Another question

  • 48 Replies
  • 8553 Views
?

lagnaf

  • 45
  • +0/-0
Re: Another question
« Reply #30 on: March 30, 2011, 11:27:34 AM »
If it's possible that real video from the moon is fake, is it possible that magicians actually make buildings disappear?

Well at least Santa Clause is real. 

*

Jack1704

  • Official Member
  • 11207
  • +0/-0
  • Francine?!?!?
Re: Another question
« Reply #31 on: March 30, 2011, 11:36:42 AM »
If it's possible that real video from the moon is fake, is it possible that magicians actually make buildings disappear?
If its possible its also impossible.
Stop all this nonesense and bring on the lapdancers.
I understand Jack1704. It's a Brit thing.

?

sillyrob

  • Official Member
  • 3771
  • +0/-0
  • Punk rawk.
Re: Another question
« Reply #32 on: March 30, 2011, 11:38:14 AM »
If it's possible that real video from the moon is fake, is it possible that magicians actually make buildings disappear?
If its possible its also impossible.
You are correct.

?

lagnaf

  • 45
  • +0/-0
Re: Another question
« Reply #33 on: March 30, 2011, 11:39:20 AM »
If it's possible that real video from the moon is fake, is it possible that magicians actually make buildings disappear?
If its possible its also impossible.

Is it possible that the technology you're using right now is fake?

*

Jack1704

  • Official Member
  • 11207
  • +0/-0
  • Francine?!?!?
Re: Another question
« Reply #34 on: March 30, 2011, 11:51:56 AM »
If it's possible that real video from the moon is fake, is it possible that magicians actually make buildings disappear?
If its possible its also impossible.

Is it possible that the technology you're using right now is fake?
Of course it can.
Stop all this nonesense and bring on the lapdancers.
I understand Jack1704. It's a Brit thing.

?

lagnaf

  • 45
  • +0/-0
Re: Another question
« Reply #35 on: March 30, 2011, 11:53:57 AM »
If it's possible that real video from the moon is fake, is it possible that magicians actually make buildings disappear?
If its possible its also impossible.

Is it possible that the technology you're using right now is fake?
Of course it can.

If I were you I'd turn it off and unplug it.  Who knows what nefarious deeds it's programmed to do to you. 

*

Jack1704

  • Official Member
  • 11207
  • +0/-0
  • Francine?!?!?
Re: Another question
« Reply #36 on: March 30, 2011, 12:27:31 PM »
You sound like my IT department.
Stop all this nonesense and bring on the lapdancers.
I understand Jack1704. It's a Brit thing.

?

lagnaf

  • 45
  • +0/-0
Re: Another question
« Reply #37 on: March 30, 2011, 12:40:03 PM »
You sound like my IT department.

And you sound like a Creationist.

*

Jack1704

  • Official Member
  • 11207
  • +0/-0
  • Francine?!?!?
Re: Another question
« Reply #38 on: March 30, 2011, 12:59:53 PM »
You sound like my IT department.

And you sound like a Creationist.
If only i was.
Stop all this nonesense and bring on the lapdancers.
I understand Jack1704. It's a Brit thing.

?

lagnaf

  • 45
  • +0/-0
Re: Another question
« Reply #39 on: March 30, 2011, 01:05:36 PM »
You sound like my IT department.

And you sound like a Creationist.
If only i was.

So you do accept evolutionary biology?

*

Jack1704

  • Official Member
  • 11207
  • +0/-0
  • Francine?!?!?
Re: Another question
« Reply #40 on: March 30, 2011, 01:14:47 PM »
I believe it is the most reasonable answer.
Stop all this nonesense and bring on the lapdancers.
I understand Jack1704. It's a Brit thing.

?

lagnaf

  • 45
  • +0/-0
Re: Another question
« Reply #41 on: March 30, 2011, 01:18:19 PM »
I believe it is the most reasonable answer.

You sure you can trust those biologists, paleontologists, microbiologists and so forth?

*

Jack1704

  • Official Member
  • 11207
  • +0/-0
  • Francine?!?!?
Re: Another question
« Reply #42 on: March 30, 2011, 01:19:57 PM »
I believe it is the most reasonable answer.

You sure you can trust those biologists, paleontologists, microbiologists and so forth?
No i am not, but its not just based on what i am told.
Stop all this nonesense and bring on the lapdancers.
I understand Jack1704. It's a Brit thing.

?

lagnaf

  • 45
  • +0/-0
Re: Another question
« Reply #43 on: March 30, 2011, 01:30:08 PM »
I believe it is the most reasonable answer.

You sure you can trust those biologists, paleontologists, microbiologists and so forth?
No i am not, but its not just based on what i am told.

In other words you've gone to the effort of doing your own reading and research to find out for yourself?

*

Jack1704

  • Official Member
  • 11207
  • +0/-0
  • Francine?!?!?
Re: Another question
« Reply #44 on: March 30, 2011, 03:17:24 PM »
yes
Stop all this nonesense and bring on the lapdancers.
I understand Jack1704. It's a Brit thing.

?

lagnaf

  • 45
  • +0/-0
Re: Another question
« Reply #45 on: March 30, 2011, 04:08:06 PM »
yes

Why would you trust your findings?

?

Around And About

  • 2606
  • +0/-0
  • Circular Logic Falls Flat
Re: Another question
« Reply #46 on: March 30, 2011, 04:45:13 PM »
yes

Why would you trust your other people's findings?

I'm assuming he's not an evolutionary biologist who conducts his own research.
I'm not black nor a thug, I'm more like god who will bring 7 plagues of flat earth upon your ass.

?

lagnaf

  • 45
  • +0/-0
Re: Another question
« Reply #47 on: March 30, 2011, 04:46:29 PM »
yes

Why would you trust your other people's findings?

I'm assuming he's not an evolutionary biologist who conducts his own research.

Word.

?

JoshuaZ

  • 351
  • +0/-0
Re: Another question
« Reply #48 on: March 30, 2011, 07:30:33 PM »
Why are all other planets, stars, and moons in our solar system and our galaxy spherical?

Do you have any evidence for these claims?

Well, you can check this yourself for Mars and Venus with a telescope that isn't too expensive. And if you buy a decent backyard telescope you can confirm it quite well for Mars. You'll need to be patient and you will need to do it somewhere without much light pollution but this isn't that tough for at least those two bodies. Detecting the roundness of other bodies is tougher (incidentally Lagnaf is actually incorrect when it comes to moons. Some of the smaller moons are not spherical (such as Deimos and Phobos, the moons of Mars). But even detecting those bodies is very difficult since they are so small. (This is precisely why they aren't spherical- you get near spheres when objects have enough gravity to pull themselves into a spherical shape. That's why all large objects are sphere.) They weren't detected until the late 19th century.) So you can't see them with a small telescope.