Three different FE’s, three different butchered versions of gravity.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on February 06, 2023, 06:25:02 AM

We've had radiation in everything we breathe, eat, drink, etc for years. Yes, pretty sure that even this small amount, if it's in everything, is enough to profoundly shorten lifespan.

What type of radiation.  In what quantities.

UVA/UVB, Gamma, and Infrared are the dangerous ones. But alot of others too.



From the same article that told us water blocks radiation, gave us this graph.

Again…

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on January 12, 2023, 05:39:37 AM

How do rockets keep from being blasted by radiation that nukes their passengers and fries their guidance systems?

What radiation are we talking about?  And at what strength?  For what length of time?

Maybe if you listened, I wouldn't have to keep telling you the same damned stuff. We pass through the ionosphere. And the Van-Allen Belt. This powerful radiation acts as a barrier for even worse cosmic radiation and for as a screen between Earth's atmosphere and outer space. But it also sends radiation our way. The point being that such rockets flying right through this, and it kinda screws with things.

As for the rest, why don't you look it up yourself? So needy.


Ever hear of the radiation cookie analogy?

Quote

Radiation and the Cookie Test
 

I don't care about your damned cookies.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on February 03, 2023, 06:19:01 AM

If you only read what is said line by line, then you are a literalist.

Which is probably why you stopped reading and dismissed the Bible as nonsense, right...?

Take this passage:

Quote

21 The Lord said to Moses, “When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go. 22 Then say to Pharaoh, ‘This is what the Lord says: Israel is my firstborn son, 23 and I told you, “Let my son go, so he may worship me.” But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son.’”

24 At a lodging place on the way, the Lord met Moses and was about to kill him. 25 But Zipporah took a flint knife, cut off her son’s foreskin and touched Moses’ feet with it. “Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me,” she said. 26 So the Lord let him alone.

 
 
At this point, a literalist would quit. 

However, at this point a rational person would ask: Who recorded what the Lord said to Moses?   Don't you ever question who wrote all the OT?  How did the descendants of Noah know about Cain and Able?  How could they have written where Cain found a wife?

A rational person would understand that the words written in the Bible, are make-believe stories written by people promoting their version of religion.  The authors are no different than the people who wrote down Islamic Laws and Theories or the Zorasters or the Hindus or the Buddhists or the JW's or the Mormons. 

The readers and followers of any of these are exactly like you.  They choose what to believe and what to reject.  And each one will insist that they are right.

The only bearing this has on FE is that Creationists believe, with no evidence whatsoever, that their views are correct.
 
The only bearing this has on FE is that Creationists believe, regardless of how far-fetched their beliefs are, that their beliefs are correct.

You keep calling yourself rational.

But the "rational" atheistic materialists are responsible for almost daily violence against unborn children. The "rational" materialists are responsible for most of the deaths of humans at the hands of war or famine.

You are not rational. You are insane. And violent AF.

A rational person understands that these records were written as myth by Noah's own family, probably Shem. Why were they written (more relevant)? This oral tradition is to explain the diaspora of humankind, and their development toward high technology that almost destroyed the world. The line of Shem, Noah, and Seth was kept intact as a living record while the rest of the world destroyed itself.
Who wrote about Cain? Probably his own family, in much the same way as you know where your brother lives, even when you are not on good terms.

Moses recorded what was said to Moses. Making it hearsay. Which is why I reject rules against mixing meat and milk, and alot of this other shit. The Deuteronomic code was nonsense that Moses came up with, and told everyone that God said it. Moses did not write the first five books of the Bible, as they widely say about this.
https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/3912290/jewish/What-Are-the-Five-Books-of-Moses.htm
Genesis was not written by him (oral tradition of several people predating Moses, hundreds of years before he was born). Nor was Numbers (if I remember correctly, he died near the end of Numbers).

And do you trust the wikipedia tables? If so, why? If not, why even bring them up? It also says in your wiki article, "In some developed countries, like the US and Japan, artificial exposure is, on average, greater than the natural exposure, due to greater access to medical imaging." Do you believe that or not?

I brought them up because you trust this sort of thing. I legitimately don't care about numbers and statistics because most of them are projected. But you tell me over and over how I am stupid for not trusting charts and numbers.
Unless it doesn't suit you, then you reject it, even when I show you a link where you can find those numbers.

I happen to know that there is no possible way any of us can verify the level of radiation in the upper atmosphere when rockets supposedly pass. You can't exactly build a big ladder and take a geiger counter to the ionosphere, so we have to trust NASA's estimates as they travel in their fake rockets to put up fake satellites to measure fake radiation.

We can perhaps measure radiation at ground level for water, air, food, etc. But not in the upper atmosphere. You know this, so you keep asking stupid questions about "tell me the exact number." I'll tell you the same answer. There isn't such information. But you can find bullshit information from wikipedia. This is for your benefit. When you are actually presented with numbers for these sources, you question and reject them.

So incredibly dishonest.

How do rockets keep from being blasted by radiation that nukes their passengers and fries their guidance systems?

Shielding, path taken, and limiting the duration of exposure, speed. Apollo astronauts were exposed to the equivalent of 1 CT scan, round trip.

The line of Shem, Noah, and Seth was kept intact as a living record while the rest of the world destroyed itself.

God murdered everyone on the planet before anyone got a chance to destroy the world. And I guess the the ancients of other regions and continents outside of Mesopotamia were all fixin' to destroy the world too. I'm sure those aboriginal tribes were a saucy bunch and deserved to drown.

Quote

And do you trust the wikipedia tables? If so, why? If not, why even bring them up? It also says in your wiki article, "In some developed countries, like the US and Japan, artificial exposure is, on average, greater than the natural exposure, due to greater access to medical imaging." Do you believe that or not?

I brought them up because you trust this sort of thing. I legitimately don't care about numbers and statistics because most of them are projected. But you tell me over and over how I am stupid for not trusting charts and numbers.
Unless it doesn't suit you, then you reject it, even when I show you a link where you can find those numbers.

Again, I haven't rejected anything. You're the one who selectively rejects things just based upon what you like and don't like. And again, a paragraph below the numbers it says, "In some developed countries, like the US and Japan, artificial exposure is, on average, greater than the natural exposure, due to greater access to medical imaging." So I don't know what you're going on about.

I happen to know that there is no possible way any of us can verify the level of radiation in the upper atmosphere when rockets supposedly pass.

How do you "know" this?

This is for your benefit. When you are actually presented with numbers for these sources, you question and reject them.

Again, I haven't rejected anything. I don't question the numbers. I don't really even care. So I'm not sure where you keep getting that from. You're projecting for some unknown reason.

The only thing I reject is when you blather on about stuff you don't know anything about and don't provide any evidence. Just anecdotes about dog food, cartoons, and bibles. I mean how do you think you should be taken seriously and not a troll when you don't even know how a sunset works, don't seem to realize that 100's of millions of people navigate the world using globe earth and somehow, shockingly, get it right, making up this radio and sound stuff that millions of people use, engineer, build for every day. etc. But nooooo, somehow you know better than everyone else on the planet because you think your imagination is somehow reality for the rest of the world. Your staggering arrogance is beyond comprehension.

So incredibly dishonest.

You reject pretty much anything and everything that isn't known to you first hand. No matter the science, the data, the evidence, if you haven't personally gathered the knowledge, poof, out it goes. Any and all evidence you don't like is immediately branded as coming from liars. Now that's not only dishonest, but ignorant as well. And the hubris on you...unmatched.

UVA/UVB, Gamma, and Infrared are the dangerous ones. But alot of others too.

I wouldn't call IR dangerous.
UVC is more dangerous than UVA and UVB, but that is mostly blocked by the air.

From the same article that told us water blocks radiation, gave us this graph.

And note that the absorption of UVA and UVB is quite similar to visual light.
If you are going to block that radiation, you will block out the light as well.
Another reason for the Bible being dumb.
Another reason to discard it as the garbage that it is.

Maybe if you listened, I wouldn't have to keep telling you the same damned stuff.

Maybe if you listened, you would stop repeating the same refuted garabge?

We pass through the ionosphere. And the Van-Allen Belt. This powerful radiation acts as a barrier for even worse cosmic radiation and for as a screen between Earth's atmosphere and outer space.

No, it doesn't.

The Van Allen belts are caused by Earth's magnetic field.
It is that field which acts as a barrier for cosmic radiation, but in blocking the radiation, it traps the charged particles in the belts.

Rockets rarely fly through the belts. And when they do, they have adequate sheilding.

As for the rest, why don't you look it up yourself? So needy.

You are the one making the claim. The burden is on you to support it.
Don't expect other people to go do your homework for you.

But the "rational" atheistic materialists are responsible for almost daily violence against unborn children.

They aren't unborn children.
This is an example of you being entirely irrational, evaluating a lump of cells as what it has the potential to grow into.
And if you truly believed you should be happy about this, as that "child" would be spared the horrors of this plane of existence and go straight to heaven.

The "rational" materialists are responsible for most of the deaths of humans at the hands of war or famine.

You mean the countless times a god has been used to justify violence?
And this can only ever be the case if you take a rational approach and assume a god doesn't exist.
If instead you take the entirely irrational approach and pretend a god does exist, then what is it doing during all these wars, with plenty fought in its name? Why is it causing so much famine?

A rational person understands that these records were written as myth by Noah's own family

No, they don't.
They recognise that Noah was likely also a myth.
They recognise that the Bible is full of myth, and shouldn't be taken as an account of reality.

I happen to know that there is no possible way any of us can verify the level of radiation in the upper atmosphere when rockets supposedly pass.

Sure there is, by building a rocket.
You choosing to not do that, for whatever reason, doesn't make NASA's measurements fake.

Quote from: ecco on February 06, 2023, 02:36:22 PM

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on February 03, 2023, 06:19:01 AM

If you only read what is said line by line, then you are a literalist.

Which is probably why you stopped reading and dismissed the Bible as nonsense, right...?

Take this passage:

Quote

21 The Lord said to Moses, “When you return to Egypt, see that you perform before Pharaoh all the wonders I have given you the power to do. But I will harden his heart so that he will not let the people go. 22 Then say to Pharaoh, ‘This is what the Lord says: Israel is my firstborn son, 23 and I told you, “Let my son go, so he may worship me.” But you refused to let him go; so I will kill your firstborn son.’”

24 At a lodging place on the way, the Lord met Moses and was about to kill him. 25 But Zipporah took a flint knife, cut off her son’s foreskin and touched Moses’ feet with it. “Surely you are a bridegroom of blood to me,” she said. 26 So the Lord let him alone.

 
 
At this point, a literalist would quit. 

However, at this point a rational person would ask: Who recorded what the Lord said to Moses?   Don't you ever question who wrote all the OT?  How did the descendants of Noah know about Cain and Able?  How could they have written where Cain found a wife?

A rational person would understand that the words written in the Bible, are make-believe stories written by people promoting their version of religion.  The authors are no different than the people who wrote down Islamic Laws and Theories or the Zorasters or the Hindus or the Buddhists or the JW's or the Mormons. 

The readers and followers of any of these are exactly like you.  They choose what to believe and what to reject.  And each one will insist that they are right.

The only bearing this has on FE is that Creationists believe, with no evidence whatsoever, that their views are correct.
 
The only bearing this has on FE is that Creationists believe, regardless of how far-fetched their beliefs are, that their beliefs are correct.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on February 06, 2023, 10:06:44 PM

You keep calling yourself rational.

But the "rational" atheistic materialists are responsible for almost daily violence against unborn children. The "rational" materialists are responsible for most of the deaths of humans at the hands of war or famine.

You are not rational. You are insane. And violent AF.

My, my.  The gloves have come off and the True Christian reveals itself.  "Violent as F..K"?  Really?  First off, any rational, educated person knows that an embryo is not a child.  If you want to play that game then explain why approximately 30% of pregnancies spontaneously abort.  Does your God really need more angelic embryos in his heaven? 

Now, please pick up a history book and read about the Good Christians that put the Jews to the Inquisition.  Let's remember that for hundreds of years, it was good Christian Catholics and good Christian Protestants killing each other in Europe.  Let's remember that it was good Christians that burned tens of thousands of "witches" at the stake.  Let's forget the WWII propaganda and acknowledge that Hitler used the teachings of Protestant Reformer Martin Luther to inflame the German Christians against the German and Polish Jews.  People have killed people "In The Name Of God" since man invented gods.

A rational person understands that these records were written as myth by Noah's own family, probably Shem.

You are in no position to state what rational people believe.  A rational person realizes:
The Great Flood is fiction.  There was no Flood, no Noah, no Shem[/li][/list]

A rational person understands that the entirety of Genesis "is the formative Jewish myth that offers explanations, meaning and significance to the Israelities' existence in their land."

You take parts like the Flood literally and then make up nonsensical stories to justify your interpretations.

Why were they written (more relevant)? This oral tradition is to explain the diaspora of humankind, and their development toward high technology that almost destroyed the world. The line of Shem, Noah, and Seth was kept intact as a living record while the rest of the world destroyed itself.
Who wrote about Cain? Probably his own family, in much the same way as you know where your brother lives, even when you are not on good terms.

Moses recorded what was said to Moses. Making it hearsay. Which is why I reject rules against mixing meat and milk, and alot of this other shit. The Deuteronomic code was nonsense that Moses came up with, and told everyone that God said it. Moses did not write the first five books of the Bible, as they widely say about this.
 
Genesis was not written by him (oral tradition of several people predating Moses, hundreds of years before he was born). Nor was Numbers (if I remember correctly, he died near the end of Numbers).

See above.

The rest of your comments, about tables and radiation, are directed to Stash.  I'll let him address them.


 

The Great Flood is fiction.  There was no Flood, no Noah, no Shem...

On the contrary, the Great Flood is allegory. For those of us who understand what allegory and metaphor is, it is not excluded from being an actual event, it just means the meaning of the event has deeper symbolic meaning than just events.

But the Great Flood actually happened.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/evidence-for-a-flood-102813115/

The Smithsonian confirms it with their own science, though they suspect the date of the event happened earlier.

You are like Jesus deniers. You say it didn't happen and we're just supposed to believe you. But historical record of Jesus and Moses exists. And geological record (among others) scientifically proving the Great Flood happened exists. But the man's name was more likely Utnapishtim than Noah.

Moses
https://www.chasinghopewithkatherine.com/history-of-moses/

Jesus
https://reasonsforjesus.com/jesus-exist-scholars-agree-certainly-existed/

“There is no evidence that Jesus existed” is a catchphrase used by angry atheists and New Agers alike.

But is this idea taken seriously by any professors of ancient history, Biblical studies, or New Testament studies?  To say the least, no. In fact, not a single academic scholar today with a Ph.D. in a relevant field of study claims that Jesus did not exist.

Why is this?  Don’t they know of the articles online debunking Jesus, or documentaries like “Religulous” or “Zeitgeist” that debunk Jesus of Nazareth? Are they all unenlightened about how Jesus was a knock-off of horus or other ancient gods?

There is a group of about 3 main semi-scholarly people who argue for this “Christ-myth theory” that Jesus never existed. Richard Carrier is the most popular one, and quite frankly, is the only one who is even somewhat listened to by academics. He was mentioned multiple times in the article mentioned above.

Carrier has a Ph.D. in Ancient Studies from Columbia University with a specialty in Roman history, though he is currently unemployed having never held an academic position at any university.

They later go on to admit that even staunchly atheist historians nonetheless must concede the man existed. Even though they reject divinity about him.

As for Moses, Egyptian records show that he was a historical figure in Egyptian history. There are also multiple secondary sources mentioning the man.

[mountains of religious BS]

Again, your religious BS isn't going to help you here.
Try dealing with the topic at hand, such as free fall, and the moon?

Quote from: ecco on February 07, 2023, 08:55:05 AM

The Great Flood is fiction.  There was no Flood, no Noah, no Shem...

On the contrary, the Great Flood is allegory. For those of us who understand what allegory and metaphor is, it is not excluded from being an actual event, it just means the meaning of the event has deeper symbolic meaning than just events.

But the Great Flood actually happened.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/evidence-for-a-flood-102813115/

The Smithsonian confirms it with their own science, though they suspect the date of the event happened earlier.

"Confirm"? That's a mighty strong word that doesn't appear in the article. It's a hypothesis.

And, again, why are you mentioning the Smithsonian as a source for anything? For one, you have no first-hand knowledge of any of this by your own admission. And first-hand knowledge is supposedly all you rely on. And the bible sure isn't first-hand knowledge, let alone the Smithsonian.

For two, you realize that the Smithsonian has a massive "Air and Space" museum. Pretty much everyhting in it is predicated on, you guessed it, gravity.

You are like Jesus deniers. You say it didn't happen and we're just supposed to believe you. But historical record of Jesus and Moses exists.

What first-hand knowledge do you have regarding this? Seems like you're relying on a book. I thought that was heresy to you? You know, relying on experts.

Quote from: ecco on February 07, 2023, 08:55:05 AM

The Great Flood is fiction.  There was no Flood, no Noah, no Shem...

On the contrary, the Great Flood is allegory. For those of us who understand what allegory and metaphor is, it is not excluded from being an actual event, it just means the meaning of the event has deeper symbolic meaning than just events.

But the Great Flood actually happened.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/evidence-for-a-flood-102813115/

The Smithsonian confirms it with their own science, though they suspect the date of the event happened earlier.

From your Genesis we have details of the Great Flood that you say actually happened....

17Now the flood was on the earth forty days. The waters increased and lifted up the ark, and it rose high above the earth.
18The waters prevailed and greatly increased on the earth, and the ark moved about on the surface of the waters.
19And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth, and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered.
20The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered.

From your link to the Smithsonian article we have information that a relatively small portion of the earth experienced flooding.

Sediment layers suggest that 7,500 years ago Mediterranean water roared into the Black Sea


Eventually, like a bathtub overflowing, the Mediterranean had to pour through into the Black
Sea basin.

THE TWO AIN'T THE SAME THING!  If you want to believe that "the Great Flood actually happened"  and you have evidence for it, then show it.  Don't embarrass yourself by copy/posting a scientific article that says nothing about all the high hills under the whole heaven getting covered.

You are like Jesus deniers. You say it didn't happen and we're just supposed to believe you. But historical record of Jesus and Moses exists.

I'm not like a Jesus denier, I am a Jesus denier.  I don't expect you to believe anything I say.  Your Creation indoctrination is far too extensive to ever be able to see truth.  The above example of you rationalizing evidence for The Flood is proof thereof.

And geological record (among others) scientifically proving the Great Flood happened exists. But the man's name was more likely Utnapishtim than Noah.

If you have any "geological record ... scientifically proving the Great Flood" then why not show it?  Why link a Smithsonium article that had nothing to do with the flood?


 

Moses
https://www.chasinghopewithkatherine.com/history-of-moses/

An internet preacher is hardly a valid source of historically accurate information:

Katherine Abraham is a third-generation Indian Seventh-day Adventist who completed her schooling and later university studies in Pune, under the aegis of Nowrosjee Wadia College and the ILS Law College in Pune. With degrees in law, literature, and journalism, Katherine has been committed to bringing about a distinct social change and strongly believes that a revival and reformation of the mindset is the need of the hour.

Do you take everything written by Seventh-day Adventists to be historically accurate?  I doubt it.

Jesus
https://reasonsforjesus.com/jesus-exist-scholars-agree-certainly-existed/

Quote

“There is no evidence that Jesus existed” is a catchphrase used by angry atheists and New Agers alike.    snip
They later go on to admit that even staunchly atheist historians nonetheless must concede the man existed. Even though they reject divinity about him.

Your linked site is just another Christian Apologetics site like Answers In Genesis Answers or CARM.  Since you were unable to link to any evidence for Jesus we must conclude that you have no evidence for Jesus.

Historians will tell you that there may have been an historical Jesus.  Historians may tell you that the Jesus myth is based on stories of a number of itinerant mid eastern preachers.

The fact is that there is no evidence to support the concept that Jesus is God.  That is just one of many reasons there are atheists.

 

As for Moses, Egyptian records show that he was a historical figure in Egyptian history. There are also multiple secondary sources mentioning the man.

If there are "Egyptian records show that he was a historical figure in Egyptian history" then why didn't you present them?


You are very consistent in your approach to religion and your approach to science in general and the shape of the earth in particular:
You make an assertion.
You claim to have evidence to support you assertion.
You post pictures or links that you assert support your allegation.

The problem is that your evidence isn't really evidence at all.  It is evidence for something entirely different or it is just more assertions from very biased, easily discredited sites/people.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on February 08, 2023, 01:50:25 AM

Quote from: ecco on February 07, 2023, 08:55:05 AM

The Great Flood is fiction.  There was no Flood, no Noah, no Shem...

On the contrary, the Great Flood is allegory. For those of us who understand what allegory and metaphor is, it is not excluded from being an actual event, it just means the meaning of the event has deeper symbolic meaning than just events.

But the Great Flood actually happened.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/evidence-for-a-flood-102813115/

The Smithsonian confirms it with their own science, though they suspect the date of the event happened earlier.

"Confirm"? That's a mighty strong word that doesn't appear in the article. It's a hypothesis.

And, again, why are you mentioning the Smithsonian as a source for anything? For one, you have no first-hand knowledge of any of this by your own admission. And first-hand knowledge is supposedly all you rely on. And the bible sure isn't first-hand knowledge, let alone the Smithsonian.

For two, you realize that the Smithsonian has a massive "Air and Space" museum. Pretty much everyhting in it is predicated on, you guessed it, gravity.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on February 08, 2023, 01:50:25 AM

You are like Jesus deniers. You say it didn't happen and we're just supposed to believe you. But historical record of Jesus and Moses exists.

What first-hand knowledge do you have regarding this? Seems like you're relying on a book. I thought that was heresy to you? You know, relying on experts.

What I may have even said is that you can't trust secondary sources.

What I meant when I said about secondhand knowledge is that secondhand knowledge is utterly and completely useless if you don't understand how to judge the sources with your our mind.
You cannot trust secondary sources blindly. You cannot trust experts blindly. 

And for the record, I do not trust Smithsonian blindly. Nor their experts. I trust the facts that they present on their own merit, and say that this seems logical. Moreover, I happen to know there are flood stories not just in the Middle East but in Australia, China, South America, and so on.

But when people tell me "I have proved Sputnik is real, just look at this NASA photos!" I insist that they actually look at whether that's possible. I insist they use firsthand knowledge to gauge the secondhand knowledge presented. You claim that because a man is telling you that he's a scientist, and telling that he could see an object roughly 2 feet (23 inches) around from space as it flew past.

Okay, first off. How far away can you see an object only 2 ft around? Well, we can do this test with a drone.

As you can see, the drone flies out of line of sight fairly easily. It is a small object, not much smaller than the Sputnik.


Btw. Here's a shot of our space ships returning from a trip to Saturn.

But because I am not from NASA, you suddenly have proper criticism for this picture.

But not NASA pictures of Mars, even when people show they are simply desaturated and recolored red.





Here, I have a rare discovery.
A petrified forest in the wastes of Mars and an old building from back when Mars had ancient life!



(Actually, I just layered two pictures together in both cases)






Now here you have a taste of your own medicine, as here is a scientific article showing clearly, confirming that sediments from one area washed to another during the great flood. And look, immediately you're like "well that's just a theory!"  Sediments don't wash from one area to another without a major upheaval of water.

And You have repeatedly replaced what I actually believe about the flood (effectively creating a strawman. Lemme post two theories, to show the diff.
1. I hold that throughout the ancient world, there was flooding all over the place. This is not the same as flooding the world. This means that water level rose several hundred feet making continents that were formerly dry land into water. We not only have the sediment record, we have the fossil record and several swamped landmasses.

See if you can spot the differences.
2. You say that I'm saying that at one point water reached high enough rates to turn all land on Earth into ocean.

One of these is a strawman. One of these I actually meant. 

I'm not like a Jesus denier, I am a Jesus denier. 

Which makes you a crackpot. The only major Jesus denier got his PhD only to find himself unemployed.
Since you respect numbers and credentials, explain to me how no major academic institution would take him? Wait, I'll save you the trouble. It's because even atheist historians do not deny multiple secondary sources, and a rather large "Jesus-shaped hole" in history.

What do I mean by a Jesus shaped hole? Well suppose one day I was permabanned, and more importantly every single post I have made (along with any quotes by other users) is scrubbed from the system. They wiped out all record of me. 
Stash, DataOverload, JackBlack, and maybe you deny that I ever was on this forum.
Slime and Disputeone do remember me, but despite me being gone, they don't actually know I was banned. How would they find out that I've been erased? What proof would there be of me? Well, any threads that I participated in but didn't start would have them responding to nobody, getting into arguments where none existed before. The number of pages might be reduced if I made multiple or big posts. There would also be a sense where the tone of certain conversations changed, where it's like "Great, we're all in agreement that the Earth is round," then suddenly, you're going into long arguments against FE. Even though some ppl here don't like me, actually being gone would change the structure of many threads where my comments were permanently collapsed. 

are flatearthers allowed to use the mercator style east-west map?

What I may have even said is that you can't trust secondary sources.

Yet you are happy accepting the bible, a book written by unknown authors, with a clear motive to control people, full of pure garbage.

say that this seems logical

You mean it matches your delusional fantasy so you happily accept it; while if it shows your fantasy is wrong, you reject it.

Okay, first off. How far away can you see an object only 2 ft around? Well, we can do this test with a drone.

Do you mean see or resolve?
There is a fundamental difference.

Go take a tiny, but bright LED out on a dark night, place it down and directed towards you, and then back away and see how far you can see it for.

You can see quite small but bright objects from a significant distance if it is dark enough.

So you aren't dismissing Sputnik because it doesn't make sense or is "clearly BS".
You are dismissing it because it doesn't fit your fantasy.

Also notice how you cherry pick Sputnik, rather than the much simpler to see ISS, which countless people have taken photos and videos of.
Why? Because it is easier for you to pretend Sputnik is BS than it is to pretend the ISS is BS.

But ultimately it all comes down to not matching your delusional fantasy.

Unlike the Bible, which you happily accept, even though it is clearly BS.

But because I am not from NASA, you suddenly have proper criticism for this picture.

No, because it obviously photoshopped we have proper criticism.
And it demonstrates that whoever produced this crap has no idea about brightness or lighting in general.

But not NASA pictures of Mars, even when people show they are simply desaturated and recolored red.

You mean when people assert garbage with no justification at all.

In order for this to be valid criticism they would need to provide a source from NASA and a source from Earth.
Instead, they typically provide a single image, and a copy of it with a filter, and claim that one is from NASA and one is from Earth.
Dishonest scum like this are happy to fabricate their own images to lie and claim it is from NASA to pretend NASA is faking crap when it is actually them faking it.

So go find the original sources, a photo from NASA and a photo from someone else as clearly from Earth (without a connection to claiming NASA faked it).

Now here you have a taste of your own medicine, as here is a scientific article

No, just more of your rambling garbage.
Do you know what a scientific article is?

And You have repeatedly replaced what I actually believe about the flood

You mean you accept the Bible is BS, and the flood described never happened?

Which makes you a crackpot.

No, it doesn't.
Denying the existence of fictional characters like Jesus and Santa does not make one a crackpot.

The only major Jesus denier got his PhD only to find himself unemployed.
Since you respect numbers and credentials, explain to me how no major academic institution would take him?

Since you claim to respect numbers, explain why a single example should prove anything.
What were the other attributes of this person?

And there hasn't just been one.
There have been plenty.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christ_myth_theory

The main counter is that some guy can who was born at that time and baptised existed, but basically everything said about them is myth.

So it is like saying Santa Claus is real, because it was based upon a historical figure.

First off, please stop commingling comments to me and comments to Stash.  We are two different people.  Address his comments in one post, and mine in another.

Quote from: ecco on February 07, 2023, 08:55:05 AM

The Great Flood is fiction.  There was no Flood, no Noah, no Shem...

But the Great Flood actually happened.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/evidence-for-a-flood-102813115/

The Smithsonian confirms it with their own science, though they suspect the date of the event happened earlier.

 Again - NO!  The Smithsonian did not confirm your Great Flood.
 

What I may have even said is that you can't trust secondary sources.

What I meant when I said about secondhand knowledge is that secondhand knowledge is utterly and completely useless if you don't understand how to judge the sources with your our mind.
You cannot trust secondary sources blindly. You cannot trust experts blindly. 

And for the record, I do not trust Smithsonian blindly. Nor their experts. I trust the facts that they present on their own merit, and say that this seems logical.

It is not logical that you think an article about a localized flood is an article that confirms the Biblical Flood of Noah. 

Unless you can afford a trip on a Space-x flight, you will never have first-hand knowledge of being in space.
Unless you can afford a trip on a Triton submarine, you will never have first-hand knowledge of being deep undersea.
With your Biblically indoctrinated mindset you mistrust the knowledge of scientists.  How really sad.

On the other hand, you believe the nonsense spewed by believers of a flat earth.  There are experiments you can do yourself that prove the flat earth concept is nonsense.  But you don't do them.  Instead, you rely on what the Flat Earthers have to say because it doesn't conflict with your Bible stories.  Your double standard is obvious to everyone except yourself.

 Moreover, I happen to know there are flood stories not just in the Middle East but in Australia, China, South America, and so on.

So what.  No one denies that there have been floods and tsunamis throughout history.  But none have been worldwide.  Your Smithsonian article makes that quite clear.

Now here you have a taste of your own medicine, as here is a scientific article showing clearly, confirming that sediments from one area washed to another during the great flood. And look, immediately you're like "well that's just a theory!"  Sediments don't wash from one area to another without a major upheaval of water.

I see no article, just a big map.

And You have repeatedly replaced what I actually believe about the flood (effectively creating a strawman. Lemme post two theories, to show the diff.
1. I hold that throughout the ancient world, there was flooding all over the place. This is not the same as flooding the world. This means that water level rose several hundred feet making continents that were formerly dry land into water. We not only have the sediment record, we have the fossil record and several swamped landmasses.
 
See if you can spot the differences.
2. You say that I'm saying that at one point water reached high enough rates to turn all land on Earth into ocean.
One of these is a strawman. One of these I actually meant. 

You have said you believe the story of Genesis: "But the Great Flood actually happened."

 

17Now the flood was on the earth forty days. The waters increased and lifted up the ark, and it rose high above the earth. 18The waters prevailed and greatly increased on the earth, and the ark moved about on the surface of the waters. 19And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the earth, and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered. 20The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered. 21And all flesh died that moved on [c]the earth: birds and cattle and beasts and every creeping thing that creeps on the earth, and every man. 22All in whose nostrils was the breath [d]of the spirit of life, all that was on the dry land, died. 23So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who were with him in the ark remained alive. 24And the waters prevailed on the earth one hundred and fifty days.

No strawman.  Just your own words and the words in your Bible.  If you want to retract your "But the Great Flood actually happened.", then retract it and admit your Bible is wrong.

 

Quote

(ecco)I'm not like a Jesus denier, I am a Jesus denier. 

Which makes you a crackpot. The only major Jesus denier got his PhD only to find himself unemployed.
Since you respect numbers and credentials, explain to me how no major academic institution would take him? Wait, I'll save you the trouble. It's because even atheist historians do not deny multiple secondary sources, and a rather large "Jesus-shaped hole" in history.

Care to say who you are talking about?

What do I mean by a Jesus shaped hole? Well suppose one day I was permabanned, and more importantly every single post I have made (along with any quotes by other users) is scrubbed from the system. They wiped out all record of me. 
Stash, DataOverload, JackBlack, and maybe you deny that I ever was on this forum.
Slime and Disputeone do remember me, but despite me being gone, they don't actually know I was banned. How would they find out that I've been erased? What proof would there be of me? Well, any threads that I participated in but didn't start would have them responding to nobody, getting into arguments where none existed before. The number of pages might be reduced if I made multiple or big posts. There would also be a sense where the tone of certain conversations changed, where it's like "Great, we're all in agreement that the Earth is round," then suddenly, you're going into long arguments against FE. Even though some ppl here don't like me, actually being gone would change the structure of many threads where my comments were permanently collapsed.

I have no idea what that long ramble is about.  I never erased anyone.  You are beginning to sound paranoid.

What first-hand knowledge do you have regarding this? Seems like you're relying on a book. I thought that was heresy to you? You know, relying on experts.

What I may have even said is that you can't trust secondary sources.

What I meant when I said about secondhand knowledge is that secondhand knowledge is utterly and completely useless if you don't understand how to judge the sources with your our mind.
You cannot trust secondary sources blindly. You cannot trust experts blindly. 
[/quote]

Who said anything about "blindly?

And for the record, I do not trust Smithsonian blindly. Nor their experts. I trust the facts that they present on their own merit, and say that this seems logical. Moreover, I happen to know there are flood stories not just in the Middle East but in Australia, China, South America, and so on.

Source for floods in Australia, China, South America required with specifics. Like do they timeline match up with Noah, etc.

But when people tell me "I have proved Sputnik is real, just look at this NASA photos!" I insist that they actually look at whether that's possible. I insist they use firsthand knowledge to gauge the secondhand knowledge presented. You claim that because a man is telling you that he's a scientist, and telling that he could see an object roughly 2 feet (23 inches) around from space as it flew past.

Okay, first off. How far away can you see an object only 2 ft around? Well, we can do this test with a drone.

As you can see, the drone flies out of line of sight fairly easily. It is a small object, not much smaller than the Sputnik.

What do drones in 2023 have to do with sputnik in the 50's? And who said they could see it? Sputnick was highly reflective so conceivably, it could be seen as maybe a spec. But from what I read, most sightings of it were of the rocket, not sputnik itself.

Btw. Here's a shot of our space ships returning from a trip to Saturn.

But because I am not from NASA, you suddenly have proper criticism for this picture.

Nope, you're wrong. If that came from NASA, I'd consider it a rendering of some sort.

But not NASA pictures of Mars, even when people show they are simply desaturated and recolored red.

And here's a perfect example of you blindly believing a secondary source. The third image, NASA Mars photo versus some place in Bulgaria...

- For one, the bulgaria photo its originally from some travel blog, https://en.visitstconstantine.bg/travel-guide-landmarks#pobiti-kamani
- For two, the "Mars" photo is not from NASA or Mars, https://factcheck.afp.com/nasa-says-image-was-not-taken-during-us-space-agencys-mars-missions
- For three, someone as far back as 2014, that's how long this fake meme has been kicking around on ssocial media, just took the bulgaria image, red saturated it in PS and created the meme.
- As a bonus, for four, zero NASA images from Mars show any sort of formations like that.

Who is the blind one here? Just stumbling into an old fake meme and believing it immediately to be true because it fits your narrative. That is blindness.

 

The above is indeed fake.  Do you have evidence that NASA posted it?  People like HotDevil07 create nonsense pictures like this to get a following and to drag the gullible like you farther down the rabbit hole.  You may believe everyone at NASA is lying to you, but they are not so ignorant as to make such an obvious fake. 

Something else to think about... How did the person who posted the fake get the original picture of Bulgaria?  Did someone in NASA leak it?  THINK!

ETA:

I had Google find the image.  Here is a comment from:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pobiti_Kamani

The Stone Desert is not only a well-known European tourist attraction ...
In September 2020, Reuters reported that an image of Pobiti Kamani, photoshopped red, circulated social media under false claims that it was an "original NASA photo of Mars".[5]

So, who took a picture of a well-known tourist attraction, colored it red, and claimed it was taken on Mars...
1. The dummies at NASA?
2. A Flat Earther trying to further the cause of belittling NASA and science?
3. A globalist posting such an easily discredited "fake" to see how many ignorant FlatEarthers would go along with the anti-NASA BS?

My guess would be #3.  And you went for it hook, line, and sinker.  Typical.

 

What is your problem with the above picture?  NASA, as well as millions of other professionals,  use different camera filters for different purposes.   

why is it always the conspiracy theorists are the dishonest ones?

covid
moon
tuckerC



soo odd...

It'a a weird phenomenon. We're always being called sheeple, indoctrinated, will blindly follow anything, and so on. Then someone comes along with a meme, a social media meme for god's sake, and exclaims, "Look! See, you're people are liars, you fell for it all again".
Of course, the meme is complete garbage, the individual didn't even bother to look into the validity of it for even one second, yet we are the blind ones? Happens over and over and over again.

why is it always the conspiracy theorists are the dishonest ones?

covid
moon
tuckerC

soo odd...

What do you mean by dishonest?

COVID: "Buy these masks." "Also, take these shots here." CDC at one point or another has admitted that neither work, and other people have found they may be dangerous. The vaccines cause health side-effects. So do the masks (respiratory ailments). Vaccines may be free, but it's a racket. You pay and pay for the side-effects.
Moon Landing: If the moon landing is real, then NASA and other groups are vindicated in the funding they gain in order to do new space missions. However, if it is a lie, this is tax money that is embezzled away from the taxpayer.

A liar has something to gain. Both of these above, there is a benefiting party.
Nobody lies when they have no self-interest. So why am I lying?

...

......

.................

I'm waiting!



10 minute disproof of gravity. I haven't watched so it may not jive with what I say as my theories. But I'm not any more attached to one theory than another. The point is belief in gravity is to push the space navigation narrative. Total nonsense, and so however you prove it wrong is fine.

And no, it's not in line with my theories, but that is totally okay.

It'a a weird phenomenon. We're always being called sheeple, indoctrinated, will blindly follow anything, and so on. Then someone comes along with a meme, a social media meme for god's sake, and exclaims, "Look! See, you're people are liars, you fell for it all again".
Of course, the meme is complete garbage, the individual didn't even bother to look into the validity of it for even one second, yet we are the blind ones? Happens over and over and over again.

Yes, you are the blind ones.

Because you don't bother to notice that the NASA has actually mentioned these locations as "training locations."

They are telling you they are lying! They are even telling you where you can find the lie! You are ignoring that they literally have all the time in the world to record "Mars footage" while they are supposedly train in those locations. You ignore that it is literally that easy to fly "into space" and live off the grid for several months (with assistance from NASA stooges), then drop a return pod which for all you know could be empty, while they drive back into civilization quietly. This is literally a magic trick and your eyes are looking at the wrong thing!



Wonder Works? That site doesn't match up. (Searches some more)

https://wonderworksweb.com/page34.html

I found the website, moving around a 502 Bad Gateway.  Wonder Works is a theme park. WonderWorks, Inc. is a  design and production company exactly as described. And look!

Lockheed Martin again! The same company that gives you fake satellites while the real ones they make are atmospheric is served by these turkeys. NASA itself. Much of the involved media who does movies about space. Same crew.

Then I considered the possibility that the Youtube ppl may have made up this company page. So I Google Mapped the location (7231 Remmet Ave, Canoga Park, CA 91303). Yup, sure enough, it's there.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/7231+Remmet+Ave,+Canoga+Park,+CA+91303/@34.2020117,-118.6028979,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x80c29c15223f96fb:0x35966366e32c4adf!8m2!3d34.2020073!4d-118.6007092!16s%2Fg%2F11bw4b6yf2

But maybe they just tricked Google Maps. Let's try Yelp.

https://www.yelp.com/biz/wonderworks-canoga-park
They say it's unclaimed, but yes, location matches the business name.

MapQuest too.
https://www.mapquest.com/us/california/wonderworks-11021923

But yes, I'm blind to believe that maybe a film company can do fakery. That NASA could hire a special effects company. No, sorry, maybe YOU are gullible.

Far from not possible that you could ever be tricked, it is very much possible. And that you are doubling down on this, means that you not only are extremely gullible but also extremely ashamed to be declared wrong.

To which I say... Let it go, let it goooooooooooo...



Stop doubling down and understand it is not only very possible, but any company able to do so makes billions a year. Your tax dollars at work to scam you out of more tax dollars.

But you all are probably Canadians or don't pay taxes. This is the only explanation I can give for you doubling down like this. Besides shame of course.

Quote from: Stash on February 10, 2023, 12:47:28 PM

It'a a weird phenomenon. We're always being called sheeple, indoctrinated, will blindly follow anything, and so on. Then someone comes along with a meme, a social media meme for god's sake, and exclaims, "Look! See, you're people are liars, you fell for it all again".
Of course, the meme is complete garbage, the individual didn't even bother to look into the validity of it for even one second, yet we are the blind ones? Happens over and over and over again.

Yes, you are the blind ones.

Because you don't bother to notice that the NASA has actually mentioned these locations as "training locations."

They are telling you they are lying! They are even telling you where you can find the lie! You are ignoring that they literally have all the time in the world to record "Mars footage" while they are supposedly train in those locations. You ignore that it is literally that easy to fly "into space" and live off the grid for several months (with assistance from NASA stooges), then drop a return pod which for all you know could be empty, while they drive back into civilization quietly. This is literally a magic trick and your eyes are looking at the wrong thing!



Far from not possible that you could ever be tricked, it is very much possible. And that you are doubling down on this, means that you not only are extremely gullible but also extremely ashamed to be declared wrong.

Again, your argument is always, because people have the capacity and ability to lie, they are lyng...Therefore, everyone is lying. That's not a valid argument, anyone can see that.

Your Jerad video for instance. They also fabricated a 50' tall model for an amusement park of the Eiffel Tower, here:



Your argument is that the Eiffel Tower doesn't exist because these folks made a very convincing model of one. Here's their model of St Peters...



Looks amazingly realistic. Your argument is that St. Peters doesn't exist because these people can and did make a model of it.

That's not an argument for anything: People can lie, fake something, so all people are lying, faking something.

I'm not at all ashamed to be wrong. Bring it on. Bring on the actual evidence. I don't really care about me being right or wrong. It's just that no one has served up any convincing evidence, not even a shred that my personal thinking that the earth is a globe or that space travel exists is not valid. I've definitely had many moments where someone brings up something that made me go, "Hmm, I wonder how that can be, I wonder how that works..." Then look into such and rely on evidence to inform my stance.  Simple as that.

Try and come up with some evidence that someone has actually lied about and faked something, not just that all people in the world have the ability to lie about or fake something. It's just a lame, extremely low effort argument and not based upon anything.

What do you mean by dishonest?

People blatantly lying, i.e. making stuff up, dishonestly misrepresenting things, etc.

CDC at one point or another has admitted that neither work, and other people have found they may be dangerous.

See, this is an example of such dishonesty, they admit they are not perfect, that is not admitted they don't work.
But you are happy to blatantly lie to promote your BS.

Moon Landing: If the moon landing is real, then NASA and other groups are vindicated in the funding they gain in order to do new space missions. However, if it is a lie, this is tax money that is embezzled away from the taxpayer.

Not really, the moon landing was a dick swinging contest.
But there is nothing to show it was faked.

Nobody lies when they have no self-interest. So why am I lying?

Because you can't handle reality.
You can't handle being an insignificant speck living on an insignificant rock, orbiting an insignificant star in a massive universe.
You would much rather pretend you are the play thing of a childish evil tyrant.
And space shows that fantasy of yours to be pure BS.
Gravity shows that fantasy of yours to be pure BS.

10 minute disproof of gravity. I haven't watched so it

Further demonstrating your dishonesty.
You just look for whatever BS you think can help support you, and are happy to promote it or accept it, without thinking, and present as if it destroys reality.
Are you sure it is a 10 minute disproof of gravity, or is it the vastly more likely option of 10 minutes or pure BS?

If you can't be bothered watching it, why should I or anyone else care?

But I'm not any more attached to one theory than another.

Yes, you are.
Any theory which exposes your fantasy as BS you hate, even without any rational justification for doing so.

The point is belief in gravity is to push the space navigation narrative. Total nonsense, and so however you prove it wrong is fine.

And more dishonest BS.
The point of gravity is to explain how reality works.
To explain why things fall, why objects orbit other objects, and so on.

It has nothing to do with pushing any narrative.
But because it destroys your fantasy you need to smear it with all sorts of dishonest BS.

You dismiss it as nonsense, and don't care what dishonest BS is used to pretend it is wrong.

That is the kind of dishonesty being discussed.

Yes, you are the blind ones.

You are the one happy to take a video, based upon its name, without caring about its content, all to pretend gravity is wrong.
All because you don't like gravity.

So no, you are the blind one. You are the one intentionally burying your head in the sand to try to cling to your delusional fantasy.

You accept whatever BS is presented as factual to pretend your fantasy is true.

Because you don't bother to notice that the NASA has actually mentioned these locations as "training locations."

Which in no way supports your blatant lies.
You have no evidence at all for any of it.
You just cling to them and keep spouting them because that is what helps you prop up your fantasy.

But yes, I'm blind to believe that maybe a film company can do fakery.

No, you are blind to just accept whatever delusional BS people make up if it will help prop up your fantasy, while rejecting everything that shows you are wrong.

No, sorry, maybe YOU are gullible.

Far from not possible that you could ever be tricked, it is very much possible. And that you are doubling down on this, means that you not only are extremely gullible but also extremely ashamed to be declared wrong.

Have you looked in the mirror lately?

You are happy to boldly assert that everyone who doesn't agree with your delusional fantasy, who objects to it and explains why you are wrong are gullible or lying.
But then as soon as it comes to something that supports your delusional garbage, you happily accept it, without thinking.

This is an incredibly dishonest double standard, which only serves to promote your delusional BS.

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on February 17, 2023, 08:25:15 PM

Quote from: Stash on February 10, 2023, 12:47:28 PM

It'a a weird phenomenon. We're always being called sheeple, indoctrinated, will blindly follow anything, and so on. Then someone comes along with a meme, a social media meme for god's sake, and exclaims, "Look! See, you're people are liars, you fell for it all again".
Of course, the meme is complete garbage, the individual didn't even bother to look into the validity of it for even one second, yet we are the blind ones? Happens over and over and over again.

Yes, you are the blind ones.

Because you don't bother to notice that the NASA has actually mentioned these locations as "training locations."

They are telling you they are lying! They are even telling you where you can find the lie! You are ignoring that they literally have all the time in the world to record "Mars footage" while they are supposedly train in those locations. You ignore that it is literally that easy to fly "into space" and live off the grid for several months (with assistance from NASA stooges), then drop a return pod which for all you know could be empty, while they drive back into civilization quietly. This is literally a magic trick and your eyes are looking at the wrong thing!



Far from not possible that you could ever be tricked, it is very much possible. And that you are doubling down on this, means that you not only are extremely gullible but also extremely ashamed to be declared wrong.

Again, your argument is always, because people have the capacity and ability to lie, they are lyng...Therefore, everyone is lying. That's not a valid argument, anyone can see that.

Your Jerad video for instance. They also fabricated a 50' tall model for an amusement park of the Eiffel Tower, here:



Your argument is that the Eiffel Tower doesn't exist because these folks made a very convincing model of one. Here's their model of St Peters...



Looks amazingly realistic. Your argument is that St. Peters doesn't exist because these people can and did make a model of it.

That's not an argument for anything: People can lie, fake something, so all people are lying, faking something.

I'm not at all ashamed to be wrong. Bring it on. Bring on the actual evidence. I don't really care about me being right or wrong. It's just that no one has served up any convincing evidence, not even a shred that my personal thinking that the earth is a globe or that space travel exists is not valid. I've definitely had many moments where someone brings up something that made me go, "Hmm, I wonder how that can be, I wonder how that works..." Then look into such and rely on evidence to inform my stance.  Simple as that.

Try and come up with some evidence that someone has actually lied about and faked something, not just that all people in the world have the ability to lie about or fake something. It's just a lame, extremely low effort argument and not based upon anything.

No, some people lie so all lie all the time is not what I'm getting at. Their customers mentioned by name are:

WonderWorks inc.™ is a full service design and production company serving the film, theme park and museum industries whose client list includes NASA, Lockheed Martin Skunkworks, SpaceX Dragon, XPrize, Space Camp, Challenger Center, Spielberg, Lucas, Disney, Universal, G.M., Ford, Chrysler, Rockwell, and the Smithsonian Museum.  With a project list that spans the globe, WonderWorks inc. provides clients with an extensive history of knowledge, creativity, cutting-edge technology and a commitment to detail in all of our replicas and space suits.   We are not a hobby or toy store nor do we sell Halloween costumes.   There are many excellent sources for those products but we specialize in realism.

That includes film studios, which we already knew about. Then museums (huh?!?) and car companies. Then they mention a military company that I've verified has a connection to satellites, and two space companies.

I'm a game programmer. Should I ask them for a quote on a realistic picture of takeoff to the moon? I think they would charge an arm and a leg though.

This is not a blanket "people lie, so all people lie" thing. This is a "When those people lie, this is where they go. And everyone tells themselves they are too smart to be fooled, so instead of you know, not being fooled, they put up defense after defense when caught fooled."

So like, if I paid for them to remove the watermark, and layered myself into Eiffel, I could have myself "walking in France."

 Yes, yes bring it on. Except you didn't actually understand that the company actually says it works for them. That it can happen is one thing, that the company says it does happen is another.

But maybe you say, "They're lying."



Sometimes no matter if something is trurh or lie, you get the same result. He either wants advertising and exaggerated (in which case he gets sued by NASA and these other big names), or he wants advertising and has no reason to lie. The risk of lawsuit makes the first unlikely, so this is as close to proof as you're gonna get.

Quote from: Stash on February 17, 2023, 09:01:50 PM

Quote from: bulmabriefs144 on February 17, 2023, 08:25:15 PM

Quote from: Stash on February 10, 2023, 12:47:28 PM

It'a a weird phenomenon. We're always being called sheeple, indoctrinated, will blindly follow anything, and so on. Then someone comes along with a meme, a social media meme for god's sake, and exclaims, "Look! See, you're people are liars, you fell for it all again".
Of course, the meme is complete garbage, the individual didn't even bother to look into the validity of it for even one second, yet we are the blind ones? Happens over and over and over again.

Yes, you are the blind ones.

Because you don't bother to notice that the NASA has actually mentioned these locations as "training locations."

They are telling you they are lying! They are even telling you where you can find the lie! You are ignoring that they literally have all the time in the world to record "Mars footage" while they are supposedly train in those locations. You ignore that it is literally that easy to fly "into space" and live off the grid for several months (with assistance from NASA stooges), then drop a return pod which for all you know could be empty, while they drive back into civilization quietly. This is literally a magic trick and your eyes are looking at the wrong thing!



Far from not possible that you could ever be tricked, it is very much possible. And that you are doubling down on this, means that you not only are extremely gullible but also extremely ashamed to be declared wrong.

Again, your argument is always, because people have the capacity and ability to lie, they are lyng...Therefore, everyone is lying. That's not a valid argument, anyone can see that.

Your Jerad video for instance. They also fabricated a 50' tall model for an amusement park of the Eiffel Tower, here:



Your argument is that the Eiffel Tower doesn't exist because these folks made a very convincing model of one. Here's their model of St Peters...



Looks amazingly realistic. Your argument is that St. Peters doesn't exist because these people can and did make a model of it.

That's not an argument for anything: People can lie, fake something, so all people are lying, faking something.

I'm not at all ashamed to be wrong. Bring it on. Bring on the actual evidence. I don't really care about me being right or wrong. It's just that no one has served up any convincing evidence, not even a shred that my personal thinking that the earth is a globe or that space travel exists is not valid. I've definitely had many moments where someone brings up something that made me go, "Hmm, I wonder how that can be, I wonder how that works..." Then look into such and rely on evidence to inform my stance.  Simple as that.

Try and come up with some evidence that someone has actually lied about and faked something, not just that all people in the world have the ability to lie about or fake something. It's just a lame, extremely low effort argument and not based upon anything.

No, some people lie so all lie all the time is not what I'm getting at. Their customers mentioned by name are:

Quote

WonderWorks inc.™ is a full service design and production company serving the film, theme park and museum industries whose client list includes NASA, Lockheed Martin Skunkworks, SpaceX Dragon, XPrize, Space Camp, Challenger Center, Spielberg, Lucas, Disney, Universal, G.M., Ford, Chrysler, Rockwell, and the Smithsonian Museum.  With a project list that spans the globe, WonderWorks inc. provides clients with an extensive history of knowledge, creativity, cutting-edge technology and a commitment to detail in all of our replicas and space suits.   We are not a hobby or toy store nor do we sell Halloween costumes.   There are many excellent sources for those products but we specialize in realism.

That includes film studios, which we already knew about. Then museums (huh?!?) and car companies. Then they mention a military company that I've verified has a connection to satellites, and two space companies.

So what? What's your point?

This is not a blanket "people lie, so all people lie" thing. This is a "When those people lie, this is where they go. And everyone tells themselves they are too smart to be fooled, so instead of you know, not being fooled, they put up defense after defense when caught fooled."

Because you've already assumed NASA is lying without any evidence and that the Vatican is not lying about the existence of St Peters without any evidence. All because a replica/model fabricator for movies, museums, amusement parks, etc., makes life-like facsimiles of things. Cart before the horse.

You still haven't shown that NASA or any of the other 30+ space agency/companies around the world are lying. First you have to do that. Not present just the ability to lie. Everyone and everything has the "ability" to lie. And remember, NASA is not the only game in town. That's where all of your notions are really toast.

All you're doing is saying, "Look, these guys make models of rockets and stuff, I bet NASA uses them to fake space...Because, duh, space is fake, NASA lies..." I could just as easily say, "Look, these guys make models of churches and stuff, I bet the Vatican uses them to fake their god worship...Because, duh, god worship is fake and the Vatican lies...". Not compelling at all.

Start with the actual evidence that all of the space agencies/companies, not just NASA, are all lying and faking. Actual evidence. Not ridiculous, speculative, "all things can be faked, therefore all things and everyone is a lie or lying, oh, but except for things that I personally believe aren't lies or lying. Because, well, that's just what I believe..."

Evidence, evidence, evidence. Not blind faith.

Quote from: Stash on February 10, 2023, 12:47:28 PM

It'a a weird phenomenon. We're always being called sheeple, indoctrinated, will blindly follow anything, and so on. Then someone comes along with a meme, a social media meme for god's sake, and exclaims, "Look! See, you're people are liars, you fell for it all again".
Of course, the meme is complete garbage, the individual didn't even bother to look into the validity of it for even one second, yet we are the blind ones? Happens over and over and over again.

Yes, you are the blind ones.

Because you don't bother to notice that the NASA has actually mentioned these locations as "training locations."

They are telling you they are lying! They are even telling you where you can find the lie! You are ignoring that they literally have all the time in the world to record "Mars footage" while they are supposedly train in those locations. You ignore that it is literally that easy to fly "into space" and live off the grid for several months (with assistance from NASA stooges), then drop a return pod which for all you know could be empty, while they drive back into civilization quietly. This is literally a magic trick and your eyes are looking at the wrong thing!



Wonder Works? That site doesn't match up. (Searches some more)

https://wonderworksweb.com/page34.html

I found the website, moving around a 502 Bad Gateway.  Wonder Works is a theme park. WonderWorks, Inc. is a  design and production company exactly as described. And look!

Lockheed Martin again! The same company that gives you fake satellites while the real ones they make are atmospheric is served by these turkeys. NASA itself. Much of the involved media who does movies about space. Same crew.

Then I considered the possibility that the Youtube ppl may have made up this company page. So I Google Mapped the location (7231 Remmet Ave, Canoga Park, CA 91303). Yup, sure enough, it's there.

https://www.google.com/maps/place/7231+Remmet+Ave,+Canoga+Park,+CA+91303/@34.2020117,-118.6028979,17z/data=!3m1!4b1!4m6!3m5!1s0x80c29c15223f96fb:0x35966366e32c4adf!8m2!3d34.2020073!4d-118.6007092!16s%2Fg%2F11bw4b6yf2

But maybe they just tricked Google Maps. Let's try Yelp.

https://www.yelp.com/biz/wonderworks-canoga-park
They say it's unclaimed, but yes, location matches the business name.

MapQuest too.
https://www.mapquest.com/us/california/wonderworks-11021923

But yes, I'm blind to believe that maybe a film company can do fakery. That NASA could hire a special effects company. No, sorry, maybe YOU are gullible.

Far from not possible that you could ever be tricked, it is very much possible. And that you are doubling down on this, means that you not only are extremely gullible but also extremely ashamed to be declared wrong.

To which I say... Let it go, let it goooooooooooo...



Stop doubling down and understand it is not only very possible, but any company able to do so makes billions a year. Your tax dollars at work to scam you out of more tax dollars.

But you all are probably Canadians or don't pay taxes. This is the only explanation I can give for you doubling down like this. Besides shame of course.

I love love love how your avatar features an old hag with her soiled briefs draped over her head. Much like your crusty view of the real world. All you can see and smell is the poo stains of the flat earth movement and every other dopey conspiracy theory you buy into. Your view of reality has a brown filter to it, my friend, and you munch up the shit like a kid at Easter munching on a chocolate easter bunny.

So, you're a flat earther, or flerfer as we prefer to say around these parts?

Umm, NASA doesn't ever need to hire any special effects company. Why would they, when everything they build ends up with a backdrop of either outer space or the entire planet behind it? Why would they, when I can watch the international space station travel by with my very own eyes (unaided) from the luxury of my verandah, and simultaneously watch the live feed of their flyby?

NASA'S budget doesn't include special effects companies. Have a look into their budget if you don't believe me. They would consult camera companies, though, for the most state of the art camera equipment. And no, it is not possible that NASA hires special effects companies without declaring it.

Take your grandma's shit stained briefs off your face and look around every once in a while. Otherwise all you'll ever be is a reality denying conspiratard.

Game programmers seem to have a weakness for conspiracies like flat earth. Is it because they spend so much time creating realities in the gaming world, that they have trouble distinguishing between game reality and actual reality?

Do the briefs go on the head, after you stand up from the gaming computer?

No, some people lie so all lie all the time is not what I'm getting at.

Of course not, it is only those you don't agree with who lie.
Those who support your delusional BS you are happy to accept without question, further demonstrating your dishonest double standard.

everyone tells themselves they are too smart to be fooled, so instead of you know, not being fooled, they put up defense after defense when caught fooled."

Not everyone, just people like you.

Except you didn't actually understand that the company actually says it works for them.

And you just happily accept the word of a company you claim is lying to everyone.

Sometimes no matter if something is trurh or lie, you get the same result. He either wants advertising and exaggerated (in which case he gets sued by NASA and these other big names), or he wants advertising and has no reason to lie. The risk of lawsuit makes the first unlikely, so this is as close to proof as you're gonna get.

The question here is what did they do for NASA?
If they did anything for them, they could list them as a client, without risk of being sued.

That doesn't mean they have helped NASA fake anything.
If they had helped NASA fake everything, do you really think NASA would allow them to advertise that?

Again, you act like there is a massive conspiracy which requires such great levels of intellect, except involved is an idiot.


Again, the sole reason you think it is a lie is because it destroys your delusional fantasy, and you can't handle reality.

I love love love how your avatar features an old hag with her soiled briefs draped over her head. Much like your crusty view of the real world. All you can see and smell is the poo stains of the flat earth movement and every other dopey conspiracy theory you buy into. Your view of reality has a brown filter to it, my friend, and you munch up the shit like a kid at Easter munching on a chocolate easter bunny.

So, you're a flat earther, or flerfer as we prefer to say around these parts?

Umm, NASA doesn't ever need to hire any special effects company. Why would they, when everything they build ends up with a backdrop of either outer space or the entire planet behind it? Why would they, when I can watch the international space station travel by with my very own eyes (unaided) from the luxury of my verandah, and simultaneously watch the live feed of their flyby?

NASA'S budget doesn't include special effects companies. Have a look into their budget if you don't believe me. They would consult camera companies, though, for the most state of the art camera equipment. And no, it is not possible that NASA hires special effects companies without declaring it.

Take your grandma's shit stained briefs off your face and look around every once in a while. Otherwise all you'll ever be is a reality denying conspiratard.

Game programmers seem to have a weakness for conspiracies like flat earth. Is it because they spend so much time creating realities in the gaming world, that they have trouble distinguishing between game reality and actual reality?

Do the briefs go on the head, after you stand up from the gaming computer?

Oh yes, I see. "Get with the times, man!"

 We haven't heard that before.

9What has been will be again,

and what has been done will be done again;

there is nothing new under the sun.

10Is there a case where one can say,

“Look, this is new”?

It has already existed

in the ages before us.

11There is no remembrance

of those who came before,

and those yet to come will not be remembered

by those who follow after.

The Hindus believed in cyclical history. So apparently does the writer of Ecclesiastes. When the nuke was invented, one of the inventors said something cryptic about it being the first time "in recent history." What does he mean? Well, Hindu legendary text has stuff like the Mahabharata where it describes something hot and bright as a second sun, and explains in depth symptoms of fallout. The Bible itself talks about corn that looks all dried out for seven years, and people dying in their 20s after mention of Joseph's generations. News flash. Lifespan has been pretty consistent through history, with most people living around 80s as long as there wasn't alot of poverty or war. To have it suddenly dive to 20 to 40 is more than a bit strange. Like the air itself is polluted for a few half-lifes.

Feminism? Usually it was okay to have people equal, but society used it as a means to an end (socialism), and then threw equality away in favor of suffering (ask communists how equal their society really was, turns out it was just as bigoted and sexist as before it used "equality" to get to payback). Usually equality works when it is equality. When women start ball-busting men, you get chauvinism again.

Oh it's the newest thing! Free love! Only she pays for that free love, when you don't marry her, when you get her to have an abortion, and when you run away. It's the latest thing! Come worship Molech, the child sacrifice demon-god of Ancient Babylon! It's brand new, I say!

Suuuure it is. Am I a killjoy? Not really, but you may think so. You may think I need to get with the times. I think you're one of those they say "Those who do not learn history are doomed to repeat it." Or I'm fond of saying, those who fail in History class, are doomed to repeat it.

Is FE old? Yes, so was Round Earth. Secular pagan society or classical religious society. Two models. It's not about not about old or new, they are both as dirt. Theories of the universe cycle around, but this doesn't mean that I have to follow along with "the latest thing." Sometimes I need to actually do what makes sense to me.

Special effects for movies has been around for awhile, and before movie magic was sleight-of-hand magic. The "sorcerer" has nothing up his sleeve. Don't be the poor yokel that thinks the magician is actually doing something real though. That's the point where he take all your money as you go to show after show. NASA is literally able to do this to you as you buy their rhetoric and turn around and mock me. I'm not the one paying taxes on NASA though. I legit don't make enough money.
https://fee.org/articles/nasa-shouldn-t-be-funded-by-the-government/

There are a number of ways to spend a $19.3 billion annual budget; we could pay for 1.94 million young adults in the United States to attend a public 4-year university, we could provide 1.87 million people with health care, or we could use the money to fund the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) for one year.

Currently, our opinion doesn’t matter when it comes to which option we would rather have the government spend our money on. The entire country could be in favor of the government providing healthcare for one year, but the decision would still be made by a few bureaucrats sitting comfortably in their opulent headquarters on Capitol Hill. If the idea of someone stealing your money and disregarding your opinion about what it’s used for doesn’t bother you, please let me know and I will gladly start collecting a portion of your paycheck!

In 2020, NASA is planning to spend $2.4 billion on a trek to Mars so that they can collect samples of the environment to hopefully answer questions about its potential for life. If you’re thinking that this $2.4 billion price tag includes the retrieval of said samples, you’re unfortunately mistaken. The current plan is to leave the samples in space until they find the time and money to come up with another plan to retrieve them; this could mean several years — even decades — before they decide to even think about the retrieval process.

Samples which btw never were, and they hope you will forget about them.


Guess what though? It might not have been PT Barnum who said that, but one of the skeptics to his Cardiff Giant hoax (a giant man carved from gypsum), who bought the original hoax sculpture in order to charge higher fees, only to watch Barnum make a replica and claim his was the real one.
https://medium.com/skeptikai/the-real-story-behind-the-quote-theres-a-sucker-born-every-minute-1db9a7220d34
In other words, it's people like me, not the con artists, who most widely understand this. And yes, there really is. Including the one who said it, who lost in court to Barnum when both were proved a hoax.

Come worship Molech, the child sacrifice demon-god of Ancient Babylon!

As opposed to the evil piece of shit you worship that decided to kill every first born to show off.

NASA is literally able to do this to you as you buy their rhetoric and turn around and mock me.

Prove it.
So far the mountains of evidence demonstrate you are wrong.
You have provided nothing except dishonest crap to promote your delusional BS.

In other words, it's people like me, not the con artists, who most widely understand this.

So people like you who have been conned by con artists, into believing complete garbage, garbage that you cannot justify at all and which requires you to ignore the mountains of evidence that demonstrate you are wrong?

Guess what though?

Hence why there are people on YouTube marketing a manufactured  product to biased people who cling onto the world being flat. 

Here’s an old list

Despite..

Meteorite impact craters on earth.

Satellites tracked by radar.

Meet the amateur astronomers who track secretive spy satellites for fun
If Zuma is still up there, these are the people who might spot it.

BY MARY BETH GRIGGS JANUARY 12, 2018

https://www.popsci.com/zuma-spy-satellite-amateur-astronomer/

Lake Pontchartrain Power Transmission Lines: Evidence of Earth’s Curvature

https://flatearth.ws/pontchartrain

Math associated with right triangles proves it’s impossible for objects like the sun and North Star to appear to set beyond the horizon

Earth’s movement and gravity backed by the theory of relativity, and shown in how it measurably impacts time/clocks. And ring laser gyroscopes.

Parabolic Motion of Projectiles

The blast from the Tsar nuclear bomb resulted in seismic waves and atmospheric pressure waves that circled the earth three times.

Distance to the sun measured by parallax

The way comets pivot around the sun.
Solar and lunar eclipses.
Comets pulled into the sun or Jupiter.

Over the horizon radar
Skywaves
Why shortwave has greater broadcast areas than ground FM
Why increasing antenna hight increases broadcast area
The sun sets over the horizon
The seasons
Why certain constellations are only seen from specific hemispheres
Retrograde travel of planets in the sky
Equatorial mounts for telescopes
Why Mars is closer to the earth at times then farther away
Visible man made objects orbiting the earth that were not there in the sky 100 years ago
Satellite TV
You can actually sail around the world
Airplane flight paths in the Southern Hemisphere
Eratosthenes of Cyrene measures circumstance of the earth around 249 BC
Earth's Curvature and Battleship Gunnery
Phases of Venus
Third party verification of Sputnik
Third party verification of moon missions
Third party / amateur verification of satellites in the hundreds. If not thousands
Star parallax
Earth based photos of the International Space Station.
Map projection
Great Circle paths
Long bridges and tunnels need to take in account the earth is curved.
Geodetic Survey.
Bouguer anomaly/survey


——Only takes one item being true to demonstrate the reality of a spherical earth and destroy flat earth.  And they are all true—-

Quote

    Come worship Molech, the child sacrifice demon-god of Ancient Babylon!

As opposed to the evil piece of shit you worship that decided to kill every first born to show off.

Hrrrrmmmm.

So like, this little guy whose only crime was his momma didn't want him?

Yes, I'm gonna make you look at him.



Or the firstborn of the Egyptians who...

• Killed the firstborn of the Jews merely because there were too many of them (making it God taking revenge, not to be cruel).
• Enslaved their people for centuries.
• Ground their elderly and injured into the dust building temples and monuments.
• Refused them any holidays, even a three day march to worship at a mountain (not exactly a pleasure trip)

Btw, this was a time when leaders behaved like they were God. This Quora answered what would have happened if God had not forced Pharaoh to harden his heart. As it was, Pharaoh caused his own death by pursuing the Jews to kill them.

Tell you what. (1) If your sister is raped by someone, and she goes ahead and aborts, or (2) I kill five of your children and you finally have enough and kill one of mine.

You tell me honestly, which of these is more justified? Rhetorical. #2 obviously. Because you can give the child up for adoption in case #1. Maybe it's not ideal. Maybe the system is overburdened. But in the case of adoption, this happens...



and if they're lucky and don't age out, this too...



Meanwhile this happens when the mom gets raped and blames the child. Child parts in a jar.



Look at it!!!