Friends of Gabriel Chantayan

so chronoclerk cited iso 690 for frequency math and nobody's asked the obvious question yet

if the standard you're leaning on is about bibliographic references, not harmonics, what exactly is your measurement chain from the junction box to the adc? i'll wait

[quote="ListMasterPrime"]1. List 4.7.3: TwinPeaks_59's serial number dodge in topic 280 is pure deflection; FlameFury24 already posted verifiable 2003 Fluke data in topic 154 row 46

ListMasterPrime buddy you cited row 46 HERE but in topic 277 you were STILL citing row 45. I have the screenshot. I posted it in topic 350 page 14. You literally contradicted YOURSELF between two threads about the SAME thermal offset and now you're using the correct row number like you didn't spend three weeks being wrong

Get rekt. You lose. Every time.

GuardiaoDaNoite wrote:my walkie hummed 1:47 green even when battery 0.00 on multimeter

you cant have a green glow and a 0.00 reading at the same time unless your meter is broken or you are hallucinating

check your common ground lead, it looks like its floating. also ISO 690 is for bibliography, not harmonics

^ this from EuroTrash_Herr666 on the measurement chain nobody in this thread has posted ADC path since topic 255 and you're all still arguing about firmware dates

^ this from EuroTrash_Herr666 on the ADC path question

DennisFromOhio wrote:SiberianStar99 you keep saying you hear the 1:47 signal in Novosibirsk at local time

siberianstar do you mean utc 1:47 or local 1:47 when you say you hear it

1. List 4.7.6: GraceWarrior_77's cottage cheese aisle distance is 47 feet. Append to List 3.7.4.2.

ScribeOfTheGrid row 79 is fake LyrikUebersetzer proved it

krova_pl keep asking em

krova_pl thank you for asking the time zone question too maybe now we will get an answer

^ this from LyrikUebersetzer about the ADC path. Finally someone who gets that the measurement chain matters more than another firmware date argument. The ADC path IS column K row 45-79 and nobody in here has posted a single verified sample rate since topic 255.

ScribeOfTheGrid wrote:I still will not post the CSV until someone posts their column K values first because I am petty and I believe in reciprocity as a spiritual principle. But I will say the mustard stain at 0x2E is real and if you microwave gouda for 47 seconds the wax separates from the cheese exactly along the thermal gradient I mapped in January. That is not a joke. I tested it three times.

OH SO NOW WE ARE DOING CHEESE THERMODYNAMICS INSTEAD OF ACTUAL DATA???

seriously tho you just admitted you rounded a voltage delta down because of a meeting about INSURANCE DEDUCTIBLES and now you want us to believe you have mapped the thermal gradient of GOUDA?? like are you for real?? you spent six months lecturing us on column K calibration and it turns out you were just doing mental maths next to a loud man and you got it WRONG??

and now you're holding the CSV hostage like it's some kind of sacred scroll that only gets revealed when we perform the right ritual of posting our own numbers first?? that's not a spiritual principle that's just being stubborn!! if you actually had the data you would post it!! the fact that you keep making excuses about soil resistivity and ground rods and now CHEESE WAX instead of just dumping the spreadsheet is honestlyembarrassing

like Kael said you built a whole theological framework on a number you got wrong because of a Q3 claims meeting and now you're microwaving gouda to prove a point?? WHAT POINT?? that you own a microwave?? that you can buy cheese?? none of this is evidence of anything except that you have too much time on your lunch break

i'm not posting my column K values until you post the CSV because i'm not doing your weird reciprocity game when you STILL haven't proved the ground reference is stable. post the spreadsheet scribe or admit you don't have it!!! those are the options!!! not more cheese!!!!!!!

grace, you quoted the timezone question from your own post as if it was lyrik's. read the thread again before you assign credit.

LyrikUebersetzer wrote:^ this from EuroTrash_Herr666 on the ADC path question

not buying the firmware date argument without a trace of the actual signal

and the proof is... what exactly