Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - NotSoSkeptical

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 94
1
I forgot, does Heiwa say they don't exist because they can't exist in principle, or just that we haven't made one yet?

He says they don't exist because you can't have explosive fission.

2
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.
Wrong again.

a) Religinal perspective: Jesus has practically prove its being wrong. But you can believe it dead. We are not Jesus, but even so, we can try our chance to call him back alive.
b) Scientific perspective: Another way, there is a Brasilian professor is trying head transfer by beheading them. Your example just an ordinary organ according to his studies, hence not a proof of somebody dead. It can be the example that professor work on. He tells possiblity of a succesfull transter (a head only) another body is 85%. So, it is 85% possible alive, 15% dead; if it is an example of that study. You can not know whether or not it belong them, possible not, but you can not be sure. Not certain.

You can take whichever you want.

Both your options a and b are subjective.

Try again, because you are wrong.
Nope. They are proving your supposedly knowledge just a prediction can be debunked by simple examples. Brasilian doctor is already exist, alive man, giving him an example not subjective, but the fact of life. You even so close your eyes or prefer to return back to your sweet home in order to escape of truth, likewise always you do.

Trying to perform a full head transplant and actually doing it are completely different.

As such, when he removes the head from the one body, to put on another, the body will be dead.  That isn't a prediction.
Again, the claim is that the head will be involved the other one without any part of them dead. This is possible theorically. Hence, you are wrong when you accept it dead. because it is not dead.

Try again, another example.

Nothing theoretical about it.

Since you are claiming that the body can live without the head, prove it.

3
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.
Wrong again.

a) Religinal perspective: Jesus has practically prove its being wrong. But you can believe it dead. We are not Jesus, but even so, we can try our chance to call him back alive.
b) Scientific perspective: Another way, there is a Brasilian professor is trying head transfer by beheading them. Your example just an ordinary organ according to his studies, hence not a proof of somebody dead. It can be the example that professor work on. He tells possiblity of a succesfull transter (a head only) another body is 85%. So, it is 85% possible alive, 15% dead; if it is an example of that study. You can not know whether or not it belong them, possible not, but you can not be sure. Not certain.

You can take whichever you want.

Both your options a and b are subjective.

Try again, because you are wrong.
Nope. They are proving your supposedly knowledge just a prediction can be debunked by simple examples. Brasilian doctor is already exist, alive man, giving him an example not subjective, but the fact of life. You even so close your eyes or prefer to return back to your sweet home in order to escape of truth, likewise always you do.

Trying to perform a full head transplant and actually doing it are completely different.

As such, when he removes the head from the one body, to put on another, the body will be dead.  That isn't a prediction.

4
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.
Wrong again.

a) Religinal perspective: Jesus has practically prove its being wrong. But you can believe it dead. We are not Jesus, but even so, we can try our chance to call him back alive.
b) Scientific perspective: Another way, there is a Brasilian professor is trying head transfer by beheading them. Your example just an ordinary organ according to his studies, hence not a proof of somebody dead. It can be the example that professor work on. He tells possiblity of a succesfull transter (a head only) another body is 85%. So, it is 85% possible alive, 15% dead; if it is an example of that study. You can not know whether or not it belong them, possible not, but you can not be sure. Not certain.

You can take whichever you want.

Both your options a and b are subjective.

Try again, because you are wrong.


5
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.
Nope. Always. Prove opposite.


I find a decapitated body.

I know that the body is dead.

Objective.



6
So, knowing is as subjective as believing.

No,  Knowing can be as subjective as believing.

It can be but isn't always.

7
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Space Force
« on: August 07, 2020, 11:04:37 AM »
How is this not CN material?

8
I removed the posts that quoted the post from Heiwa that caused his ban.

Damnit boydster.  I would have just edited out the part.  I had a great reply in there.

9
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Space Force
« on: August 07, 2020, 08:26:22 AM »
The real question here is why is this not in CN?

10
If only there was some place on the interweb to find out more about Hiawa's BS . . .
The Moon? Planet Mars? An asteroid?

The empty space between your ears.
I would be more happy if you tried to win my 1M . See post #1.
Your family would be more happy if you stopped being a crackpot conspiracy theorist.
? My family is very happy with me. Do you have one? A family?

No family is happy about another family member being mentally detached and spreading wild conspiracy theories to the point of being considered a laughing stock by most of your former colleagues.
I doubt you have a family. But I have a good laugh at you that haven't won my Challenge.
And deflection.  It's ok Heiwa.  There is nothing to be ashamed about.  I'm sure your family loves you, but to deny that they are hurt and embarrassed by your wild conspiracy theories only further hurts them.  The first step to making things better is to admit to your problem.

11
If only there was some place on the interweb to find out more about Hiawa's BS . . .
The Moon? Planet Mars? An asteroid?

The empty space between your ears.
I would be more happy if you tried to win my 1M . See post #1.
Your family would be more happy if you stopped being a crackpot conspiracy theorist.
? My family is very happy with me. Do you have one? A family?

No family is happy about another family member being mentally detached and spreading wild conspiracy theories to the point of being considered a laughing stock by most of your former colleagues.

12
If only there was some place on the interweb to find out more about Hiawa's BS . . .
The Moon? Planet Mars? An asteroid?

The empty space between your ears.
I would be more happy if you tried to win my 1M . See post #1.
Your family would be more happy if you stopped being a crackpot conspiracy theorist.

13
If only there was some place on the interweb to find out more about Hiawa's BS . . .
The Moon? Planet Mars? An asteroid?

The empty space between your ears.

14
No, it was to encourage people to try to win my Challenge and learn about various governments lies.
And here I thought that it was about teaching you some physics. ::)
The Challenge is just to be won. The prize is truth and knowledge.

Operation fishbowl is real: I was eye witness to it. Your claim is wrong.
Topic is not your eyesight. If you are not blind, see post #1 about topic.
No, the topic is your affliction with Dunning-Kruger.
See post #1 about topic.

See all the posts that show you are retarded.

15
Flat Earth General / Re: Nexus Rings
« on: August 03, 2020, 08:58:24 PM »
Local-ether model, which must accepted even by the relativists since they cannot explain the missing orbital Sagnac effect.

First, stop using this ridiculous claim.  A supposedly missing orbital Sagnac effect does not automatically qualify that the local-ether model must be accepted.  Your claim makes about as much sense as because someone can't explain <fill in the blank>, people must accept telekinesis.

Secondly, there is no missing orbital Sagnac effect.  Stop ignoring point of reference.

16
The Lounge / Re: I have very sad news. Rabinoz has passed away.
« on: August 03, 2020, 11:47:54 AM »
I send him and his family my prayers.

17
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Do Nuclear Bombs Exist?
« on: July 31, 2020, 05:13:08 AM »
You are all such tools, have fun.

Who says we are not?

18
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Do Nuclear Bombs Exist?
« on: July 30, 2020, 05:36:58 AM »
A friend of Serov told me a lot.
How do you know that what he told you was true and not just more Communist propaganda and misinformation?
Well, I knew his daughter and wife and he sounded truthful. I explain all at my website.
Good propaganda and misinformation always sounds truthful, especially when it reinforces your own preconceptions.
Well, you have opinions about anything. You ask a question. I answer. You insult me. Does it make you happy? You sound being unhappy. Get some fresh air.
It would make me happy if you answer the questions that I ask rather than rambling on about random things that rattle around in your head.
Well, I repaired a ship at Mombasa, Kenya 1999 and met a woman whose father had assisted Stalin, or a Mr. Serov,  to build a fake a-bomb 1948/58. I checked the info and it appeared correct. Same woman agreed with me that the ship M/S Estonia sank due to sabotage 1994. And we watched - on TV - how the WTC at NY was destroyed by explosives 2001. I explain it at my website http://heiwaco.com .

What was the name of the ship you repaired?  You remember all the other minute details very well, the name of the ship should easily be remembered.

19
The Lounge / Re: Werepenguin: Bodysnatcher Edition
« on: July 29, 2020, 07:47:55 AM »
Easy pass from me. Have fun getting doxxed y'all
Did you ASI tell you that?

20

So why you would say that a ship won't sink without a hull breach of some sort is a mystery. Is water coming in from topside considered a "hull breach" to you?

Ships have a hull and a deck. They can only sink when the hull is damaged. If you load to much on the deck, the ship will capsize and not sink.

How are you getting along winning my 1M challenge?

Wrong.

Capsizing is when a ship has listed 90 degrees or more from upright.  Only if the ship still has sufficient buoyancy will it not sink while capsized.



21
The Lounge / Re: What Would You Have Done . . .
« on: July 28, 2020, 06:11:00 PM »
Fundamentally, the error we're making is being reactive. Just trying to stick a bandage on it.

We would be better off if we treated it like a fire in the house. One does not take half measures when your house is on fire.

Not entirely.  A lot of people forget that unless the right is expressly given to the Federal Government, the rights are reserved to the state.  The fed can only do so much.  After that it is up to the individual states to make the decisions.

True.  But the states often take their cues from the government unless there's a reason to do otherwise.

For example, masks.  If Trump had promoted them early instead of attacking them as some kind of liberal ploy then the red states would have been much quicker to adopt them.

That wouldn't have made a difference.  People panic bought masks like crazy anyway.  As well, the spikes in COVID cases are in high population areas and places that people frequent for vacations.

Suggesting masks isn't going to stop people that have COVID or have been exposed from going out and about and spreading it. It's the same as stupid and lazy parents that still send their kids to school when they are sick.  They don't care and/or don't want to bothered.  Stupid people aren't going to stop being stupid.

Being a RED state vs a BLUE state makes no difference.  The lowest COVID #s by State are RED states.  The high case areas are in high population areas, which tend to be BLUE.

Except you are ignoring the second wave that hit RED states that opened too soon, and is not hitting BLUE states that stayed shut down like the medical community advised.

You also can not ignore that the vast, vast, vast majority of anti-maskers are Trump supporters.

The plain fact is that masks slow down the spread REGARDLESS of other behaviors and creating this whole anti-mask movement is one of Trumps biggest crimes against the American people, and has absolutely caused unnecessary deaths.

Trump 100% made a difference with masks, and not for the better.  Massive failure all due to his ego and not wanting to look weak.

Florida and Texas.  Yeah those places that people like to go to vacation to.

22
Clearly Sando doesn't understand what the words Theoretical and Hypothetical mean.

23
The Lounge / Re: What Would You Have Done . . .
« on: July 28, 2020, 04:55:30 PM »
Fundamentally, the error we're making is being reactive. Just trying to stick a bandage on it.

We would be better off if we treated it like a fire in the house. One does not take half measures when your house is on fire.

Not entirely.  A lot of people forget that unless the right is expressly given to the Federal Government, the rights are reserved to the state.  The fed can only do so much.  After that it is up to the individual states to make the decisions.

True.  But the states often take their cues from the government unless there's a reason to do otherwise.

For example, masks.  If Trump had promoted them early instead of attacking them as some kind of liberal ploy then the red states would have been much quicker to adopt them.

That wouldn't have made a difference.  People panic bought masks like crazy anyway.  As well, the spikes in COVID cases are in high population areas and places that people frequent for vacations.

Suggesting masks isn't going to stop people that have COVID or have been exposed from going out and about and spreading it. It's the same as stupid and lazy parents that still send their kids to school when they are sick.  They don't care and/or don't want to bothered.  Stupid people aren't going to stop being stupid.

Being a RED state vs a BLUE state makes no difference.  The lowest COVID #s by State are RED states.  The high case areas are in high population areas, which tend to be BLUE.

24
The Lounge / Re: What Would You Have Done . . .
« on: July 28, 2020, 03:32:41 PM »
Fundamentally, the error we're making is being reactive. Just trying to stick a bandage on it.

We would be better off if we treated it like a fire in the house. One does not take half measures when your house is on fire.

Not entirely.  A lot of people forget that unless the right is expressly given to the Federal Government, the rights are reserved to the state.  The fed can only do so much.  After that it is up to the individual states to make the decisions.

25
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Do Nuclear Bombs Exist?
« on: July 28, 2020, 09:44:14 AM »
Yes, when I worked in Japan 1972/6 I met and worked with people from Hiroshima and Nagasaki that told me they survived the destruction 1945 of their towns and rebuilt them. No radiation. It was napalm.
Did they tell you that it was napalm, or did you tell them it was napalm?

Yes, I met a beautiful woman in a hotel bar at Mombasa, Kenya, 1999, and later I met her father that had worked for Wismut AG in East Germany 1947/58 producing Uranium to build Stalin's A-Bomb that exploded 1949. But Wismut AG was just Soviet propaganda from A to Z 1945/91.
Did she tell you that Wismut AG was just Soviet propaganda or did you tell her?

I am quite proud of the new layout of the site. I also support the US idea to explode an A-Bomb at the Nevada test site this autumn to show I am wrong.
Why do you think that you know what happened better than the locals who lived through those events?

Thanks for the questions. The answers are at my website.
I'm not asking about your website.  I'm asking you.

Heiwa doesn't know anything.  That's why he always directs people to his website.

26
I'm surprised Heiwa hasn't come out and said that the Titanic was really sunk by German U-Boats and covered up by the government.  There was no iceburg.

27
Please, quote me correctly.
I just claim that ships float on their hulls and that a damage of the hull may cause sinking. I can easily sink any ship just by opening the valves in the bottom and flood the hull.
And I have worked in shipping since 1969. You sound like another sick loser of my Challenge (topic).

Yes, first fantasy cause of incident (announced by the government) was fire on the car deck in the superstructure on top of the hull and below the deck house with >1000 passengers. To stop the fire the manual sprinkler system was started by the crew. Then the scuppers were blocked by garbage on the deck so the sprinkler water could not escape from the car deck. So the ship, with intact hull, just capsized and sank. Just like Estonia 1994 after losing the bow visor. Water on the car deck, capsize and fast sinking. With intact hull.
There is no evidence of any water on the car decks of either ships! A ship cannot sink with an intact hull.
So in both cases the hull was damaged by sabotage ... and the ships sank.
And in both cases the ship owners could collect insurances, etc, etc. Only in the Egyptian case it was a little different. Suddenly my owner friend was sentenced to go to jail ... so he retired at London.


There quoted you correctly.  Emphasis Added.


You're a scary individual. I can see why no one would hire you for any sort of safety at sea sort of contract. You claim that ships can't sink without a hull breach. Yet ships have sunk without a hull breach. I have nothing to do with safety at see or ship design, yet I can poke immediate holes in your hyperbole. Who would hire you? You're a potential menace to maritime engineering. It's really no wonder your hull design was dashed. You literally have no idea what you're talking about, so much so, that a layman can pick out how batshit crazy and off you are.


Sounds about right.
No.

There is no no about it.  That's what you wrote.  Face reality.
No. You have to read (if you can) what I say, think (if you can) about it, and then comment (if you can) about it.  Face reality.

Nope.  Ships can sink without damaging the hull.  You are wrong.  Face Reality.

28
My advice to the RE is for them to start to research the quantum rotating wormholes subject.

The most cited paper on arxiv is J. Maldacena's paper regarding ER=EPR (from Princeton's Institute of Advanced Studies).

Theoretical.

Not anymore:

https://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=30499.msg2272439#msg2272439

Providing a link back to this site, doesn't make it real.

It's still theoretical.

29
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Do Nuclear Bombs Exist?
« on: July 26, 2020, 05:29:20 AM »
An object in elliptical orbit going to the Moon or planet Mars must have an initial speed and direction leaving Earth to enable it to arrive at the target. It is in fact impossible. You will always miss the target or crash on the target.

It's only impossible because you say it is impossible. There is no evidence that it is impossible presented by you here or at your site. You just saying something is impossible is not a tenuous position because you provide no evidence that it is not. Neither does your site.

You're kind of in a weird space: Things are not possible simply because I say so. Hardly a position of intellect, knowledge, or authority. One of that of a charlatan.
It seems you agree what an orbit is. So any spacecraft taking off for a trip in space enters an orbit (around Earth). And for that you need energy. And let's face it, there is no rocket on Earth today that can provide that energy for a little trip to the Moon. Just do the calculations.

You'll reply that 1969 such rockets existed - Saturn 5 - but they are out of production and all drawings are lost, so there is a problem. But the solution is simple.
The rockets taking off >50 years ago were just theater props for Hollywood shows.

Then there is the SpaceX CEO. The most intelligent science pro on Earth ... and rich too. He sells trips to planet Mars. Ask him how he will get there.

I feel sorry for your family.  It must be hard being related to insane conspiracy theorist.
Well, my family = daughters & Co. are all in good shape and invite me all the time for all sorts of things.
Do you have any family apart from a mother? Or were you found in a gutter?
You sound like being a sick loving A-Bombs idiot!
Do you really ask people around you being related to insane conspiracy theorists?
If you worry about A-Bombs, my advice is ... stop worrying.
Coming to visit you at the mental institute is not inviting you out.

30
Please, quote me correctly.
I just claim that ships float on their hulls and that a damage of the hull may cause sinking. I can easily sink any ship just by opening the valves in the bottom and flood the hull.
And I have worked in shipping since 1969. You sound like another sick loser of my Challenge (topic).

Yes, first fantasy cause of incident (announced by the government) was fire on the car deck in the superstructure on top of the hull and below the deck house with >1000 passengers. To stop the fire the manual sprinkler system was started by the crew. Then the scuppers were blocked by garbage on the deck so the sprinkler water could not escape from the car deck. So the ship, with intact hull, just capsized and sank. Just like Estonia 1994 after losing the bow visor. Water on the car deck, capsize and fast sinking. With intact hull.
There is no evidence of any water on the car decks of either ships! A ship cannot sink with an intact hull.
So in both cases the hull was damaged by sabotage ... and the ships sank.
And in both cases the ship owners could collect insurances, etc, etc. Only in the Egyptian case it was a little different. Suddenly my owner friend was sentenced to go to jail ... so he retired at London.


There quoted you correctly.  Emphasis Added.


You're a scary individual. I can see why no one would hire you for any sort of safety at sea sort of contract. You claim that ships can't sink without a hull breach. Yet ships have sunk without a hull breach. I have nothing to do with safety at see or ship design, yet I can poke immediate holes in your hyperbole. Who would hire you? You're a potential menace to maritime engineering. It's really no wonder your hull design was dashed. You literally have no idea what you're talking about, so much so, that a layman can pick out how batshit crazy and off you are.


Sounds about right.
No.

There is no no about it.  That's what you wrote.  Face reality. 

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 94