Who Gains?

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 01, 2015, 04:28:49 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 01, 2015, 04:27:16 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 01, 2015, 01:16:17 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on November 30, 2015, 03:22:30 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on November 30, 2015, 01:21:22 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on November 30, 2015, 12:14:30 AM

Well, yeah, if you're not the government agency in charge of budget. What the hell are you talking about?!

Isn't it the government itself which were faking everything, and funded NASA as a medium for the faking? How else would NASA get funding anyways, if it's all faked by NASA only without cooperation by the government?

That doesn't even make sense.

It doesn't make sense that NASA is funded by the government? Doesn't it make sense that the government would check wether NASA was a fraud or not before they decided to fund it? Doesn't it then make sense that if it was all fake, the government would have to be in on it? Sorry if your magical dreams where NASA steals our money from the government simply by existing conflicts with reality, but we are discussing reality here, not dreams and magic.

Read what I'm saying, your assertions are starting to feel more and pathetic. Is all you have straw men?

I have read what you are saying. However, your fantasies and opinions do not count as fact, and they do not answer my question.

Because your questions are irrelevant to what I'm saying, why should I bother with them?

*sigh*

You said that somehow the government is unable to increase the military budget. Why? Why can't the government increase the military budget?

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 01, 2015, 04:31:14 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 01, 2015, 04:28:49 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 01, 2015, 04:27:16 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 01, 2015, 01:16:17 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on November 30, 2015, 03:22:30 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on November 30, 2015, 01:21:22 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on November 30, 2015, 12:14:30 AM

Well, yeah, if you're not the government agency in charge of budget. What the hell are you talking about?!

Isn't it the government itself which were faking everything, and funded NASA as a medium for the faking? How else would NASA get funding anyways, if it's all faked by NASA only without cooperation by the government?

That doesn't even make sense.

It doesn't make sense that NASA is funded by the government? Doesn't it make sense that the government would check wether NASA was a fraud or not before they decided to fund it? Doesn't it then make sense that if it was all fake, the government would have to be in on it? Sorry if your magical dreams where NASA steals our money from the government simply by existing conflicts with reality, but we are discussing reality here, not dreams and magic.

Read what I'm saying, your assertions are starting to feel more and pathetic. Is all you have straw men?

I have read what you are saying. However, your fantasies and opinions do not count as fact, and they do not answer my question.

Because your questions are irrelevant to what I'm saying, why should I bother with them?

*sigh*

You said that somehow the government is unable to increase the military budget. Why? Why can't the government increase the military budget?

You said that. I'm not talking about the government. how about actually trying to address the argument I'm making, rather than what you'd like?

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 01, 2015, 04:39:48 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 01, 2015, 04:31:14 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 01, 2015, 04:28:49 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 01, 2015, 04:27:16 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 01, 2015, 01:16:17 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on November 30, 2015, 03:22:30 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on November 30, 2015, 01:21:22 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on November 30, 2015, 12:14:30 AM

Well, yeah, if you're not the government agency in charge of budget. What the hell are you talking about?!

Isn't it the government itself which were faking everything, and funded NASA as a medium for the faking? How else would NASA get funding anyways, if it's all faked by NASA only without cooperation by the government?

That doesn't even make sense.

It doesn't make sense that NASA is funded by the government? Doesn't it make sense that the government would check wether NASA was a fraud or not before they decided to fund it? Doesn't it then make sense that if it was all fake, the government would have to be in on it? Sorry if your magical dreams where NASA steals our money from the government simply by existing conflicts with reality, but we are discussing reality here, not dreams and magic.

Read what I'm saying, your assertions are starting to feel more and pathetic. Is all you have straw men?

I have read what you are saying. However, your fantasies and opinions do not count as fact, and they do not answer my question.

Because your questions are irrelevant to what I'm saying, why should I bother with them?

*sigh*

You said that somehow the government is unable to increase the military budget. Why? Why can't the government increase the military budget?

You said that. I'm not talking about the government. how about actually trying to address the argument I'm making, rather than what you'd like?

So you really did mean that NASA alone are the fakers. So, how do they get money? As I asked earlier, which is VERY relevant:

Doesn't it make sense that the government would check wether NASA was a fraud or not before they decided to fund it? Doesn't it then make sense that if it was all fake, the government would have to be in on it? Sorry if your magical dreams where NASA steals our money from the government simply by existing conflicts with reality, but we are discussing reality here, not dreams and magic.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 01, 2015, 09:06:38 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 01, 2015, 04:39:48 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 01, 2015, 04:31:14 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 01, 2015, 04:28:49 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 01, 2015, 04:27:16 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 01, 2015, 01:16:17 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on November 30, 2015, 03:22:30 AM

Quote from: Master_Evar on November 30, 2015, 01:21:22 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on November 30, 2015, 12:14:30 AM

Well, yeah, if you're not the government agency in charge of budget. What the hell are you talking about?!

Isn't it the government itself which were faking everything, and funded NASA as a medium for the faking? How else would NASA get funding anyways, if it's all faked by NASA only without cooperation by the government?

That doesn't even make sense.

It doesn't make sense that NASA is funded by the government? Doesn't it make sense that the government would check wether NASA was a fraud or not before they decided to fund it? Doesn't it then make sense that if it was all fake, the government would have to be in on it? Sorry if your magical dreams where NASA steals our money from the government simply by existing conflicts with reality, but we are discussing reality here, not dreams and magic.

Read what I'm saying, your assertions are starting to feel more and pathetic. Is all you have straw men?

I have read what you are saying. However, your fantasies and opinions do not count as fact, and they do not answer my question.

Because your questions are irrelevant to what I'm saying, why should I bother with them?

*sigh*

You said that somehow the government is unable to increase the military budget. Why? Why can't the government increase the military budget?

You said that. I'm not talking about the government. how about actually trying to address the argument I'm making, rather than what you'd like?

So you really did mean that NASA alone are the fakers. So, how do they get money? As I asked earlier, which is VERY relevant:

Quote

Doesn't it make sense that the government would check wether NASA was a fraud or not before they decided to fund it? Doesn't it then make sense that if it was all fake, the government would have to be in on it? Sorry if your magical dreams where NASA steals our money from the government simply by existing conflicts with reality, but we are discussing reality here, not dreams and magic.

And that still makes no sense whatsoever. Let me know when Obama's straddling a satellite.

And that still makes no sense whatsoever. Let me know when Obama's straddling a satellite.

So you are too stupid to understand how conspiracies work? Otherwise, you have to point out what doesn't make sense.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 02, 2015, 06:22:25 AM

And that still makes no sense whatsoever. Let me know when Obama's straddling a satellite.

So you are too stupid to understand how conspiracies work? Otherwise, you have to point out what doesn't make sense.

You're the one supposing a ridiculously large conspiracy. Please tell me how exactly the government would have any more means than the rest of us to tell what NASA and similar space agencies are doing. A few stated results, a few faked pictures, and when it started who'd look that hard at something that gave them a leg up on the Soviets?

You're the one supposing a ridiculously large conspiracy. Please tell me how exactly the government would have any more means than the rest of us to tell what NASA and similar space agencies are doing. A few stated results, a few faked pictures, and when it started who'd look that hard at something that gave them a leg up on the Soviets?

I am not supposing a ridiculously large conspiracy. I answered to someone else who (according to you) did. Don't join the conversation if you don't know what is being discussed.
Also, NSA? CIA? The government has far better means of examining NASA than the public does.
And lastly, you are ignorant. The soviets would just tell the world that the US faked it if it was faked. The soviet very well knew that it was legit.

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 02, 2015, 09:48:39 AM

You're the one supposing a ridiculously large conspiracy. Please tell me how exactly the government would have any more means than the rest of us to tell what NASA and similar space agencies are doing. A few stated results, a few faked pictures, and when it started who'd look that hard at something that gave them a leg up on the Soviets?

I am not supposing a ridiculously large conspiracy. I answered to someone else who (according to you) did. Don't join the conversation if you don't know what is being discussed.
Also, NSA? CIA? The government has far better means of examining NASA than the public does.
And lastly, you are ignorant. The soviets would just tell the world that the US faked it if it was faked. The soviet very well knew that it was legit.

What? We've been having a discussion independently of anyone else. Keep up. What are you talking about?!
How would those organizations conclude that space travel doesn't occur? Find me an NSA operative who's been to space.
The Soviets wouldn't throw the accusation as it would mean they'd have to out their own lie; and the US wouldn't have thrown it because they couldn't have known for certain. We've reached the stage where the lie sustains itself.

Quote from: Master_Evar on December 02, 2015, 10:10:52 AM

Quote from: JRoweSkeptic on December 02, 2015, 09:48:39 AM

You're the one supposing a ridiculously large conspiracy. Please tell me how exactly the government would have any more means than the rest of us to tell what NASA and similar space agencies are doing. A few stated results, a few faked pictures, and when it started who'd look that hard at something that gave them a leg up on the Soviets?

I am not supposing a ridiculously large conspiracy. I answered to someone else who (according to you) did. Don't join the conversation if you don't know what is being discussed.
Also, NSA? CIA? The government has far better means of examining NASA than the public does.
And lastly, you are ignorant. The soviets would just tell the world that the US faked it if it was faked. The soviet very well knew that it was legit.

What? We've been having a discussion independently of anyone else. Keep up. What are you talking about?!
How would those organizations conclude that space travel doesn't occur? Find me an NSA operative who's been to space.
The Soviets wouldn't throw the accusation as it would mean they'd have to out their own lie; and the US wouldn't have thrown it because they couldn't have known for certain. We've reached the stage where the lie sustains itself.

There is no gain - the only people would gain any money are globe map companies :S NASA and all the governments spend the trillions so that your local news agency can sell you a globe of the earth.

So independently.
They don't have to be to space. They just have to check the rocket building process, rocket testing, rocket launches and use their own comms to verify that there are objects in space. Also, it's not just space travel. It's the whole "earth is round" thing as well. If NASA faked that I am pretty sure those agencies would immediately figure out if it was a fraud or not. Radar systems, which I presume the NSA does some work with, uses the geometry of the landscape and the position of the radar to determine ranges for stationary radars. Earth curvature is would be part of the geometry, if the earth is round, which it is.
And it wouldn't really hurt soviet so much to say that space travel is fake. It would hurt the US far more at that point.
Also, I googled for "NSA Astronauts" and there MIGHT actually have been an NSA astronaut (at least), it's hard to know because of all the conspiracy theories (about secret alien life etc.).

Quote from: BBoyJmE on November 25, 2015, 09:20:26 PM

There is no gain - the only people would gain any money are globe map companies :S NASA and all the governments spend the trillions so that your local news agency can sell you a globe of the earth.

So independently.

You mean the REer I disagreed with? Are you even trying?

They don't have to be to space. They just have to check the rocket building process, rocket testing, rocket launches and use their own comms to verify that there are objects in space.

Because rocket science is simple enough for any disinterested person who pops by and who isn't concerned with the physics to spot.Really?

Also, it's not just space travel. It's the whole "earth is round" thing as well. If NASA faked that I am pretty sure those agencies would immediately figure out if it was a fraud or not. Radar systems, which I presume the NSA does some work with, uses the geometry of the landscape and the position of the radar to determine ranges for stationary radars. Earth curvature is would be part of the geometry, if the earth is round, which it is.

Margin or error. People use Mercator to navigate, is that accurate? They don't spot the errors because they're too minor to deal with; the error bars that occur from the issues of travelling (wind currents knocking a plane off course, for example) are just smaller.
You're not doing anything but asserting the accuracy of RET.

And it wouldn't really hurt soviet so much to say that space travel is fake. It would hurt the US far more at that point.

How do you know? Would you have taken the risk, in the cold war?

You mean the REer I disagreed with? Are you even trying?

You didn't disagree to their version of the conspiracy, so I could assume it was the "right" version.

Because rocket science is simple enough for any disinterested person who pops by and who isn't concerned with the physics to spot.Really?

You think they send untrained low-level of education folks with no degree in physics there? Really?

Margin or error. People use Mercator to navigate, is that accurate? They don't spot the errors because they're too minor to deal with; the error bars that occur from the issues of travelling (wind currents knocking a plane off course, for example) are just smaller.
You're not doing anything but asserting the accuracy of RET.

A bit of a lie. People uses GPS to navigate. IF they are using the mercator to navigate, they also probably use the handy equations used to calculate the distortion of the mercator so that they know their actual position and the actual distances. Or they use many smaller maps.

How do you know? Would you have taken the risk, in the cold war?

Yup. Soviet was the losers and US was the heroes. They could have either said:
- The US didn't land on the moon at all, because our radars didn't find them. (Their radars worked, they had sent probes to orbit the moon before returning, and this would completely destroy the fame the US just got. At this point, the US can either admit that space travel all together is impossible, say that space travel to the moon is impossible, or just suck it up. Neither case would hurt the soviets too much except the first one, as the soviets got the first probe and human in space. The soviet wouldn't be considered losers anymore, but the scum that they were considered as anyways by the US.)
- That space travel to the moon is impossible. (And then follows the same options from the US as earlier stated, and consequences.)
- That space travel all together is impossible. (Read above for consequences.)

In all cases the US would loose far more fame than the soviets, but this is no reason to start a nuclear war.

You didn't disagree to their version of the conspiracy, so I could assume it was the "right" version.

Well, beyond explicitly disagreeing with what they said, sure... Could you please try to make an honest argument for ocne? Dealing with you is just pathetic.

You think they send untrained low-level of education folks with no degree in physics there? Really?

Why would the NSA hire a physicist??!

A bit of a lie. People uses GPS to navigate.

Always? Really? Are you paying attention to the arguemnt or quibbling over irrelevant details? Oh, wait, you're you.

In all cases the US would loose far more fame than the soviets, but this is no reason to start a nuclear war.

So, just ignoring what I've said. Great, sure, not like I expect anything more.
If the Soviets showed the moon landing was faked, America could respond by showing that space travel was faked. As the originators, the Soviets would face just as much censure. There's no gain outside your ridiculously addled mind: and whatever minimal benefit they might get would be overshadowed by risk.

Well, beyond explicitly disagreeing with what they said, sure... Could you please try to make an honest argument for ocne? Dealing with you is just pathetic.

What they claimed, not the base for their claims. It was in no way clear that you disagreed with the model of the conspiracy.

Why would the NSA hire a physicist??!

Why can't NSA employees have an education in physics? They most probably have at least some people with advanced knowledge in physics, so they know what it is they are listening in on when intercepting calls etc.

Always? Really? Are you paying attention to the arguemnt or quibbling over irrelevant details? Oh, wait, you're you.

*Facepalm*
Cherrypicking one piece of a whole statement is pure dishonesty:

A bit of a lie. People uses GPS to navigate. IF they are using the mercator to navigate, they also probably use the handy equations used to calculate the distortion of the mercator so that they know their actual position and the actual distances. Or they use many smaller maps.

So, just ignoring what I've said. Great, sure, not like I expect anything more.
If the Soviets showed the moon landing was faked, America could respond by showing that space travel was faked. As the originators, the Soviets would face just as much censure. There's no gain outside your ridiculously addled mind: and whatever minimal benefit they might get would be overshadowed by risk.

Except that the soviets actually managed to transmit a signal to the US from their probe. The US government and the public has no other explanation for it. The Soviets COULD have faked it somehow, but the US government and the public wouldn't know that.

What they claimed, not the base for their claims. It was in no way clear that you disagreed with the model of the conspiracy.

Despite repeatedly telling you otherwise and the fact I in no way gave any impression whatsoever that I agreed with that, but sure, why should I expect honesty from you?

Why can't NSA employees have an education in physics? They most probably have at least some people with advanced knowledge in physics, so they know what it is they are listening in on when intercepting calls etc.

Because fighting terrorism requires knowledge of rocket science. What the hell are you on about?!

Cherrypicking one piece of a whole statement is pure dishonesty:

I addressed the only part of the statement that was relevant. You hedged the rest and asserted, and no one I know brings a calculator and set of equations along with a map, so that part was clearly relevant only to the GPS case I addressed. Picking a representative part of your message is not dishonesty, how about you try to be honest?

Except that the soviets actually managed to transmit a signal to the US from their probe. The US government and the public has no other explanation for it. The Soviets COULD have faked it somehow, but the US government and the public wouldn't know that.

They sent a signal. Wow. The US managed photos, why does one end up magically immune to censure? Honest arguments please, not assertion based on trying to force a specific nonsensical conclusion.

Jrowe

if this is a nasa conspiracy what about all the military hardware in space, its not all made by nasa.

The fact that radar and other communications systems factor into the curvature of the earth - not made by nasa

the maps used by the navy and army which use a spherical projection.

If the goverment isn't in on it they would have known.

The earth was believed to be round by the practically the entire population of it before NASA came along.

This clearly can't be a Nasa created conspiracy, and if its not, whats in it for them to continue it?

Despite repeatedly telling you otherwise and the fact I in no way gave any impression whatsoever that I agreed with that, but sure, why should I expect honesty from you?

NOW afterwards I have been repeatedly told that you disagree with that model. I just assumed you followed the model which was generally being discussed here, that the government is behind it with NASA as their decoy.

Because fighting terrorism requires knowledge of rocket science. What the hell are you on about?!

Good point! They need to know rocketry (and rocket science) so that they know if the people they are listening in on are talking about rocket parts and fuels etc. You know, if some terrorists plan to use rockets or missiles to bomb stuff, or if any other country does.

I addressed the only part of the statement that was relevant. You hedged the rest and asserted, and no one I know brings a calculator and set of equations along with a map, so that part was clearly relevant only to the GPS case I addressed. Picking a representative part of your message is not dishonesty, how about you try to be honest?

EXCEPT that the whole statement was relevant, or otherwise the part you cherry picked would be what is called "out of context". Normal people understands context, but you seem to struggle with it way more than anyone should.

They sent a signal. Wow. The US managed photos, why does one end up magically immune to censure? Honest arguments please, not assertion based on trying to force a specific nonsensical conclusion.

So people can't believe that the photos are faked? Also, if space travel is impossible the pics have to be faked, so people of the public with good enough photo-editing skills could reveal the fakery. Another reason the US wouldn't want to admit space travel is faked. Easier to prove a faked picture to be faked than a faked signal which was definitely heard all throughout the US without any soviets in the airspace and without any soviet transmitters in most parts of the US to be faked.

if this is a nasa conspiracy what about all the military hardware in space, its not all made by nasa.

Assertion that it's in space.

The fact that radar and other communications systems factor into the curvature of the earth - not made by nasa
the maps used by the navy and army which use a spherical projection.

So? That doesn't make them accurate, they're just within error bars. That's trivial.

Good point! They need to know rocketry (and rocket science) so that they know if the people they are listening in on are talking about rocket parts and fuels etc. You know, if some terrorists plan to use rockets or missiles to bomb stuff, or if any other country does.

Let me know when a terrorist plot goes to space. Focus on more than semantics.

EXCEPT that the whole statement was relevant, or otherwise the part you cherry picked would be what is called "out of context". Normal people understands context, but you seem to struggle with it way more than anyone should.

Yet again, I picked a representative part of your quote. Read rather than repeating the bullshit you'd like to be true. You're the one who apparently struggles with context: I picked the section which would allow me to make a clearer reply. It was relevant to the rest of the quote, because the part I quoted was representative. READ YOU FUCKING MORON.

So people can't believe that the photos are faked? Also, if space travel is impossible the pics have to be faked, so people of the public with good enough photo-editing skills could reveal the fakery. Another reason the US wouldn't want to admit space travel is faked. Easier to prove a faked picture to be faked than a faked signal which was definitely heard all throughout the US without any soviets in the airspace and without any soviet transmitters in most parts of the US to be faked.

So people can't believe a signal was faked?
How about you pay attention to what we're actually talking about rather than relying on a pathetic double standard. Are you going to justify your claims, or just assert them?

Let me know when a terrorist plot goes to space. Focus on more than semantics.

I never said that they needed to go to space. Rockets and missiles can be used within the atmosphere, you know? Actually, that whole counter was stupid. Don't you know what a rocket/missile is?

Yet again, I picked a representative part of your quote. Read rather than repeating the bullshit you'd like to be true. You're the one who apparently struggles with context: I picked the section which would allow me to make a clearer reply. It was relevant to the rest of the quote, because the part I quoted was representative. READ YOU FUCKING MORON.

No, you picked the part which would be out of context. I never stated that people only ever use GPS. I said people use GPS, and the latter statement which you left out acknowledges that the mercator can be used, but only correctly if you have the equations required to calculate the errors that comes with projecting a globe onto a plane.

So people can't believe a signal was faked?
How about you pay attention to what we're actually talking about rather than relying on a pathetic double standard. Are you going to justify your claims, or just assert them?

What is more likely? That an american photo that NASA took is fake, or that a signal you could hear yourself and could verify didn't come from a russian transmitter within the atmosphere is fake? Actually, quoting what you said:

READ YOU FUCKING MORON.

As you obviously did not.

I never said that they needed to go to space. Rockets and missiles can be used within the atmosphere, you know? Actually, that whole counter was stupid. Don't you know what a rocket/missile is?

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were staying on topic.

No, you picked the part which would be out of context. I never stated that people only ever use GPS. I said people use GPS, and the latter statement which you left out acknowledges that the mercator can be used, but only correctly if you have the equations required to calculate the errors that comes with projecting a globe onto a plane.

You stated that people didn't only ever use GPS, and followed with examples primarily based on GPS: take those equations you mentioned. Do you think people wander around with maps and calculators and a list of equations, or do they just use the map?
Look at that, you just ignored what I said.

What is more likely? That an american photo that NASA took is fake, or that a signal you could hear yourself and could verify didn't come from a russian transmitter within the atmosphere is fake?

Pray tell, how exactly would you verify the signal didn't come from a Russian transmitter in the atmosphere? I called you out on your assertions before.

Oh, I'm sorry, I thought you were staying on topic.

I literally lol'd at this stupidity. I am obviously staying on topic. How does the topic change just because rockets can be used in the atmosphere as weapons?

You stated that people didn't only ever use GPS, and followed with examples primarily based on GPS: take those equations you mentioned. Do you think people wander around with maps and calculators and a list of equations, or do they just use the map?
Look at that, you just ignored what I said.

I stated that people didn't only ever use GPS, yup. They don't only ever use GPS, so why did you claim I stated that earlier?
Also, what example are you talking about? I didn't give you any examples, so you are lying. So honest of you  . And do YOU think people would wander around with a whole mercator projection just to take a small trip? No, the mercator would be used for intercontinental trips, on boats and planes. Such trips are plotted in advance, using the simple equations.
Also, can you quote what I ignored?

Pray tell, how exactly would you verify the signal didn't come from a Russian transmitter in the atmosphere? I called you out on your assertions before.

How would the russians manage to repeatedly get a transmitter capable of transmitting over most of the US without said transmitter being found? Stealth jets would have been detected, as there would have to be multiple ones at a time.

I literally lol'd at this stupidity. I am obviously staying on topic. How does the topic change just because rockets can be used in the atmosphere as weapons?

What the fuck are you on about? We're discussing space travel, moron, why are you whining about terrestrial events?

I stated that people didn't only ever use GPS, yup. They don't only ever use GPS, so why did you claim I stated that earlier?

Read you pathetic penguin, why is it so hard to get any honest argument from you? Your arguments relied on people only using GPS. Even if you stated otherwise, your arguments relied on GPS being universal.

Also, what example are you talking about? I didn't give you any examples, so you are lying.

"IF they are using the mercator to navigate, they also probably use the handy equations used to calculate the distortion of the mercator so that they know their actual position and the actual distances. Or they use many smaller maps."
Grow the fuck up.

No, the mercator would be used for intercontinental trips, on boats and planes. Such trips are plotted in advance, using the simple equations.

And still ignoring the fact any errors on such long journeys would automatically be corrected for, and put down to wind currents and pilot error, so nope, still no more than assertion.

Also, can you quote what I ignored?

I addressed the only part of the statement that was relevant. You hedged the rest and asserted, and no one I know brings a calculator and set of equations along with a map, so that part was clearly relevant only to the GPS case I addressed. Picking a representative part of your message is not dishonesty, how about you try to be honest?

Every fucking word, as ever.

How would the russians manage to repeatedly get a transmitter capable of transmitting over most of the US without said transmitter being found? Stealth jets would have been detected, as there would have to be multiple ones at a time.

Then use passenger jets. Hardly difficult to sneak a transmitter on board. Even assuming your claim is true: if it was so easy to detect stealth jets, they wouldn't exist.

What the fuck are you on about? We're discussing space travel, moron, why are you whining about terrestrial events?

Wrong, idiot. We are discussing who, why and how anyone would gain what from telling people that the earth is round, if it is in fact flat. You gotta keep up with the discussion.

Read you pathetic penguin, why is it so hard to get any honest argument from you? Your arguments relied on people only using GPS. Even if you stated otherwise, your arguments relied on GPS being universal.

No, my arguments did not, as I have multiple times explicitly expressed. Can't you remember ANYTHING?

No, you picked the part which would be out of context. I never stated that people only ever use GPS. I said people use GPS, and the latter statement which you left out acknowledges that the mercator can be used, but only correctly if you have the equations required to calculate the errors that comes with projecting a globe onto a plane.

See? I can't see the claim "people only ever use GPS" in there anywhere. So yeah, you're directly lying.

"IF they are using the mercator to navigate, they also probably use the handy equations used to calculate the distortion of the mercator so that they know their actual position and the actual distances. Or they use many smaller maps."
Grow the fuck up.

Ehm? I asked for an EXAMPLE and you quoted a STATEMENT. Do you not know the difference between a statement and an example? I guess this is further evidence you do not know how to debate.

And still ignoring the fact any errors on such long journeys would automatically be corrected for, and put down to wind currents and pilot error, so nope, still no more than assertion.

Yeah, if the trip is pre-plotted then all the errors will be corrected for. I do not see the problem, at all.

Quote

I addressed the only part of the statement that was relevant. You hedged the rest and asserted, and no one I know brings a calculator and set of equations along with a map, so that part was clearly relevant only to the GPS case I addressed. Picking a representative part of your message is not dishonesty, how about you try to be honest?

Every fucking word, as ever.

Except for the fact that I SPECIFICALLY answered to that one:

EXCEPT that the whole statement was relevant, or otherwise the part you cherry picked would be what is called "out of context". Normal people understands context, but you seem to struggle with it way more than anyone should.

Just how much of a liar are you? Are you even trying at this point?

Then use passenger jets. Hardly difficult to sneak a transmitter on board. Even assuming your claim is true: if it was so easy to detect stealth jets, they wouldn't exist.

Yes, because soviet citizens where allowed to fly to the US however they pleased, both by the soviet government and the US government, and somehow all the flights over the US that day matched perfectly so that the signal could be heard at the same time all over the US. 
Sorry, but this is madness. It ain't gonna work in reality this way, not with the cold war and everything.

Wrong, idiot. We are discussing who, why and how anyone would gain what from telling people that the earth is round, if it is in fact flat. You gotta keep up with the discussion.

So, another straw man. I've never claimed a flat Earth conspiracy, merely a space travel one. keep up.

See? I can't see the claim "people only ever use GPS" in there anywhere. So yeah, you're directly lying.

Nope, you're ignoring eveyrthing I've said. You don't need to mention GPS to be relying on it suse. When you can address what I'm actually saying, try again. For example, " the mercator can be used, but only correctly if you have the equations required to calculate the errors that comes with projecting a globe onto a plane," how is that typically done?

Ehm? I asked for an EXAMPLE and you quoted a STATEMENT. Do you not know the difference between a statement and an example? I guess this is further evidence you do not know how to debate.

So, semantics and whinging, same as ever. A statement of an example: one possible situation.

Yeah, if the trip is pre-plotted then all the errors will be corrected for. I do not see the problem, at all.

Errors can't be corrected for beforehand: if they could be, there wouldn't be error.

Except for the fact that I SPECIFICALLY answered to that one:

And it was shown to be bullshit, keep up.

Yes, because soviet citizens where allowed to fly to the US however they pleased, both by the soviet government and the US government, and somehow all the flights over the US that day matched perfectly so that the signal could be heard at the same time all over the US. 
Sorry, but this is madness. It ain't gonna work in reality this way, not with the cold war and everything.

Because  there's no possible way to get onto a passenger jet under false pretences, even if that was the only possible course of action.
Why would flights need to match up? Just a matter of a strong enough signal over enough space. And for that matter, why would that be at all unusual? It only needs to happen on one day: any agency with any ability to plan whatsoever would choose the day what they're trying to do is possible.

Quote

Wrong, idiot. We are discussing who, why and how anyone would gain what from telling people that the earth is round, if it is in fact flat. You gotta keep up with the discussion.

So, another straw man. I've never claimed a flat Earth conspiracy, merely a space travel one. keep up.

Quote

See? I can't see the claim "people only ever use GPS" in there anywhere. So yeah, you're directly lying.

Nope, you're ignoring eveyrthing I've said. You don't need to mention GPS to be relying on it suse. When you can address what I'm actually saying, try again. For example, " the mercator can be used, but only correctly if you have the equations required to calculate the errors that comes with projecting a globe onto a plane," how is that typically done?

Quote

Ehm? I asked for an EXAMPLE and you quoted a STATEMENT. Do you not know the difference between a statement and an example? I guess this is further evidence you do not know how to debate.

So, semantics and whinging, same as ever. A statement of an example: one possible situation.

Quote

Yeah, if the trip is pre-plotted then all the errors will be corrected for. I do not see the problem, at all.

Errors can't be corrected for beforehand: if they could be, there wouldn't be error.

Quote

Except for the fact that I SPECIFICALLY answered to that one:

And it was shown to be bullshit, keep up.

Quote

Yes, because soviet citizens where allowed to fly to the US however they pleased, both by the soviet government and the US government, and somehow all the flights over the US that day matched perfectly so that the signal could be heard at the same time all over the US. 
Sorry, but this is madness. It ain't gonna work in reality this way, not with the cold war and everything.

Because  there's no possible way to get onto a passenger jet under false pretences, even if that was the only possible course of action.
Why would flights need to match up? Just a matter of a strong enough signal over enough space. And for that matter, why would that be at all unusual? It only needs to happen on one day: any agency with any ability to plan whatsoever would choose the day what they're trying to do is possible.

Ahh, so you are off-topic. Sorry, but the topic of the thread is how anyone would gain from a round earth conspiracy, not a space travel conspiracy. Can you please get on-topic or stop posting.

Ahh, so you are off-topic. Sorry, but the topic of the thread is how anyone would gain from a round earth conspiracy, not a space travel conspiracy. Can you please get on-topic or stop posting.

So, all you have to offer is a straw man of FET, and when you get called out on it, and can't address an actual model, you evade and hide behind the fact you rely on a model only the trolls hold.

http://www.theflatearthsociety.org/tiki/tiki-index.php?page=Motive+of+the+Conspiracy

But no one has explained why "they" would do this, or how "they" would gain. So I pose to you: who gains from a round earth?

Satan gains. 

Why would they hid a flat earth from us?

--- because such knowledge coupled with the fact that such knowledge was documented in the bible suggests divine intervention between man and an omniscient being a long time ago. 

Can't be that hard, can it?

Did Enoch have a telescope?

Unless the ancient prophets had telescope technology, they discovered the true form of the earth some other way.  How else but through divine revelation?

Can i get an amen.

Can i get an amen.

Sure. 

The ancient accounts of the true form of the earth prove that God exists and communicated with man.  There is no other physical way in which lowly man could possibly know. 

This explains the neurotic vehemence and persistence of the shills.  They are possessed by the devil. 

Quote from: Frank Lee on December 11, 2015, 12:58:29 PM

Can i get an amen.

Sure. 

The ancient accounts of the true form of the earth prove that God exists and communicated with man.  There is no other physical way in which lowly man could possibly know. 

This explains the neurotic vehemence and persistence of the shills.  They are possessed by the devil.

Or one of his faith legion of demons. Finally someone who cuts to the chase.
This was, is, and shall be, till the end of this eon, the way it is. Everything else is just banter fodder.

I actually don't understand how knowing the shape of the earth changes anything. Infact, 99% of people don't care, so It is doing nothing to actually change it. BTW, all your religious mumbo-jumbo makes no sense. If the devil did posses us, wouldn't he want to lie about something bigger? Like, space even existing? Or the meaning of life? It actually makes ZERO sense. None.