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 - Thermal Detonator

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 89
31
Flat Earth General / Re: A major flaw in the zetetic model
« on: December 28, 2010, 02:29:00 PM »
What would you expect to see if you were standing on a big sphere, guys?  :-*

I would expect to see people slipping and falling off when I walked far enough in one direction.


And can you tell me why you'd expect to see that?

32
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Is it possible..
« on: December 28, 2010, 06:45:55 AM »
I can imagine a photon stationary in a vacuum, which is not possible, yet I can imagine it.

How do you know it is not possible?

The same way you do. Troll somewhere else.

33
BTW, esteemed Brother Mad James claims to have a high powered astronomical telescope, which is likely to be equipped with setting circles. Ask him nicely and he can verify that they do indeed work. As can I, for I too have one.

How did you verify that they work?

By using them, of course. They gave me the result that it was predicted they should give me: therefore, they work.
Troll harder.

34
tl:dr

Really.

35
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Lying cops
« on: December 27, 2010, 08:04:45 PM »
In the UK, lying to the police can lead to being charged with the crime of Obstruction Of Justice. This famously happened in the case of the Yorkshire Ripper some years ago, where someone unconnected with the crimes fed false info to the police which delayed them in catching the real killer. Even in cases where the person is not charged with this, it would count unfavourably against them in court.
But by the same token, the police lying to a suspect could also damage a case for the prosecution. Transcripts of police interviews are admissible evidence in court, and if the defence lawyer was to cross examine the cop by reading a lie from the transcript and then asking the cop "was that true?" and the cop having to admit it wasn't... well, it is not something the prosecution would relish. If big lies were used to wring a confession from the suspect, then the defence can bring in the possibility of confession under duress, leading to an unsafe conviction, which may even result in the judge ordering the confession to be inadmissable evidence.
So the police lying in an interrogation may get the information, but lessen the chances of a successful conviction.

36
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Is it possible..
« on: December 27, 2010, 07:54:45 PM »
I can imagine a photon stationary in a vacuum, which is not possible, yet I can imagine it.
Or a sensible post by Parsifal. But that's a little far fetched.

37
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Bio-luminescent moon and conservation of energy
« on: December 27, 2010, 07:51:30 PM »
Have any of you actually looked at the moon through a telescope?

Yes. What about it?

Because it becomes clearly evident that the moon has a heavily cratered landscape with no sign of biomass. Certainly not on the scale that would be required for what this, frankly, jackass theory proposes.

Mad James has claimed that the Moon appears to look like a flat metal disc with no craters or other geographical features through his telescope. As yet, it is unclear whether this is because of a problem with his eyes, or a problem with his brain.

38
I do not have Windows Media Player, so I cannot launch it to watch the video.
Troll "Bendy light specialist" is troll.

What could have possibly prompted that assumption?

Having read more than three posts by Parsifal is enough, turning it from assumption to verified fact based on statistical data.

39
Technology, Science & Alt Science / Re: Might pi be rational?
« on: December 27, 2010, 07:46:30 PM »
While levee may want you to believe that, his point falls flat.

This is a tautology.

40
the usefulness and accuracy of setting circles

This is the unsupported portion of your argument.

BTW, esteemed Brother Mad James claims to have a high powered astronomical telescope, which is likely to be equipped with setting circles. Ask him nicely and he can verify that they do indeed work. As can I, for I too have one. However that would be a problem for you, because it wouldn't give you the answer you want, so your response will be to say the word of other people cannot be trusted. (In which case, never get on a bus or a train again, because you only have somebody's word that it's going where they say it is.) In summary: either take my word for it, or never travel by public transport again.
Additional: there are almost certainly amateur astronomy clubs in your vicinity, who will be able to give you a FREE personal demonstration of setting circles.

41
Oh, so Windows doesn't cost money. I see.
TD, could I ask you to not trash my thread with shit you haven't thought through? Thank you.

Windows media player files are able to be read with freely available software from sources other than Microsoft. As Parsifal knows only too well, but which would be inconvenient for him to mention in this context. He might like to try Miro since it's open source and non-profit.
PP, could I ask you not to trash your own thread with shit you haven't thought through? Thank you.

42
Flat Earth General / Re: We Don't Need to Disprove FE.
« on: December 27, 2010, 07:18:57 PM »

Please read Earth Not a Globe.

*screams and screams and screams until he's sick*  :D

(admit it, y'all missed me doing that.)

43
So you see, they're really quite intelligent insults as insults go.
You judge your own insults? That's like laughing at your own jokes.

I love the way you are progressing into a frothing rage as I get gradually calmer.  8)
Strange. We both think we're the ones getting calmer, and we both think the other party is raging. Unfortunately, your posting history makes me much more likely to be right than yourself <3

You were the last one to use both italics for emphasis and to write a direct imperative aimed at me, so in purely objective terms, you currently appear to be angrier than me.
And you really don't have anything profound to say about the earth - looking through your post history it's almost entirely nitpicking at grammar. You didn't used to be like this when I was here before.
Also, a lesson for you on how to make posts: judge your own insults. Choose them carefully, don't just do what you seem to think is good and pick one at random. Otherwise you run the risk of making an insult which is inappropriate.

Jesus, all this rage because I made one lowbrow joke about bowel movements. You need to have more things to do in your life. And where are the mods? This thread has gone way off topic and needs dealing with.

44
Flat Earth Debate / Re: Bio-luminescent moon and conservation of energy
« on: December 27, 2010, 05:26:43 PM »
The moon's distance changes. Sometimes it's closer and sometimes it's further. That's why it appears bigger at times. However, its average distance is the same as the sun.

Your source of this information, if you please?

45
Er... there's a difference between not being able to say anything profound about the shape of the earth (you), and being able to come out with all sorts of profound and challenging discussions about it but also choosing at times to be light hearted and humorous (me.)
Lighten up, pencilneck.  ::)
Er... there's a difference between ranting angrily and calling people names which mostly apply to the offender [if they apply to anything at all - see below] (you) and making points regarding the shape of the Earth and engaging in challenging discussions, but also choosing to point it out when TD is being dumb (me).
Get a viewpoint, or at least learn some insults. "Pencilneck"? "You spineless chicken"? Really?

PizzaPlanet has hit a number 6 on the Bristol scale.

Berny
Is riding at a nice 4.
Was a 2 today. You're welcome.

Pencilneck is a quote from Ghostbusters, pertaining to the character you remind me of.
Spineless chicken is an indicator of cowardice, in that cowards are often referred to as spineless, and often as chicken, hence combining them is a logical progression.
So you see, they're really quite intelligent insults as insults go. Plus if I called you a wanker, it would confuse the Americans.

I love the way you are progressing into a frothing rage as I get gradually calmer.  8)

46
Flat Earth General / Re: Why don't I have cancer?
« on: December 27, 2010, 05:02:01 PM »
25% of people develop cancer in their lifetime? :s

No.  Odds are almost 50% of developing cancer in your lifetime.  Odds are about 25% of dying from cancer.
http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerBasics/lifetime-probability-of-developing-or-dying-from-cancer

OK I think I had my statistics in a mix there.

47
Flat Earth General / Re: Why don't I have cancer?
« on: December 27, 2010, 12:47:58 PM »
25% of people develop cancer in their lifetime? :s

Yes, based on forecasts of how long people of high school age will live. The longer you live, the greater your chance of getting it. Of course that's not to say that 25% of them will die from cancer - that would be much lower. Many will get cancer and then die of other causes - look up the statistics for elderly men with prostate cancer. Most of them have it, most of them aren't killed by it. Many cancers will of course be successfully treated.

Can we move this thread to the science discussion section?

48
Flat Earth General / Re: Why don't I have cancer?
« on: December 27, 2010, 12:41:33 PM »
I spend ten to fifteen minutes standing outside, in full view of the moon, while waiting for my bus. The same goes for the majority of the people who go to my high school (six hundred). Why don't we all have cancer?

Out of six hundred people, the probability is that approximately one hundred and fifty of you will develop cancer of some kind during their lifetime. Cancer among high school students is very rare.

49
Skeleton, he can't say anything profound about the shape of the earth so he resorts to pedantic spellchecking. Don't sweat it.
Oh, so you claim that your bowel movement "joke" was relevant to the shape of the Earth? That's interesting. Would you like to explain how?
Or are you just a hypocrite, as I originally claimed?

Er... there's a difference between not being able to say anything profound about the shape of the earth (you), and being able to come out with all sorts of profound and challenging discussions about it but also choosing at times to be light hearted and humorous (me.)
Lighten up, pencilneck.  ::)

50
Flat Earth General / Re: A major flaw in the zetetic model
« on: December 27, 2010, 10:39:36 AM »
...you FEers still don't get it?

If the Earth is round, the zetetic method will come to the conclusion that the Earth is flat, because from our perspective the Earth would still look flat.

No, it's even more ludicrous than that. It DOESN'T LOOK FLAT. And they still claim it does.

What would you expect to see if you were standing on a big sphere, guys?  :-*

51
Flat Earth General / Re: FEers STILL can't answer this basic question
« on: December 27, 2010, 10:36:09 AM »
The conspiracy likely finds its roots in the BGMG. It's possible it predates that, but unliklely.
I myself don't believe in a conspiracy

So you accept that satellites and photos of Earth from space are real, that the Moon is 250,000 miles away, that GPS is correct, and all the other things that give evidence of the Earth being round which are commonly dismissed as "conspiracy cover ups" by the flat guys, as they have no other way to explain them?

52
The Lounge / Re: Happy Kwanzaa!
« on: December 27, 2010, 08:47:42 AM »
 ::)

53
I'll show you proof of the opposite. It exists*, but I'll only show it to you after you pay me $100
*-or does it? Only one way to find out.

Lrn2 comparable example. Use a metaphor that does not cost money or detriment the user.

54
Skeleton, he can't say anything profound about the shape of the earth so he resorts to pedantic spellchecking. Don't sweat it.

55
(BTW even Parsifal has agreed that my original post on the subject is consistent with his BLT).

I also refuted your "disproof" of bendy light you just linked to.

Your move.

You tried to refute it initially but then when other posters pointed out the resultant compression of perspective that would have resulted from your proposed refutation, you agreed with them, thereby admitting your refutation of my initial disproof must be in error.

Completely unworkable since perspective applies in both horizontal and vertical directions to make things look smaller when they are far away. Bent light would only compensate for perspective in the direction of a plane from horizon to zenith, meaning that if stars were subject to perspective effects, they would still appear to move closer together in a plane parallel to the horizon. The effect would be similar to altering the aspect ratio of a picture.

You are correct, of course. Do you have any evidence that this does not occur?

And indeed, the usefulness and accuracy of setting circles is evidence that this does not occur. So the chain of discussion in summary:
1. TD proposes disproof
2. Parsifal refutes disproof
3. Skeleton and Clocktower show how Parsifal's method of refutation is wrong
4. Parsifal agrees.
End result - Parsifal agrees with TD's disproof.

Going "no, ur wrongg, herp derp" is not a refutation. Also nice to see that some people on the forum do take my ideas on board and continue them when I'm not here, even if the flat guys are still stuck in the stone age.

56
The Lounge / Re: Its Christmas
« on: December 26, 2010, 05:35:23 AM »
On the first day of Christmas, Tom Bishop sent to me, a view of the horizon from in a pear tree.

57
Incorrect. Bendy light predicts variable distortion of star positions as they approach the horizon. This has been proved not to happen, hence is the best disproof of bendy light.
It has not.
EDIT: Oh, and it does not.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=41120.msg1032611#msg1032611

Lurk moar. Falsifiable prediction of bendy light tested and found wanting. You denying reality doesn't mean that reality has to agree with you.  :P
(BTW even Parsifal has agreed that my original post on the subject is consistent with his BLT). Use of setting circles by astronomers has proved that this effect is not observed. So before you start kneejerk mouthing off, try a little understanding.
You have my permission to feel ashamed now.

58
Movement, as in bowel?
Excellent post, my friend. Since there's not much content to respond to, I'll focus on your grammar and punctuation. I'm terribly sorry to inform you that it's not too good. You see, you somehow managed to make three mistakes in one sentence; it certainly doesn't help that the sentence consists of four words.
My suggestions as a qualified specialist would be:
  • Obtain an English language textbook.
  • Put some effort into your content so that resorting to grammar Nazism is an option, and not a necessity.

Lrn2comedy. Kthxbye.

P.S. "excellent post, my friend" also is a four word sentence and contains the following errors: 1. I'm not your friend. 2. Incompatibility with attitude shown towards the post in the rest of the message.
Just so you know.

59
Like I said, I'm not a conspirator, because you would all be dead.

I think the disappearance of prominent members of the Movement would raise more eyebrows than not.

Movement, as in bowel?

60
The Lounge / Re: American/Canadian Dollars
« on: December 25, 2010, 07:04:02 PM »
Any country that accepts American dollars routinely for payment instead of its own currency is both corrupt and likely to be part of the third world. Name a country outside the USA that accepts American dollars and you can guarantee it's a country where the police can be very easily bribed.

This would be true if it wasn't for the fact that governments routinely buy/sell currency to influence trade.

I mean accepted by the common man in shops for buying goods, not as in bought by governments. Obviously currencies can be traded with each other.

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 89