Tom Bishop = Bot??

  • 18 Replies
  • 4159 Views
?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Tom Bishop = Bot??
« on: February 01, 2008, 11:41:34 AM »
The evidence seems to be mounting, but let's for once PROVE something. So, how do we go about it? And if he is, we need to know why he is broken. Perhaps one of those paradoxes actually got to him?
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

Chase_the_Bass

  • 170
  • +0/-0
  • Musical Master
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #1 on: February 01, 2008, 11:42:40 AM »
The next sentence is true. The previous sentence is false.
A painter paints pictures on canvas.  But musicians paint their pictures on silence.  ~Leopold Stokowski

?

Miss M.

  • 1854
  • +0/-0
  • Screw you.
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #2 on: February 01, 2008, 11:43:07 AM »
Have you tried telling him he's a bot?

That's how I caused the God-bot to crash the other month. :-\
Quote from: TheEngineer
I happen to like GG.
Quote from: Z, the Enlightened.
I never thought in my life I'd write the sentence "I thought they were caught in a bipolar geodesic?"

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #3 on: February 01, 2008, 11:43:51 AM »
Ok.
Tom Bishop, you are a robot.
Might have to PM him.
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

Miss M.

  • 1854
  • +0/-0
  • Screw you.
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #4 on: February 01, 2008, 11:45:26 AM »
Be sure to take screenies or it never happened.
Quote from: TheEngineer
I happen to like GG.
Quote from: Z, the Enlightened.
I never thought in my life I'd write the sentence "I thought they were caught in a bipolar geodesic?"

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #5 on: February 01, 2008, 11:46:14 AM »
Huh?
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

Chase_the_Bass

  • 170
  • +0/-0
  • Musical Master
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #6 on: February 01, 2008, 11:46:49 AM »
Screen Cap. Press "Print Screen"
A painter paints pictures on canvas.  But musicians paint their pictures on silence.  ~Leopold Stokowski

?

Miss M.

  • 1854
  • +0/-0
  • Screw you.
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #7 on: February 01, 2008, 11:49:07 AM »
Yeah. :P


Otherwise we could just say it was all a conspiracy on your part.
Quote from: TheEngineer
I happen to like GG.
Quote from: Z, the Enlightened.
I never thought in my life I'd write the sentence "I thought they were caught in a bipolar geodesic?"

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #8 on: February 01, 2008, 11:50:23 AM »
Ok, if he breaks, I'm not paying for his repair.
And a screenie of what? Him breaking?
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

Chase_the_Bass

  • 170
  • +0/-0
  • Musical Master
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #9 on: February 01, 2008, 11:54:07 AM »
 ::)
A painter paints pictures on canvas.  But musicians paint their pictures on silence.  ~Leopold Stokowski

?

Chase_the_Bass

  • 170
  • +0/-0
  • Musical Master
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #10 on: February 01, 2008, 11:55:22 AM »
To Tom Bishop. Is the answer to this question no?
A painter paints pictures on canvas.  But musicians paint their pictures on silence.  ~Leopold Stokowski

?

fshy94

  • 1560
  • +0/-0
  • ^^^ This is the Earth ...die alien invaders!!
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #11 on: February 01, 2008, 11:57:37 AM »
Proof the Earth is round!
http://theflatearthsociety.org/forum/index.php?topic=19341.0

Quote from: Althalus
The conspiracy has made it impossible to adequately explain FE theory in English.
^^LOL!

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #12 on: February 01, 2008, 11:58:56 AM »
I sent the PM. Not sure exactly what you want me to screenshot, but I've screenied the PM:
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #13 on: February 01, 2008, 12:04:48 PM »
I sent him this:


Title: How do you explain this drawing?


Click to view larger picture


Look at this. The actual distance between Johannesburg and Sydney is less than 7000 miles. Now, using a scale measurement of the distance of New York - London which is around 3500 miles, I got a scale key of 3000 miles. Extrapolating this upon another person's FE map, which actually shrinks the distance because it doesn't go all the way around the circle, I got that the distance from Johannesburg -- Sydney according to FE is equal to over 5 times as long, because the straight line equivalent(going over Asia a bit) is almost 4 times long. Even with Tom's magic jet streams, which would only double the speed of the aircraft, the plane won't make it. Bear in mind that my estimates are conservative, since the map only goes half-way around the circumference of the Earth, so your jet streams don't work, unless you increase their speed to over 1500 MPH :D .

I got the response:

Quote
There is no Flat Earth map. Any distances between continents are hypothetical only.

Additional responses for clarification went unanswered.

I feel certain that a human would not have said that. I also have a theory regarding why such an advanced bot may be trawling this site. Think about it. We are the flat earth society. What more prominent forum is there to acceptably(to a college students mind) troll with an experimental bot/script? Furthermore, said beliefs are a little strange, so it would be acceptable for a human to say some of the weird things he says, and evade detection. Said shoddy maths and so on are acceptable here, what easier location for a bot?


I plan to test this by inserting a lot of images for Tom to decode, and see if he can.
Love it!!! Made me lol!
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #14 on: February 01, 2008, 04:39:17 PM »
WTF is up with the rhino?

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #15 on: February 01, 2008, 06:06:20 PM »
Why isn't photographic evidence counted?  I'm betting you've never seen an emperor penguin, only pictures.  Do you doubt they exist?

Yes. Unless I have seen the evidence first hand I cannot know whether something exists.

You...doubt...that Emperor Penguins...exist?!

WTF?

?

Germanicus

  • 485
  • +0/-0
  • Ave, Caesar, morituri te salutant
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #16 on: February 01, 2008, 06:37:51 PM »
Quote
You...doubt...that Emperor Penguins...exist?!

WTF?

The plot thickens

*

Trekky0623

  • Official Member
  • 10045
  • +0/-0
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #17 on: February 01, 2008, 06:43:13 PM »
More evidence:

I posted a thread related to the angle of the sun using basic math.  It took us FIVE PAGES before we convinced TomBot that my drawing was not to scale.  IT HAD FUCKING MEASUREMENTS RIGHT NEXT TO THE DIAGRAM:




As you can see, the 3000 mile line is longer that the 6872.4.  TomBot continued to say that my math was flawed because the the 3000 mile line was "longer".

?

Conspiracy Mastermind

  • 1836
  • +0/-0
  • There is no conspiracy...
Re: Tom Bishop = Bot??
« Reply #18 on: February 02, 2008, 11:42:55 AM »
If you actually click on the link in my quote you find he changed the image after Tom replied to the post. I've done a proper test. Can't say where, the bot might catch on.
Plus I don't remember him posting denying he's a bot.
« Last Edit: February 02, 2008, 11:44:29 AM by Conspiracy Agent »
Quote from: Tomcooper84
there is no optical light, there is just light and theres no other type of light unless you start talkling about energy saving lightbulbs compared to other types of light bulbs
ENaG: Evidence Not a Guarantee.