Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations

  • 852 Replies
  • 176280 Views
*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45080
  • +87/-109
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #660 on: May 05, 2014, 11:21:10 AM »
The very fact that 4 times now you failed to pm me to get the data, means you are the one that is scared of the truth. That's why you won't pm me. What other reason could there be.
Maybe he's afraid that you'll sell his email address to spammers.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #661 on: May 06, 2014, 10:14:59 AM »
I PM'd you for that same data. No reply.

That's simply because—being an inveterate liar—sceptimatic cannot provide any proof that he allegedly sent PMs to even one single forum member or one single moderator.

And that's simply because his purported "experiment" was never carried out, and there are NO research results to send to anybody.
 

?

11cookeaw1

Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #662 on: May 07, 2014, 12:24:50 AM »
Scepti, what motive is there for people to hide what goes on in a nuclear reactor. The perceived danger of the nuclear radiation by the public is why we don't get most of our energy for nuclear radiation. It also cause them to be forced to spend a VERY large amount of money on safety features. The people who ran them would be FAR richer if they revealed that used hydrogen to create energy. Your conspiracy theory is literally equivalent to saying that the health risks of cigarettes are made up by the very people who sell them. There is absolutely no benefit in keeping the conspiracy theory. If nuclear power plants actually used hydrogen, then it would be easy for someone to create a power plant that uses hydrogen to create energy and not pretend that it's a nuclear plant. That way it would be much easier to get permission to build it and they wouldn't have to spend huge amounts of money on safety features, meaning it would be EASY for them to out computer everyone else and rack up a fortune. So Scepti WHAT'S THE INCENTIVE!

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #663 on: May 07, 2014, 03:31:29 AM »
Scepti, what motive is there for people to hide what goes on in a nuclear reactor. The perceived danger of the nuclear radiation by the public is why we don't get most of our energy for nuclear radiation. It also cause them to be forced to spend a VERY large amount of money on safety features. The people who ran them would be FAR richer if they revealed that used hydrogen to create energy. Your conspiracy theory is literally equivalent to saying that the health risks of cigarettes are made up by the very people who sell them. There is absolutely no benefit in keeping the conspiracy theory. If nuclear power plants actually used hydrogen, then it would be easy for someone to create a power plant that uses hydrogen to create energy and not pretend that it's a nuclear plant. That way it would be much easier to get permission to build it and they wouldn't have to spend huge amounts of money on safety features, meaning it would be EASY for them to out computer everyone else and rack up a fortune. So Scepti WHAT'S THE INCENTIVE!
What is the most abundant form of energy on this Earth? What powers Earth's sun, will also power Earth's gadgets.
When nuclear power stations go wrong, they seem to blow up. Why?
The incentives could be a whole host of things. I don't profess to know it all. Money, secrecy, the ability to amaze and scare people, etc.

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • +0/-0
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #664 on: May 07, 2014, 03:35:55 AM »
Scepti, what motive is there for people to hide what goes on in a nuclear reactor. The perceived danger of the nuclear radiation by the public is why we don't get most of our energy for nuclear radiation. It also cause them to be forced to spend a VERY large amount of money on safety features. The people who ran them would be FAR richer if they revealed that used hydrogen to create energy. Your conspiracy theory is literally equivalent to saying that the health risks of cigarettes are made up by the very people who sell them. There is absolutely no benefit in keeping the conspiracy theory. If nuclear power plants actually used hydrogen, then it would be easy for someone to create a power plant that uses hydrogen to create energy and not pretend that it's a nuclear plant. That way it would be much easier to get permission to build it and they wouldn't have to spend huge amounts of money on safety features, meaning it would be EASY for them to out computer everyone else and rack up a fortune. So Scepti WHAT'S THE INCENTIVE!
What is the most abundant form of energy on this Earth? What powers Earth's sun, will also power Earth's gadgets.
When nuclear power stations go wrong, they seem to blow up. Why?
The incentives could be a whole host of things. I don't profess to know it all. Money, secrecy, the ability to amaze and scare people, etc.
Nuclear power station don't blow up.

?

Starman

  • 3860
  • +0/-0
  • Never miss a day to learn something
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #665 on: May 07, 2014, 03:42:25 AM »
Scepti, what motive is there for people to hide what goes on in a nuclear reactor. The perceived danger of the nuclear radiation by the public is why we don't get most of our energy for nuclear radiation. It also cause them to be forced to spend a VERY large amount of money on safety features. The people who ran them would be FAR richer if they revealed that used hydrogen to create energy. Your conspiracy theory is literally equivalent to saying that the health risks of cigarettes are made up by the very people who sell them. There is absolutely no benefit in keeping the conspiracy theory. If nuclear power plants actually used hydrogen, then it would be easy for someone to create a power plant that uses hydrogen to create energy and not pretend that it's a nuclear plant. That way it would be much easier to get permission to build it and they wouldn't have to spend huge amounts of money on safety features, meaning it would be EASY for them to out computer everyone else and rack up a fortune. So Scepti WHAT'S THE INCENTIVE!
What is the most abundant form of energy on this Earth? What powers Earth's sun, will also power Earth's gadgets.
When nuclear power stations go wrong, they seem to blow up. Why?
The incentives could be a whole host of things. I don't profess to know it all. Money, secrecy, the ability to amaze and scare people, etc.
Nuclear power station don't blow up.
You lasted about 3 minutes. Just stay out of any conversation with me, you're not worth my time.
I was reading other stuff. If you tell me to so something I will do the opposite.

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45080
  • +87/-109
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #666 on: May 07, 2014, 05:46:18 AM »
What is the most abundant form of energy on this Earth?
Solar radiation.  It powers a whole planet full of plants.

What powers Earth's sun, will also power Earth's gadgets.
Yes, there are high hopes that fusion will be the energy source of the future.  Glad you're coming around.
 
When nuclear power stations go wrong, they seem to blow up. Why?
Actually, reactors tend to melt down rather than blow up.  However, when a reactor melts down, the extreme heat generated will cause the coolant in the pressure vessel to overheat and either the steam is vented or the pressure vessel explodes.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • +0/-0
  • How else would light work?
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #667 on: May 07, 2014, 07:13:11 AM »
What is it about about disbelieving that you value so much more than believing, scepti?
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

?

RandomREalist

  • 659
  • +0/-0
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #668 on: May 07, 2014, 08:12:32 AM »
You keep believing that, Marky. I'll carry on questioning it all.

Do you question your own existence?

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #669 on: May 07, 2014, 09:02:19 AM »
What is it about about disbelieving that you value so much more than believing, scepti?
I've seen enough crap in the media to make me question everything. It's not about wanting to disbelieve everything, it's being put into a situation where the more you look into things, the more you see the real potential for being duped arises.
To you, everything may appear hunky dory. That depends on your state of mind, as in, if you're fully trusting, unconditionally, then your mind will focus on trusting official lines, whilst distrusting those who question that.

I would like nothing better than to be told the truth and not have to question what's told. I don't even think you're that naive that you can't see the lies we get spun.
If you can see lies with a few things, tell me honestly why they can't outright lie about most things?

The only reason why those who rule over you, don't go all out and really extract the urine from you, is because they know that there is a large amount of people that are asleep, but are not in a deep sleep and can be awoken easily.

They are testing the water right now, getting more and more ridiculous with stuff, like telling us all that they found hundreds of new planets and remote control operating a soc alled mars rover, even though every movement of the joy stick supposedly takes supposedly about 6 minutes to operate the rover, then another 6 minutes for them to see that operation performed. A total of about 12 minutes with each operation.
Some remote control that is. Hahahahaha.

Anyway, it's pathetic things like this, plus the pathetic body language the liars show when spinning us the lies.
I assume you believe body language experts can determine if a person is being truthful to a high degree, right?


*

JimmyTheCrab

  • 10340
  • +0/-5
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #670 on: May 07, 2014, 09:31:27 AM »

I assume you believe body language experts can determine if a person is being truthful to a high degree, right?
Nope.  All the latest research shows they are quite poor at it.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

JimmyTheCrab

  • 10340
  • +0/-5
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #671 on: May 07, 2014, 10:28:43 AM »
Quote
Well I wouldn't expect any other answer from the likes of you, crabby.
Why not?  I don't remember expressing my scepticism of body language experts before.
Quote from: mikeman7918
a single photon can pass through two sluts

Quote from: Chicken Fried Clucker
if Donald Trump stuck his penis in me after trying on clothes I would have that date and time burned in my head.

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • +0/-0
  • How else would light work?
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #672 on: May 07, 2014, 10:47:54 AM »
That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. You "believe" in the capabilities of body language experts without any mention of evidence but you "disbelieve" in other people's ability to operate rovers on Mars. What convinced you about these body language experts that was lacking from the MSL mission?
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #673 on: May 07, 2014, 11:01:50 AM »
That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. You "believe" in the capabilities of body language experts without any mention of evidence but you "disbelieve" in other people's ability to operate rovers on Mars. What convinced you about these body language experts that was lacking from the MSL mission?
It doesn't actually take body language experts to spot blatantly bad liars.

?

inquisitive

  • 5108
  • +0/-0
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #674 on: May 07, 2014, 11:07:28 AM »
That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. You "believe" in the capabilities of body language experts without any mention of evidence but you "disbelieve" in other people's ability to operate rovers on Mars. What convinced you about these body language experts that was lacking from the MSL mission?
It doesn't actually take body language experts to spot blatantly bad liars.
People say you have not replied to their PMs.

?

QuQu

  • 231
  • +0/-0
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #675 on: May 07, 2014, 11:08:32 AM »
That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. You "believe" in the capabilities of body language experts without any mention of evidence but you "disbelieve" in other people's ability to operate rovers on Mars. What convinced you about these body language experts that was lacking from the MSL mission?
It doesn't actually take body language experts to spot blatantly bad liars.

You personally need only a mirror.

?

inquisitive

  • 5108
  • +0/-0
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #676 on: May 07, 2014, 11:17:39 AM »
That's the kind of thing I'm talking about. You "believe" in the capabilities of body language experts without any mention of evidence but you "disbelieve" in other people's ability to operate rovers on Mars. What convinced you about these body language experts that was lacking from the MSL mission?
It doesn't actually take body language experts to spot blatantly bad liars.
People say you have not replied to their PMs.
So what do you want me to do about that?
Have you replied?

*

markjo

  • Content Nazi
  • 45080
  • +87/-109
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #677 on: May 07, 2014, 01:16:15 PM »
What is it about about disbelieving that you value so much more than believing, scepti?
I've seen enough crap in the media to make me question everything.
That's good because you'd be an idiot if you believed everything that the media has to say, especially about science.  The content that the media produces is usually over simplified and/or misunderstood by the authors.

However, if you were to take a college level science course or two, then that would be a different story.  In a lab science environment, not only are you given the step-by-step derivation of these concepts, you also get a chance to perform experiments to test and validate them.
Science is what happens when preconception meets verification.
Quote from: Robosteve
Besides, perhaps FET is a conspiracy too.
Quote from: bullhorn
It is just the way it is, you understanding it doesn't concern me.

*

sokarul

  • 19303
  • +1/-1
  • Extra Racist
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #678 on: May 07, 2014, 03:02:19 PM »
What is it about about disbelieving that you value so much more than believing, scepti?
...

I would like nothing better than to be told the truth and not have to question what's told. I don't even think you're that naive that you can't see the lies we get spun.
If you can see lies with a few things, tell me honestly why they can't outright lie about most things?...
Kinda of like how you supposedly have pictures and data for an experiment that proves the earth is flat?
Sceptic why do you want to be told the truth but have no problem spiting out lies?
ANNIHILATOR OF  SHIFTER

It's no slur if it's fact.

*

Goddamnit, Clown

  • 824
  • +0/-0
  • How else would light work?
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #679 on: May 07, 2014, 04:58:34 PM »
It doesn't actually take body language experts to spot blatantly bad liars.
Nevertheless, you believe in these people's ability to do so. What was it that convinced you of that, which 60 years of space exploration hasn't provided?
Big Pendulum have their tentacles everywhere.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #680 on: May 07, 2014, 11:58:59 PM »

I note that sceptimatic still hasn't addressed this claim he made a couple of days ago regarding his alleged "experimental" data.....

Quote
375 people have access to it at this present time. Over 40 of them are scientists. The feed back has been immense to the point that many of them are going to expand on it with some added extras, which they tell me I will see the results of.

It's a brilliantly done experiment which cannot be debunked legitimately.

So... it's about time you came up with some sort of evidence proving that this is not simply another of your fanciful fairy stories.  And of course your purported experiment "cannot be debunked".  That's simply because it doesn't—and never has—existed, other than in your mind.

Prove me wrong.  If you can.
 

 

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #681 on: May 08, 2014, 12:29:02 AM »
What is it about about disbelieving that you value so much more than believing, scepti?
...

I would like nothing better than to be told the truth and not have to question what's told. I don't even think you're that naive that you can't see the lies we get spun.
If you can see lies with a few things, tell me honestly why they can't outright lie about most things?...
Kinda of like how you supposedly have pictures and data for an experiment that proves the earth is flat?
Sceptic why do you want to be told the truth but have no problem spiting out lies?
You have no clue whether I'm telling lies or not. The fact that you haven't seen the results of my experiment and only been told about them makes me a liar. How weird, because you are told about hundreds upon hundreds of experiments done, yet never verified by mainstream science and you seem to have no problem accepting them as being 100% genuine.
Very strange indeed.

?

inquisitive

  • 5108
  • +0/-0
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #682 on: May 08, 2014, 12:32:54 AM »
What is it about about disbelieving that you value so much more than believing, scepti?
...

I would like nothing better than to be told the truth and not have to question what's told. I don't even think you're that naive that you can't see the lies we get spun.
If you can see lies with a few things, tell me honestly why they can't outright lie about most things?...
Kinda of like how you supposedly have pictures and data for an experiment that proves the earth is flat?
Sceptic why do you want to be told the truth but have no problem spiting out lies?
You have no clue whether I'm telling lies or not. The fact that you haven't seen the results of my experiment and only been told about them makes me a liar. How weird, because you are told about hundreds upon hundreds of experiments done, yet never verified by mainstream science and you seem to have no problem accepting them as being 100% genuine.
Very strange indeed.
Yet you ask for PMs, but do not reply to them.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #683 on: May 08, 2014, 12:43:50 AM »
It doesn't actually take body language experts to spot blatantly bad liars.
Nevertheless, you believe in these people's ability to do so. What was it that convinced you of that, which 60 years of space exploration hasn't provided?
If I told you how I know you would go into frenzied denial of it, so let's just say, I know because I have had experience in knowing.


As for supposed space exploration. What has it provided?
Weirdly, they brought back supposed samples of moon rock by supposedly going to the moon and yet simple telescopes appear good enough to work out the composition of hundreds of light year planets orbiting so called stars.
They can tell you anything because you are willing to wait with baited breath... anything that they spew out, no matter how ridiculous it sounds.

You know when you study all the space stuff? You sit tehre and say, "ahhh, so that's why it works" and yet you never seem to think, " hmm, it appears like they just make it up as they go along and fit it all in piece by piece, no matter how magical it all appears."

Your reasons? It's because you are all wannabe scientists and are terrified of going against what's been put out, because that makes you a rogue to the science community.
It's the fear of being called a conspiracy loon, when you have every right to question some of this stuff, because it's nonsense....clearly nonsense.
Those people are not laughing at us, they are laughing at you, because they know how easy it is to make you starry eyed.
If you actually take a look at a lot of the stuff they put out, they are actually telling you to your face that it's all nonsense...you just can't see it.

That's not a dig at you personally. That's just an observation of people like yourself. It's you people that are in denial of the real truth, because the scientific lies are a very good substitute for what's hidden from us, that is the truth.

*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #684 on: May 08, 2014, 12:46:10 AM »
What is it about about disbelieving that you value so much more than believing, scepti?
...

I would like nothing better than to be told the truth and not have to question what's told. I don't even think you're that naive that you can't see the lies we get spun.
If you can see lies with a few things, tell me honestly why they can't outright lie about most things?...
Kinda of like how you supposedly have pictures and data for an experiment that proves the earth is flat?
Sceptic why do you want to be told the truth but have no problem spiting out lies?
You have no clue whether I'm telling lies or not. The fact that you haven't seen the results of my experiment and only been told about them makes me a liar. How weird, because you are told about hundreds upon hundreds of experiments done, yet never verified by mainstream science and you seem to have no problem accepting them as being 100% genuine.
Very strange indeed.
Yet you ask for PMs, but do not reply to them.
I don't recall asking for pm's off anyone other than Geoffrey. Am I correct on this?
I gave him 4 chances to pm me. He refused. Case closed as far as I'm concerned. He had his chance to get the data, which he would have shared with you lot in pm, as my instructions were to simply not put it in the forum for debate.

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #685 on: May 08, 2014, 12:53:37 AM »
You have no clue whether I'm telling lies or not.


I do sceptimatic.  Have evidence that you're an inveterate liar that is.  How?  Why?

Because you've failed—or ignored—every simple little test I've proposed to you in order to prove that you're telling the truth about anything.

Not one of the moderators on this forum have confirmed—with just a simple "yes" or "no"—that they've received any sort of PM from you outlining your alleged "experiment".  I haven't asked for even the vaguest idea of the actual contents of these purported PMs—just their confirmation of having received them.

Hasn't happened yet.  Care to explain why?
 

*

ausGeoff

  • 6091
  • +0/-0
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #686 on: May 08, 2014, 01:03:55 AM »

I don't recall asking for PMs off anyone other than Geoffrey. Am I correct on this?
I gave him 4 chances to pm me. He refused.

Nope.  This is simply another one of your disingenuous lies sceptimatic, obviously used in an attempt to avoid answering any simple questions about your alleged but non-existent "experiment".

I can assure anybody else here that I most certainly never "refused" to PM sceptimatic.  Why would I have bothered?  If he was seemingly so keen to prove his point and/or the validity of his alleged experiment, he would've simply PMd me regardless.  Why the big secret and the repeated childish demands that I PM him?

Any legitimate researcher is normally more than keen to share his results with other people, especially if they're of a particularly spectacular nature (such as proving the earth is indeed flat).
 


(And see my post above about moderators never receiving PMs from sceptimatic either.)


*

sceptimatic

  • Flat Earth Scientist
  • 30076
  • +3/-4
Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #687 on: May 08, 2014, 01:09:08 AM »
You have no clue whether I'm telling lies or not.


I do sceptimatic.  Have evidence that you're an inveterate liar that is.  How?  Why?

Because you've failed—or ignored—every simple little test I've proposed to you in order to prove that you're telling the truth about anything.

Not one of the moderators on this forum have confirmed—with just a simple "yes" or "no"—that they've received any sort of PM from you outlining your alleged "experiment".  I haven't asked for even the vaguest idea of the actual contents of these purported PMs—just their confirmation of having received them.

Hasn't happened yet.  Care to explain why?
I told them not to divulge the information to anyone on the forum but they were free to pass it on to anyone they wish outside of it.
This was all agreed on and I was satisfied that they were people of their word, which has proved to be the case.
I was willing to take you at your word not to put it in the forum, yet be free to pass it on to anyone outside. All you had to do is pm me.
I don't trust many people in life, because trust has to be earned and most people do not attempt to earn it, as you would know, as everyone knows.

Each person has very few genuine friends in this world...but many acquaintances.
Most people will stab you in the back for promotion.
Most people will stab you in the back for a monetary gain.
Most people would stab you in the back to steal an idea.
Most people will take advantage of a chance to ridicule an idea, experiment that does not follow a set path.

I gave you 4 chances, Geoffrey, so here's the final deal.
If you want the data, then pm me. I'll give you till midnight tonight, my time. The time is 9:07 am, right now.
If anyone thinks I'm being unfair or not trying to help Geoffrey, let me know.

?

11cookeaw1

Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #688 on: May 08, 2014, 03:35:41 AM »
Scepti, what motive is there for people to hide what goes on in a nuclear reactor. The perceived danger of the nuclear radiation by the public is why we don't get most of our energy for nuclear radiation. It also cause them to be forced to spend a VERY large amount of money on safety features. The people who ran them would be FAR richer if they revealed that used hydrogen to create energy. Your conspiracy theory is literally equivalent to saying that the health risks of cigarettes are made up by the very people who sell them. There is absolutely no benefit in keeping the conspiracy theory. If nuclear power plants actually used hydrogen, then it would be easy for someone to create a power plant that uses hydrogen to create energy and not pretend that it's a nuclear plant. That way it would be much easier to get permission to build it and they wouldn't have to spend huge amounts of money on safety features, meaning it would be EASY for them to out computer everyone else and rack up a fortune. So Scepti WHAT'S THE INCENTIVE!
What is the most abundant form of energy on this Earth? What powers Earth's sun, will also power Earth's gadgets.
When nuclear power stations go wrong, they seem to blow up. Why?
The incentives could be a whole host of things. I don't profess to know it all. Money, secrecy, the ability to amaze and scare people, etc.
Money? The safety features nuclear power plants are forced to have are extremely expensive because of the perceived dangers, and hiring highly trained workers costs a lot. Nuclear power plants would be WAY cheaper to build and run if they weren't force to spend vast amounts of money preventing a radioactive meltdown. Secrecy? There are many countries with nuclear power, quite a number of countries have nuclear weapons, there are hundreds of civilian nuclear reactors alone around the world. You don't realise just how large the conspiracy would have to be.
The ability to amaze and scare people? If it wasn't for people being scared of nuclear power then nuclear power would be FAR more profitable. The incident in Fukishima is causing many existing nuclear reactors to be SHUT DOWN and many planned ones to be cancelled. Exactly how would the nuclear power industry on benefitted from that. There is absolutely no reason the fake it.

?

11cookeaw1

Re: Scepti - Nuclear Power Stations
« Reply #689 on: May 08, 2014, 03:53:59 AM »
What is it about about disbelieving that you value so much more than believing, scepti?
...

I would like nothing better than to be told the truth and not have to question what's told. I don't even think you're that naive that you can't see the lies we get spun.
If you can see lies with a few things, tell me honestly why they can't outright lie about most things?...
Kinda of like how you supposedly have pictures and data for an experiment that proves the earth is flat?
Sceptic why do you want to be told the truth but have no problem spiting out lies?
You have no clue whether I'm telling lies or not. The fact that you haven't seen the results of my experiment and only been told about them makes me a liar. How weird, because you are told about hundreds upon hundreds of experiments done, yet never verified by mainstream science and you seem to have no problem accepting them as being 100% genuine.
Very strange indeed.
"Nerv verified" "NEVER VERIFIED" That is completely and utterly bogus. It's a general rule of scientific research that experiments have to be repeated by independent scientists for them to be accepted. You however have refused to give anyone the data on your experiments even after being asked for them multiple times.