1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 15, 2024, 09:26:29 PM »

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-classified-documents-case-dismissed-07-15-24/index.html

Trump wins.  His Judge has basically said all special appointments are unconstitutional and thus the case is dismissed, which breaks from every other judge whose had this. Also, she did this after over a year!  Why didn't she dismiss it sooner?  Because she's corrupt.

Indeed.  Her ruling will certainly be appealed but that will not complete before the election so if Trump is elected then he will immediately pardon himself and then allow the appeal to reverse her decision so all the other folks found guilty via a special prosecutor will not be let out.  Trump cares about Trump and little else. Of course if Trump is elected there will be vastly more to worry about than the special prosecutor regulations.

Jesus, the amount of bullshit.

Presidents cannot pardon themselves. All persons must apply for pardon or commutation. Once application has been filed, that is actually admission of guilt. If Trump tried this, he would lose all support and impeachment would be be successful.

Get a fucking grip and start practicing the words found in your goddamn username.

Actually if you'd do some research rather that just spew vulgarity, its not in fact clear if Presidents can do this or not (it all came up with Nixon) and of course he could only do it for the 2 federal cases not for the 2 state cases (I didn't think I'd have to spell that out but ok).  Perhaps more accurately I should have said "Trump would effectively pardon himself or otherwise weasel out of the charges."  Which is what he has been doing via delay after delay after ....  If nothing else Cannon's ruling offers yet more delay opportunities with appeals and on and on.  If you don't think such would continue 100 fold if Trump becomes POTUS again then you have not been paying attention.

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: July 15, 2024, 06:53:36 PM »

https://edition.cnn.com/politics/live-news/trump-classified-documents-case-dismissed-07-15-24/index.html

Trump wins.  His Judge has basically said all special appointments are unconstitutional and thus the case is dismissed, which breaks from every other judge whose had this. Also, she did this after over a year!  Why didn't she dismiss it sooner?  Because she's corrupt.

Indeed.  Her ruling will certainly be appealed but that will not complete before the election so if Trump is elected then he will immediately pardon himself and then allow the appeal to reverse her decision so all the other folks found guilty via a special prosecutor will not be let out.  Trump cares about Trump and little else. Of course if Trump is elected there will be vastly more to worry about than the special prosecutor regulations.

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: June 29, 2024, 07:31:47 PM »

...
Biden is clearly not fit for office. But it’s equally clear that Trump isn’t either.
...

I'll push back very slightly on that.  Trump is indeed unfit as his only concern is himself.  He would be a disaster for the entire planet let alone the US.
Given the constant presence of a large support staff, Biden might be able to do the job for another 4 years despite his feebleness.  But whether that is true or not doesn't really matter as his horrid debate performance likely has made him unelectable so he has got to go.  Our only hope is if Biden steps aside ASAP, but I fear that's a longshot.

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 10, 2024, 08:39:18 PM »

No thanks, I try to never have my fun come at another's expense.

Well, that's demonstrably false...

OK, demonstrate it.

but you're also the only person here to mention doing anything at someone else's expense.

Perhaps you should consult a dictionary on the meaning of "crime".

It's fine if you're unfamiliar with the slogan. You're not expected to know everything at all times. But instead of just imagining what it means in your head, you could try educating yourself. As is often the case with you, fixing your knowledge gaps is a quick Google search away.

How was I supposed to know it was a slogan?    You could have easily copied the wikipedia link in your post: Be gay do crime, for those whose experience is different from your own, but you declined to do so.  I simply took you at your word, clearly a mistake.

I attempted to answer your post presuming you actually wanted an answer.  Clearly another mistake.   Apologies to the other members.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 08, 2024, 10:31:23 PM »

but "..do crime"?  that seems pretty extreme.

You should try it, it's fun. Just don't get caught, it's not fun if you do.

No thanks, I try to never have my fun come at another's expense.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: June 08, 2024, 07:38:51 PM »

I have a question.

Now, I'm pretty pro-freedom as people go. The "be gay, do crime" kinda guy. I'm probably out of touch with Christian America. But...

I'd say (as an atheist) I'm out of touch with Christian American as well, but "..do crime"?  that seems pretty extreme.

Why does anyone care whether or not Trump slept with a porn actress? And, for what it's worth, why do we care if Bill Clinton had his cock sucked by Monica Lewinsky? What does marital fidelity/ability to get one's dick wet have to do with running a nation?

I genuinely don't get it. Please be kind.

With Clinton (or any politician) trust is a big thing.  People need to believe what their leaders say in order to be onboard with programs those leaders are trying to implement.  Folks are hesitant to trust someone who has broken vows to their partner, or that is my guess anyway. I'm mostly distrustful of politicians in general so it didn't really matter to me personally.  For Trump its a bit different.  He is charged with falsifying business records where they listed payments to hush up the story (which by itself is not illegal) as other things.  Had they listed it in the records as "hush money payment", he still would have had an image issue, but it would not have been illegal.

Again personally I usually don't trust politicians and Trump especially as he seems to say whatever he thinks will win points in the moment.

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: December 07, 2023, 02:17:45 AM »

Even under the scenario that Hunter Biden was collecting money under the guise of providing access to political power, but was really scamming the people paying him, how can you maintain that this shouldn't be investigated by Congress? Why are you guys crying that this should not be investigated?

First I did NOT say it was a scam, there are multiple reasons to put a high profile person on your board, one is just how it appears.   We should investigate things of which we have reason to believe (i.e. evidence) that there was illegal activity.  I am not aware of such in the Hunter Biden case.

What there IS apparently evidence for is that Hunter Biden did not pay his federal taxes for a number of years and dealing with that (in addition to paying the back taxes and interest which he did already) was all part of the plea deal that fell apart a while back.  So now he is being charged with federal tax violations.  I think that was all pretty much expected.  How much of that plea deal failure is politically motivated (to have the case going on during the campaign season)  and how it will all eventually turn out, I have no idea.

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden

« on: December 06, 2023, 03:08:37 AM »

...One can sell a relationship for gain without actually doing anything.  Hunter doesn't need to even communicate to his father to use his father's position to his advantage.  Networking is literally the most effective way to get a job and what better way than to namedrop your famous dad?

Absolutely, and even beyond getting the job, having a namedropable person on your board can be an advantage even if they never do anything.  In some deal one CEO says to another "well you know we have the Presidents son on our board...".  All the more so in areas where influence is at times pedaled this way, but it need not always be so.  Just the appearance of the possibility can easily be enough.  If it went further in this case I have no idea, but it need not have done so and I am not aware of any evidence that it did.

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Died Suddenly

« on: October 10, 2023, 06:04:08 PM »

... And why does it shut down academic discussion and censors science it doesn't like? Can you please explain? ...

At the risk of stating the overwhelmingly obvious, if what you claim of science were true the scientific view of life the universe and everything would never change, let alone change radically as it has done over the past couple of 100 years.  So there must be some other reason that folks like anti-vaxers or flat-earthers can only self publish on forums like youtube to be taken up by the lay public and can not manage to get published in peer reviewed science journals.  Obviously they simply do not have the data to support their claims and/or are ignoring the data that disproves their claims and/or  are making other similar fundamental mistakes in their methodology.

10

Flat Earth Media / Re: New line-of-sight sea level signal transmission record

« on: September 30, 2023, 12:29:36 AM »

The key takeaway here is just as AATW points out, that if the earth was flat this would not be a note worthy event as it would be common place.

If the earth were flat this wouldn't be remarkable, this would be expected. The fact it's newsworthy tells you something...

11

Science & Alternative Science / Re: NASA’s Latest Moon Actors

« on: September 25, 2023, 04:17:06 AM »

Also imagine this ichoosenonsense clown telling construction workers and engineers that they need to do their jobs differently and get new tools because level doesn't mean straight, it means curved because the Earth is "round".

For projects where the deviation would make a difference, like the LIGO project they DO take it into account.  For smaller structures it not only would be difficult and expensive but would serve no purpose so they do not do so.

12

Science & Alternative Science / Re: Nothing To See Here (Maui)

« on: September 24, 2023, 09:09:54 PM »

... joe rogan experience video link removed ...

As is often the case with him, this is at best a huge distortion of what the governor actually was talking about.  Which was about ways to prevent developers from rushing in to take advantage of the local people.
https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2023/maui-city-smart-project-state-lands-josh-green/

13

Science & Alternative Science / Re: NASA’s Latest Moon Actors

« on: September 21, 2023, 09:38:33 PM »

Does anybody know what he's talking about?

He didn't bother reading the discussion before responding, and he's too proud to do so now, so he's just... saying things. None of it is on topic - which is why he's ranting about multiple observation points in an experiment that only involves one. He also doesn't understand that making RE assumptions in an FE experiment works against his goal, because he does not understand propositional logic.

Watching a target move away from a fixed observation point produces exactly the same effect as moving the telescope to points of increasing distance from a fixed target, nor did I make any assumptions about the shape of the earth in describing the methodology, only in what the expected result would be.  But you don't wish to discuss it, so I'm done here.

14

Science & Alternative Science / Re: NASA’s Latest Moon Actors

« on: September 21, 2023, 03:28:56 PM »

Its the telescope that must be level at each observation point not the ground in between and of course close to the same elevation.

If you want to test a hypothesis, you need to remain true to the hypothesis. Arbitrarily throwing parts of it away will invalidate your results. I get that you'd really like to talk about something else, something that makes you more comfortable, but perhaps you could take that elsewhere, too?

The hypothesis is that if the earth was flat a leveled telescope sighted on a distant object would maintain that sight line as it moves further away.  But it does not, it points every further up making the object appear to sink.  Thus the earth is not flat.

Here we have an RE-adherent claiming it is possible for an object to be continuously observed over a flat, level surface at a distance of say...400 miles.

I have made no such claim.  The surface need not be continuously level as long as the telescope is leveled at each point of observation (not continuous observation).  Nor did I give any distance which of course would depend on the height of the target object as well as being limited by visibility conditions.

Of course you did. You wrote that the telescope would need to be leveled. If it is already leveled once and remains on the same level ground, affixed to that point, that's your claim.

You claim the object disappears because a telescope mounted as described eventually ends up somehow pointing up.

The telescope needs to be leveled AT EACH OBSERVATION POINT.  Level is perpendicular to the pull of gravity which makes it tangential to the surface.  Since the earth is round the angle of that tangent plane changes at each observation point resulting in the telescope pointing higher relative to the target as the distance between them increases.

15

Science & Alternative Science / Re: NASA’s Latest Moon Actors

« on: September 20, 2023, 03:07:51 PM »

Its the telescope that must be level at each observation point not the ground in between and of course close to the same elevation.

If you want to test a hypothesis, you need to remain true to the hypothesis. Arbitrarily throwing parts of it away will invalidate your results. I get that you'd really like to talk about something else, something that makes you more comfortable, but perhaps you could take that elsewhere, too?

The hypothesis is that if the earth was flat a leveled telescope sighted on a distant object would maintain that sight line as it moves further away.  But it does not, it points every further up making the object appear to sink.  Thus the earth is not flat.

Here we have an RE-adherent claiming it is possible for an object to be continuously observed over a flat, level surface at a distance of say...400 miles.

I have made no such claim.  The surface need not be continuously level as long as the telescope is leveled at each point of observation (not continuous observation).  Nor did I give any distance which of course would depend on the height of the target object as well as being limited by visibility conditions.

16

Science & Alternative Science / Re: NASA’s Latest Moon Actors

« on: September 20, 2023, 03:00:53 PM »

The hypothesis is that if the earth was flat a leveled telescope sighted on a distant object would maintain that sight line as it moves further away.

No, it emphatically is not. Read the thread before posting again. I will not have you derail it any further.

This thread was derailed long before I joined in, including by your own posts, but whatever.

But it does not, it points every further up making the object appear to sink.

Just asserting it again as fact is unlikely to advance your position. "I said so, duh!" just isn't a sufficient standard of evidence.

Its an easy test to perform, there are plenty of examples on the net but of course you won't accept those nor bother to do the test yourself.

Thus the earth is not flat.

Even if we assume your assertion as true (and, naturally, we don't), this does not follow. In fact, your claim above would disprove RE and FE alike.

Because you say so?  How would this disprove RE?

17

Science & Alternative Science / Re: NASA’s Latest Moon Actors

« on: September 20, 2023, 12:28:44 AM »

Its the telescope that must be level at each observation point not the ground in between and of course close to the same elevation.

If you want to test a hypothesis, you need to remain true to the hypothesis. Arbitrarily throwing parts of it away will invalidate your results. I get that you'd really like to talk about something else, something that makes you more comfortable, but perhaps you could take that elsewhere, too?

The hypothesis is that if the earth was flat a leveled telescope sighted on a distant object would maintain that sight line as it moves further away.  But it does not, it points every further up making the object appear to sink.  Thus the earth is not flat. 

18

Science & Alternative Science / Re: NASA’s Latest Moon Actors

« on: September 19, 2023, 10:07:35 PM »

Curios that this claimed wave never seems to pass

Fascinating - how have you established this given only the specific picture we're discussing? Were you expecting for the contents of a still photograph to change over time?

I was not referring specifically to that photo but the "wave explanation" used so commonly in similar cases.  Here's a video for you

but setting that aside what about observations over land?

Perfectly level land (or reasonably close to), sure

Its the telescope that must be level at each observation point not the ground in between and of course close to the same elevation.

mountains

Sigh. Try again.

Views of mountains work well for such an exercise but distant skylines or other tall structures work as well if you don't like mountains.

19

Science & Alternative Science / Re: NASA’s Latest Moon Actors

« on: September 19, 2023, 05:38:58 PM »

As for obstruction...well yes, that's what I was trying to demonstrate.

Therein lies the problem. You lack the ability to distinguish your hypothesis from the proof. You think the horizon is caused by obstruction, so you take ANY obstruction (in this case, one caused by a tall wave), present it, and go "ta-da!" It does nothing to distinguish between the two hypotheses, but here you are, strutting around like a pigeon and showing the same non-sequitur over and over again.

Curios that this claimed wave never seems to pass, but setting that aside what about observations over land?  There are plenty of posts on the net of careful observations of mountains with precisely leveled telescopes where not only does the bottom of the mountain become obscured but the top of the mountain appears lower as you move further away.   All easily explained via the RE model.

20

Science & Alternative Science / Re: Nothing To See Here (Maui)

« on: September 18, 2023, 09:29:59 PM »

“The two most common elements in the universe are Hydrogen and stupidity.”

― Harlan Ellison