.jpg.9e99ff3727a52b51047711c51028c847.jpg)
.jpg.e0850aef2895b3e8c638a24da2b8f92e.jpg)
Comedy Time
-
Posts
794 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by Comedy Time
-
-
3 minutes ago, alexa said:
Well it's in the Lazeria Map Collection.
Is it? That is a fictional map of Utopia. Who told you it was the underworld?
-
10 minutes ago, alexa said:
I used to know of somone else who posted pictures of this kind Ha!
Hmmm, very interesting.
10 minutes ago, alexa said:As for the vid's that support space, I've seen most of them and they are mostly full of scientific crap and lies.
How would you know? You and science are not best friends. And you've seen "most of them"?
Hell's bells you've not seen 1% of them....and your capacity to assess "lies" seems fatally flawed given that you just bigged up one littered with them.
-
7 minutes ago, alexa said:
Well watch the vid & you might find out!
I watched it all - NASA occupied about 5% of it. Oooh the Nazis and operation Paperclip and all the usual bullshit about Full Earth composites, conveniently ignored about a hundred Apollo pictures....all the ISS (not NASA - four other agencies too!) images and video.
Speaking of watching videos to "find out" things, why don't you ever watch the ones posted as rebuttal?
-
5 minutes ago, alexa said:
Agreed, this under ground base is called 'Tartarius' and is where the fallen angels and their off spring demons reside.
Holy cow! Where do you get this gibberish from? You think saying something makes it real?
5 minutes ago, alexa said:Why else would Neil Armstrong and some of the church leaders have gone to Antarctica.
To visit the demon off springs of fallen angels? Why else you say?
Errr, a sense of adventure? Exploring the stark beauty of it?
https://www.adventure-life.com/travel/news/neil-armstrong-joins-antarctica-voyage
5 minutes ago, alexa said:Here is a map of the underworld which you can zoom in and out of.
Nope. That is a fictional map of Utopia. Who told you it was the underworld?
https://www.arthistorybabes.com/blog/2018/3/7/the-land-of-cockaigne
5 minutes ago, alexa said:Also you'll notice at the bottom of this map places called Beelzebub and 'Tartarius', Beelzebub & Tartarius are mentioned in the Scripts.
Hmmm, that seals the deal for you does it?
-
4 hours ago, oz93666 said:
Ah Yes ... lets not forget them .... Antarctica has been one of the favorite places for the ET's to have a base ... It's remote from everywhere ... no snooping humans
The reps were working with the NAZI's ... They had a big base there which they didn't much use , so allowed the NAZI's use of it ... Early 1940's they started to re-locate there ... just as well for them , cos they lost the war , and all the best scientists and engineers got out quick to Antarctica just in time , leaving the 3rd rate scientists for the Americans (Paperclip) ... Hitler escaped to Sth America , apparently not wishing to live underground surrounded by ice..
So in this base they continued their work on advanced craft and weapons ... The Americans got wind of this and sent Admiral Byrd down there to see what's going on .... he got his arse whipped by advanced UFO type craft ... Many thousand US military were killed ...
By end 1940's the Nazis had a primitive base on the moon .... Fast forward 80 years the NAZIs have a vast off world fleet , around a million humans ... more advanced than the cabal run SSP ... the NAZI "dark fleet" and the cabal SSP are totally separate ( but both controlled at the top by the ETs ) ... They trade with one another , the NAZI's need people (slaves) ... which the cabal gives them in exchange for tech etc....
Should we be replying to THIS and will you stop posting it everywhere if nobody responds? It's like Flat Earth for scifi fans. Do you have one single scrap of tangible evidence for any of that?
4 hours ago, oz93666 said:Not clear how active the ET's or the NAZIs are now in Antarctica ... I expect they still have some presence ...
You see, if I was a Nazi....I'd have got the right hump about the cold and would have suggested somewhere warm, deserted Pacific island or something. And the ETs, I bet they all phoned home complaining.
-
9 hours ago, lake said:
So the earth is a ball, NASA never told a lie, 911 is down to box cutters, all science is true and everything concerning covid stated by governments and media is correct!
Would that be about right?
That is called an excessive non-sequitur argument.
9 hours ago, lake said:So the earth is a ball,
Yes. Proven with so many things it is laughable that people dispute it.
9 hours ago, lake said:NASA never told a lie
They hid the truth about Challenger, but that is an internal departmental thing. To all intents and purposes the claim is that they lie about the stuff they present....so no. They haven't lied. Just useless conspiracy crap.
9 hours ago, lake said:911 is down to box cutters
If it wasn't, why not give them hi-tech plastic guns or hidden explosive vests? The absence of a coherent alternative leaves the conclusion. I don't know for sure whether it is true, but I know the conspiracy claims make no sense.
9 hours ago, lake said:all science is true
A really daft comment. Science gets many, many things spot on. The tough things to verify are surrounding universe creation, reality and life. There's work to be done.
9 hours ago, lake said:and everything concerning covid stated by governments and media is correct!
Doubtful. They can't even agree amongst themselves. The disease is real.....anyone who knows NHS staff will get that. The cause being 5G is ludicrous. I certainly don't want to delve into the colossal thread and argue the toss.
9 hours ago, lake said:Would that be about right?
Now I could say, so the world is flat, loads of NASA conspiracies are true, 911 was no planes, all science is wrong, covid is caused by mobile phone masts, a cast of millions and millions. Would that be about right?
-
9 hours ago, alexa said:
If you hadn't noticed............ the title of this thread is
NASA Lies ..... There Is No Such Thing As Space
Sigh.....what the hell has NASA got to do with that video!?
-
1
-
-
8 hours ago, wideawake said:
You won't even admit it's a piss poor video. It's pretty bad when phones can get better videos then the security camera at an airport.
Btw, where's the video of all the other 'terrorists"?
It's a poor CCTV video and this is a strawman argument. The quality of video makes no difference. Can't find any other video. There was many years ago. Don't care really. I withdraw the claim.....we can't see them boarding. There.
-
10 hours ago, Macnamara said:
'No planery'?
what you mean like saying that it was likely a tomahawk missile that hit the pentagon...something like that?
So after all your faffing around you are a no planer?
Now we are into the following territory:
- Nobody must see the Tomahawk missile. Including air-traffic control.
- A team must be quickly assembled to invisibly and very quickly sprinkle plane parts all over The Pentagon. Emergency services on route + news teams/helicopters.
- The actual plane and all passengers must be disposed off.
- The bodies must be burnt and mashed and a team/person to sprinkle the DNA quickly all over the crash site(s).
- A team to launch the missile from somewhere.
- A team to set charges to bust the internal walls and set aircraft fuel charges.
- Somebody to set the charges to blow the light poles and the generator.
- Somebody/a team to create the general shape of a plane in the wall with explosives
http://911research.wtc7.net/pentagon/evidence/witnesses/sgydk.html
-
8 hours ago, wideawake said:
Your qualified pilot didn't have time to fly planes, he was too busy writing blogs, showing off on CNN, doing everything but flying planes and did you noticed that he started going public in... 2002?
Geez, another coincidence. Just on time to debunk conspiracy theories.
So only your "qualified pilots" count and this is an ad hominem argument.
https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/hangar-talk/98119-your-opinion-9-11-piloting-2.html
-
1 hour ago, wideawake said:
Btw, I forgot to mention about your evidence of hijackers boarding.
Ever wondered why the video is sooo blurry? It was supposed to have happened on Sept 11,2001... not in 1954.
Hand waving noted. The evil perps unable to get some look alikes and HD quality
-
1 hour ago, wideawake said:
Thank you,
First of all, I don't use Wikipedia as a reference... not reliable
Yeah, hurting for links much?
Give it up mate, I see you're pushing the official narrative and will go to any length to convince anyone.
Wiki is fine for general stuff that can be corroborated. A similar crash and it broke into tiny bits. That should convince an honest truther.
I'm not pushing the official anything! I'm dissecting your unofficial claims. They are all huffenpuff.
The qualified pilot said it could be done and most of his peers agreed. Your response was to ignore this and talk about coincidence
-
1 hour ago, alexa said:
This proves what NASA's all about.
No. It explains what YOU are about. You don't care about honesty...just deceptive crap. Ironic that you believe deceptive videos whilst labelling NASA deceptive.
What the hell has NASA got to do with any of it?
-
2
-
-
1 hour ago, Ali_tn said:
Watch this Guys it's extraordinary
Did this a couple of pages ago...it was ignored of course...
Pure deceptive shit.
Axial tilt to ecliptic is 66.56341
Earth curve is 7.98 inches but varies all across the surface according to variable radius and of course not the contrived bullshit 666
it's ratio to a yard or any other measurement.....duhhh.
Earth orbital speed is 29.78 kmh or 66, 616mph ON AVERAGE.
So typical of flat earth dishonesty!
-
How dare this bloke seek to "educate" people with his stupid "I just go me a camera innit" videos.
Perspective is all about the vanishing point....something that is bloody obvious.
Things vanish as they reach it!! They don't just bloody disappear.
Sunset. Flat earth splattered.
-
1
-
-
@wideawakeYou suggested I should put some links up.
Shanksville similar to...... American Eagle Flight 4184:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Eagle_Flight_4184
Engines at the Pentagon:
http://www.aerospaceweb.org/question/conspiracy/q0265.shtml
Full analysis of Pentagon Impact:
http://911research.wtc7.net/essays/pentagon/index.html
Another Pilot looks at the issues:
https://www.salon.com/2006/05/19/askthepilot186/
-
21 minutes ago, Pre-Raphaelite said:
MI5...MI6...CIA...NSA...GCHQ. Here you go:-
Post options:
Information Assurance and Specialists
Intelligence
Cyber
Technology Roles
Specialist Roles
Project and Programme Office
and
https://www.gchq-careers.co.uk/index.html
Technical Analyst
Cyberfirst Bursary
Cyber Insights Summer School (Physics/Matchs/Eihical Hacking)
Technical Intelligence Analyst
Wow, thanks. Which one is posting on the Icke forum? I was once again being flippant, but it's most comforting(for you) that YOU think those organisations think the things I address, need to be addressed.
-
7 minutes ago, wideawake said:
To hit the Pentagon squarely he needed only a bit of luck, and he got it
Yes, like everything else that happened on 9/11. Luck and coincidences
Hey, you ramp up the old conspiracy-speak. Coincidences occur all over the world every day and some ridiculously unfeasible. The pilot said it wasn't difficult. OK? You failed as I expected to acknowledge that. The pilot said he and his fellow pilots agreed with this...you still going to ignore that?
7 minutes ago, wideawake said:no camera footage of anything for National Security.
Such as? Planes hitting the buildings? CCTV footage of passengers boarding? Footage of the plane parts?
7 minutes ago, wideawake said:Not even proof of "the terrorists" boarding the planes.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-us-canada-14347433
7 minutes ago, wideawake said:The planes were remote controlled or they were missiles. I suspect the latter.
Yeah ok. The latter involves disposing of the planes, the bodies, sprinkling DNA and engine parts, manufacturing videos, magic plane shaped impacts etc....
A ridiculous claim. Particularly since numerous people actually saw the bloody planes.
7 minutes ago, wideawake said:Btw, don't believe what FEMA or any other organization sponsored by the government publishes.
Uhuh. A self reinforcing argument. Here, try reading it...
http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapter IV Aircraft Impact.pdf
-
15 hours ago, zArk said:
The moon turns
Uhuh. You and your team of flat earthers are absolutely appalling the way you ignore so, so many things.
The "turning" moon. Identical in its orientation to the ground in two places at once, 2000 miles apart. You are full of crap!
The Moon is upside down in Australia. The face is visible at the same time to Perth and Sydney, they are around 2000 miles apart. Yet the exact same face is visible to each place.
We could just as easily use something MUCH wider in an example, such as Sierra Leone to Columbo , 6,256 on roughly the same latitude and identical views of the Moon!!
Now do something amazing and acknowledge the glaring problem with that!
-
12 hours ago, Nobby Noboddy said:
Do you understand what 'real life' means?
Do you understand what honest debate means?
I await your response or probable evasion.
-
17 minutes ago, wideawake said:
I asked you if you had links reference your statements as it is obvious you are not an experienced pilot and you come back with bs questions because? You can't back up what your are stating here?
Any other day, you would fill a page full of links but... not today?
https://askthepilot.com/questionanswers/conspiracy-nation/
Dude, you are afraid to answer the obvious question. You people are very fond of making claims and statements without considering the obvious implications.
1. The terrorist pilots lacked the skill and training needed to fly jetliners into their targets
This is an especially popular contention with respect to American flight 77. Hijacker pilot Hani Hanjour was a notoriously untalented flier who never piloted anything larger than a four-seater. Yet he is said to have pulled off a remarkable series of aerobatic maneuvers before slamming into the Pentagon. The pilots of American 11 and United 175 also had spotty records and had flown only private planes. They should have had great difficulty navigating to New York City, and even greater difficulty hitting the twin towers squarely. To bolster this idea that the hijackers were Oswaldian pawns, the conspiromongers often invoke impressive-sounding jargon and fluffery about high-tech cockpits, occasionally trundling out testimony from pilots.
Reality: The cabal’s feats did not require in-depth technical knowledge or a high degree of skill. The attackers, as private pilots, were completely out of their league in the cockpits of those 757s and 767s; however they were not setting out to perform single-engine missed approaches or Category-3 instrument landings with a failed hydraulic system – or to land at all. They were setting out to steer an already airborne jetliner, in perfect weather, into the side of a building. Though, for good measure, Mohammed Atta and at least one other member of his group did buy several hours of simulator training on a Boeing 727 (this was not the same type of jet used in the attacks, but it didn’t need to be). Additionally they obtained manuals and instructional videos for the 757 and 767, available from aviation supply shops.
Hani Hanjour’s flying was exceptional only in its recklessness. If anything, his loops and spirals above the nation’s capital revealed him to be exactly the shitty pilot he by all accounts was. To hit the Pentagon squarely he needed only a bit of luck, and he got it. Striking a stationary object — even a large one with five beckoning sides — at high speed and from a steep angle is very difficult. To make the job easier, he came in obliquely, tearing down light poles as he roared across the Pentagon’s lawn. If he’d flown the same profile ten times, seven of them he’d probably have tumbled short of the target or overflown it entirely.
As for those partisan pilots known to chime in on websites, take them with a grain of salt. As somebody who flies 757 and 767s for a living, I think my testimony carries some weight. Ask around and you’ll discover that the majority of professional pilots feel the way I do.17 minutes ago, wideawake said:Any other day, you would fill a page full of links but... not today?
And routinely they would get ignored. As will the one I just posted.
17 minutes ago, wideawake said:Go play somewhere
Flouncey flounce.
http://web.mit.edu/civenv/wtc/PDFfiles/Chapter IV Aircraft Impact.pdf
-
33 minutes ago, wideawake said:
Obviously you haven't been looking and tell me to look for an answer. You remind me of a poster on another forum about the very same subject... maybe you are the same person.
I didn't tell you to look for anything, I asked if you did... you almost certainly went looking for conspiracy stuff only. I couldn't give a shit who I remind you of. Diving planes accumulate speed very quickly. The planes are built to exceed guidance and tested accordingly.
What crazy world has the MASSIVE team involved creating video showing it doing "impossible" speeds. Kinda dumb don't you think? Answer please.
-
36 minutes ago, zArk said:
as i said, the omission of an alternative doesnt validate the failure of the established sphere model
the sphere model fails because its own calculations when applied to the solar eclipse do not fit
The sphere model works fine and your "omission" of a magic alternative object is one of the most ludicrous head up the backside explanations I've ever seen.
36 minutes ago, zArk said:The moon shadow would move outside the circumference of the earth before the observed experienced eclipse finishes
Being a bullshitter when this has been explained to you numerous times is not cool. Your reference comes from an idiotic yooootub video where he lifts the data for the penumbra and uses it for the shadow. You ignored all posts explaining this to you.
36 minutes ago, zArk said:- The final experienced observed eclipse would be rotated around away from the sun/moon at the time recorded
Gibberish, no it wouldn't.
36 minutes ago, zArk said:- the moon is not observed prior or post eclipse
A brainless observation. Neither is your magic bullshit alternative!! The Moon has no light on it and it is broad daylight. Atmospheric scattering occludes stars during the day. Clearly, anyone with eyes can see the dark part of the Moon is much dimmer than stars when viewed at night.
36 minutes ago, zArk said:its a hole in the sphere model.
It's a vacuous hole in your understanding.
36 minutes ago, zArk said:just like the curvature model which fails because now we have technology like telescopes available to everyone
Hahahaha....new "technology"? They've had them for hundreds of years dude!! It doesn't fail, flat earthers don't consider refraction and ignore things disappearing over the curve!
-
9 hours ago, wideawake said:
Some kind of a smart answer when there is none to be found...
You have a link to your professional pilots stating it is easy to crash a plane in NY WTC?
You have a link that would state you can go at 500mph at low altitude without having it falling apart?
Yes. A smart answer and of course you ignored it. If it wasn't possible for the plane to do these speeds, what crazy world has the MASSIVE team involved creating video showing it doing so!? Kinda dumb don't you think? Answer please.
You can find pilots stating any number of things but the aircraft MUST have a tolerance way higher than the figures quoted for passenger service. I posted a pilot account on one of the threads. Even a shallow dive will get the airspeed building quickly - it's called gravity. There's numerous forums where New Yorkers talk about the planes flying over their apartments and places where experts discuss max speeds and bad pilots. Have YOU gone looking for any of that?
NASA Lies ..... There Is No Such Thing As Space
in Space & Universe
Posted
How could you possibly know what is lies when you have no knowledge at all of basic mathematics or any science.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=iss+videos&FORM=HDRSC3
......keep scrolling down for about an hour until you find one you have actually watched!!