World is flat

  • 87 Replies
  • 10251 Views
World is flat
« on: November 27, 2011, 12:05:24 PM »
What do scientist gain by lying about the world is flat.   
Thanks
« Last Edit: November 27, 2011, 12:11:40 PM by frostyshake »

?

Hazbollah

  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 2444
  • Earth Shape Apathetic.
Re: World is flat
« Reply #1 on: November 27, 2011, 01:22:46 PM »
The conspiracy doesn't know the earth is flat.
Always check your tackle- Caerphilly school of Health. If I see an innuendo in my post, I'll be sure to whip it out.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: World is flat
« Reply #2 on: November 27, 2011, 01:38:00 PM »
What do scientist gain by lying about the world is flat.   
Thanks


They gain nothing, most scientists believe the earth is round.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

*

Tom Bishop

  • Flat Earth Believer
  • 17933
Re: World is flat
« Reply #3 on: November 27, 2011, 02:38:20 PM »
Quote from: frostyshake
What do scientist gain by lying about the world is flat.   
Thanks

They're not lying. They're mistaken.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #4 on: November 27, 2011, 04:07:09 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?
Y'all be trippin'

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: World is flat
« Reply #5 on: November 27, 2011, 04:26:31 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #6 on: November 27, 2011, 09:18:00 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

StephenFlatMan

  • 61
  • THE EARTH IS A SPHERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Re: World is flat
« Reply #7 on: November 28, 2011, 02:50:13 AM »
The funny thing is that all you lot are stupid, the world is round, and can you prove the world is flat??

don't think you can, other than edited pictures or stuff like that.

 ???
WHO LET THE DOGS OUT!?
WHO WHO WHO?

*

Tausami

  • Head Editor
  • Flat Earth Editor
  • 6767
  • Venerated Official of the High Zetetic Council
Re: World is flat
« Reply #8 on: November 28, 2011, 03:01:29 AM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

*

PizzaPlanet

  • 12260
  • Now available in stereo
Re: World is flat
« Reply #9 on: November 28, 2011, 05:06:46 AM »
The funny thing is that all you lot are stupid, the world is round, and can you prove the world is flat??
Greetings, angry noob. You are an unwelcome pest, only due to your character. But fear not, there were many like you before! Read the FAQ, lurk moar, etc. etc.

don't think you can, other than edited pictures or stuff like that.
Funny, that's exactly what RE'ers are doing.
hacking your precious forum as we speak 8) 8) 8)

Re: World is flat
« Reply #10 on: November 28, 2011, 06:37:51 AM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #11 on: November 28, 2011, 08:42:16 AM »
NASA and other space agencies seem to be spending a lot of money on fake satellites, fake rockets, fake launchings, fake pictures... I wonder if they have any money left!
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: World is flat
« Reply #12 on: November 28, 2011, 09:23:11 AM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #13 on: November 28, 2011, 09:35:46 AM »
NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.

Is that so?

It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57'). 

!?
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #14 on: November 28, 2011, 10:16:31 AM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: World is flat
« Reply #15 on: November 28, 2011, 11:27:43 AM »
NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.

Is that so?
Yes.

It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57'). 

!?

Whats the question?
« Last Edit: November 28, 2011, 11:30:58 AM by Archibald »
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: World is flat
« Reply #16 on: November 28, 2011, 11:40:32 AM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic. 
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #17 on: November 28, 2011, 11:55:01 AM »
All I can say is Duh.
The FAQ needs updating to reflect the falsehood of the FAQ.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: World is flat
« Reply #18 on: November 28, 2011, 12:11:36 PM »
All I can say is Duh.


This may be your most intellectually challenging posts to date.  Great Job good fellow!
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #19 on: November 28, 2011, 12:17:04 PM »
All I can say is Duh.


This may be your most intellectually challenging posts to date.  Great Job good fellow!

No one responds to anything else around here. I've asked flat out questions and all you get is pointed to a fake fictional FAQ. You have to resort to their tactics.
The FAQ needs updating to reflect the falsehood of the FAQ.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #20 on: November 28, 2011, 12:24:59 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic.

Simple. They are part of the conspiracy.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: World is flat
« Reply #21 on: November 28, 2011, 01:01:13 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic.

Simple. They are part of the conspiracy.


Not so simple.  You are essentially predicating your fictitious conspiracy on what you would label similarities based on FE advocates who believe in a vast collective conspiracy to decieve the public while raking in great profits.  There isnt much similarity though when millions and millions have interacted with and lived in the  region known as Iraq.  Besides, it has never taken the false accusation that a false land actually exists to start a war.  In reality, it takes much less and is much easier to initiate than any extravagant lengths such as you have proposed.  Troll harder.
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #22 on: November 28, 2011, 01:06:46 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic.

Simple. They are part of the conspiracy.


Not so simple.  You are essentially predicating your fictitious conspiracy on what you would label similarities based on FE advocates who believe in a vast collective conspiracy to decieve the public while raking in great profits.  There isnt much similarity though when millions and millions have interacted with and lived in the  region known as Iraq.  Besides, it has never taken the false accusation that a false land actually exists to start a war.  In reality, it takes much less and is much easier to initiate than any extravagant lengths such as you have proposed.  Troll harder.

I can only assume that you have been brainwashed by the Iran Exists Theory and are an unwitting cog in the conspiracy.

What makes your conspiracy (that would also involve millions of people) better than mine. Besides the fact that mine would be easier to pull off and would be more profitable.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: World is flat
« Reply #23 on: November 28, 2011, 01:37:27 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic.

Simple. They are part of the conspiracy.


Not so simple.  You are essentially predicating your fictitious conspiracy on what you would label similarities based on FE advocates who believe in a vast collective conspiracy to decieve the public while raking in great profits.  There isnt much similarity though when millions and millions have interacted with and lived in the  region known as Iraq.  Besides, it has never taken the false accusation that a false land actually exists to start a war.  In reality, it takes much less and is much easier to initiate than any extravagant lengths such as you have proposed.  Troll harder.

I can only assume that you have been brainwashed by the Iran Exists Theory and are an unwitting cog in the conspiracy.

What makes your conspiracy (that would also involve millions of people) better than mine. Besides the fact that mine would be easier to pull off and would be more profitable.

First of all, please dont insult me, its not ''my'' conspiracy.  Second, the cospiracy involving space agencies and a few select others, (or the one you label my conspiracy) does not have need for millions of active participents, the notion implying otherwise is necessarily false.  In attempt to help you understand as I am most compassionate even in the face of sarcastic inquiries, I will succumb to a level of understanding coupled with equal terminology.  What makes ''my'' conspiracy ''better'' than yours has already been elucidated by me.  The most salient being, (we will ignore geographical fact simply to to attenuate the chances of your continued obfuscated comparisons)  that it would not take a false accusation of a false land to initiate the invasion and subsequent war  with a country, real or not real.  How many examples have there been?  Nobody possessing sound reasoning would grant this a fair assessment. 
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #24 on: November 28, 2011, 01:46:27 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic.

Simple. They are part of the conspiracy.


Not so simple.  You are essentially predicating your fictitious conspiracy on what you would label similarities based on FE advocates who believe in a vast collective conspiracy to decieve the public while raking in great profits.  There isnt much similarity though when millions and millions have interacted with and lived in the  region known as Iraq.  Besides, it has never taken the false accusation that a false land actually exists to start a war.  In reality, it takes much less and is much easier to initiate than any extravagant lengths such as you have proposed.  Troll harder.

I can only assume that you have been brainwashed by the Iran Exists Theory and are an unwitting cog in the conspiracy.

What makes your conspiracy (that would also involve millions of people) better than mine. Besides the fact that mine would be easier to pull off and would be more profitable.

First of all, please dont insult me, its not ''my'' conspiracy.  Second, the cospiracy involving space agencies and a few select others, (or the one you label my conspiracy) does not have need for millions of active participents, the notion implying otherwise is necessarily false.  In attempt to help you understand as I am most compassionate even in the face of sarcastic inquiries, I will succumb to a level of understanding coupled with equal terminology.  What makes ''my'' conspiracy ''better'' than yours has already been elucidated by me.  The most salient being, (we will ignore geographical fact simply to to attenuate the chances of your continued obfuscated comparisons)  that it would not take a false accusation of a false land to initiate the invasion and subsequent war  with a country, real or not real.  How many examples have there been?  Nobody possessing sound reasoning would grant this a fair assessment.

Its easier to go to war against a country that doesn't exist than to attack one that does...


Also, I call it "your" conspiracy because you claim it is true...

It would necessarily take millions of active participants to achieve what the NASA conspiracy supposedly does. Scientists around the world, airplane pilots, submarine captains, GPS manufacturers, and a lot of other people that deal with reality all the time. Either everyone in the world is ridiculously stupid or they are in league with the conspiracy. Your choice...

To stoop to your faulty level of reasoning (I'm nice like that), how many conspiracies has you seen have the control that you give NASA?

You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: World is flat
« Reply #25 on: November 28, 2011, 02:03:15 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic.

Simple. They are part of the conspiracy.


Not so simple.  You are essentially predicating your fictitious conspiracy on what you would label similarities based on FE advocates who believe in a vast collective conspiracy to decieve the public while raking in great profits.  There isnt much similarity though when millions and millions have interacted with and lived in the  region known as Iraq.  Besides, it has never taken the false accusation that a false land actually exists to start a war.  In reality, it takes much less and is much easier to initiate than any extravagant lengths such as you have proposed.  Troll harder.

I can only assume that you have been brainwashed by the Iran Exists Theory and are an unwitting cog in the conspiracy.

What makes your conspiracy (that would also involve millions of people) better than mine. Besides the fact that mine would be easier to pull off and would be more profitable.

First of all, please dont insult me, its not ''my'' conspiracy.  Second, the cospiracy involving space agencies and a few select others, (or the one you label my conspiracy) does not have need for millions of active participents, the notion implying otherwise is necessarily false.  In attempt to help you understand as I am most compassionate even in the face of sarcastic inquiries, I will succumb to a level of understanding coupled with equal terminology.  What makes ''my'' conspiracy ''better'' than yours has already been elucidated by me.  The most salient being, (we will ignore geographical fact simply to to attenuate the chances of your continued obfuscated comparisons)  that it would not take a false accusation of a false land to initiate the invasion and subsequent war  with a country, real or not real.  How many examples have there been?  Nobody possessing sound reasoning would grant this a fair assessment.

Its easier to go to war against a country that doesn't exist than to attack one that does...


Also, I call it "your" conspiracy because you claim it is true...

It would necessarily take millions of active participants to achieve what the NASA conspiracy supposedly does. Scientists around the world, airplane pilots, submarine captains, GPS manufacturers, and a lot of other people that deal with reality all the time. Either everyone in the world is ridiculously stupid or they are in league with the conspiracy. Your choice...

To stoop to your faulty level of reasoning (I'm nice like that), how many conspiracies has you seen have the control that you give NASA?


It would not be easier to send thousands of troops to a non existent place.  Your comparisons are simply too fundamentally flawed to be considered as a NASA/World Space Coalition (WSC) comparison to be taken seriously.  Millions of people are not needed.  GPS manufactures produce the devices employed to succussfully navigate the known world, the navigation advice is relayed from a signal, which is in the control of the WSC.  The manufaturers allow for the retrieving of the signal to the devices they produce to tthe LCD screen to the consumers view.  They are not needed in the conspiracy.  If you have rebuttles to any of this submit them please, if not, we may move on to the next group of  'millions' you suspect are indespensible  in ''my'' conspiracy.  I will be happy to assist. 
« Last Edit: November 28, 2011, 02:28:26 PM by Archibald »
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #26 on: November 28, 2011, 02:25:40 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic.

Simple. They are part of the conspiracy.


Not so simple.  You are essentially predicating your fictitious conspiracy on what you would label similarities based on FE advocates who believe in a vast collective conspiracy to decieve the public while raking in great profits.  There isnt much similarity though when millions and millions have interacted with and lived in the  region known as Iraq.  Besides, it has never taken the false accusation that a false land actually exists to start a war.  In reality, it takes much less and is much easier to initiate than any extravagant lengths such as you have proposed.  Troll harder.

I can only assume that you have been brainwashed by the Iran Exists Theory and are an unwitting cog in the conspiracy.

What makes your conspiracy (that would also involve millions of people) better than mine. Besides the fact that mine would be easier to pull off and would be more profitable.

First of all, please dont insult me, its not ''my'' conspiracy.  Second, the cospiracy involving space agencies and a few select others, (or the one you label my conspiracy) does not have need for millions of active participents, the notion implying otherwise is necessarily false.  In attempt to help you understand as I am most compassionate even in the face of sarcastic inquiries, I will succumb to a level of understanding coupled with equal terminology.  What makes ''my'' conspiracy ''better'' than yours has already been elucidated by me.  The most salient being, (we will ignore geographical fact simply to to attenuate the chances of your continued obfuscated comparisons)  that it would not take a false accusation of a false land to initiate the invasion and subsequent war  with a country, real or not real.  How many examples have there been?  Nobody possessing sound reasoning would grant this a fair assessment.

Its easier to go to war against a country that doesn't exist than to attack one that does...


Also, I call it "your" conspiracy because you claim it is true...

It would necessarily take millions of active participants to achieve what the NASA conspiracy supposedly does. Scientists around the world, airplane pilots, submarine captains, GPS manufacturers, and a lot of other people that deal with reality all the time. Either everyone in the world is ridiculously stupid or they are in league with the conspiracy. Your choice...

To stoop to your faulty level of reasoning (I'm nice like that), how many conspiracies has you seen have the control that you give NASA?


It would not be easier to send thousands of troops to a non existent place.  Your comparisons are simply too fundamentally flawed to be considered as a NASA/World Space Coalition (WSC) comparison to be taken seriously.  Millions of people are not needed.  GPS manufactures produce the devices employed to succussfully navigate the known world, the navigation advice is relayed from a signal, which is in control of the WSC.  The manufaturers allow for the retrieving of the signal to the devices they produce to tthe LCD screen to the consumers view.  They are not needed in the conspiracy.  If you have rebuttles to any of this submit them please, if not, we may move on to the next group of  'millions' you suspect are indespensible  in ''my'' conspiracy.  I will be happy to assist.

I think you're finally beginning to understand the error of your ways. Let us complete the process.

99% of scientists around the world would have to be paid off to keep faking data and ignoring what they observe. Lets see you discount those millions.

P.S. it would be a lot cheaper to send soldiers to some random place, call it Iran, and then pocket the money that's not being used for artillery, medical aid, and the general overhead cost of killing people.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

?

Archibald

  • 1082
  • mans reach exceeds his grasp
Re: World is flat
« Reply #27 on: November 28, 2011, 02:47:15 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic.

Simple. They are part of the conspiracy.


Not so simple.  You are essentially predicating your fictitious conspiracy on what you would label similarities based on FE advocates who believe in a vast collective conspiracy to decieve the public while raking in great profits.  There isnt much similarity though when millions and millions have interacted with and lived in the  region known as Iraq.  Besides, it has never taken the false accusation that a false land actually exists to start a war.  In reality, it takes much less and is much easier to initiate than any extravagant lengths such as you have proposed.  Troll harder.

I can only assume that you have been brainwashed by the Iran Exists Theory and are an unwitting cog in the conspiracy.

What makes your conspiracy (that would also involve millions of people) better than mine. Besides the fact that mine would be easier to pull off and would be more profitable.

First of all, please dont insult me, its not ''my'' conspiracy.  Second, the cospiracy involving space agencies and a few select others, (or the one you label my conspiracy) does not have need for millions of active participents, the notion implying otherwise is necessarily false.  In attempt to help you understand as I am most compassionate even in the face of sarcastic inquiries, I will succumb to a level of understanding coupled with equal terminology.  What makes ''my'' conspiracy ''better'' than yours has already been elucidated by me.  The most salient being, (we will ignore geographical fact simply to to attenuate the chances of your continued obfuscated comparisons)  that it would not take a false accusation of a false land to initiate the invasion and subsequent war  with a country, real or not real.  How many examples have there been?  Nobody possessing sound reasoning would grant this a fair assessment.

Its easier to go to war against a country that doesn't exist than to attack one that does...


Also, I call it "your" conspiracy because you claim it is true...

It would necessarily take millions of active participants to achieve what the NASA conspiracy supposedly does. Scientists around the world, airplane pilots, submarine captains, GPS manufacturers, and a lot of other people that deal with reality all the time. Either everyone in the world is ridiculously stupid or they are in league with the conspiracy. Your choice...

To stoop to your faulty level of reasoning (I'm nice like that), how many conspiracies has you seen have the control that you give NASA?


It would not be easier to send thousands of troops to a non existent place.  Your comparisons are simply too fundamentally flawed to be considered as a NASA/World Space Coalition (WSC) comparison to be taken seriously.  Millions of people are not needed.  GPS manufactures produce the devices employed to succussfully navigate the known world, the navigation advice is relayed from a signal, which is in control of the WSC.  The manufaturers allow for the retrieving of the signal to the devices they produce to tthe LCD screen to the consumers view.  They are not needed in the conspiracy.  If you have rebuttles to any of this submit them please, if not, we may move on to the next group of  'millions' you suspect are indespensible  in ''my'' conspiracy.  I will be happy to assist.

I think you're finally beginning to understand the error of your ways. Let us complete the process.

99% of scientists around the world would have to be paid off to keep faking data and ignoring what they observe. Lets see you discount those millions.

P.S. it would be a lot cheaper to send soldiers to some random place, call it Iran, and then pocket the money that's not being used for artillery, medical aid, and the general overhead cost of killing people.

99% of scientists are simply doing more advanced work pertaining to the laws  and theories that you learned about throughout your schooling (provided you were priveledged to any).  Their work is but an extension of the already constructed foundation which so many readily accept.  It costs  as much money to pay them to accept RET as it does for them to pay you.  Have you recieved any money?  No, because it does not cost money.

P.S (since we are using this antiquated correspondence formality)  It is not easier, just give up your flawed comparisons.  Whatever random land would act as Iran would have to have the same  exact setup, populace, technology, and other georaphical features and temperatures as has been documented regarding this ''alleged'' region since ancient times have dictated.  The ones who profit from wartime are the ones who finance, or, financiers.  Less some resource, or strategic or lucrative property is ascertained. 
For whatever reason you allow Clocktower to derail any thread Archibald posts in.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #28 on: November 28, 2011, 03:02:10 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic.

Simple. They are part of the conspiracy.


Not so simple.  You are essentially predicating your fictitious conspiracy on what you would label similarities based on FE advocates who believe in a vast collective conspiracy to decieve the public while raking in great profits.  There isnt much similarity though when millions and millions have interacted with and lived in the  region known as Iraq.  Besides, it has never taken the false accusation that a false land actually exists to start a war.  In reality, it takes much less and is much easier to initiate than any extravagant lengths such as you have proposed.  Troll harder.

I can only assume that you have been brainwashed by the Iran Exists Theory and are an unwitting cog in the conspiracy.

What makes your conspiracy (that would also involve millions of people) better than mine. Besides the fact that mine would be easier to pull off and would be more profitable.

First of all, please dont insult me, its not ''my'' conspiracy.  Second, the cospiracy involving space agencies and a few select others, (or the one you label my conspiracy) does not have need for millions of active participents, the notion implying otherwise is necessarily false.  In attempt to help you understand as I am most compassionate even in the face of sarcastic inquiries, I will succumb to a level of understanding coupled with equal terminology.  What makes ''my'' conspiracy ''better'' than yours has already been elucidated by me.  The most salient being, (we will ignore geographical fact simply to to attenuate the chances of your continued obfuscated comparisons)  that it would not take a false accusation of a false land to initiate the invasion and subsequent war  with a country, real or not real.  How many examples have there been?  Nobody possessing sound reasoning would grant this a fair assessment.

Its easier to go to war against a country that doesn't exist than to attack one that does...


Also, I call it "your" conspiracy because you claim it is true...

It would necessarily take millions of active participants to achieve what the NASA conspiracy supposedly does. Scientists around the world, airplane pilots, submarine captains, GPS manufacturers, and a lot of other people that deal with reality all the time. Either everyone in the world is ridiculously stupid or they are in league with the conspiracy. Your choice...

To stoop to your faulty level of reasoning (I'm nice like that), how many conspiracies has you seen have the control that you give NASA?


It would not be easier to send thousands of troops to a non existent place.  Your comparisons are simply too fundamentally flawed to be considered as a NASA/World Space Coalition (WSC) comparison to be taken seriously.  Millions of people are not needed.  GPS manufactures produce the devices employed to succussfully navigate the known world, the navigation advice is relayed from a signal, which is in control of the WSC.  The manufaturers allow for the retrieving of the signal to the devices they produce to tthe LCD screen to the consumers view.  They are not needed in the conspiracy.  If you have rebuttles to any of this submit them please, if not, we may move on to the next group of  'millions' you suspect are indespensible  in ''my'' conspiracy.  I will be happy to assist.

I think you're finally beginning to understand the error of your ways. Let us complete the process.

99% of scientists around the world would have to be paid off to keep faking data and ignoring what they observe. Lets see you discount those millions.

P.S. it would be a lot cheaper to send soldiers to some random place, call it Iran, and then pocket the money that's not being used for artillery, medical aid, and the general overhead cost of killing people.

99% of scientists are simply doing more advanced work pertaining to the laws  and theories that you learned about throughout your schooling (provided you were priveledged to any).  Their work is but an extension of the already constructed foundation which so many readily accept.  It costs  as much money to pay them to accept RET as it does for them to pay you.  Have you recieved any money?  No, because it does not cost money.

P.S (since we are using this antiquated correspondence formality)  It is not easier, just give up your flawed comparisons.  Whatever random land would act as Iran would have to have the same  exact setup, populace, technology, and other georaphical features and temperatures as has been documented regarding this ''alleged'' region since ancient times have dictated.  The ones who profit from wartime are the ones who finance, or, financiers.  Less some resource, or strategic or lucrative property is ascertained.

The comparison stands, your inability to accept it is not my problem, it is yours.

Just to humor you, I will present another case. If an engineer creates a satellite to be launched into orbit, wouldn't it be suspicious if that satellite never actually made it. I doubt he would be content with a clever illusion of a space launch rather than an actual one.
You, sir, can't comprehend the idea of bottoms.

Re: World is flat
« Reply #29 on: November 28, 2011, 03:29:21 PM »
What does the "Conspiracy" have to gain?

Money. Lots and lots of money.

The source of their "lots of money" has never been elaborated upon. Where do they get this money from? And why can they only get it if people think the world is round?

NASA has a lot of funding for space missions. Where do you think it's all going if they aren't going to space?

The national defense budget is WAY bigger than NASA's, doesn't it make more sense to fake a war than to fake a rocket?


It depends, do you have anything of substance?  The defense budget is several times larger, and there expenses are several times larger.  Also, NASA has been at the helm of every space agency in the world.
It was americans which allowed for the alleged orbit of sputnik (57') and the subsequent first man in space (59').   Which allowed for the start of the great exorbitant profits race which both sides achieved and enjoyed all the while working together  to continue the luxury.  The space race story actually begins (on my account) with the defection of german rocket scientists following WW1 and again  after WW2.

I'll give you an example...

I could use your same logic and say that I don't believe that Iran is a real country. Our government (along with every other government in the world) decided that they would deceive the public into believing that this fictitious country actually exists. Then, when everyone is worried about the (fake) country getting nuclear weapons, they will throw money at the governments to take care of the problem. Since there is no Iran, and no nuclear problem, they're free to bask in the money that they conned the world out of.

This sounds as probable, if not more so, than NASA controlling the world.

Except that geographically, millioins and millions of peoPle have visited the region known as Iraq.  The things that people say are there (save for the alleged WMD's) have in fact been observed.  I would say most people who have a circle of affiliates  outside of say....10, have known someone or knows someone who has had a  family member or friend go to Iraq.   So no, not really the same logic.

Simple. They are part of the conspiracy.


Not so simple.  You are essentially predicating your fictitious conspiracy on what you would label similarities based on FE advocates who believe in a vast collective conspiracy to decieve the public while raking in great profits.  There isnt much similarity though when millions and millions have interacted with and lived in the  region known as Iraq.  Besides, it has never taken the false accusation that a false land actually exists to start a war.  In reality, it takes much less and is much easier to initiate than any extravagant lengths such as you have proposed.  Troll harder.

I can only assume that you have been brainwashed by the Iran Exists Theory and are an unwitting cog in the conspiracy.

What makes your conspiracy (that would also involve millions of people) better than mine. Besides the fact that mine would be easier to pull off and would be more profitable.

First of all, please dont insult me, its not ''my'' conspiracy.  Second, the cospiracy involving space agencies and a few select others, (or the one you label my conspiracy) does not have need for millions of active participents, the notion implying otherwise is necessarily false.  In attempt to help you understand as I am most compassionate even in the face of sarcastic inquiries, I will succumb to a level of understanding coupled with equal terminology.  What makes ''my'' conspiracy ''better'' than yours has already been elucidated by me.  The most salient being, (we will ignore geographical fact simply to to attenuate the chances of your continued obfuscated comparisons)  that it would not take a false accusation of a false land to initiate the invasion and subsequent war  with a country, real or not real.  How many examples have there been?  Nobody possessing sound reasoning would grant this a fair assessment.

Its easier to go to war against a country that doesn't exist than to attack one that does...


Also, I call it "your" conspiracy because you claim it is true...

It would necessarily take millions of active participants to achieve what the NASA conspiracy supposedly does. Scientists around the world, airplane pilots, submarine captains, GPS manufacturers, and a lot of other people that deal with reality all the time. Either everyone in the world is ridiculously stupid or they are in league with the conspiracy. Your choice...

To stoop to your faulty level of reasoning (I'm nice like that), how many conspiracies has you seen have the control that you give NASA?


It would not be easier to send thousands of troops to a non existent place.  Your comparisons are simply too fundamentally flawed to be considered as a NASA/World Space Coalition (WSC) comparison to be taken seriously.  Millions of people are not needed.  GPS manufactures produce the devices employed to succussfully navigate the known world, the navigation advice is relayed from a signal, which is in control of the WSC.  The manufaturers allow for the retrieving of the signal to the devices they produce to tthe LCD screen to the consumers view.  They are not needed in the conspiracy.  If you have rebuttles to any of this submit them please, if not, we may move on to the next group of  'millions' you suspect are indespensible  in ''my'' conspiracy.  I will be happy to assist.

I think you're finally beginning to understand the error of your ways. Let us complete the process.

99% of scientists around the world would have to be paid off to keep faking data and ignoring what they observe. Lets see you discount those millions.

P.S. it would be a lot cheaper to send soldiers to some random place, call it Iran, and then pocket the money that's not being used for artillery, medical aid, and the general overhead cost of killing people.

99% of scientists are simply doing more advanced work pertaining to the laws  and theories that you learned about throughout your schooling (provided you were priveledged to any).  Their work is but an extension of the already constructed foundation which so many readily accept.  It costs  as much money to pay them to accept RET as it does for them to pay you.  Have you recieved any money?  No, because it does not cost money.

P.S (since we are using this antiquated correspondence formality)  It is not easier, just give up your flawed comparisons.  Whatever random land would act as Iran would have to have the same  exact setup, populace, technology, and other georaphical features and temperatures as has been documented regarding this ''alleged'' region since ancient times have dictated.  The ones who profit from wartime are the ones who finance, or, financiers.  Less some resource, or strategic or lucrative property is ascertained.

The comparison stands, your inability to accept it is not my problem, it is yours.

Just to humor you, I will present another case. If an engineer creates a satellite to be launched into orbit, wouldn't it be suspicious if that satellite never actually made it. I doubt he would be content with a clever illusion of a space launch rather than an actual one.

It means that space agencies have to fake images in real time.
“The Earth looks flat, therefore it is” FEers wisdom.