Conspiracy

  • 98 Replies
  • 4915 Views
*

Junker

  • 3784
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #60 on: April 25, 2017, 11:33:08 AM »
as i said the pictures clearly show a global earth.
You certainly did claim that. However, you have not proven your claim. I feel like we are going in circles here because of your inability to understand a fairly simple concept.

now you would have to disprove that
No, I don't have to disprove a claim you made without supporting evidence.

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #61 on: April 25, 2017, 11:38:25 AM »
as i said the pictures clearly show a global earth.
You certainly did claim that. However, you have not proven your claim. I feel like we are going in circles here because of your inability to understand a fairly simple concept.

now you would have to disprove that
No, I don't have to disprove a claim you made without supporting evidence.

Junker, the burden of proof is on you.  You made the claim that his pictures do not prove a flat earth. 

*

Junker

  • 3784
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #62 on: April 25, 2017, 11:44:21 AM »
Junker, the burden of proof is on you.  You made the claim that his pictures do not prove a flat earth.
I would suggest you look up how the burden of proof works, friend. He made an unsubstantiated claim. It is not on me to prove him wrong. It is up to him to prove his claim. I am not sure how to explain this in a more simple manner so you actually understand it.

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #63 on: April 25, 2017, 11:48:41 AM »
as i said the pictures clearly show a global earth.
You certainly did claim that. However, you have not proven your claim. I feel like we are going in circles here because of your inability to understand a fairly simple concept.

now you would have to disprove that
No, I don't have to disprove a claim you made without supporting evidence.

and your claim is that the earth is flat, where is your evidence for that?
i at least can show you all the pictures that are taken from space, and the source say that they are correct.

*

Junker

  • 3784
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #64 on: April 25, 2017, 11:50:20 AM »
and your claim is that the earth is flat...

Where did I make that claim?

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #65 on: April 25, 2017, 11:51:54 AM »
Junker, the burden of proof is on you.  You made the claim that his pictures do not prove a flat earth.
I would suggest you look up how the burden of proof works, friend. He made an unsubstantiated claim. It is not on me to prove him wrong. It is up to him to prove his claim. I am not sure how to explain this in a more simple manner so you actually understand it.

you make the unsubstantiated claim that the earth is flat. against all scientists that show evidence that the earth is a globe.
this claim is proven a lot of time and it is backed up with lots of experiments.
now its up to you to prove your claim.

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #66 on: April 25, 2017, 11:51:59 AM »
Junker, the burden of proof is on you.  You made the claim that his pictures do not prove a flat earth.
I would suggest you look up how the burden of proof works, friend. He made an unsubstantiated claim. It is not on me to prove him wrong. It is up to him to prove his claim. I am not sure how to explain this in a more simple manner so you actually understand it.

He didn't make an unsubstantiated claim.  He makes a claim that the earth is round, and showed evidence of that claim by showing pictures of the earth from space, showing it to be a sphere.  Therefore, it is a substantiated claim.   Your claim, so far, is unsubstantiated. 

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #67 on: April 25, 2017, 11:53:33 AM »
and your claim is that the earth is flat...

Where did I make that claim?

Fine, put your money where you mouth is.  What do you believe?  Is the earth a sphere or flat?

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #68 on: April 25, 2017, 12:05:38 PM »
I can tell using simple observations from my home and from my visits to the ocean that the Earth is a sphere.  Given that I know what is a sphere, and I know that NASA can launch rockets, and I know that my GPS works, and I see satellite photographs of weather phenomenon that can be observed in the ground,  and given that I have a Google earth which is extremely accurate, and it is not difficult for me to surmise that Rockets go to space and produce those images.

 Evidence of a spherical earth is compatible with evidence from NASA. Now if someone is all confused and thinks that the earth is flat, then I can imagine why they might think that  NASA is fake. And I still, I can never quite figure out how the conspiracy nuts believe that tens of thousands  or hundreds of thousands or even millions of people from different countries all over the world would cooperate in this massive conspiracy.
"Science is real."
--They Might Be Giants

*

Junker

  • 3784
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #69 on: April 25, 2017, 12:06:58 PM »
you make the unsubstantiated claim that the earth is flat.
Can you point out where I made that claim?

He didn't make an unsubstantiated claim. 
False.

He makes a claim that the earth is round
Yes, he did.

and showed evidence of that claim by showing pictures of the earth from space
No, he didn't.

I really don't understand why you are having such a hard time with this.

Is the earth a sphere or flat?
Yes.

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #70 on: April 25, 2017, 12:11:28 PM »
you make the unsubstantiated claim that the earth is flat.
Can you point out where I made that claim?

He didn't make an unsubstantiated claim. 
False.

He makes a claim that the earth is round
Yes, he did.

and showed evidence of that claim by showing pictures of the earth from space
No, he didn't.

I really don't understand why you are having such a hard time with this.

Is the earth a sphere or flat?
Yes.

As i figured, you are a coward and a bully.  You think that you are so much smarter than everyone else on this site, and who knows, you may be.  But you have shown to have the maturity of a 6 year old.  You are nothing but a troll, you offer no evidence, no intelligence insight.  I ask a simple question at the beginning of this forum, and you nit-pick the question to avoid it.  Congratulations, you are a troll.  Now come out of your parents basement and join the rest of the world.

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #71 on: April 25, 2017, 12:21:40 PM »
you make the unsubstantiated claim that the earth is flat.
Can you point out where I made that claim?

He didn't make an unsubstantiated claim. 
False.

He makes a claim that the earth is round
Yes, he did.

and showed evidence of that claim by showing pictures of the earth from space
No, he didn't.

I really don't understand why you are having such a hard time with this.

Is the earth a sphere or flat?
Yes.

As i figured, you are a coward and a bully.  You think that you are so much smarter than everyone else on this site, and who knows, you may be.  But you have shown to have the maturity of a 6 year old.  You are nothing but a troll, you offer no evidence, no intelligence insight.  I ask a simple question at the beginning of this forum, and you nit-pick the question to avoid it.  Congratulations, you are a troll.  Now come out of your parents basement and join the rest of the world.

we will see how long he keeps up to avoiding to show evidence for anything.

i like trolls they are funny to play with  ;D

*

Junker

  • 3784
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #72 on: April 25, 2017, 12:28:37 PM »
As i figured, you are a coward and a bully. 
:(

You think that you are so much smarter than everyone else on this site
When did I ever say that?

...and who knows, you may be.
Aww, thanks.

*more childish ranting...
Do you feel better now?

we will see how long he keeps up to avoiding to show evidence for anything.
Evidence for what? You are the one with an outstanding claim that requires evidence to support it.

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #73 on: April 25, 2017, 12:47:00 PM »

we will see how long he keeps up to avoiding to show evidence for anything.
Evidence for what? You are the one with an outstanding claim that requires evidence to support it.
If you do not accept the evidence of a round earth then that is your decision.  End of story.

*

Junker

  • 3784
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #74 on: April 25, 2017, 12:50:16 PM »
If you do not accept the evidence of a round earth then that is your decision.  End of story.

Where did I say I wouldn't accept evidence of a round earth?

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #75 on: April 25, 2017, 12:55:28 PM »
As i figured, you are a coward and a bully. 
:(

You think that you are so much smarter than everyone else on this site
When did I ever say that?

...and who knows, you may be.
Aww, thanks.

*more childish ranting...
Do you feel better now?

we will see how long he keeps up to avoiding to show evidence for anything.
Evidence for what? You are the one with an outstanding claim that requires evidence to support it.

Really?  That is all you have.  That is why you are here, isn't it?  To troll and wait for somebody to say something?  That is all you do here, is bait people.  Of course, you could go to one of you alter-egos and at least try to make an argument.  Because from what I have seen, I believe there is actually only 3 or 4 people who claim (probably just as a joke) that the earth is flat, and use different sign-ins to do so.  And since you don't have the balls to actually say what you believe in, I guess we all know what kind of person you are...

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #76 on: April 25, 2017, 01:00:09 PM »
If you do not accept the evidence of a round earth then that is your decision.  End of story.

Where did I say I wouldn't accept evidence of a round earth?
I did not say you did.   What about understanding satellite operation, distance measurements, angle of sun etc.  Try doing them.

*

Junker

  • 3784
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #77 on: April 25, 2017, 01:06:31 PM »
Really?  That is all you have.
What is all I have  ???

That is why you are here, isn't it?  To troll and wait for somebody to say something?
Yeah, that is why I have had an account here for nine years, to do just that...  ::)

That is all you do here, is bait people. 
False. You make it sound like I am forcing people to respond to me.

Of course, you could go to one of you alter-egos
What?

Because from what I have seen, I believe there is actually only 3 or 4 people who claim (probably just as a joke) that the earth is flat, and use different sign-ins to do so.
I would love to see your evidence for this belief.

And since you don't have the balls to actually say what you believe in, I guess we all know what kind of person you are...
Non-sequitur.

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #78 on: April 25, 2017, 01:18:16 PM »
Is the earth a sphere or flat?

Yes.

This is not a yes or no question. I don't know if you just don't understand what questions are, or if you get confused on how to answer them properly, but I bet it's because you're just being a dick.

When given a choice between two options the answer is never "yes" or "no" unless the two options are "yes" or "no".which they are not in this case. The answer can only be one of the options provided. By giving the answer you did, you show that you are either to stupid to understand a question and the proper way to answer it, or are purposefully trolling to get a ride out of people. In both of those cases, continuing a conversation/debate with you is a lesson in futility. You bring nothing to the debate or conversation.

Hopefully I have helped others realize this and they no longer give you the time of day.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2017, 01:22:21 PM by FEskeptic »

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #79 on: April 25, 2017, 01:21:55 PM »
That is why you are here, isn't it?  To troll and wait for somebody to say something?
Yeah, that is why I have had an account here for nine years, to do just that...  ::)

With the evidence I have seen from your posts, that is exactly what you do, apparently for nine years.  Good for you!!

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #80 on: April 25, 2017, 01:27:22 PM »
That is why you are here, isn't it?  To troll and wait for somebody to say something?
Yeah, that is why I have had an account here for nine years, to do just that...  ::)

With the evidence I have seen from your posts, that is exactly what you do, apparently for nine years.  Good for you!!

and he is not good in math
he joined at 23 March 2009
till now that is just over 8 years and not 9.
or he had multiple accounts, but than the question why?


*

Junker

  • 3784
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #81 on: April 25, 2017, 01:29:09 PM »
he joined at 23 March 2009
till now that is just over 8 years and not 9.

Ah, you got me. If only I knew not going and checking my profile or remembering my exact join date was going to get me found out, I would have never mentioned it...  ::)

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #82 on: April 25, 2017, 01:40:31 PM »
he joined at 23 March 2009
till now that is just over 8 years and not 9.

Ah, you got me. If only I knew not going and checking my profile or remembering my exact join date was going to get me found out, I would have never mentioned it...  ::)

i am not good in english, but should you not say: i have my account sinse x years and not i have had my account since x year?

?

dutchy

  • 2366
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #83 on: April 25, 2017, 03:14:09 PM »
And the claim from NASA that this is a single photo instead of the computer model/composite image?
If the original 1972 photo of the ''blue marble'' is shot by a conventional Hasselblad, then that is what is capable in outerspace.
The moment photoshop and cgi made it to the next level, NASA relies on this technique solely......
We simply ask to use modern ''Hasselblads'' to take pictures from outerspace, even if this means we get grainy pictures that won't be flashy enough to be presented in the next edition of Vogue.
All the crap that the public wants ''good looking'' pictures is beyond me.
If a photoshop artist can make equally ''real'' looking pictures from space without data from infrared and other specialised cosmic camera's says it all !
Quote
No. You were indicating because they look different it mus be fake.
Even if they were faking it they wouldn't use a child's globe. Software already lets you model that.
First thing i would do (did it a lot over the years !!!!!) take the globe we have in the house and see what happens when looking at it from different angles.
To assume that would be the same result for a satelite in outerspace is hogwash.
Simply because we only know what the result is when looking at a chidren's globe.
We don't know what a satelite sees from a distance looking towards earth, we only know what looking at a small globe ''looks like''.
It is a brainwashing technigue.........''look the photo's from outerspace look the same as when i use my cheap camera to photograph my small globe (minus the clouds)''
Quote
At real speed? No, because you wouldn't notice the incredibly slow rotation.
I will watch the whole 24 hours and will decide after that if it was to slow......
Quote
So yes, it is taking pictures of bush fires, not just city lights.

If they were faking it, do you think they would have made that mistake?
So bush fires from outerspace look the same as citylights....the fire explanations came after people complained about ''city lights'' in places without cities.
No black clouds, just the same result as what you see looking towards Sydney and Perth.

It is fake as can be, composites that tell us nothing about a timelapse recording from ISS.
But that's the way it was sold.
We are not seeing real fires and cloud activity, we see cartoons that a photoshop artist can make in a week.
« Last Edit: April 25, 2017, 03:17:24 PM by dutchy »

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #84 on: April 25, 2017, 03:23:16 PM »
Then provide this workable flat Earth hypothesis you claim exists.
Already done, friend.
BULLSHIT!!!
So far all you have provided is a bunch of baseless claims and directing us to go look elsewhere.
So how about you provide it?

where
In multiple threads on these fora, as a simple search will show.
No. It won't.
How about instead of repeatedly telling us to search, you provide a link to one of these magic threads?

because there is no workable Flat Earth Idea, all explanations are wrong and debunked
Do you have any evidence to support your outlandish claim?
Yes, and it has been provided to you before.
The FE model cannot account for many things.
One of the really big issues is the southern polar stars (including the sun during the southern summer).
This all appear to circle a point due south of the observer, regardless of time of observation (as long as they can be seen).
This point is know as the south celestial pole.
This pole is always located due south, 180 degrees away from the north celestial pole, and this is true regardless of where you are on Earth (although in some locations you can't easily see both).
The only way for this to happen is if Earth is a sphere (or some other shape akin to a sphere). It cannot happen on a flat Earth. On a flat Earth you can't have 2 points such that regardless of where you are, they are 180 degrees apart.
Only for points along the line connecting the 2 points will that be possible. For ever other point you will form a triangle, where the internal angles will add to 180 degrees, making it impossible for the angle between the 2 poles (at your location) to be 180 degrees.

*

Junker

  • 3784
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #85 on: April 25, 2017, 03:26:27 PM »
BULLSHIT!!!
I would really recommend you try to be less emotional, friend.

So far all you have provided is a bunch of baseless claims and directing us to go look elsewhere.
What claims?

How about instead of repeatedly telling us to search, you provide a link to one of these magic threads?
Sure thing, as long as you admit that you are incapable or unwilling to do the research yourself.

Yes, and it has been provided to you before.
False.

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #86 on: April 25, 2017, 03:43:21 PM »
And the claim from NASA that this is a single photo instead of the computer model/composite image?
If the original 1972 photo of the ''blue marble'' is shot by a conventional Hasselblad, then that is what is capable in outerspace.
And that doesn't mean that all pictures they provide are claimed to be single images rather than composites.

The moment photoshop and cgi made it to the next level, NASA relies on this technique solely......
No. They don't. They have many different satellites in space (some which they just launched and others use, like GEOS and DSCOVR), some of these are far enough away from Earth to take what is known as a full disc image. This is because Earth no longer takes up more than the entire FOV in either the x or y direction.
There are plenty of these pictures available.
However, most these days just take a picture of a section of the UV-Vis-IR spectrum, or multiple sections of it as separate pictures, which can then be combined into a single true colour, or false colour image.

We simply ask to use modern ''Hasselblads'' to take pictures from outerspace, even if this means we get grainy pictures that won't be flashy enough to be presented in the next edition of Vogue.
Then go and pay for it. Don't expect NASA to do it just so some conspiracy nuts can just dismiss it anyway. There is really no point at all for them to do that.

If a photoshop artist can make equally ''real'' looking pictures from space without data from infrared and other specialised cosmic camera's says it all !
Why would they need IR when they were making a colour image in the visible region?
They used satellite photos which were stitched together.

First thing i would do (did it a lot over the years !!!!!) take the globe we have in the house and see what happens when looking at it from different angles.
And did you look at it from different distances as well?

To assume that would be the same result for a satelite in outerspace is hogwash.
Why assume it would be different for a satellite in space?
Do you think there is some magic pixie dust in space which will make them all look the same instead of acting just like cameras do on Earth?
Do you think there is some magic that will allow it to act like it is much further away?

Simply because we only know what the result is when looking at a chidren's globe.
We don't know what a satelite sees from a distance looking towards earth, we only know what looking at a small globe ''looks like''.
Except we have photos from them, so we do.

It is a brainwashing technigue.........''look the photo's from outerspace look the same as when i use my cheap camera to photograph my small globe (minus the clouds)''
And why would you expect anything different?
It isn't brainwashing at all.

Quote
At real speed? No, because you wouldn't notice the incredibly slow rotation.
I will watch the whole 24 hours and will decide after that if it was to slow......
Then all you need to do is go set up the camera in space.
Also, how will you tell if it is Earth rotating, the camera orbiting or a combination of both?

Quote
So yes, it is taking pictures of bush fires, not just city lights.

If they were faking it, do you think they would have made that mistake?
So bush fires from outerspace look the same as citylights....the fire explanations came after people complained about ''city lights'' in places without cities.
No black clouds, just the same result as what you see looking towards Sydney and Perth.
Why wouldn't they look the same? Do you understand how long exposure pictures which are then composited and integrated into 1 work?
The lights are effectively saturated pixels. That is why they all appear pretty much the same.
The black clouds don't show up, because while the clouds where there at some points, at other points they weren't and instead the light from the fire went through.
What you are seeing is not a single picture, it is effectively the sum of all the lights.

It is fake as can be, composites that tell us nothing about a timelapse recording from ISS.
And you are yet to show that. There is not a single reason to think it is fake other than paranoia.

But that's the way it was sold.
We are not seeing real fires and cloud activity, we see cartoons that a photoshop artist can make in a week.
PROVE IT.

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #87 on: April 25, 2017, 03:46:22 PM »
BULLSHIT!!!
I would really recommend you try to be less emotional, friend.
Calling bullshit on your bullshit isn't being emotional.

So far all you have provided is a bunch of baseless claims and directing us to go look elsewhere.
What claims?
Claims that there is a workable FE model.
I know, you try and avoid making claims, but you fail and have made them.

How about instead of repeatedly telling us to search, you provide a link to one of these magic threads?
Sure thing, as long as you admit that you are incapable or unwilling to do the research yourself.
The issue is not that I am incapable of doing so, the issue is that in my searching there isn't any.
I am incapable of finding something that doesn't exist, and I am unwilling to go seaching through every single thread on these forums to find a working model.
Happy now?
Going to provide the magic thread?

Yes, and it has been provided to you before.
False.
Nope. Completely true, I even provided you another here, but of course, no response to that.
Are all the southern stars in on the conspiracy as well, or everyone that can observe them?

*

Junker

  • 3784
Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #88 on: April 25, 2017, 03:48:51 PM »
I am incapable of finding something...

It sure does seem that way...

Re: Conspiracy
« Reply #89 on: April 25, 2017, 03:51:38 PM »
I am incapable of finding something...

It sure does seem that way...
And of course, you typical dishonest quote mining.

Yes, finding things which don't exist is quite difficult for an honest rational person.

Now are you going to link to the magic thread with a working FE model?