btw you havent answered my question

But falsely reported its divergence rate

have you considered doing the laser test correctly and posting it here to show the differences?

Even though what the producer of the model they used as well as the person that used the same mode a year prior on the same lake

John D supposedly used a cullimator on his lasers

It the copper pipes he used

so youre ignoring my question?

1st one

Were too wide to have any effect

So you still get that high divergence rate

Of which were no where in his presented calculations

I’m so confused, are you trying to answer a question?

i asked if he had evidence to back up his assertion

He brought up beam divergence which is a significant problem

I provided you evidence

That lies in the reports they themselves presented

you were talking about things, but you didnt actually provide evidence

Yeah I gotta admit, you still have burden of proof, Chief

what if you did the laser test correctly and posted the video?

Do I have to read you FE cores report

For you

Or John Ds report

That he used a bubble level on

To level the laser

Which is laughable

When you are trying to prove the non-existence of laser refraction

In the math he presented

Or even more laughable

As to how FE Core balanced the laser by pointing it at the horizon

Which means it would be slightly bent down

As well as they broke the collimator prior to testing

Nor did they bring the target grid to their target sites

Or get any pictures of the laser hitting the target

All verified by the president of the FE Core himself

@Silly Rabbit, Trix Are For Kids I can go on all day about the flaws in their experiments

Or the willful deception

Whichever one you prefer

Considering these people are getting thousands in donations

Yet not providing any tangible results from their experiments

Or putting in even a sliver of an attempt to do it properly

id love to see your video of your laser test done right