. Two different statements.

Nonsense!

Your opinion has been noted.

mercy snip



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"John Ousterhout" wrote in message
news:3VLgh.1098499$084.800306@attbi_s22...
Montblack wrote:
Page not found
The page you are looking for might have been removed,
had its name changed, or is temporarily unavailable.

HTTP 404 - File not found

Dear Mr. Black

Thank you for your valuable feedback. Your comments have been noted and
the deficiencies identified have been corrected.

YOU NICKING FUTPICKER! My wife the Grammar Nazi supplies all the nicking
futpicking that I can stand, thank you very much.

Sincerely yours
J. Ousterhout,
Webmonster - http://www.ousterhout.net
rah/14, EAA, AOPA, OPA, FAA, FFA, EIEIO

Why does this idiotic little tantrum not surprise me?



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

"DABEAR" wrote in message
oups.com...

snipped

Some things not included in the FAI's categories:

mercy snipped

Any aviation-related records on issues such as:

- size
- weight
- capacity
- feats of strength associated with or performed with aircraft
- repetition records associated with aircraft
- anything not covered by FAI categories but clearly aviation-related

Next!





--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Juan Jimenez wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
"DABEAR" wrote in message
oups.com...
snipped

FWIW, I don't recall Zoom claiming his 'record' was recognized by
anyone.
Then it's not a record.
Sorry, but that's wrong too. A record is a record if you document it to
a
sufficient level that it can be verified. Whether or not the person
chooses to submit it to the FAI does not change that. An "FAI Record"
is
only such if it is recognized by the FAI. Two different statements.

The problem is cambell provides no disinterested documentation.
Sorry, but no. Wrong answer.

Have you asked him? Never mind, I already know the answer.

The simple, incontrovertible fact is that you have no evidence to reach
such
a conclusion. No one here does.

He hasn't yet provided proof in any publication.

As I said here, no one here appears to have the balls to simply go up to him
and ask him. Pathetic.

No one should have to.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Juan Jimenez wrote:
"BobR" wrote in message
s.com...
It is a very simple concept, if you claim a WORLD RECORD which is what
Cambell clearly stated in the bio, it should be verifiable by a
recognized World Athority.

There's another simple concept -- opinions are like anuses, everyone has one
and in the case of the RAH Gaggle, they all stink.

Yours included.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Juan Jimenez wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
"Dan" wrote in message
...
Juan Jimenez wrote:
http://www.aero-news.net/news/featur...B643&Dynamic=1

Gee, he lost his chase plane according to your cite. No witnesses
no
record.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired
Still trying to prove intelligence? Notice the word "barograph" in the
article? chuckle Get over it.
Yawn, is there an unbiased party who who verified calibration of said
barograph, sealed said barograph, placed said barograph in the aircraft
and verified that said barograph remained sealed with its original seal
and verified the maximum altitude upon completion of the attempt?
Go ask Jim. That is, assuming you can muster the cojones to do so, given
no
one else around seems to have any when it comes to going to the source.
All
bark, no bite.

My point is he made a claim and has yet to prove it. If he wants to be
taken seriously on this point he should have submitted it to a
controlling
authority. It really isn't that difficult to understand.
I don't think he really gives a damn what anyone else here thinks of what
he
did or didn't do, Dan. If you haven't figured that out yet, here's your
chance.

Juan

As a publisher he should care what people think of him.

Perhaps he doesn't care what YOU think.

On the other hand you criticize people who question his claims without
providing any proof of your own.

What makes you think I care what you think about what I post here, Dan?

You keep piping up.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired

Juan Jimenez wrote:
snip

As I said here, no one here appears to have the balls to simply go up to him
and ask him. Pathetic.

Why bother? He lied about the record once, he will only do it again.

Dan, U.S. Air Force, retired