Jump to content

Comedy Time

  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Comedy Time

  1. Mythbusters used a light some distance away from the miniature setup. It was basically one light source as it must be, but far enough away so that the angle was close to parallel. There is not a light source in existence apart from the Sun that can evenly light massive areas of terrain whilst still maintaining single crisp shadows that follow parallel paths. Find me another Apollo example with divergent shadows please. You may struggle....but if you do, remember this... here's more on that example you gave... http://www.moonhoaxdebunked.com/2017/05/55-why-arent-shadows-parallel.html
  2. Wrong!! I am not defending the shitty government and your argument is like someone going nah nah na nah naaaah. I am pointing out discrepancies and poor methodology in these alternate claims. They aren't all wrong, far from it....try reading the flow of that exchange instead of knee jerk comments.
  3. I know, because I am kicking your arse.
  4. Amazing. Like a five year old at Christmas with their new toy. Relevance factor zero. Tell me again about the sun full size disappearing over the horizon. Once again the BEST case scenario with the LOWEST possible distance to horizon.... Using disappearance angle of 0.001 degrees: If on the equator at Zenith the Sun is at Everest height (as if!!), the second it disappears 90 degrees to zenith it is 286,000 miles away. Basic trigonometry. If on the equator at Zenith the Sun is at the 3000 miles Flaterfers height (as if!!), the second it disappears 90 degrees to zenith it is 172 MILLION miles away. Basic trigonometry. The trouble with you Bb is that instead of doing the "I majored in mathematics" you claimed you had done - which is obviously bullshit, you choose to point that silly camera at things without working out the real issues.
  5. False dichotomy. Koch's postulates are not gospel. Despite the importance of Koch’s postulates in the development of microbiology, they have severe limitations, which even Koch realized. For example, he believed that cholera and leprosy were caused by microbes, but could not fulfill all four postulates. Furthermore, Koch knew that the putative agent of cholera, Vibrio cholerae, could be isolated from both sick and healthy people, invalidating postulate #2. Many viruses do not cause illness in all infected individuals, a requirement of postulate #1. An example is poliovirus, which causes paralytic disease in about 1% of those infected. Further compromising postulate #1 is the fact that infection with the same virus may lead to markedly different diseases, while different viruses may cause the same disease. Postulates #2 and #3 cannot be fulfilled for viruses that do not replicate in cell culture, or for which a suitable animal model has not been identified.
  6. And you chose the inaccurate Facebook one. From your link, which is from the "evil" WHO... "The WHO believe Covid-19 kills 0.6 per cent of all patients or one in every 167. Although it sounds minimal, it means Covid-19 is six times deadlier than the flu and almost as twice as fatal as polio." If the methodology by which you dismiss counter evidence is "because it's from the mainstream" - then your method is just a little bit flawed. Take it up with Google. I imagine they don't hold the same sites as you do in high esteem. I don't agree with their policy. Then don't label me as "infected" when I do the same. If you think I watch it and lap it up then you are mistaken. I suppose there is an element of truth to that in general terms, but since the matter is deemed as "nothing to worry about" that is not valid here. Yes, I can agree in theory with that. The news generally will dictate the reaction from the public at large. I don't have a problem with reading between the lines or that some things are censored or shutdown. You weren't reading at all simply because it comes from the MSM. So effectively you only cherry pick things FROM the MSM that support your case and ignore things that don't. Please don't insult "anyone's" intelligence by saying that is not the case. I've just spent a couple of hours searching this thread and there are examples of empty wards etc. But again you are cherry picking things that agree with you and labelling fake those that do not. Righto, so Snopes is all wrong and so is the BBC because of "reasons". She could be real huh and I am a "simpleton" for not realising she could be acting. But you aren't one for not realising that all your examples could be from people selling books and lying to get attention? https://www.simonandschuster.co.uk/books/Undercover-Epicenter-Nurse/Erin-Marie-Olszewski/9781510763678 Cherry picking again. And YOU automatically take all the opposite as truth because you are a conspiracy theorist. I don't automatically take anything as truth, I assimilate data and form a logical opinion that fits what the data tells me. I modify that opinion as the data may or may not change. You should try that. My "bullshit" is observational contradictions to what is being presented. None of you people are questioning a single thing being shown. What you are doing is lapping it all up into a "coronavirus" memory store then when quizzed about it, it becomes a huge thing because of "all" that evidence presented. I actually don't want to limit this thread at all, or disrupt it, but really!! WHY aren't any of you truth seekers questioning things being presented by your own side? Example... Empty hospital beds/ full beds and sobbing nurses. Former stored, latter is fake Which bit, the official one or the conspiracy "read between the lines" one? I asked where they are on this thread! It is a complete dodge. You quote an advisory script from the government employed buffoons but failed to answer this.... I dare you to imagine just for a second that there IS a nasty disease out there and the public aren't taking it seriously. What would YOU do? Yes it was, insult noted yet again. Regardless of the agreed draconian result. He didn't photograph what you said he did!! He actually photographed the sealed off section of A&E that was closed. I cannot actually believe how you can so badly miss the point I am making! You claim the figures show x,y,z (cherry picking again of course). I said why don't they fake them, you know the ones that YOU think are incriminating. It would be a piece of cake for them to do so. You aren't the spokesperson for "everyones intelligence" sic. No, I am highlighting inconsistencies with your approach, relevant to the topic. Don't flatter yourself concerning me "asking you questions", many are asked to show how your method is biased.
  7. Ok, so all the "examples" on the internet where the rays appear to converge are caused by 1 or both of two things. Variation in the terrain, such as craters or small undulations or by the object itself not being vertical. Anyway, back to your example. It's perspective and variable terrain. The LM shadow is being cast in roughly the same direction as the undulating ground where the rocks are casting theirs. Terrain and angle make the shadows change - very brief video: Seal the deal? Mythbusters analysed that very photo..
  8. Certainly. Just one small request first...(after you provide a specific example)... Draw the light diagram from ANY light source that does this. Because nearfield light sources produce shadows that DIVERGE. Only when it gets quite some distance does the divergence angle come close to the parallel of the sun. There is NO studio single source light that illuminates such a vast area evenly.
  9. Who me ? Use @userid command or quote. Kindly stop saying something is "obvious" when that only applies to people unable to address their content. Which fact checking website do you use? Or should we take alternative websites as written?
  10. I was polite enough to post a reply to you about crepuscular rays and other sun evidence. You weren't polite enough to respond.
  11. You didn't know. And please, must I repeat myself? You and the truth are not best friends. You have been misled by the oldest deceit in human history.....religion. And now you are being mislead by some of the newest....tin-foil-hattery. Now present a piece of evidence or find another thread to dump your nonsense into? I've seen some cast iron world-ain't-flat posts totally ignored by you with no excuses, so if I offered you anything on this thread it would get the same result. I can prove beyond doubt that we landed on the Moon to a rational intelligent person, or somebody prepared to look at things objectively. Not you though, you have proven yourself unreachable by any debate.
  12. Sure it does. If there are conflicting beliefs that don't work with each other, there is no common ground. Evidence suggests a second one is an over reaction. But evidence suggested the first one was way too late. Yeah about that. Your extremely blinkered views are not seeing MY beliefs being attacked? Really? I'm not attacking beliefs, I am discussing what I believe to be problems supporting them. Or perhaps people who have really strong beliefs resent them being challenged and will defend them at all costs. I don't have arrogance in general but sometimes the odd thing sneaks out in defiance. I am quite ok being arrogant on occasion, pretty much exclusively on subjects I fully understand though. Certainly not in this thread - I am totally open to the ideas being presented, just not nearly convinced. There are gaping holes in the theories, but also in the main narrative. p.s. that isn't the cue to drag this thread through another off topic series of posts aimed at poor old me.
  13. Uhuh, so when you quote the bare minimum bullshit facebook story that's ok then? You are deliberately misrepresenting and doing the same as the people you criticise. Yet pretty much every picture you are posing comes from a conspiracy theorist watching the news. So you are watching the news but it doesn't count because they are cherry picking stuff and not watching all of it? Is that right? Shit news reporting? As I said, from what is presented, nothing to worry about was the message. Why are you still blabbing on about this? Uhuh. Read between the lines. You ignored the content in that link. That's not reading between any lines. Total conspiracy shit. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43140105 https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/american-three-terrorist-attacks/ The nurse is real, you couldn't find any bullshit about her could you, so you rake up some other daft stuff. Self supporting conspiracy. Yes I get it. Brigade of shills huh? Where are they all on this thread? I know I'm not one and there ain't an awful lot of people taking any of you lot to task! So did Barack Obama. Inevitable is inevitable. This was always likely to happen. But nice dodge.... That is a genuine question. A man breaks into a hospital in the middle of a genuine pandemic, putting people's lives at risk...what would YOU do? You seem to mainly read what I type...so what went wrong here? What would YOU do? Then.... "Tell him off and say stop being so naughty. Prison was a bit extreme, but a fine would have been about right." Nice dodge again. He photographed sealed off closed A&E areas. And you just ignored MY stats. Serious question - try not to dodge: These people are according to you going to extraordinary lengths to fake a pandemic. Why didn't they fake the death stats? I mean you posted stuff about death certificates and attributing deaths to covid19, so how did all this come out and why didn't they just quietly fudge the death stats...not my ones....YOUR ones. There seems to be an awful lot of foul ups going on here. I say incompetence, you say fakery. There does exist some middle ground. No, don't be like that. I'm not jogging on - you've 3 times complained I didn't answer your post. Which one?
  14. No, really you didn't. Let's recap. You said your version of events explained everything that happened. I asked how the columns bent in and you said this.... "I don't care how they bent. A missile can bend them inwards just as easy as a plane." Now excuse me for pointing it out but a) You don't know and B) missiles don't make plane shaped holes and it involves all the no plane shite to occur with the video footage. So try again...and we're only on item number one.
  15. Ok, start with explaining the holes in the buildings. Inwards columns........ Good job you know what you believe huh?
  16. I won't post Vic and Bob holding handbags and going ooooh....but seriously you don't think it valid that although there is massive differences in belief between the various conspiracies, not ONE of you argues about it with each other? I never do anything on this forum for the latter and the former is wrong too. My question is because there are 3 main beliefs doing the rounds (and I suspect subsets), so why is there no discussion between the different versions of this? I don't think it was planned but it certainly creates some unpleasant opportunities. I agree 100% with that. I would be interested in what you have on that.
  17. No problem dude. You believe what you want, you ignore what you want. Do you actually know what you believe happened? Does it explain everything that happened? THAT should be your starter for 10.
  18. You and truth are like shit and sugar lumps. You ignore everything. Tell me about the picture with all the satellite dishes pointing off Earth. In your own time. God knows this information, he wants you to use your brain.
  19. But YOUR pilots are doing similar stuff and you continue to avoid valid posts with a lot of arm waving.
  20. So the ones spouting shite on pilotsfortruf aren't real then.
  21. Loads of evasion dude. Well done. I'll summarise what you just wrote... "Yeah, what you posted is all BS innit, he isn't a pilot because of reasons innit, I don't know how the columns bent like that innit, could be a missile with magic plane shape producing properties innit, about your list....oh look over here diversion diversion diversion." What are you afraid of? The video shows a plane. Discuss. The other video shows plane parts. Discuss. My list details the problems. Discuss them. The pilot explains the situation - prove he isn't a pilot. And you....arm waved it all away. Truthers huh.
  22. I'm seeing lots of evidence to suggest it. So it certainly seems that way.
  23. Ah bless I keep reminding you of someone. You think there was only one landing? You think the video is the only evidence? Everything is beyond you. Type something specific and I shall address it.
  24. Wow, you're great at debate. Wave it all away with a sweep of the hand. Three times you ignored them. Wave those arms around. That's what honest people do. You should try it. I retracted it because videos that were there 15 years ago have now gone. That is called an ad hominem argument. You ignore his testimony because it contradicts your own bullshit. The pilots-for-truf also spoke out just after 911, but their shite is ok is it? Dude, you've got that arse backwards. I go to normal lengths to disprove bullshit stories. You just totally ignored the post I made. Are you that afraid to debate honestly? 1. Video 1 - The plane parts everywhere. Proven. 2. Video 2 -A visible plane from pixel reduction. Proven. I tried it myself and got a similar result. 3. A list of the people who had to be in on it is massive. Obvious and proven. And a question that you are running away from. 4. How did the columns bend inwards from an explosion at the impact point?!
  • Create New...