The only legitimate FET - A call to end debate

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 09:14:01 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 09:02:19 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 07:55:00 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 07:50:16 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 07:09:55 AM

The moons light is that of its biomass.  A weather system exists on the moon that periodically travels across its surface and causes the effect of a lunar eclipse.

I'm sorry I forgot to answer that question.  I'm not a troll and I'm also not put on this earth to answer all your questions at your whim.  You aren't entitled to answers, and frankly given your demeanor and lack of any attempt at being polite I don't see why I should continue to go out of my way to help you understand theories that you can read about using the search function.

Surely you have proof of "biomass" and "moon weather system", beacause, you know, there is no atmosphere on the moon.

Actually, there is an atmosphere on the moon.  Its caused by the regular sputtering of gases from the crust and mantle due to decay.  One can use spectroscopy to see this.  That is aside from the direct visual evidence.  What evidence do you have that there is no atmosphere on the moon?

The biomass is also believed to be regularly expelled and is known in its dry form manna and in its wet form as blood rain.  These are both often red which is why at times one can see the biomass of the moon turn red as it expels its dead matter.  These samples contain elements found on the moon including Na and K both of which we can use spectroscopy to verify their origin.

LOLWTF are you saying??

This is my evidence:
http://W1NGXL3wc0M

Give me yours

Do you disagree that there is an atmosphere on the moon and where is your evidence?

Do you think is simpler to think that the eclipse is due to the earth or due to "The biomass is also believed to be regularly expelled and is known in its dry form manna and in its wet form as blood rain.  These are both often red which is why at times one can see the biomass of the moon turn red as it expels its dead matter."

Blood rain? Also BELIAVED regularly expelled?? Dead Matter??? But WTF?? It is a giant rock!

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 10:47:33 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 09:14:01 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 09:02:19 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 07:55:00 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 07:50:16 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 07:09:55 AM

The moons light is that of its biomass.  A weather system exists on the moon that periodically travels across its surface and causes the effect of a lunar eclipse.

I'm sorry I forgot to answer that question.  I'm not a troll and I'm also not put on this earth to answer all your questions at your whim.  You aren't entitled to answers, and frankly given your demeanor and lack of any attempt at being polite I don't see why I should continue to go out of my way to help you understand theories that you can read about using the search function.

Surely you have proof of "biomass" and "moon weather system", beacause, you know, there is no atmosphere on the moon.

Actually, there is an atmosphere on the moon.  Its caused by the regular sputtering of gases from the crust and mantle due to decay.  One can use spectroscopy to see this.  That is aside from the direct visual evidence.  What evidence do you have that there is no atmosphere on the moon?

The biomass is also believed to be regularly expelled and is known in its dry form manna and in its wet form as blood rain.  These are both often red which is why at times one can see the biomass of the moon turn red as it expels its dead matter.  These samples contain elements found on the moon including Na and K both of which we can use spectroscopy to verify their origin.

LOLWTF are you saying??

This is my evidence:
http://W1NGXL3wc0M

Give me yours

Do you disagree that there is an atmosphere on the moon and where is your evidence?

Do you think is simpler to think that the eclipse is due to the earth or due to "The biomass is also believed to be regularly expelled and is known in its dry form manna and in its wet form as blood rain.  These are both often red which is why at times one can see the biomass of the moon turn red as it expels its dead matter."

Blood rain? Also BELIAVED regularly expelled?? Dead Matter??? But WTF?? It is a giant rock!

Do you disagree that there is an atmosphere on the moon and where is your evidence?

Do you still hold we are not accelerating just because you "don't feel it"?

Why is it when I miss a question out I'm a troll, but you continue to dodge my questions?

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 12:00:51 PM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 10:47:33 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 09:14:01 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 09:02:19 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 07:55:00 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 07:50:16 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 07:09:55 AM

The moons light is that of its biomass.  A weather system exists on the moon that periodically travels across its surface and causes the effect of a lunar eclipse.

I'm sorry I forgot to answer that question.  I'm not a troll and I'm also not put on this earth to answer all your questions at your whim.  You aren't entitled to answers, and frankly given your demeanor and lack of any attempt at being polite I don't see why I should continue to go out of my way to help you understand theories that you can read about using the search function.

Surely you have proof of "biomass" and "moon weather system", beacause, you know, there is no atmosphere on the moon.

Actually, there is an atmosphere on the moon.  Its caused by the regular sputtering of gases from the crust and mantle due to decay.  One can use spectroscopy to see this.  That is aside from the direct visual evidence.  What evidence do you have that there is no atmosphere on the moon?

The biomass is also believed to be regularly expelled and is known in its dry form manna and in its wet form as blood rain.  These are both often red which is why at times one can see the biomass of the moon turn red as it expels its dead matter.  These samples contain elements found on the moon including Na and K both of which we can use spectroscopy to verify their origin.

LOLWTF are you saying??

This is my evidence:
http://W1NGXL3wc0M

Give me yours

Do you disagree that there is an atmosphere on the moon and where is your evidence?

Do you think is simpler to think that the eclipse is due to the earth or due to "The biomass is also believed to be regularly expelled and is known in its dry form manna and in its wet form as blood rain.  These are both often red which is why at times one can see the biomass of the moon turn red as it expels its dead matter."

Blood rain? Also BELIAVED regularly expelled?? Dead Matter??? But WTF?? It is a giant rock!

Do you disagree that there is an atmosphere on the moon and where is your evidence?

Do you still hold we are not accelerating just because you "don't feel it"?

Why is it when I miss a question out I'm a troll, but you continue to dodge my questions?

I know that there is a very tenuos atmosphere on the moon but... how can you say that it has a weather system and that this weather system causes predictable eclipses?? How can be possible that weather system produces that dark shadows on the surface?

Quote from: General Disarray on June 20, 2010, 06:51:51 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 06:48:40 AM

Quote from: General Disarray on June 20, 2010, 06:45:59 AM

That is evidence that it might be possible to fit that aspect into the greater work of FET if it were true, but it is not evidence that FET is true and RET is not.

Given a round earth one would expect gravitational pull to diminish as one reaches higher altitudes.

Where is the evidence that acceleration is constant regardless of altitude?

I have just supplied a very easy test that anyone can perform, given proper knowledge of the area.

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 06:53:10 AM

Quote from: General Disarray on June 20, 2010, 06:51:51 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 06:48:40 AM

Quote from: General Disarray on June 20, 2010, 06:45:59 AM

That is evidence that it might be possible to fit that aspect into the greater work of FET if it were true, but it is not evidence that FET is true and RET is not.

Given a round earth one would expect gravitational pull to diminish as one reaches higher altitudes.

Where is the evidence that acceleration is constant regardless of altitude?

I have just supplied a very easy test that anyone can perform, given proper knowledge of the area.

wait, I thought you believed that the heavens pulled up on the mass on earth. Also, does that mean you think the measured differences in acceleration are human error?

And the acceleration?

The weather system is clearly visible with your naked eye.  Why wouldn't a weather system cause shadows?

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 12:23:02 PM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 12:19:40 PM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 12:00:51 PM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 10:47:33 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 09:14:01 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 09:02:19 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 07:55:00 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 20, 2010, 07:50:16 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 07:09:55 AM

The moons light is that of its biomass.  A weather system exists on the moon that periodically travels across its surface and causes the effect of a lunar eclipse.

I'm sorry I forgot to answer that question.  I'm not a troll and I'm also not put on this earth to answer all your questions at your whim.  You aren't entitled to answers, and frankly given your demeanor and lack of any attempt at being polite I don't see why I should continue to go out of my way to help you understand theories that you can read about using the search function.

Surely you have proof of "biomass" and "moon weather system", beacause, you know, there is no atmosphere on the moon.

Actually, there is an atmosphere on the moon.  Its caused by the regular sputtering of gases from the crust and mantle due to decay.  One can use spectroscopy to see this.  That is aside from the direct visual evidence.  What evidence do you have that there is no atmosphere on the moon?

The biomass is also believed to be regularly expelled and is known in its dry form manna and in its wet form as blood rain.  These are both often red which is why at times one can see the biomass of the moon turn red as it expels its dead matter.  These samples contain elements found on the moon including Na and K both of which we can use spectroscopy to verify their origin.

LOLWTF are you saying??

This is my evidence:
http://W1NGXL3wc0M

Give me yours

Do you disagree that there is an atmosphere on the moon and where is your evidence?

Do you think is simpler to think that the eclipse is due to the earth or due to "The biomass is also believed to be regularly expelled and is known in its dry form manna and in its wet form as blood rain.  These are both often red which is why at times one can see the biomass of the moon turn red as it expels its dead matter."

Blood rain? Also BELIAVED regularly expelled?? Dead Matter??? But WTF?? It is a giant rock!

Do you disagree that there is an atmosphere on the moon and where is your evidence?

Do you still hold we are not accelerating just because you "don't feel it"?

Why is it when I miss a question out I'm a troll, but you continue to dodge my questions?

I know that there is a very tenuos atmosphere on the moon but... how can you say that it has a weather system and that this weather system causes predictable eclipses?? How can be possible that weather system produces that dark shadows on the surface?

And the acceleration?

The weather system is clearly visible with your naked eye.  Why wouldn't a weather system cause shadows?

Man, the weather system that you "clearly see" on the moon is the one on the earth. Damn. And how can a chaotic weather system produce really dark shadows with perfect round edges?? And that is even predictable down to milliseconds?

I still fail to reason why you think the lunar landings must be a hoax...
Also, why don't you believe the equivalence of masses, I thought you accepted einstein

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 20, 2010, 12:33:46 PM

I still fail to reason why you think the lunar landings must be a hoax...
Also, why don't you believe the equivalence of masses, I thought you accepted einstein

I don't think it was a hoax.  I think they are incompetent.  They bring back petrified biomass from the moon and mistake it for a rock.  Really?

I believe I was referring to another model as I assumed you were asking about it.  If you could clarify the statement I made concerning this, I'd be happy to explain.

I'd hardly call the edges perfect, the conform as they fly over the moonscape.

Its also not chaotic for reasons you mention: the atmosphere on the moon is very weak.

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 20, 2010, 12:26:40 PM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 06:53:10 AM

Quote from: General Disarray on June 20, 2010, 06:51:51 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 06:48:40 AM

Quote from: General Disarray on June 20, 2010, 06:45:59 AM

That is evidence that it might be possible to fit that aspect into the greater work of FET if it were true, but it is not evidence that FET is true and RET is not.

Given a round earth one would expect gravitational pull to diminish as one reaches higher altitudes.

Where is the evidence that acceleration is constant regardless of altitude?

I have just supplied a very easy test that anyone can perform, given proper knowledge of the area.

wait, I thought you believed that the heavens pulled up on the mass on earth. Also, does that mean you think the measured differences in acceleration are human error?

Apologies, hence the "given proper knowledge of the area" was meant to hint that one would have to take local geology and geography into account.  One can determine the pull of the heavens to account for them too.  

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 12:41:16 PM

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 20, 2010, 12:33:46 PM

I still fail to reason why you think the lunar landings must be a hoax...
Also, why don't you believe the equivalence of masses, I thought you accepted einstein

I don't think it was a hoax.  I think they are incompetent.  They bring back petrified biomass from the moon and mistake it for a rock.  Really?

I believe I was referring to another model as I assumed you were asking about it.  If you could clarify the statement I made concerning this, I'd be happy to explain.

Ok I understand your position better. so what evidence do you have that it was biomass? wouldn't we be able to see the cells?
also, what evidence do we have of water and an atmosphere rich in CO2 that would be necessary for plant life? also, why is it gray.
Is this some other type of life? and if it wasn't fake, then why did they reach microgravity?

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 12:30:42 PM

I'd hardly call the edges perfect, the conform as they fly over the moonscape.

Its also not chaotic for reasons you mention: the atmosphere on the moon is very weak.

If one area had more pull then the others, mass would clump into that region. eventually leading to a super massive black hole.

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 20, 2010, 12:48:12 PM

Quote from: John Davis on June 20, 2010, 12:41:16 PM

Quote from: Thevoiceofreason on June 20, 2010, 12:33:46 PM

I still fail to reason why you think the lunar landings must be a hoax...
Also, why don't you believe the equivalence of masses, I thought you accepted einstein

I don't think it was a hoax.  I think they are incompetent.  They bring back petrified biomass from the moon and mistake it for a rock.  Really?

I believe I was referring to another model as I assumed you were asking about it.  If you could clarify the statement I made concerning this, I'd be happy to explain.

Ok I understand your position better. so what evidence do you have that it was biomass? wouldn't we be able to see the cells?
also, what evidence do we have of water and an atmosphere rich in CO2 that would be necessary for plant life? also, why is it gray.
Is this some other type of life? and if it wasn't fake, then why did they reach microgravity?

Experts have said it was biomass.  It made most the major news outlets.  It also is clearly red, as is symptomatic of dead moon life.

I doubt it is plant life.

If what wasn't fake?

Running to the pool, be back later to respond to the other posts

Look, no possible weather system.

Quote from: SSSavio on June 21, 2010, 12:36:04 AM

Look, no possible weather system.

That shows nothing of the existence or non-existence of a weather system.

So, what about that acceleration?  Do you still hold we are not accelerating?

Yeah we are not accelerating.

Quote from: SSSavio on June 21, 2010, 02:15:50 AM

Yeah we are not accelerating.

What does g equal again?  I was under the impression you lot believed we were stuck to the earth due to gravity.  I take it you are taking an uncommon view?

Quote from: John Davis on June 21, 2010, 02:22:34 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 21, 2010, 02:15:50 AM

Yeah we are not accelerating.

What does g equal again?  I was under the impression you lot believed we were stuck to the earth due to gravity.  I take it you are taking an uncommon view?

What are you saying? We were stuck to the earth because huge masses cause space distortion.

Quote from: SSSavio on June 21, 2010, 02:49:03 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 21, 2010, 02:22:34 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 21, 2010, 02:15:50 AM

Yeah we are not accelerating.

What does g equal again?  I was under the impression you lot believed we were stuck to the earth due to gravity.  I take it you are taking an uncommon view?

What are you saying? We were stuck to the earth because huge masses cause space distortion.

wat.
g equals nine point eight meters per second per second. That's acceleration. I can back that up with a great deal of evidence, son, and none of my photos are shopped.

Quote from: G.Oak on June 21, 2010, 03:08:15 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 21, 2010, 02:49:03 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 21, 2010, 02:22:34 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 21, 2010, 02:15:50 AM

Yeah we are not accelerating.

What does g equal again?  I was under the impression you lot believed we were stuck to the earth due to gravity.  I take it you are taking an uncommon view?

What are you saying? We were stuck to the earth because huge masses cause space distortion.

wat.
g equals nine point eight meters per second per second. That's acceleration. I can back that up with a great deal of evidence, son, and none of my photos are shopped.

Yes captain obvious, i know. I think he wants to know what is the cause of this acceleration.

Quote from: SSSavio on June 21, 2010, 03:22:54 AM

Quote from: G.Oak on June 21, 2010, 03:08:15 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 21, 2010, 02:49:03 AM

Quote from: John Davis on June 21, 2010, 02:22:34 AM

Quote from: SSSavio on June 21, 2010, 02:15:50 AM

Yeah we are not accelerating.

What does g equal again?  I was under the impression you lot believed we were stuck to the earth due to gravity.  I take it you are taking an uncommon view?

What are you saying? We were stuck to the earth because huge masses cause space distortion.

wat.
g equals nine point eight meters per second per second. That's acceleration. I can back that up with a great deal of evidence, son, and none of my photos are shopped.

Yes captain obvious, i know. I think he wants to know what is the cause of this acceleration.

No, you claimed we were not accelerating because you "didn't feel it". 

So to recap the moon has no atmosphere, but it does and we aren't accelerating, but we are.

And zetetics apparently don't own gravimeters or accelerometers.

And you call us trolls. 

We arent accelerating

So, i dont feel acceleration, but it happens.

Yeah we are not accelerating.

source?
also, how do you explain microgravity?