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 - Tom Bishop

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 492  Next >
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: June 13, 2024, 09:25:26 PM »
Biden's neckline is looking pretty odd here, especially if you zoom in as his face is shifting and you get a good view of the side of his neck.

CNBC video source:

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 13, 2024, 03:32:14 PM »

Basically: Trump tried to buy positive witnesses who work for him or silence them from cooperating volunterily from law enforcement.

Credible?  Maybe.  Not sure.

Where does it say that they got those things after they were contacted by the court to be witnesses?

It doesn't say that. And obviously they would want to bring in high ranking witnesses closest to Trump at the top, so top people getting benefits in their job means nothing here.

This is like calling in the CEO of Microsoft to testify against the alleged crimes of Bill Gates and declaring that the witness was given wage increases and a promotion to CEO prior to being called as a witness, which is evidence of witness tampering. Nonsense.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 11, 2024, 06:01:18 PM »
An outright case of reverse jury nullification if there ever was one:

Is that really how it works? Some random guy on the Internet can hint that he knows the verdict ahead of time, and that's it, we need a mistrial now? Would this work for someone else? Hey guys, my brother is on Hunter Biden's jury, and he's already promised a conviction! MAGA forever!

The court can investigate and determine if any jury members are telling people that it's going to be a sham trial. If they are, then it is grounds for a mistrial.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 08, 2024, 06:01:55 PM »
Unusually, Tom is actually right about her denial

“So you signed and released a statement that said, ‘I am not denying this affair because I was paid in hush money, I’m denying it because it never happened,’” Cooper asked. “That’s a lie?”

“Yes,” Daniels replied.

Cooper asked why she signed it. Daniels indicated that she was worried about legal repercussions. After all, we will note, she was paid $130,000 by Trump’s attorney Michael Cohen days before the 2016 election in exchange for a promise not to share the story of the alleged encounter.

...Asked under cross-examination why she denied the encounter previously, Daniels pointed to the nondisclosure agreement that she had been paid to sign.

So, actually, her denial is evidence of the payment to silence her.

Actually in the statement it says that she denied it in 2006 and 2011, so it can't be true that the denial is solely in response to the $130K Michael Cohen payment in 2016.

I can only see the practice of going back and fourth on claims and denials as evidence of extortion.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 06, 2024, 10:55:04 AM »
Wow, hypocritical. Stormy Daniels retracting her claim that she slept with Trump doesn't stop you from disbelieving her.

Daniels didn't "retract" anything by saying she didn't sleep with Trump.

I'm not going to waste any more time on the ridiculous Segura story. Anyone can claim anything they want about their life or their career on the Internet.

Anyone can also make a false sex claim in an extortion attempt. The fact is that Tony Segura has not retracted his statements, has not been engaged in any known fraud, and is a far more credible source. He has a law degree and lives in Newport Beach like Michael Avenatti. It is reasonable that they are acquaintances. You have yet to produce evidence to disbelieve him.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 05, 2024, 01:31:16 PM »
Trump is a famous former president
When someone is famous for being bad, the correct word is "infamous"

The 3rd worst in history and the only living person in the bottom 10:

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 05, 2024, 12:19:05 PM »
As far as I can tell Tony Segura holds the special distinction of being entrusted with company finances, which demands a higher moral responsibility. Trump is a famous former president and current lightning rod and martyr of the right who is trusted and beloved by millions. Neither he or Trump has admitted to fraud.

Your sources are a lawyer who has abused the trust placed in him and admitted to fraud, another lawyer who is in prison, and also this person:

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 05, 2024, 02:41:10 AM »
Wow, hypocritical. Stormy Daniels retracting her claim that she slept with Trump doesn't stop you from disbelieving her.

Reading the retraction article:

"Mr. Cohen states that OAN’s article is false. He writes that 'I did not have an affair with Stormy Daniels and furthermore I did not ‘cook up’ the allegations to extort the Trump Organization before the 2016 election.' Mr. Cohen continued: 'The notion that right before the election I would extort the man I fervently supported and believed was about to become president, all to make $130,000 that I did not even keep for myself, is beyond absurd. It’s just plain stupid.'"

This is laughable, considering that he admits to stealing tens of thousands of dollars from Trump through fraud.

In the claim it said that the person overheard that Michael Avenatti was divulging details of his client Daniels extorting Trump with Cohen. Avenatti denying it means nothing.

In this claim we, at least, have a third party source named Tony Segura with a claim of information who received no financial benefit. Your only source of information that your claimed event did occur is the person deriving financial benefit herself.

Tony Segura does claim to have a law degree from Western State College of Law, and lives in corporate lawyer Michael Avenatti's Newport Beach, CA, area, which strengthens his claim of acquaintance -

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 04, 2024, 02:16:10 PM »
Michael Cohen claims that he took out home equity credit on his home to pay Stormy Daniels.

What in the world?

It gives more credence to the allegations that it was really Michael Cohen who was having the affair with Stormy Daniels. A report came out with allegations that Stormy Daniel's former lawyer Michel Avenatti was claiming that she and Michael Cohen were having an affair and schemed to extort Trump.

"Today a report comes out that imprisoned attorney Michael Avenatti, who was as dishonest as Cohen, claimed that Cohen had an affair with Stormy Daniels and that he and Daniels made up the scheme to get money from citizen Trump."

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 04, 2024, 02:28:37 AM »
That, along with the bank records of the relevant payments, emails discussing the payments, and even a recording of Trump talking about the payments. Not to mention the fact that Trump's "I was just paying my lawyer" defense was extremely implausible on the face of it - why would Trump suddenly give his lawyer a $130,000 bonus?

According to fraudster Michael Cohen that is about how much he usually got as a bonus. According to his own words, it was not out of line for him to get such a bonus:

"You were shorted on 100,000 on your bonus that year, " Blanche asked.

"That's correct," Cohen said, confirming he normally got $150,000 as an annual bonus around the holidays.

So now we've circled to the "Trump is innocent because he's incapable of managing his own finances." Argument.

Michael Cohen was hired to manage Trump's legal finances. I don't see why Trump should have to be responsible for Michael Cohen's crimes. especially since Cohen has admitted that Trump was not fully aware of what was happening to the money. He lied about where money went and stole from Trump.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: June 03, 2024, 10:19:42 PM »
Trump said that he didn't have knowledge of the payment. It's not clear that Trump was fully aware of what was happening with his finances. The lawyer Michel Cohen is a fraudster who was invoicing large amounts of money and was not honest or transparent with where the money was going. Cohen admitted in court that he was asking the Trump Organization for money to pay for things, and then pocketed the money himself.

In 2017, the Trump Organization owed technology company Red Finch $50,000 for services rendered. Cohen, who helped facilitate the transaction, asked for a $100,000 reimbursement, "grossed up" to account for taxes, from the Trump Organization.

However, on the stand Monday, Cohen admitted that he stole from Trump, only paying $20,000 to Red Finch and pocketing the remaining $60,000 for himself.

"So the $50,000 that you got back from Red Finch ... you only paid the Red Finch owner $20,000, right?" Blanche asked Cohen.

"Yes sir," Cohen replied.

The lawyer clarified that Cohen pocketed the $60,000 difference and confirmed this was stealing.

"You did steal from the Trump Organization based upon the expected reimbursement from Red Finch?" Blanche asked.

"Yes sir," Cohen replied, according to CNN.

Cohen said multiple prosecutors from the district attorney's office are aware that he stole form the Trump Organization and acknowledged that he has not plead guilty to alleged crime.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 31, 2024, 11:55:43 AM »
It would be different if it was one or two charges in a single case. Trump has multiple cases against him with 88 felony counts. Even little old ladies call it BS and unprecedented for the liberal government to prosecute opposing presidential candidates in this manner. The over the top prosecution overshadows any actual crime that occurred, so Trump wins.

In addition, the crimes described are meaningless to most people. They don't have anything substantial that people see as immediately bad and reprehensible. Overvaluing Mar-a-Lago, lol. If there is nothing substantially terrible that people can repeat at a water cooler with conviction and a straight face, it's a failure in narrative for the anti-trump.

For this case in specific, the general public is familiar with the concept of someone making settlements for claims made against them and do not readily see the illegality when hearing of this case.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: May 31, 2024, 04:58:50 AM »
It is correct that for Biden and Trump supporters that this isn't going to move the needle for them.

However, there is a segment of the population who does not vote. If the narrative is that these are cooked trials and overzealous persecution they will be more inclined to vote for Trump. America loves underdogs and martyrs. All of this is basically free publicity for Trump at this point. The more felonies they charge him with and the more over the top this looks, the better it will be for his campaign.

IMO this is going too slow and they need to hurry up and jail him so this becomes the biggest international news story on earth.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Wiki Spam
« on: May 22, 2024, 11:38:50 PM »
Can we look at enabling the Wiki again for edits. I would suggest upgrading the software to the latest version and leaving it as a default theme and handing it over to Pete to fix the theme whenever he gets the time. No special coordination of work or time will be necessary.

Flat Earth Community / Re: The Final Experiment
« on: May 21, 2024, 05:07:00 AM »
It would be nice if more experiments were performed on Antarcica. However, some here will recall the last trip to Antarctica experiment turned out to be a scam perpetuated by the RE'ers organizing it. People paid a lot of money to go and the organization just disappeared with the money.

See this video: CANCELED! Polar Explorer Event Fraud!

In this case for "The Final Experiment" they say that they welcome guests and if you want to go then to contact them to find out how much it will be. There are some rumors that they want $30K or something of that nature.

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: What is the true map of the earth?
« on: May 14, 2024, 10:42:20 AM »
The quote from Maggie teneva (who she?) is simply a throwaway line at the end of an article about entertaining your kids on longhaul.

Are you claiming that she is joking? She is clearly not, even if the article is about childcare on an airplane. It is not a satire article. She is known as a travel writer. -- "Travel writer Maggie Teneva posits these and other benefits derived from exploring the world outside our own cocoons"

The "stopping for fuel" link doesn't go anywhere.

Did you try googling the text?

I got results for the page and was able to put it into web archive to see the content:

The Continental Airlines example is undated, has no reference, and (if true) sounds like poor planning by  the airline in not using aircraft with apprpriate capacity/range.

Well yes, that's what the article says. The planes were traveling a distance within the distance of the Boeing 757's 4100 miles range. The planes were within their range, but still ran out of fuel. This proves that the flights as they are claimed to exist are dependent on a balance of physical phenomena.

Here is a related graphic:

ETOPS is not a restriction; it is a relaxation of previously existing routes that require aircraft to route within 1-hour flying time of a suitable diversion airfield.  In the case of the Airbus A350, this can now be extended to 5hrs 30min at single engine cruise speed (frightening but true), meaning that only Antarctica is off limits (unless, of course, one of the ice-runways is the destination). 

The USAF, being outwith ICAO regulations, is not limited by ETOPS.  The United States maintains "landing strips on certain uninhabited islands in remote locations" for military operational, security and diplomatic purposes. 

Aircraft often divert from route for reasons of security, medical or technical emergency, but beyond the apocryphal stements you have made, I challenge you to identify a single recent occurance made purely for a splash and dash.  Any commercial aircraft diverting from its planned route purely for a fuel stop would find its captain and dispatcher having a series of one-way conversations with management. 

Planes also make ETOPS stops when they run out of fuel due to winds. According to the above graphic, there were 14 Continental trans-Atlantic non-stops stopping for fuel between Jan 1 to Jan 8, 2012. They took off and thought they had enough fuel according to weather radar, but were mistaken on how the wind conditions would change.

And yes, jetstreams are a perpetual phenomenon, but no they are not alway at the extreme stengthsyou suggest, and almost without excdeption are a west-to-east direction.  Apart from local eddies there is absolutely no, general, assistance, anywhere on Earth, to westbound travel. 

Incorrect. Maps of the Trade-winds show that winds can travel in both Easterly and Westerly directions in the Northern and Southern Hemispheres:

Your statement "Flights are canceled all the time, especially long haul flights" is simply untrue.  For example, I've just looked at data on FR24 for LATAM's Santiago-Melbourne service LA804/805; run with a Boeing 787 Dreamliner.  The service operates 3 times a week in each direction and between 15 Feb and today, 12 weeks, 36 planned return trips; one cancellation.

This is covered on the page


Airliners call a cancelled flight "rescheduled":

  “ How often are flights cancelled/diverted?

Not often. Flights are more often rescheduled than cancelled or diverted. In the event that a flight is cancelled whether under the airline's control or caused by a severe weather or air traffic disruptions, many airlines will rebook your flight or cancel your remaining flight(s). ”


Oh Great: United Airlines Redefines “Cancelled” - Suggests that cancelled flights are alternatively called "removed" to improve cancellation stats.

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: What is the true map of the earth?
« on: May 13, 2024, 02:58:06 AM »
You're talking about the jetstreams as being a constant phenomenon.

Correct. The jetstreams are present year-round.

"The jet stream is a year-round feature of our atmosphere, but the double jet stream phenomenon is more common in winter."

"In the UK, we feel the influence of the polar jet stream (which is also sometimes called the ‘mid-latitude’ or the ‘eddy-driven’ jet stream), which forms due to the difference in the temperatures between the pole and equator. On its northern side lies colder air, and on its southern side warmer air – so its position is important for what type of weather we experience in the UK. It waxes and wanes with the seasons, being strongest in winter, but is a year-round phenomenon."

"The northern hemisphere polar jet flows over the middle to northern latitudes of North America, Europe, and Asia and their intervening oceans, while the southern hemisphere polar jet mostly circles Antarctica, both all year round."

They aren't, they are variable, in location, direction and velocity.  Like I said, its just a wind.  If its above 60 kts, as you say, they term it a jetstream, but its still just a wind. 

And you are absolutely correct that favourable jetstreams (like other winds) are exploited for the purpose of speed and economy, but if the jetstream is absent, or unfavourable, the flights still occur.

They don't. Flights are canceled all the time, especially long haul flights. See this quote by travel writer Maggie Teneva:

“Long-haul flights are often associated with long layovers and delays or cancellations.”

If there are unexpected changes to the jet stream or winds mid-flight, a non-stop flight might even stop for fuel:

“ Dozens of Continental Airlines flights to the East Coast from Europe have been forced to make unexpected stops in Canada and elsewhere to take on fuel after running into unusually strong headwinds over the Atlantic Ocean.

The stops, which have caused delays and inconvenience for thousands of passengers in recent weeks, are partly the result of a decision by United Continental Holdings Inc., the world's largest airline, to use smaller jets on a growing number of long, trans-Atlantic routes. ”

Per ETOPS, plane flight routes are required to be in vicinity of airports or landing strips for unexpected stops like that. Even long haul flights over oceans need the capability to make detour routes to islands with landing strips in case something like the above happens. The US Military is even known to maintain landing strips on certain uninhabited islands in remote locations for ETOPS purposes.

Just look at the post-Covid-resurrected Qantas/LAN services between Chile and Australasia; they take place on schedule every time, eastbound and westbound.  They can't be that anomalous can they? 

Now try Googling Air France flight AF174 on 8 May.  (Or here's a link);

Airbus A350 F-HUVC departed Paris CDG as AF174 for Mexico City but developed a problem over Newfoundland and returned to CDG.  Flight tracking data shows that the return leg was performed almost completely along the same route and at a similar altitude as the outbound leg.  Pretty dumb with a 300mph wind wasn't it, or maybe the airline actually knew the windspeed?

The Jet Stream can change in nature within hours. This is why those non-stop flights stopped for fuel in the previous quote I gave. Those planes didn't take off knowing that the winds would be unfavorable. Planes have a network which tracks the Jet Stream to follow the best path in real time. If that was the path it took, then it is simply because the flight logistics people determined that it was the best path at that specific time.

"Jet streams may start, stop, split into two or more parts, combine into one stream, or flow in various directions including opposite to the direction of the remainder of the jet."

In this case, the jet stream probably just moved out of the way and the plane had enough fuel in its wings to take a long trip back, or there was a favorable path at a lower altitude.

Most typically, the planes take different routes on the return trip:

Why are westbound transatlantic routes located hundreds of km away from eastbound routes?

Looking at flights between NY and London (click to see route):

BA 185 (EGLL - KEWR)
United 941 (EGLL - KEWR)
United 16 (KEWR - EGLL)

The FlightAware anticipated routes are quite similar in both directions, but the actual routes for past flights are really remote from each other:

The two westbound routes are either 800 km north or 1,000 km south of the eastbound route (the dotted line shows the shortest path).

Why are the two westbound routes different and so remote from each other? Why this difference of about 1,800 km?

Why BA 185 route seems to be composed of two arcs?

Did the pilots changed their mind in flight because of the jet streams? Is it related to ETOPS constraints, or alternate airport at Santa Maria? or something else?

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: What is the true map of the earth?
« on: May 12, 2024, 07:48:49 PM »
A jetstream is just a wind, and I accounted for it in my calculation.  A look at any jetstream map will show that they are predominently westerly in the southern hemisphere, which corresponds with my previous statement and, if it is assisting the eastbound flight will it not be hindering the westbound which is occuring simultaneously and at similar latitudes? 

We've also done Jeran's thing before.  Simultaneous to the "supersonic" speeds is a series of altitude changes which an F-16 would struggle with.  Its just a batch of missing data on aircraft position; when it recovers the position data it integrates the delta-position over time to determine speed.

The speeds you provided for the Southern Hemisphere flights were too low. You stated "40 kts acting as a headwind hampering LAN801 and assisting LAN804". Jet streams are far faster, and we know that long haul flights take advantage of the Jet Stream.

"To be considered a Jet Stream, the accepted minimum speed limit is 60 knots. The speed of the Jet Stream is typically 100 kts (nautical miles per hour) but can reach 200 kts over North America and Europe in the winter. Speeds of 300 kts are not unheard of, particularly over south-east Asia."

Commercial flights would fly at the the plane's cruising speed + the Jet Stream speed. See this article from a Northern Hemisphere event over the Atlantic Ocean:

'In February 2019, a Virgin Atlantic plane flew at 801mph from Los Angeles to London, reaching its top speed over Pennsylvania thanks to a 200mph jet stream – although it slowed down to a mere 710mph once it hit the ocean. The aircraft – a Boeing 787 Dreamliner – usually has a cruising speed of around 560mph. Virgin founder Richard Branson described it as flying “faster than any other commercial non-supersonic plane in history.”'

Flat Earth Investigations / Re: What is the true map of the earth?
« on: May 12, 2024, 04:07:57 PM »
Rowbotham's original society solved the sinking ship.
Did it, though? He spends some time in ENaG claiming that things like ladies dresses disappear bottom first on a flat path, which they don't. And then he claims that ships which have gone over the horizon can be "restored", which they can't.

All of this is true of this effect though, and you have even admitted that the effect exists before in past conversations. See this past admission from 2022 from you:

Quote from: AllAroundTheWorld
But in any case, your "experiment" simply demonstrates the part I already wrote in bold above. The very thin hull in your picture will become hard to resolve at a certain distance. And yes, in that case optical magnification could "restore" it. But the reason it can be "restored" is that it isn't hidden in the first place. It isn't behind anything, it just becomes difficult to discern at a certain distance.

Which is exactly what Rowbotham is describing in Earth Not a Globe. When bodies are smaller than 1/60th of a degree they become lost to optical resolution, and are beyond perception. So, you were wrong. This effect does exist and it is reversible with optical zoom.

The experiment we discussed in that thread is still available for you to perform here:

Lady Blount's society collected the professional surveyor and railway proofs.
Did they? Well where are those then? I looked her up and found something about some photo they took. It's here:,_Lady_Blount#/media/File:Blount-photo-bedford-level.jpg
What the hell is that supposed to be?!

The railroad references are here:

Yes, Lady Bount also verified Rowbotham's water convexity experiments with the then-new technology of long distance photography.

The Old Bedford Level was the scene of further experiments over the years, until in 1904, photography was used to prove that the earth is flat. Lady Blount, a staunch believer in the zetetic faith hired a photographer, Mr Clifton of Dallmeyer's who arrived at the Bedford Level with the firm's latest Photo-Telescopic camera. The apparatus was set up at one end of the clear six-mile length, while at the other end Lady Blount and some scientific gentlemen hung a large, white calico sheet over the Bedford bridge so that the bottom of it was near the water. Mr Clifton, lying down near Welney bridge with his camera lens two feet above the water level, observed by telescope the hanging of the sheet, and found that he could see the whole of it down to the bottom. This surprised him, for he was an orthodox globularist and round-earth theory said that over a distance of six miles the bottom of the sheet should be more than 20 feet below his line of sight. His photograph showed not only the entire sheet but its reflection in the water below. That was certified in his report to Lady Blount, which concluded: "I should not like to abandon the globular theory off-hand, but, as far as this particular test is concerned, I am prepared to maintain that (unless rays of light will travel in a curved path) these six miles of water present a level surface."
—The Zetetic Website

Near the surface of the water, for at least the span of six miles, the light created a path which contradicted Round Earth Theory.

EA and UA are admittedly pretty good explanations for certain observations BUT they are just that.

A hypothesis typically does not have supporting evidence. However, the pages show that there is supporting evidence for celestial-scale, and possibly celestial-specific, bending of light.

This is an issue with your way of enquiring. You form a theory which explains observation rather than forming a hypothesis and then making observations which test that hypothesis - which then becomes a theory as observations build confidence. I know this is deliberate, and working the other way around could lead to the same conclusions. The issue though is when observations are presented which show your theory to be wrong you just claim they're wrong/flawed/fake. That's not a way to make progress.

Incorrect. There are observations to test the EA hypothesis of large celestial-scale bending.

If you ask me what is happening on earth thousands of miles away, there will be less research there. The total world model is a topic for the next generation of FE to figure out.
Is it, though? There are flat earthers all around the...disc, right? And we have instant communications now.
There are surely ways you can do large scale experiments reasonably cheaply. I'm sure you could club together and get a ticket for a Santiago to Sydney plane ticket, a FE person on that flight could gather a load of data which would help you advance things.

People sitting in a plane have a difficult time telling how much the winds and the jet stream are adding to the journey. Planes have a hard time determining their true speeds because they are propelling themselves in pockets of fluids which itself is traveling through larger scales of fluids. Wind-intake odometers for planes are notoriously inaccurate. Comparing yourself to Lat/Lon coordinates would also change your speed depending if you are assuming an RE or and FE which has different spacing between the coordinate points. There needs to be an independent method of speed determination.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Covid-19 vaccine two shots
« on: May 12, 2024, 03:32:59 AM »
Did anyone here even get fries for subjecting themselves to drug testing?

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 492  Next >