Also, learn how to use the [li] tag. Your attempts at generating lists are appalling.
I do know quite well how to generate lists.
But when I'm replying to a creep like yourself
and there only two items in the list, it's hardly worth the bother.
If we are not speculating then we must assume
Quote from: rabinoz on January 14, 2017, 06:48:08 AMI don't see that much difference in the ideas about conspiracy between the two societies. Both seem to say essentially this: Quote P1) If personally unverifiable evidence contradicts an obvious truth then the evidence is fabricated P2) The Flat Earth is an obvious truth P3) There is personally unverifiable evidence that contradicts the FET - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C1) The unverifiable evidence that contradicts the FET is fabricated evidence P4) If there is large amounts of fabricated evidence then there must be a conspiracy to fabricate it P5) There is a large amount of fabricated evidence (see C1) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C2) There must be a conspiracy to fabricate it.This is not even remotely close to the views of most people here. I won't speak for them, and personally I don't subscribe to any conspiracy theory.
I don't see that much difference in the ideas about conspiracy between the two societies. Both seem to say essentially this: Quote P1) If personally unverifiable evidence contradicts an obvious truth then the evidence is fabricated P2) The Flat Earth is an obvious truth P3) There is personally unverifiable evidence that contradicts the FET - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C1) The unverifiable evidence that contradicts the FET is fabricated evidence P4) If there is large amounts of fabricated evidence then there must be a conspiracy to fabricate it P5) There is a large amount of fabricated evidence (see C1) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C2) There must be a conspiracy to fabricate it.
P1) If personally unverifiable evidence contradicts an obvious truth then the evidence is fabricated P2) The Flat Earth is an obvious truth P3) There is personally unverifiable evidence that contradicts the FET - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C1) The unverifiable evidence that contradicts the FET is fabricated evidence P4) If there is large amounts of fabricated evidence then there must be a conspiracy to fabricate it P5) There is a large amount of fabricated evidence (see C1) - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - C2) There must be a conspiracy to fabricate it.
Ok. You proven you are unworthy to unignored. You proven it was a bad idea to unignore you. and it was for me a disgusting experience...Now you are going to place where you deserved and accustomed.
You accuse {FE} people of malice where incompetence suffice
It cannot be otherwise.
Quote from: Rounder on January 16, 2017, 05:30:38 AMIt cannot be otherwise.Of course it can. For a quick example, they could simply be wrong about the conclusions of their observations.
I'm not suggesting they didn't go to space.
1. What are Russia and China's reasons for "faking" space travel?2. How do you account for the fact that 536 people from 38 countries are running around the world, doing interviews etc. Are all of these other countries in on the conspiracy too?3. We have the technology, why do flat earthers continue to deny we have conquered space?
I dunno about "most", but yes, some do believe that. That, however, is completely inconsequential to your suggestion that "it cannot be otherwise".
Quote from: Venus on January 10, 2017, 12:19:03 AM1. What are Russia and China's reasons for "faking" space travel?2. How do you account for the fact that 536 people from 38 countries are running around the world, doing interviews etc. Are all of these other countries in on the conspiracy too?3. We have the technology, why do flat earthers continue to deny we have conquered space?1. The same reasons that the U.S.A. has, presumably -- that whole concept of militaristic dominance through the illusion of space travel and control. 2. That sounds about right. 3. Your reasoning rests upon the premise that we have conquered space and have the technology to do so, which is totally absurd and completely false.
Your reasoning that the earth is flat is totally absurd and completely false.
Quote from: geckothegeek on January 21, 2017, 08:10:33 PMYour reasoning that the earth is flat is totally absurd and completely false.Irrelevant. Please refrain from off-topic personal attacks and get back to the discussion at hand, unless you have nothing to contribute. Thanks.
Would you care to explain your premise that the earth is flat and space travel is impossible ?
Quote from: Elusive Rabbit on January 20, 2017, 01:27:00 AMQuote from: Venus on January 10, 2017, 12:19:03 AM1. What are Russia and China's reasons for "faking" space travel?2. How do you account for the fact that 536 people from 38 countries are running around the world, doing interviews etc. Are all of these other countries in on the conspiracy too?3. We have the technology, why do flat earthers continue to deny we have conquered space?1. The same reasons that the U.S.A. has, presumably -- that whole concept of militaristic dominance through the illusion of space travel and control. 2. That sounds about right. 3. Your reasoning rests upon the premise that we have conquered space and have the technology to do so, which is totally absurd and completely false.If space doesn't exist, then how does faking exploration of it expand military power exactly?
Quote from: Rekt on January 30, 2017, 02:43:28 PMQuote from: Elusive Rabbit on January 20, 2017, 01:27:00 AMQuote from: Venus on January 10, 2017, 12:19:03 AM1. What are Russia and China's reasons for "faking" space travel?2. How do you account for the fact that 536 people from 38 countries are running around the world, doing interviews etc. Are all of these other countries in on the conspiracy too?3. We have the technology, why do flat earthers continue to deny we have conquered space?1. The same reasons that the U.S.A. has, presumably -- that whole concept of militaristic dominance through the illusion of space travel and control. 2. That sounds about right. 3. Your reasoning rests upon the premise that we have conquered space and have the technology to do so, which is totally absurd and completely false.If space doesn't exist, then how does faking exploration of it expand military power exactly?Who says space doesn't exist? You've constructed a very weak strawman here.