# Comedy Time

Members

794

1. ## Fake Moon Landings

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

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. ## 9/11 EXPOSED IN 10 MINUTES

I know, because I am kicking your arse.
4. ## The Flat Earth/Globe Earth Discussion Thread

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.

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.

7. ## Fake Moon Landings

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. ## Fake Moon Landings

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. ## The Flat Earth/Globe Earth Discussion Thread

Previous page...only one with multiple images.

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?
11. ## The Flat Earth/Globe Earth Discussion Thread

I was polite enough to post a reply to you about crepuscular rays and other sun evidence. You weren't polite enough to respond.
12. ## Fake Moon Landings

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.

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.

15. ## 9/11 EXPOSED IN 10 MINUTES

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.
16. ## 9/11 EXPOSED IN 10 MINUTES

Ok, start with explaining the holes in the buildings. Inwards columns........ Good job you know what you believe huh?

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.
18. ## 9/11 EXPOSED IN 10 MINUTES

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.
19. ## The Flat Earth/Globe Earth Discussion Thread

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.
20. ## 9/11 EXPOSED IN 10 MINUTES

But YOUR pilots are doing similar stuff and you continue to avoid valid posts with a lot of arm waving.
21. ## 9/11 EXPOSED IN 10 MINUTES

So the ones spouting shite on pilotsfortruf aren't real then.
22. ## 9/11 EXPOSED IN 10 MINUTES

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.

I'm seeing lots of evidence to suggest it. So it certainly seems that way.
24. ## Fake Moon Landings

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.
25. ## 9/11 EXPOSED IN 10 MINUTES

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?!
×

• #### Activity

×
• Create New...