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 - Curiouser and Curiouser

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 38
1
Also should have pointed out:

They should be focused on the much bigger things we are doing, including Mars (of which the Moon is a part), Defense and Science!"

WTF?

2

I hope you've been informed about Trump's pledge to go back to the moon within 5 years.
Going back to the moon + Trump's absolute incompetence tells me you should give half of your comments a second thought before posting here..... ::)


Speaking of Trump and the Moon:

Twitter [May 13, 2019 04:34:50 PM] Under my Administration, we are restoring @NASA to greatness and we are going back to the Moon, then Mars. I am updating my budget to include an additional $1.6 billion so that we can return to Space in a BIG WAY!

Twitter [Jun 7, 2019 12:38:01 PM]  For all of the money we are spending, NASA should NOT be talking about going to the Moon - We did that 50 years ago. They should be focused on the much bigger things we are doing, including Mars (of which the Moon is a part), Defense and Science!


3
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-48560874

Nasa is to allow tourists to visit the International Space Station from 2020, priced at $35,000 (£27,500) per night.

The cost to stay is trivial compared to the taxi fare to get there.

4
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trumpthiness
« on: June 07, 2019, 09:12:01 AM »
http://www.magapill.com/

LOL,  suck it up Alberto,  I bet you think Mexico is going to pay the Tariffs.   

Just curious,  are you a white male without a college degree?   Asking for a friend.

Why does it matter what race or education level I am?

There you go. Question answered.

I don't know about you, but I don't judge people on their race or education level or anything, I judge a man by his character.



1. Why do you think that JerkFace asking questions about the factual nature of your race or education level amounts to "judging" you?
2. What do you mean by "judging" in this context? It can have many shades of meaning that span a wide range from "coming to an opinion or conclusion based on evidence" to "unfairly and hastily coming to a negatively biased opinion based on superficial, trivial, or irrelevant factors."
3. It is appropriate to judge people based on race or education level when what you are judging is directly tied those factors. For example, if I'm tasked with: "Please go into the next room where you don't know anyone and find my friend Henry. He's black." I will go into the next room and attempt to judge the people there based on race. What is unacceptable is to make a judgement about an unrelated topic (fitness for a job, whether they will be a good tenant, whether they are a rapist or not) based on those factors.
4. You don't judge people on their race or education level or anything? Anything? You form no conclusions whatsoever of people except presumably through their character? I don't think you've thought this through very well. You're saying "I judge a man only by his character."
5. You judge everything about a man by his character? You judge a man's intelligence by his character? You judge a man's ability to throw a basketball or build a fence by his character? You judge a man's health by his character? I think all you have done is heard this tired, trite catchphrase and adopted it without thinking.
6. If you wanted to say "I don't judge people's character on their race or education level or anything else, I judge a man's character by his character." then I am 100% with you. But that tautology is obvious.
7. And of course, this would be funny if it weren't so sad. Please judge Donald Trump's character through the evidence of his character.

I hope you know Boydster and I were just talking smack with each other.

I don't see Boydster anywhere in the above quote train.

You either stand by your statement about how you judge a man or you don't.

If you do, then my reply applies.

If you don't, it says something about your character.

It sounds suspiciously like someone else, who when backed into a corner about flippant statements that were indefensible, replies "It's only a joke."

5
Flat Earth General / Re: Flat Earth CubeSat
« on: June 07, 2019, 08:57:58 AM »
why don't you start to design and built an exclusive CubeSat for the Flat Earth Society to prove all of your theory?

What are the functions of your imagined CubeSat that you think will prove "all the theory"?

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trumpthiness
« on: June 06, 2019, 10:20:05 PM »
http://www.magapill.com/

LOL,  suck it up Alberto,  I bet you think Mexico is going to pay the Tariffs.   

Just curious,  are you a white male without a college degree?   Asking for a friend.

Why does it matter what race or education level I am?

There you go. Question answered.

I don't know about you, but I don't judge people on their race or education level or anything, I judge a man by his character.



1. Why do you think that JerkFace asking questions about the factual nature of your race or education level amounts to "judging" you?
2. What do you mean by "judging" in this context? It can have many shades of meaning that span a wide range from "coming to an opinion or conclusion based on evidence" to "unfairly and hastily coming to a negatively biased opinion based on superficial, trivial, or irrelevant factors."
3. It is appropriate to judge people based on race or education level when what you are judging is directly tied those factors. For example, if I'm tasked with: "Please go into the next room where you don't know anyone and find my friend Henry. He's black." I will go into the next room and attempt to judge the people there based on race. What is unacceptable is to make a judgement about an unrelated topic (fitness for a job, whether they will be a good tenant, whether they are a rapist or not) based on those factors.
4. You don't judge people on their race or education level or anything? Anything? You form no conclusions whatsoever of people except presumably through their character? I don't think you've thought this through very well. You're saying "I judge a man only by his character."
5. You judge everything about a man by his character? You judge a man's intelligence by his character? You judge a man's ability to throw a basketball or build a fence by his character? You judge a man's health by his character? I think all you have done is heard this tired, trite catchphrase and adopted it without thinking.
6. If you wanted to say "I don't judge people's character on their race or education level or anything else, I judge a man's character by his character." then I am 100% with you. But that tautology is obvious.
7. And of course, this would be funny if it weren't so sad. Please judge Donald Trump's character through the evidence of his character.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trumpthiness
« on: June 06, 2019, 01:56:22 PM »
http://www.magapill.com/

LOL,  suck it up Alberto,  I bet you think Mexico is going to pay the Tariffs.   

Just curious,  are you a white male without a college degree?   Asking for a friend.

Why does it matter what race or education level I am?

There you go. Question answered.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trumpthiness
« on: June 04, 2019, 03:07:35 PM »
Hmmm. The direction of this discussion has veered from my original intent, which was a comment on the gullibility and lack of critical thinking of the American public when presented with constant repetition of falsehood, rather than the impetus.

At least you're getting an example of gullibility and lack critical thinking!

Well, I guess if you don't like Trump you can give me the extra money in your paychecks and/or tax returns from his tax cuts....

Sure. Let me know where to send you the invoice for all that "extra" money removed from my accounts.

I don't know about you, but I got more back this year than last year. And made pretty much the same.

That's the problem with simplistic arguments; assuming that if it's OK for me, it must be OK for everyone else. Assuming everyone else's situations are pretty much the same. My income went up by 7%, my federal taxes by more than 17%. Marginal tax rate increased from last year by 9%. Just depends on circumstances, and not everyone benefits.

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trumpthiness
« on: June 04, 2019, 02:20:02 PM »
Hmmm. The direction of this discussion has veered from my original intent, which was a comment on the gullibility and lack of critical thinking of the American public when presented with constant repetition of falsehood, rather than the impetus.

At least you're getting an example of gullibility and lack critical thinking!

Well, I guess if you don't like Trump you can give me the extra money in your paychecks and/or tax returns from his tax cuts....

Sure. Let me know where to send you the invoice for all that "extra" money removed from my accounts.

10

We know vaccines include many metals aim to make public sick.
...
Do not get vaccinate and prevent it from being made.

Your silly liitle game of flat earth vs round earth doesn't really matter to your essentially trivial life.

But this actually is important. If you follow this folly, I hope your children don't suffer or die from easily preventable diseases.

I know the effects of the vaccine because I live with a lot of experience people around me. I'm not dreaming. And I am not an emotional man, just I move on the facts I live on.

I take it back. I hope all your children die (but at least not in horrible pain and suffering, like many who die of diseases preventable by vaccines) so that your DNA is taken out of the gene pool, and so you don't raise a litter of spawn as ignorant as you.

11
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trumpthiness
« on: June 04, 2019, 11:03:17 AM »
Hmmm. The direction of this discussion has veered from my original intent, which was a comment on the gullibility and lack of critical thinking of the American public when presented with constant repetition of falsehood, rather than the impetus.

12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Trumpthiness
« on: June 04, 2019, 06:38:50 AM »
If Donald Trump declares in tweets and at rallys often enough "2+2=5" half of America will believe him.

13
We know vaccines include many metals aim to make public sick.
...
Do not get vaccinate and prevent it from being made.

Your silly liitle game of flat earth vs round earth doesn't really matter to your essentially trivial life.

But this actually is important. If you follow this folly, I hope your children don't suffer or die from easily preventable diseases.

14
Flat Earth General / Re: Mandela Effect and Flat Earth
« on: June 03, 2019, 01:29:27 PM »
1. Pay attention to the news and current events.
2. Unusual spelling near the end of a long name, most didn't pay attention.
3. Pay attention to the news and current events.
4. Chorus in the middle ends that way, confusing it and the final chorus understandable.
5. How many times have you heard someone else misquote versus the number of times you actually saw the movie?
6. This one I never knew, but it was from not noticing in the first place, not being sure I remembered it differently.
7. Pay attention to news and current events.
8. Nominated a bunch. Easy to misremember.
9. Pikachu has a tail? WTF. This seems so trivial as to be laughable.
10. Not in the movie, but in the original Grimm fairy tale. Which did you see more often?
11. Seriously? Bomb?
12. Never been there.
13. 2012 versus 2013? Really?
14. Not paying attention to something not very important.
15. Similar top-hatted character, Mr. Peanut, in monocled.
16. Draw a car logo you're unfamiliar with accurately from memory. Which way do the blue and white quarters of the BMW logo go? How many stars in the Subaru logo?

Alternate universe crossover intersection? Where only the attentive people remember the old universe? I'm not surprised wise thinks so.

15
Flat Earth General / Re: Mandela Effect and Flat Earth
« on: June 03, 2019, 07:46:40 AM »
The so-called Mandela Effect is nothing more than people not paying attention.

16
From their Sattellites around the earth they shoot high power lasers on every part of the earth.
No they don't.

Let NASA people clarify here if they don't mind.
But it seems Curiouser and Curiouser is a NASA employee. No?

No.

17
Anyone else think it's funny that lasers can remove hair and also grow hair?

Anyone else think it's funny that water can save your life, and also kill you?

18

The CALIPSO laser pulses might be "in excess of 5 megawatts" but each is only 20 ns long and the repetition rate is only 20 pps.
So even for the average power is only 5 x 106 x 20 x 10-9 x 20 = 2 Watts.

So the 5 megawatts sounds a huge power until you realise that each pulse lasts only 20 billionths of a second and there are only 20 per second.
The average power is less than the maximum cellphone transmitter power -  "Many cell phones have two signal strengths: 0.6 watts and 3 watts".


Yes. Power is energy divided by time. The discussion has been about high power lasers, not high energy lasers.

CALIPSO produces pulses nominally of about 5 megawatts. I consider those high power pulses. That's why I specifically said that it depends on how much you want to quibble about what high power is. Whether you think it "sounds huge" or not is based on your perception

I do find it amusing that you compare cell phone power to laser power, and imply that exposure to an amount of about 1 watt of each is equally trivial.

19
From their Sattellites around the earth they shoot high power lasers on every part of the earth.
Tranquil is a rare thing, people got pain and sick and die.
That's the consequence of laser assaults, either by NASA or any other unknown entities.
It has been applied since ancient times.

What makes you think lasers are harmful? Or untranquil? I find them quite soothing.
What makes you think that they do shoot any high power lasers on any part of the earth?

Professional experience.

The laser links are satellite to satellite and not aimed at earth at all.
Have a look at, GRACE-FO Lasers in Space: Earth Mission Tests New Technology.
Laser beams between two satellites and not "aimed at every part of earth".

There was no discussion of satellite-to-satellite laser propagation in general, nor GRACE in particular. Bringing it up just to dismiss it borders on arguing a straw man.

Or maybe this one? ICESAT-2: NASA Launching Advanced Laser to Measure Earth’s Changing Ice
Here are the Technical Specs, ICESat-2/ATLAS Performance Specifications
If my sums are right the average transmitted power in each beam is about 70 mW.

No, but I do applaud your ability to Google "nasa satellite lasers" to try to find relevant material. ICESAT-2 limits its laser operations to areas of ice formation.

CALIPSO (https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/calipso/main/index.html, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CALIPSO) has for over a decade provided coverage of the entire earth and uses nominal laser pulses in excess of 5 megawatts.


20
From their Sattellites around the earth they shoot high power lasers on every part of the earth.
Tranquil is a rare thing, people got pain and sick and die.
That's the consequence of laser assaults, either by NASA or any other unknown entities.
It has been applied since ancient times.

What makes you think lasers are harmful? Or untranquil? I find them quite soothing.

21
From their Sattellites around the earth they shoot high power lasers on every part of the earth.
No they don't.
Depends on how much you want to quibble about the exact definitions of "every part" and "high power", but danang is more correct than rabinoz.

22
Flat Earth General / Re: Correct definition of the FE shape
« on: June 01, 2019, 11:56:08 AM »
The common FE model displays a disc with an icewall and a dome on top. But is the disc really a disc? Because a disc is a twodimensional model which can't exist in a threedimensional space. Wouldn't that make the Earth a cylinder then?

A disc is not two-dimensional, either. Disc is a word used for nominally cylindrical objects that have a height-to-diameter ratio much less than 1.

I don't think the phrase "as cylindrical as a pancake" is going to catch on anytime soon.

23
Congratulations.   :D

Thaaank youuuu dude..!!

The next step is... PHEW APP.

Are you, or anyone familiar with programming?

To have a phew app that produces any mathematical results, you would have to clearly explain your ideas to a coder ... something you have been unable to do here despite over a year of attempts.

24
No need for any proof. Fatwas regarding Muslims in unusual geographic circumstances regarding adherance to numerous laws based on sunrise/sunset allow for alternative solutions, such as keeping the same schedule as Mecca, or other large Muslim cities. For instance, Muslims visiting the ISS are not required to pray 5 times every 92 minutes.

25
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Globe Proof #2
« on: May 29, 2019, 01:19:52 PM »
I'm not entirely sure what to make of the fact that Wise and JackBlack agree with each other as regards my views on flat Earth. I think I'm flattered. When opposite extremes agree that you're wrong, I think that's a good thing.

Wise: You are mistaken when you assert that there are no intermediate forms. The fossil record is piled high with them. And more intermediate forms are discovered every year. Consider the whale (and related cetaceans): When I was young, creationists cited the lack of intermediate forms in their argument that whales did not evolve from land animals. But then an intermediate fossil was found, And then another, and another, and another, and today there is a clear chain of intermediate forms between a land mammal vaguely resembling a wolf (not actually a wolf, since those had not evolved yet) and the modern-day whale. But creationists continue to repeat the outdated argument that their predecessors published half a century ago, before those intermediate forms were found.

On glaciers, I have visited places in Canada where I have seen with my own eyes, glaciers that are smaller each year I've seen them. And the great ice masses are shrinking every year. The northern sea ice where polar bears hunt is smaller in extent and shorter in duration every year, resulting in less area and less time for them to obtain food, and they have measurably less fat on them at the end of each successive hunting season. The southern sea ice is shrinking also, which is good for the emperor penguins, who now have a shorter walk to the sea from their mating grounds, but is another indication of climate change.

Evolution and climate change are real. And I do not need to believe in a bunch of silly conspiracies to assert that the Earth is flat. The Earth does not care what people believe about the JFK assassination or chemtrails, or any of the rest of it.

And just because some flat-Earth believers also believe in silly conspiracy theories does not mean they are wrong about FE.

Then tell me how in the world can you believe the earth is flat and that fact is not a conspiracy?  What about all the images from satellites the show the round earth.  What about circumnavigation?  Many countries have been to space and viewed the globe.  Tell me, how if the earth is flat, how is that possible without a conspiracy?

The "Brain In A Vat" argument does not require a conspiracy if it's carried out on you by a single entity.

I don't see that argument pertains to this issue.  Please explain.

For the earth to be flat, it requires that multitudes of evidence was falsified to justify a round earth.  In itself, it has to be a conspiracy.  This isn't about a misunderstanding, the only way for the earth to actually be flat, we have to been lied to.  I cannot see anyway around this fact...

You asked for a way it is possible for the earth to be flat without a conspiracy. If the earth is flat and you are a Brain In A Vat (see any number of online references if you are unfamiliar with this epistemological argument, or its modern equivalent Living In A Computer Simulation) and the perpetrator is a single individual, then it is not a conspiracy, which requires collaboration between more than one individual.

26
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Globe Proof #2
« on: May 29, 2019, 12:02:18 PM »
I'm not entirely sure what to make of the fact that Wise and JackBlack agree with each other as regards my views on flat Earth. I think I'm flattered. When opposite extremes agree that you're wrong, I think that's a good thing.

Wise: You are mistaken when you assert that there are no intermediate forms. The fossil record is piled high with them. And more intermediate forms are discovered every year. Consider the whale (and related cetaceans): When I was young, creationists cited the lack of intermediate forms in their argument that whales did not evolve from land animals. But then an intermediate fossil was found, And then another, and another, and another, and today there is a clear chain of intermediate forms between a land mammal vaguely resembling a wolf (not actually a wolf, since those had not evolved yet) and the modern-day whale. But creationists continue to repeat the outdated argument that their predecessors published half a century ago, before those intermediate forms were found.

On glaciers, I have visited places in Canada where I have seen with my own eyes, glaciers that are smaller each year I've seen them. And the great ice masses are shrinking every year. The northern sea ice where polar bears hunt is smaller in extent and shorter in duration every year, resulting in less area and less time for them to obtain food, and they have measurably less fat on them at the end of each successive hunting season. The southern sea ice is shrinking also, which is good for the emperor penguins, who now have a shorter walk to the sea from their mating grounds, but is another indication of climate change.

Evolution and climate change are real. And I do not need to believe in a bunch of silly conspiracies to assert that the Earth is flat. The Earth does not care what people believe about the JFK assassination or chemtrails, or any of the rest of it.

And just because some flat-Earth believers also believe in silly conspiracy theories does not mean they are wrong about FE.

Then tell me how in the world can you believe the earth is flat and that fact is not a conspiracy?  What about all the images from satellites the show the round earth.  What about circumnavigation?  Many countries have been to space and viewed the globe.  Tell me, how if the earth is flat, how is that possible without a conspiracy?

The "Brain In A Vat" argument does not require a conspiracy if it's carried out on you by a single entity.

27
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Proof the Earth is round
« on: May 29, 2019, 10:51:40 AM »
Jack: I've said the photos are real. I've also said that because photos are flat, they prove nothing about the shape of the Earth. So I'll answer your question yet again: The photos are real photos. Flat ones.

Rab: I don't try to "explain" anything. I've admitted I have no explanations for anything.

Kabool: You are correct: All photos are flat. That's my point. You can't prove a thing is round from a photo of it because the photo is by its nature flat.

Sorry all for the brevity of this post. I'm nearly out of time and have to run.

Take a photo of yourself.  Look at it.  Are you flat?  Are you so blind that you can't see that you have depth?  Can you not tell that your ears are further back than you eyes?  The wall you are standing in front of is actually a few feet away?  Or is your head so deep in the sand that you have never learned the meaning of integrity?

Yes. A flat image is definitely proof of the three-dimensionality of an object.


28
SkepticMike is back, and his avatar is now displayed again in recent posts. Is there any update regarding the OP?

29
Flat Earth General / Re: Food for thought
« on: May 23, 2019, 09:27:24 AM »
And you haven't understood the situation correctly ignoring this. However as others pointed out, its rude and frankly unreasonable to have us address this huge list.

You don't have to address the huge list. Since the primary question is "Have I understood the situation correctly? " you can just find one point you disagree with and say "no."

30
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Ice wall thousands of km high
« on: May 23, 2019, 09:06:57 AM »
And so entrenched and stubborn in your own opinions and eager to prove people wrong that you're not seeing your incorrect assumptions.

Hahahaha. Oh wow, that's hilarious, to think a flat earther said that.  Worthy of framing, I will have to bookmark that comment.


Yes. It is hilarious to think that a flat earther said that.

And that is exactly my point. You are so entrenched and stubborn in your opinions and eager to prove people wrong that you're not seeing your incorrect assumption that I am a flat earther.

I am not.

I have never made a case that the earth is flat rather than round. I have never written that I believe those who make that case are correct. I have never written that any of the subsidiary theories (universal gravitation, spotlight sun, fake spaceflight, domes, ice walls, conspiracy theories, Rowbotham's experiments, etc.) are correct. With the possible exception of an obvious sarcastic jab here or there I have never written anything that states that I am a supporter of flat earth, or that flat earth theories are correct.

I have been employed in the space science field for over 20 years. I have been personally involved in the construction of over 20 spacecraft. I have personally built and installed optical equipment in a satellite, and after its launch directed high power lasers at the satellite and received both the reflected laser beam and the sensor data from the satellite. I have built satellites that take imagery used by Google maps. I have designed and built hardware for multiple interplanetary missions. I have enough inside knowledge of the infrastructure of spaceflight hardware and the aerospace industry to know the extent to which an entity would have to go to fake aspects of it. I use ultra-precise long range measuring and metrology instruments, and I have measured the curvature of the earth. I hold multiple gradute degrees, including in Atmospheric Science. I have built scientific instrument that measure the profile of the atmosphere from space, and as such have to compensate for the curvature of the earth.

There's very little chance anything written on a site like this will change people's beliefs about the round vs flat debate. It's mostly entertainment. But I do call people out when they assume they can swoop in with a single smug one-topic "gotcha" proof and that's sufficient to convince someone. Or when, like you, they use rhetorical and logical fallacies in an argument. Whether you like it or not, whether you believe it or not, whether you intended it or not, you used the strawman fallacy in your argument. Period. And when I pointed it out, you assumed that because I disagreed with you I must be a flat earther.

People in the "I'm going to prove you wrong, you stupid flat-earther" camp almost always take any objection to their arguments defensively as "you disagree with me, you're obviously a stupid flat-earther" instead of reading what is actually written when the criticism is against the logic or validity of the argument technique.

Even when I pointed out multiple times that my interest in the conversation was not the physics of an ice wall, but that you presented a bad argument, your entrenched opinion of me as a stupid flat earther prevented you from actually reading what was written, and your eagerness to prove that I was wrong clouded your ability to see that you had made incorrect assumptions.

Perhaps with that perspective in mind, you should reread the enitre thread and ask yourself how many people involved in the conversations actually present any positions in favor of flat earth, rather than you just assuming so. It's probably fewer than you think.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 38