6641

Flat Earth Theory / Re: "Empirical" Evidence

« on: February 26, 2014, 06:37:07 PM »

I'm sure you are aware there are many much better methods of making news than a space launch.

No one's trying to make the news, I'm just asking you to read it now and then.

You have yet to provide me with a single example of how getting caught faking space flight would materially impact US foreign policy or our international relations.  I'm well-informed, thanks.

You can't simultaneously be well-informed and claim complete ignorance of the importance of the space race and its aftermath.

A minor scandal means minor trouble. Here, have a recent example: http://www.business-standard.com/article/pti-stories/italian-space-chief-offers-to-resign-over-expenses-114020701363_1.html

And here's a less recent example of why it may be a good idea to fake this stuff: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/space/8416561/Soviet-Union-lied-about-1961-Yuri-Gagarin-space-mission.html

If you want to advertise an ideology, it's a good idea to show some worthwhile successes to go with it.

I don't see how the involvement of non-space-faring nations is relevant in this situation.

Those are all spacefaring nations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_government_space_agencies#List_of_space_agencies_with_launch_capability

You're not even attempting to answer my questions anymore. If you plan to keep trying to sidetrack this discussion by bringing up irrelevant crap, you may as well just talk to yourself. I have better things to do than deal with your intentionally obtuse attitude.

6642

Technology & Information / Re: Windows 8 phone

« on: February 25, 2014, 09:38:06 AM »

If I have to show you a video I will.

Do it!

6643

Flat Earth Theory / Re: "Empirical" Evidence

« on: February 25, 2014, 09:34:12 AM »

Not really.  My point has always been that the US has nothing to lose by admitting to (or getting caught) faking space travel.  Space travel has virtually no leverage on foreign affairs.

That's simply untrue, which is exactly why more and more nations, especially "controversial" ones, are trying to get there. This isn't a matter of FE vs RE anymore, this is a matter of "please read the news more often".

But to your point, it's pretty hard to imagine that the US wouldn't know that the other space programs are fake.  For one thing, space programs are internationally cooperative.  This is actually the argument that most conspiracy believers make: nations like India, Japan, SK, the UK, France, etc. are all cooperating with the US to fake space travel.

I don't see how the involvement of non-space-faring nations is relevant in this situation.

For another thing, the US is really, really good at spying on other nations.  We do it all the time (see: 20th and 21st century American history).

Nah, they're good at breaking international laws in ineffective attempts to spy on citizens, which get frequently revealed. This, by the way, is the exact kind of reputation loss that they're afraid of when it comes to space programs.

Why?  Will the globe forget that we have ICBMs? [...]

Please stop trying to sidetrack this discussion.

6644

Flat Earth Theory / Re: "Empirical" Evidence

« on: February 24, 2014, 05:12:16 PM »

I don't see what difference it makes, anyway.

Well, it's absolutely key to the point you're making, so it makes a difference between you having a point and not having one.

The problem with this narrative (especially if you're correct about their ignorance of each other's fakery) is that it fails to explain the following 50 years of space flight.  If you faked the Mercury, Gemini, and Apollo missions in order to prove to the USSR that you have ICBMs, then why would you continue to risk exposing your fraud after they've already been convinced?

To maintain legitimacy. This isn't a competition that you win and forget about.

6645

Flat Earth Theory / Re: "Empirical" Evidence

« on: February 24, 2014, 09:51:20 AM »

I think it makes even less sense for space-fairing nations to be troubled over the repercussions of getting caught faking space travel.  All of the space-fairing nations already know that it's fake.  As you said, they're all in it together.  They lose nothing relative to one another.

What makes you think they know about each other's fakery?

Where did you explicitly say that?

You're not trying to convince your friend from the petrol station, you're trying to convince other governments that you've achieved something.

Does you saying this make garygreen incorrect?

I wouldn't say "incorrect" so much as that his question was not a valid one. I cannot clarify my thoughts on something I never said or thought.

6646

Flat Earth Theory / Re: "Empirical" Evidence

« on: February 24, 2014, 06:32:54 AM »

Why do you keep thinking this has anything to do with populations after I explicitly said it doesn't?

6647

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Has anyone ever flown a plane across Antarctica?

« on: February 23, 2014, 07:41:07 PM »

Or maybe I'm missing something.

You are missing a whole lot. First of all, you don't seem to understand what "east" and "west" mean in FET. You also seem to think that airlines will necessarily take the shortest route between two points, even though this is almost universally untrue.

6648

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Has anyone ever flown a plane across Antarctica?

« on: February 23, 2014, 03:06:36 PM »

A second way is to measure the distance traveled by a plane from Mexico to Japan, heading WEST. If the distance is greater than the distance EAST from Mexico to Japan, then it supports the flat earth.

No, it doesn't. In either case, the proportion would be the same.

6649

Flat Earth Theory / Re: "Empirical" Evidence

« on: February 23, 2014, 07:38:15 AM »

I would think that America or Russia would have loved to show that the other side faked their space program during the cold war.  Sorta like how America was publicly embarrassed when a U-2 spy plane was shot down by the Russians after America said that they weren't sending spy planes to fly over Russia.

Ah, yes, but your example is missing a "tu quoque" element to it. If Russia said "Hey, America faked their space programme, the Earth is actually flat!", everyone would have to stop and think "wait, but you said it was round, and provided pictures!".

Discrediting the other side is all well and good, but they're in this together. Besides, as Tintagel said, they probably don't even know about this.

6650

Technology & Information / Re: Desktop/Homescreen Thread

« on: February 22, 2014, 09:18:48 AM »

As in I have icons on the screen. I don't want them to get lost in a lurid background.

I use it on my phone and I didn't notice any issues. I could make the colours a bit less vibrant if you think that'd help.

It's okay, you can use something that better suits your demands, such as my wallpaper.

6651

Flat Earth Theory / Re: "Empirical" Evidence

« on: February 22, 2014, 09:16:09 AM »

So why would governments and scientists try and convince us?

Again, the exact same reason North Korea does. You're not trying to convince your friend from the petrol station, you're trying to convince other governments that you've achieved something. Trace it back to the cold war and the space race - neither America nor Russia would like to admit that they made stuff up, now would they?

6652

Flat Earth Theory / Re: "Empirical" Evidence

« on: February 20, 2014, 03:34:45 PM »

The only thing I have trouble understanding about this is, why go through all this trouble just to make us believe the earth is round? Money? Well, I'm sure that Governments and private companies could spend their money on something better than shooting large chunks of extremely expensive hardware into the sky

And yet we see North Korea doing exactly that, and the Western media making fun of them. Given how scarce their resources are compared to ours, surely they have better ways of spending them than to pretend they have a space program as big as they claim to?

6653

Arts & Entertainment / Re: Cazazza Dan

« on: February 20, 2014, 09:12:08 AM »

>implying anything the beatles did was "genius"

I dunno bro, that one time when they said "number 9" many times was pretty cool.

6654

Technology & Information / Re: Desktop/Homescreen Thread

« on: February 19, 2014, 06:30:36 PM »

Needs a portrait version that isn't too busy for phone. Then other people see it when you are out and about.

I was thinking about that. What do you mean by "not too busy", though?

6655

Technology & Information / Re: Desktop/Homescreen Thread

« on: February 19, 2014, 09:48:58 AM »

Shameless self-promotion:

6656

Arts & Entertainment / Re: The Elder Scrolls Online

« on: February 19, 2014, 09:32:02 AM »

That was stupid.

That's exactly what makes it great.

6657

Flat Earth Community / Re: Five Year Plan for the Improved Status of the Flat Earth Society

« on: February 19, 2014, 07:46:34 AM »

I'm just going to drop this discussion now. If you hate me trying to help the society so much, go ahead and ask me directly, via PM, to stop. This applies to anyone interested, especially potentially concerned council members. If you (Oscar) are just going to keep coming back to try and make me feel shit about it, well, you're getting ignored. Simples.

I should also clarify that the council has no authority over anything for the time being. I mean, I've already clarified it for you once, but here you go again. Until they develop the constitution, they're just a working group. They are more than welcome to specify rules on how social media are run whenever they get round to writing it, subject to members' approval.

6658

Science & Alternative Science / Re: Is science reliable?

« on: February 18, 2014, 03:37:13 AM »

ITT: Classic sadaam

6659

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On the notion of ban triggers but on not triggering bans

« on: February 18, 2014, 01:42:05 AM »

Aside from the For network, if you banned an IP from a dynamic pool, the two users would have to be fairly close by (couple hundred miles) and on the same ISP.

Not at all. Besides, given that IP bans offer no benefits at all in most cases, I do not understand why we'd wager whether or not the downsides are likely.

6660

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: On the notion of ban triggers but on not triggering bans

« on: February 18, 2014, 01:30:03 AM »

It doesn't seem that likely that two people share an IP address, do not know of each other's existence and are users on tfes.org.

On the contrary, it's quite likely. Many ISPs use dynamic IP addresses. They two users wouldn't "share" an IP address at any moment in time, but they would attempt to access the forum from the same IP at different times.

The other site also made interesting decisions, such as banning my entire university (a potential ~30,000 users) and banning the entirety of the Tor network. Not banning IPs/hostnames/IP ranges without good reason is a foolproof solution to this type of problems.