Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - AllAroundTheWorld

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 175  Next >
1
And another thread derailed...
Really need to stop feeding this troll.

2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« on: January 23, 2022, 09:10:16 PM »
This is what I fear, yes. Been going on for decades. I'm not the only one who thinks so.
Oh cool. So you're not the only bigot and therefore you're right.
Is that what you're going with?

Absolute horseshit.
Wow. In two words you dismiss the lived experience of gay people and reams of nature/nurture scientific study. Bravo.
And Stephen Fry wasn't joking. I mean, obviously he expressed what he wanted to say in his typical amusing fashion, but his point was that for as long as he was aware of such things, he knew what his sexuality was. Whether it's something you're born with or something which you develop is debatable, but the point is no-one "chooses" to be gay. Unless you can tell me you chose to be heterosexual, which is obviously not the case.

Quote
If you have a new age parent that likes to dress you as a drag queen so you can express yourself at the age of 4 ... you might well turn out gay.
That's what happened to your brother, is it? How come you managed to escape this awful fate?

Quote
Being gay sucks.
In large part because of people like you. Thankfully people like you aren't so common these days, so it doesn't suck as much as it used to. It's a shame you are continuing to be part of the problem. As for same sex couples having children - either through adoption or, surrogacy or sperm donor, my gut feeling is that a child is best raised by a mother and father but, actually, the literature doesn't really bear that out
https://whatweknow.inequality.cornell.edu/topics/lgbt-equality/what-does-the-scholarly-research-say-about-the-wellbeing-of-children-with-gay-or-lesbian-parents/
Obviously you'll dismiss that because it doesn't back up your bigotry, but I don't think I can help you with that.

Quote
Why?

Because it is a thing. Part of a child's education should be to teach them about the reality of the world around them. And now gay marriage is legal and gay adoption is legal - despite bigots like you - it will be increasingly common for children to encounter other children with two parents the same sex. Thankfully children are far more accepting of this sort of stuff than people like you. And it's perfectly possible to teach them about stuff like this in an age appropriate way without mentioning anal sex or strap-ons
Teaching them about stuff like this is not "encouraging" them to be gay, but it might help them to make sense of their feelings when they get to an age where they start thinking about stuff like that. I'd suggest that's a good thing, given the way it worked out for older generations of gay people who had to hide away - again, because of people like you.

Quote
You mean the previous generations that went on to create great civilisations over thousands of years?
Bishopian cherry picking. Yes, previous generations did lots of great things. They did slavery and the holocaust too.
And they forced people like Alan Turing, one of the geniuses who contributed to some of the stuff you laud, to undergo chemical castration when he was convicted for having relations with another man. Just because previous generations did a lot of good stuff doesn't mean it was all good and we can't move on and evolve as a society to do better. If you want to get left behind then that's up to you, but thankfully people like you will literally die out soon.

Quote
You are one of those people that thinks everyone who lived in the past was stupid.
Says the man who reckons* the earth is flat and all the giants of science were dum-dums
(*or, let's be honest with each other, pretends to for the lolz)

3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« on: January 23, 2022, 09:27:33 AM »
Discussing homosexuality with children is a gateway to child sexual abuse.
I’m sure you have excellent evidence of that over and above your own bigotry

In all of human history, no people's taught their kids that growing up to be gay was a good idea.
“In all of human history, no people’s (sic) taught their kids that slavery was wrong”
-1790’s Thork
Holy shit, you’re making it sound like kids are being actively encouraged to be gay. I’m sure you have excellent evidence of that over and above your own bigotry.

Your formative years are just that. Formative. You aren't born having any sexuality.
I’m sure you have excellent evidence of that over and above your own bigotry.
This is demonstrable bullshit. If you bother to talk to any gay person you’ll know that they often always knew they were gay.
(On being asked when he knew he was gay)
“Oh, I’ve always known. As soon as I came out of my mother I looked up and thought ‘I’m not going up one of those again!’”.
- Stephen Fry
You know this is not true from your own experience. Unless you’re saying that as a teenager you thought
“Well, I like a bit of cock, but I kinda like pussy too. Think I’ll go with pussy”.
No one has that experience.
A friend of mine “came out” to me and in the ensuing conversation she said that in some ways she wishes she wasn’t gay as her life would be a lot easier. But you can’t control who you are attracted to.

Kids should obviously be taught that being gay is a thing. They shouldn’t be taught it’s “good” or that it’s “bad”. It’s just a thing and it’s a thing for a significant enough percentage of the population that kids will probably know gay couples. Just not talking about stuff like that has worked out horribly for previous generations. But it should obviously be done in an age appropriate way, which is what this bill is apparently about.

4
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: FL GOP are homophobic crybabies
« on: January 23, 2022, 08:25:47 AM »
This thread is a perfect example of why people need educating about LGBTQ+ issues. Tom and Thork sound like every misconception that has been left behind by medicine and sociology about 40 years ago.
Isn’t this bill simply about making sure it’s done in an age appropriate way? Which it should be. Obviously that is open to interpretation, but as a principle it seems pretty sound.

5
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Where is Google Maps wrong?
« on: January 20, 2022, 04:19:30 PM »
Satellites above a flat accelerating upwards earth would not be practical.  A big supply of fuel would be necessary to keep them accelerating upwards to maintain a constant distance above the earth.  Extremely basic physics.  I would also think that all that burning fuel would distort pictures taken thru the hot exhaust gases.
Didn't you say this before? FET hypothesises that the earth itself shields the force which makes UA...A. That's why we don't accelerate upwards too - well, we do, but we're pushed upwards by the earth - which creates the effect which RE calls gravity.
But that shield only works up to a certain altitude which is why the earth doesn't accelerate into the stars, they are also being accelerated upwards. So if you could get a satellite into that region then it would be accelerated up along with the earth.
There are bunch of other problems, presumably you'd still need fuel to keep the satellite orbiting.
And of course there would have to be a big conspiracy amongst all the countries who launch satellites who claim that they're doing so based on all the maths to make this work on a RE. Which was kinda my point in my post which kicked this conversation off. We have a load of satellite data and photos from space. The image I posted would be extremely difficult to fake. The FE response to satellites confuses me in general. Some just shout "fake!" and run away, but this quality and quantity of data would be next to impossible to fake, and they have no actual evidence of that. Pete's response seems to be that satellites are possible on a FE but I'm not clear how that would work.

6
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Where is Google Maps wrong?
« on: January 19, 2022, 04:38:42 PM »
I don't see what this has to do with Google Maps
Well, it doesn't really but it's an example of how we are able to map the earth accurately with the help of orbiting satellites. I wasn't sure it deserved its own thread.

Quote
the FE "take" on electromagnetic acceleration doesn't change. You are viewing the image under the assumption that electromagnetic waves travel in straight lines, but they do not.
I'm not sure how that's relevant. This is a composite of photos claimed to come from an orbiting satellite - so it would be looking straight down. What's EA got to do with it?

Quote
Of course, the composite nature of the image does weaken your case (look at you, you even felt the need to defensively twitch at how it "doesn't equal fake"!) since you can compose them any way you'd like.
Well sure. I said the "!= fake" because it's a FE claim I've seen a lot (more outside here than on here, to be fair). It's a weak claim though, any panorama you take is a composite, that doesn't mean you're not actually looking at the object you're taking photos of.

I guess the point of this thread - and the reason I put this in here - is that we have very accurate maps of the whole earth. In part because of a lot of surveying but now because we have orbiting satellites which can take photos with impressive resolution. One such satellite is claimed to have taken the photos which make up this composite. A common FE claim is that this is all fake - although I'd suggest that faking a map of the whole of the UK to this resolution would be a very difficult thing to do. From other threads you've indicated you don't see a contradiction between FE and orbiting satellites but I'm never clear how you square (globe?!) that circle.

7
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Where is Google Maps wrong?
« on: January 19, 2022, 03:48:30 PM »
I saw this today which I thought was interesting

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-60044065

Amazing image of the whole of the UK, taken from a satellite using radar - so not subject to clouds etc. It's a composite (remember, kids, composite != fake), the full image is something like 2Gb and you can see quite small scale features on it.

Be interested to hear a FE take on this.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The Great Reset: Aftermath
« on: January 19, 2022, 11:10:16 AM »
The real way to go is to not have a nation of people so poorly educated that you have to resort to using "bish, bash, bosh" as your main means of communication, but that's gonna take a while.
But if Boris did that, he'd be putting himself out of a job.
He might be soon anyway the way things are going.

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The Great Reset: Aftermath
« on: January 18, 2022, 10:36:21 PM »
Holy shit, we actually agree on something. I, too, hate that slogan and I, too, think it should be "sort it".
No.
Because that surely implies that you are going to “sort it”. Surely the slogan is saying that by saying it, it will be sorted (out).
I think the slogan is…fine. I don’t love it, but it doesn’t make me froth at the mouth.

10
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Experiment to Distinguish FE from RE
« on: January 18, 2022, 04:05:25 PM »
What experiments could one do in order to distinguish FE from RE?

You're going to find that question impossible to answer.  The reason being evidenced by just what you listed:
Well, that's why I asked the question.
One of my frustrations with FE is they seem to simultaneously claim that observations demonstrate a FE, but then hypothesise mechanisms which they claim produce equivalent effects to a globe (the page about EA pretty much makes this claim).
Hence the question, what experiment could we do - and have they done - which discriminate between the two models.

11
Flat Earth Theory / Experiment to Distinguish FE from RE
« on: January 18, 2022, 01:16:47 PM »
What experiments could one do in order to distinguish FE from RE?

I would suggest that objects sinking below the horizon, the distance (and angle dip) to the horizon increasing with altitude are observations which we all agree on.
That could be explained by us living on a globe - objects disappear over the curve, as you ascend you see further over the curve. But these observations could equally be explained by EA on a flat earth.

I think we can all agree that objects fall. That could be explained by mass attracting mass, but it could equally be explained by UA.

Ah, but the weight of things, and therefore the force of gravity, varies by latitude (and in other ways) in a measurable way. That could be explained by a spinning globe, the centrifugal force being greater nearer the equator where you are spinning faster. Other variations can be explained by the mass of the earth not being distributed perfectly uniformly.
But it could also be explained by Celestial Gravitation causing local variations.

RET has explanations for all the above. If FET has hypothesised mechanisms which also explain them then what experiment can we do to help us determine the true shape of the earth?

12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: January 17, 2022, 07:58:38 PM »
UK clinic tells woman not to take any more vaccines, claims that new safety data spells bad news.
Have you alerted Donald Trump so he can stop spreading the dangerous misinformation that the vaccine is safe and effective?

13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: January 16, 2022, 09:43:09 PM »
And by the way ... covid isn't dangerous. This stupid shit about it being lethal ... its only lethal if a cold is lethal to you.
This continues to be a lie.
I never understand why some people seem to think that simply repeating something which isn’t true somehow makes it true.
This is how I feel about it. Novak isn't about to die. None of his competitors are about to die of covid either. None of the spectators will die. The only people who would die are house bound or hospitalised and unable to go attending tennis matches with large numbers of people because all kinds of diseases would kill them. Its such a lie that covid is just an indiscriminate lottery that could hit anyone like a bolt of lightning. Like any disease, it only picks off the weakest ... ergo those not out at tennis matches enjoying themselves.
I don’t particularly disagree with any of that. And I think Australia’s rules are bullshit, as is the assertion that Djokovic is a danger to anyone. But come on, dude, this isn’t just a common cold - although Omicron is admittedly much milder than the original (and still the best) Covid, which is part of the reason why we aren’t all in lockdown now like we were this time last year.

14
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 16, 2022, 09:15:38 PM »
It’s not irrelevant what Trump says because a large number of people may act on his words.
Correct, but Kangaroony is right that Trump has no medical qualifications to pontificate about this.

What’s funny is watching Trump fans, who hang on his every word, spend all year falling in to anti vax conspiracy theory rabbit holes and then trying to reconcile that with Trump’s clear pro vaccine stance.

15
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Coronavirus Vaccine and You
« on: January 16, 2022, 08:53:37 PM »
And by the way ... covid isn't dangerous. This stupid shit about it being lethal ... its only lethal if a cold is lethal to you.
This continues to be a lie.
I never understand why some people seem to think that simply repeating something which isn’t true somehow makes it true.

16
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 16, 2022, 03:17:09 PM »
Aside from driving, depending on age, none of those are things young and healthy people shouldn't do.
Irrelevant.

Quote
Considering that this is perhaps the fifth time you brought up your conversation with an ICU doctor you once had as your source of knowledge we can safely dismiss you.
Why? Because he’s not saying what you want?

I know it’s on brand of you to dismiss sources which don’t back up what you want to believe, but why is this ICU’s doctor’s experience not valid? He’s been on the front line of this. You haven’t, nor have I.

17
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Britain's Pedo Prince
« on: January 14, 2022, 05:00:11 PM »
I'd like to see Gates face charges. Gates isn't dumb. Gates is wicked.
I'm sure you have excellent evidence of that.

18
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Britain's Pedo Prince
« on: January 14, 2022, 04:31:24 PM »
It doesn't matter if it was out of stupidity or because he's a bond villain.
It absolutely does. The stupid can learn from making mistakes. Bond villains will actively pose a threat to others in the future. My guess is that Andrew has already learned his lesson. Again, he's dumb, not wicked.
I dunno.
I think people have had enough of the rich and powerful being able to do what they want without consequence.
One could argue that loss of reputation is a consequence, but he's still living a life of luxury.
I don't think it's a bad idea to send a message that they aren't above the law (even though often they are).

19
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Britain's Pedo Prince
« on: January 14, 2022, 04:20:25 PM »
^ This post illustrates my point exactly. You start from the own fantasy of your imagination and dismiss the case based on that. That’s how children act.

The point I'm making is 'Is Andrew evil, or is he just stupid?'. My feeling is that he is stupid, but he is facing the charges of someone who is evil. He acts out of poor decision making, not out of malice. In society we don't punish the stupid. We punish the evil. I think his lawyers can build a case around these kinds of premises.

I'm not a million miles away from disagreeing with you, but you're saying he shouldn't be charged.
If he did something illegal and there's good evidence of that then of course he should be charged.
It doesn't matter if it was out of stupidity or because he's a bond villain.

20
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Britain's Pedo Prince
« on: January 14, 2022, 03:47:44 PM »
your worth.

Also, of course Thork is being Thorky.
But he's not a million miles off here. Calling Andrew a pedo is harsh.
But he absolutely should be charged.

No-one in the UK cares much about Andrew.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 175  Next >