FakeX is sending men to space on Wednesday

[Softball Bat]

You're right.

[EAP]

You're right.

On this subject we totally agree.
We have good company in giant intellectuals such as Einstein, C.S Lewis, Thomas SOWELL, Dennis Prager etc....the list is huge.
Suffice it to say, as to the greatest unanswered questions, our thinking has every ounce of logic and reasoning as the left, and one could easily argue, several ounces more.

[Innocent Bystander]

I am asking reasonable questions.

Beyond plane tracking equipment, how many passengers on board MS 370 do you think had cell phones?

GPS was unable to verify where even one of the phones were?

Okay...

That is a reasonable question. How does triangulation work, and what are the depths of its limits?

[Kierland]

Typical deflection. Look at 370 over there.

I don’t need to take the flight as I have flown nonstop between Southern Hemisphere cities. You on the other hand claim that you have an open mind and are seeking answers. I just continue to point out the hypocrisy of that statement.

As for flights between Sydney and Santiago, I stated it as fact because it is. It crossed over NZ going to SCL. Radar tracked it. Here is the flight log that anyone can confirm for themself.



There you go!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So have I, Fiji to Sydney- Sydney to Cains- Melbourne to Auckland- and on it goes. What is your point?

[Kierland]

Good god you are a tool.

Like I said, flat earthers go to the deny card and you proved me correct. This flight didn't happen! You weren't on it so it isn't real! Never mind that plenty of people were.

So you still have no first hand proof, after 10 years and hundreds of posts on the subject.

[Kierland]

I guess he isn't even aware that he is doing it.

People do it all the time. Ask a dentist or someone on their staff about studies proving flossing is good for you next time they tell you you should do it because it is good for you.

[Kierland]

https://bgr.com/2020/06/20/space-perspe ... m-balloon/

125k

[Innocent Bystander]

Wait I am confused. Is the explosion fake or only the company?

Yeah, Elon is playing government contract games.

Science is exciting, though. This shows the limits of programmed predictions. The explosion shows we learn by doing.

SpaceX can blow up as many ships as it wants, as long as something new is learned each time, and they don't go bankrupt in the blowings up.

That article was interesting. They interviewed a resident. I can't decide if she's sarcastic or has been coached by a lawyer for what to say to win a future payout against SpaceX. If she's that stressed they should buy her out and move more scientists and engineers in. Can that little village become the next Los Alamos?

[Softball Bat]

Typical deflection. Look at 370 over there.

I don’t need to take the flight as I have flown nonstop between Southern Hemisphere cities. You on the other hand claim that you have an open mind and are seeking answers. I just continue to point out the hypocrisy of that statement.

As for flights between Sydney and Santiago, I stated it as fact because it is. It crossed over NZ going to SCL. Radar tracked it. Here is the flight log that anyone can confirm for themself.



There you go!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So have I, Fiji to Sydney- Sydney to Cains- Melbourne to Auckland- and on it goes. What is your point?

You know, his point is that planes from Aussie would not go over NZ on their way to S. America if the Earth looked like this...





Of course my response is that if planes going from Aussie to S. America do go over NZ it still does not prove his globe is true.

And his response is...

You don't show me a flat Earth map that you claim is accurate.

To which I say, that's true.
I wish I could show one that I can claim is accurate.
But I can't.


The topic is a mystery, and as I said, if the globe was revealed to be incontrovertibly WRONG, it would be revolutionary.
A HUGE paradigm shift.

I have determined (quite easily, actually) that the globe model is wrong and that NASA is laffably full of shit.

For these reasons I have researched the topic extensively -- and it is why it still interests me.

[Innocent Bystander]

And his response is...

You don't show me a flat Earth map that you claim is accurate.

To which I say, that's true.
I wish I could show one that I can claim is accurate.
But I can't.

Hand draw it.

[Softball Bat]

I don't know what to draw.
I do not have nearly enough info.

The Gleason Map above is interesting.

This one is also interesting...







:)

[Left Seater]

Here%20is%20but%20one%20https%3A//answe ... t-cooling/

This link does not work.

Fixed in the original post and here is the correct link:

https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/ ... t-cooling/

[Left Seater]

I have determined (quite easily, actually) that the globe model is wrong and that NASA is laffably full of shit.

For these reasons I have researched the topic extensively -- and it is why it still interests me.

More double speak and distraction. You posted what you wanted to see to accept the globe model. You were shown those existed and predictably went to the deny card. You don't care to research anything that doesn't support your flat earth model. If you did you would see the overwhelming evidence for a globe model. You would look at the items you asked for to prove a globe, vs tossing them away without a look.

[Softball Bat]

Here%20is%20but%20one%20https%3A//answe ... t-cooling/

This link does not work.

Fixed in the original post and here is the correct link:

https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/ ... t-cooling/

I have seen this before.
It is noted.

For what it is worth, I find Answers in Genesis to be WAY off the mark on a whole range of issues.
I find them to be deliberately disingenuous.

So yeah, okay.

[Softball Bat]

More double speak and distraction. You posted what you wanted to see to accept the globe model. You were shown those existed and predictably went to the deny card. You don't care to research anything that doesn't support your flat earth model. If you did you would see the overwhelming evidence for a globe model. You would look at the items you asked for to prove a globe, vs tossing them away without a look.

Dude, get a grip.

I have looked at and considered everything you have posted.

In fact, I am glad you posted the things you have.

I welcome information.


To me the "overwhelming evidence" (lol) you posted falls far short of proving the globe.

If you think it has proved your globe, fine.
Enjoy it.
I don't care.

Why do you care so much if someone is not on board with the wonderful globe?

[Left Seater]

This link does not work.

Fixed in the original post and here is the correct link:

https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/ ... t-cooling/

I have seen this before.
It is noted.

For what it is worth, I find Answers in Genesis to be WAY off the mark on a whole range of issues.
I find them to be deliberately disingenuous.

So yeah, okay.

I haven't looked at anything else there, but this one thing. His points are quite valid in my opinion. Where do you think he is being deliberately disingenuous? Point it out.

[Left Seater]

More double speak and distraction. You posted what you wanted to see to accept the globe model. You were shown those existed and predictably went to the deny card. You don't care to research anything that doesn't support your flat earth model. If you did you would see the overwhelming evidence for a globe model. You would look at the items you asked for to prove a globe, vs tossing them away without a look.

Dude, get a grip.

I have looked at and considered everything you have posted.

In fact, I am glad you posted the things you have.

I welcome information.


To me the "overwhelming evidence" (lol) you posted falls far short of proving the globe.

If you think it has proved your globe, fine.
Enjoy it.
I don't care.

Why do you care so much if someone is not on board with the wonderful globe?

The thing is you asked for specific things and I point them out. They have been done. This is a discussion board. Point out where you think the boats that have sailed around Antarctica or where the Pan Am flight is false and didn't happen.

Your typical MO is to just dismiss things out of hand. See the previous post on the Cooling Light of the Moon non-sense.

[Kierland]

Nice to see you out of the bunker and discussing why you voted for Dump and how great he is.

Ah that’s right you are a coward.

[Softball Bat]

The thing is you asked for specific things and I point them out. They have been done. This is a discussion board. Point out where you think the boats that have sailed around Antarctica or where the Pan Am flight is false and didn't happen.

I have already posted my takes on both of these things, Lefty.

1. A magazine article PET about circumnavigating Antarctica doesn't do much for me. As I said, they needed to fully document the event, as they could have, and in the manner I described. They did not.

2. I posted on the Pan Am baloney back many months ago. I am not interested in rehashing it.

3. I am open to the possibility that flights from Aussie to S. America start off by going over NZ. Maybe they do. I am not 100% sure of it, though. And even if they do, it does not prove that we are on your 25,000 mile in circumference Earth.

[Left Seater]

You dismissed both out of hand.

But if you really were interested like you keep claiming to be you would check out some of the many others that have done the same.

Here is one who is writing a book. She also allowed people to follow along live.

https://lisablairsailstheworld.com/the-record

https://lisablairsailstheworld.com/shop


As for Pan Am there were hundreds of people on the flight that know that it happened. Just because you weren't didn't mean it didn't happen. You also shot down the whole flight based on a 2D drawing of the route in a marketing brochure. Again, take another run at it and give us real answers. This is a message board, it is what we do.

[Softball Bat]

Fixed in the original post and here is the correct link:

https://answersingenesis.org/astronomy/ ... t-cooling/

I have seen this before.
It is noted.

For what it is worth, I find Answers in Genesis to be WAY off the mark on a whole range of issues.
I find them to be deliberately disingenuous.

So yeah, okay.

I haven't looked at anything else there, but this one thing. His points are quite valid in my opinion. Where do you think he is being deliberately disingenuous? Point it out.

The first two sentences of the article show them to be deliberately disingenuous or blatantly ignorant.


The flat-earth phenomenon has grown tremendously over the past five years, and it has made serious inroads in the Christian community. The claim that the Bible teaches the earth is flat first was made by skeptics in the nineteenth century in an attempt to discredit Scripture.


The claim that the Bible teaches the earth is flat was first made by skeptics in the nineteenth century?

ummm...

LOL

A blatant lie.
It was only in the 15th and 16th centuries that Christians began to latch on to the globe theory.
Prior to that, it was overwhelmingly assumed that the Earth was flat, stationary and enclosed.



Therefore, the flat-earth movement is a threat to Christianity and the authority of Scripture, as well as the creation science movement.






They have an agenda.
I do not trust them, at all.

I do not know if the moon is its own light.
If it isn't, it does not prove we are on a globe, anyway.

[Left Seater]

Again you just dismiss things in the first two sentences. Of course he is going to mention flat earth, since they are the ones claiming the moon might create its own light.

No mention of where the science falls apart, or how his methods are incorrect, just that you don't trust him so you don't have to look at things that don't work for flat earth.

[Softball Bat]

Again you just dismiss things in the first two sentences.

They LIED in the first two sentences.

That is not a way to enhance your credibility.

[Softball Bat]

As for Pan Am there were hundreds of people on the flight that know that it happened. Just because you weren't didn't mean it didn't happen. You also shot down the whole flight based on a 2D drawing of the route in a marketing brochure. Again, take another run at it and give us real answers. This is a message board, it is what we do.

The passengers on the plane are just sitting there.
They don't know shit from Shinola.

You are almost as bad as Answers in Genesis with the bullshit you try to pass off.


Your Pan Am crap was dealt with previously.





6:47 to 7:04

Get your globe.

The flight was said to track up north at about 120 west longitude (over SF).
If it went "over the North Pole," it would come out across the arctic at 60 east longitude -- and head down south around Novaya Zemlya and down into Russia.

But it DID NOT.

Your video says it came down just east of Greenland and on to England.
That means they came out from the arctic at about 10 west longitude.
lol

That is a FAR CRY from the 60 east longitude they would have needed to come out from the arctic if they wanted to make the claim that they crossed the North Pole.



Whatever.
The whole thing is an obvious PR promotional load of crap for Pan Am.

What the hell is wrong with you?

[Softball Bat]

You dismissed both out of hand.

But if you really were interested like you keep claiming to be you would check out some of the many others that have done the same.

Here is one who is writing a book. She also allowed people to follow along live.

https://lisablairsailstheworld.com/the-record

https://lisablairsailstheworld.com/shop

Lefty, again, this does not prove anything.

I wrote...

If we saw something such as the following, we could be getting somewhere:

Day 1: Morning photo of departure location, photo of sun location, photo of clock showing date and time, photo(s) of vessel instrumentation verifying current vessel location, and map of Earth -- plotting current location on map.
Do the same in the evening.

Day 2: Repeat - morning and evening

Day 3: Repeat

Day 72: Repeat


Understand?

[Softball Bat]

Again you just dismiss things in the first two sentences. Of course he is going to mention flat earth, since they are the ones claiming the moon might create its own light.

No mention of where the science falls apart, or how his methods are incorrect, just that you don't trust him so you don't have to look at things that don't work for flat earth.

Yes, just as you pored over the 121 page laser report and gave us your analysis.

The moon light situation is not a deal breaker either way.
I do not have the inclination to put the time and energy into deeply researching this aspect in order to make my own determination which side is correct.

It just simply is not that important.

[Left Seater]

I wrote...

If we saw something such as the following, we could be getting somewhere:

Day 1: Morning photo of departure location, photo of sun location, photo of clock showing date and time, photo(s) of vessel instrumentation verifying current vessel location, and map of Earth -- plotting current location on map.
Do the same in the evening.

Day 2: Repeat - morning and evening

Day 3: Repeat

Day 72: Repeat


Understand?

Oh, I understand. This lady is lying and therefore part of the hundreds of thousands that are furthering the international conspiracy. You said one thing previously and then changed it.

You don't want to accept reality that you asked for. It would destroy your worldview.

[Left Seater]

I do not know if the moon is its own light.

I do not have the inclination to put the time and energy into deeply researching this aspect in order to make my own determination which side is correct.

So let's end the façade that you have spun in the past that you want to learn and have an open mind and are doing your own research into things.

You just dismiss everything that doesn't fit your worldview.

But by all means keep calling us the crazy ones.

[Left Seater]

The flight was said to track up north at about 120 west longitude (over SF).
If it went "over the North Pole," it would come out across the arctic at 60 east longitude -- and head down south around Novaya Zemlya and down into Russia.

But it DID NOT.

Your video says it came down just east of Greenland and on to England.
That means they came out from the arctic at about 10 west longitude.
lol

That is a FAR CRY from the 60 east longitude they would have needed to come out from the arctic if they wanted to make the claim that they crossed the North Pole.

They flew over the North Pole and then made a heading change. Big fucking deal. Landing in Russia to refuel then would have been much more difficult than refueling in London. The fact you can't understand this shows that you are just making shit up and don't want to consider anything that might cause you to look at your worldview any other way.

[Softball Bat]

You just dismiss everything that doesn't fit your worldview.

Not at all.

As I've told you, I am happy to see information that is posted.
I welcome it.

Just because I am not moved to accept the globe does not mean that I dismiss everything.
I have considered what you have posted and offered my takes on the info.


If you stopped to think for a moment you would realize that I am the guy who actually HAS changed his worldview.

I accepted the globe for over 50 years.

I changed my view.

I did so because of evidence.

[Left Seater]

All words. You actions continue to show those words to be false.

But hey, you do you.

[Innocent Bystander]

New stream or same one?

[Softball Bat]

This boggles the mind.

Watch the dummy make the ASSUMPTION (1:00 point in the video) that the sun is SO FAR AWAY that it's rays are parallel when they reach the Earth.


What if the sun is NOT far away and its rays are not parallel when they reach the Earth?

[Softball Bat]

NASA investigating small air leak on International Space Station

https://www.space.com/nasa-investigates ... ation.html



Astronauts deal with leak simulations during training for their stays on the
space station, which typically are about six months long...



Yet watch deer in the headlights Don Pettit, who has had two stints on the Farce Station, stutter when asked what happens if there is a leak.
Starting at 2:40...


"There's probably a paln, I don't know of the top of my head..."


rotf...







The whole video is quite entertaining.




An absolute joke.

[Softball Bat]

Btw, Google and Youtube are now grossly censoring flat earth content.
It is quite extreme, compared to how it was a few years ago when I was actively researching this topic.

I mean, they are REALLY censoring what content comes up for you when you put in a search.
It is obvious to someone like me who was on top of this issue a few years ago.

Why does Google do this?

YouTube allows misinformation to thrive, fact-checkers say

More than 80 fact checking organizations are calling on YouTube to address what they say is rampant misinformation
on the platform.

In a letter to CEO Susan Wojcicki published Wednesday, the groups say the Google-owned GOOG, +1.16% video platform
is “one of the major conduits of online disinformation and misinformation worldwide.”

YouTube’s efforts to address the problem, they say, are proving insufficient.

“What we do not see is much effort by YouTube to implement policies that address the problem,” the letter says.
“On the contrary, YouTube is allowing its platform to be weaponized by unscrupulous actors to manipulate and exploit
others, and to organize and fundraise themselves.”

The problem, these groups said, is especially rampant in non-English speaking countries and the global south.

The fact checkers are all members of the International Fact Checking Network...

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/youtu ... latestnews





Gotta luv a tyrannical world group of "fact checkers" talking about... global.

lol


pssst... asshats, YouTube has been actively censoring content for years.

What are you fearful of?

You're going to determine what truth is, and proactively protect the sheep from... falsehoods?

Globally?

rotf...


Here's an idea...



EAD, you ridiculous, eternally failing -----> jackoffs.