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 - Pete Svarrior

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 349  Next >
As I mentioned to Tom, the desktop model setup in the YouTube video is highly inaccurate because A) the Earth's atmosphere is being represented by a solid piece of magnifying glass and B) the local spotlight Sun is represented as being very large in scale (almost 1:1 scale using a flashlight) to the diameter of the flat earth plane.
And what about these factors, in your opinion, makes the depiction "highly inaccurate"? Please highlight a specific contradiction with what's observed under FET. So far, you have suggested that a scaled-down model of FET that makes reasonable adjustments for the consequences of scaling down would be "like" someone creating a scaled-down model of RET that fails to make the same adjustments. At face value, your argument disproves itself - it proposes the same things as the problem and as the solution.

So, I am offering you a chance to fix the errors in your argumentation. It's possible that you have a point there somewhere, but that you've obfuscated it with your inadequate presentation.

Do not simply repeat your incomplete argument - I've read it the first time. Instead, fill the gaps and make yourself clear.

The two are alike in that both would use highly inaccurate model setup's as a claimed "acceptable" model scheme.
What makes you believe the FE representation would be "highly inaccurate"? What discrepancies from FE have you observed in Tom's proposed representation? Please be specific - statements like "it's wrong because it's inaccurate" are not very helpful here.

In terms of other specific aspects of FET vs. RET it's difficult to know what to use as a basis for comparison, since there is no unifying FE model.
Ah, right...

Please let me remind you that the FET subforum is not intended for newcomers with no understanding of the model. If you're not ready to post here yet, please exercise some self-restraint and let the rest of us discuss in peace.

Your statement seems kind of ridiculous. Using a desktop solid glass magnifying dome as an acceptable model scheme to show how light behaves upon the flat Earth's surface would be like someone launching a desktop model rocket in their backyard and explaining that to be an acceptable model scheme to show how a rocket engine behaves in the vacuum of space.
In what way, exactly, would the two be alike? Please detail the necessary aspects of both RET and FET to underline your argument.

Relative to earth.
That seems rather impossible under the RE model, and if it were true, it would directly conflict with your proposed outcome.

On FE, I don't see how your experiment accounts for EA.

If Sigma Octantis does not move at the night time
Relative to what?

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Covid-19 vaccine two shots
« on: April 06, 2024, 11:30:54 AM »
I point out, for instance, the smallpox vaccine, of which I heard of no one claiming it is "safe and effective," while at the same time claiming to have subsequently and successfully contracting the disease against which they were inocculated.
But that doesn't contradict the definition at all. Our immune system is called, well, the "immune system", but I'm sure you've been ill before - so clearly it's not actually immune to everything ever. It's a spectrum, not a binary. You can be more or less resistant to certain diseases. Vaccines bring that resistance up, to varying extents.

And, yeah, different diseases are different. Different vaccines are different. If your argument is that the COVID vaccine is not as good/bad as the smallpox vaccine, meh, sure.

But, to me, that "all or nothing" approach just doesn't work. Should we abandon safety features in cars, just because they fail to prevent all traffic accident deaths? Should we get rid of lifeguards at beaches and swimming pools? After all, people still drown when they're around.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Covid-19 vaccine two shots
« on: April 05, 2024, 03:44:47 PM »
I see the issue has relegated to the necessity of redefining the word vaccine.
Yes, exactly - the anti-vaxxers decided to provide their own, new definition of what a "vaccine" is, and then tried to convince others to adopt it. It worked with some, but not with most.

I just happen to think it's unproductive.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Covid-19 vaccine two shots
« on: April 04, 2024, 09:28:44 AM »
You cannot vaccinate against respiratory illness. It is a fool's errand.
Sure you can. The flu vaccine is effective, as is the COVID-19 vaccine. It significantly reduces the likelihood of an individual contracting the disease, reduces the severity of the symptoms if they do, and limits exposure of the wider population. You shouldn't have to have one (I'm not a fan of forcing people to do stuff in general), but I don't think the fearmongering is helpful either.

The only way I can think of to argue otherwise would be to present this as a binary - either the vaccine entirely eradicates a disease, with no traces of it ever found again, or it doesn't. But that's very reductive and kinda pointless.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Wiki Spam
« on: March 24, 2024, 07:13:08 PM »
I didn't see any obviously suspicious changes when I diffed a vanilla MediaWiki with our current code, but that didn't cover all the extensions we've added, so there's a chance there's something somewhere in there.
Yeah, I'm not seeing anything obvious, either. I have no access to access logs for the wiki (or, well, any access logs really) - if you don't mind granting me those I'd be keen to snoop around.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Wiki Spam
« on: March 24, 2024, 03:12:23 PM »
When I looked at the change your account made, the diff just changed the vandalism to different vandalism.
Ooh, that is very interesting. It definitely didn't look that way when I made the edit, but I only checked it once while still logged in.

The Southern Hemisphere page wasn't listed in Tom's original list of vandalised pages, so it's not at all clear whether there was any original vandalism to persist in the cache.
Makes sense. If both Tom and I ended up in a similar scenario (noticed vandalism, made edits, and those edits turned into more vandalism), it almost makes me wonder if someone made changes to our MediaWiki code. I'll poke around a little this evening.

I found our theme calls deprecated functions and I don't know to what extent it's been customised.
Last time the theme broke, we "temporarily" grabbed another one from the shelf and made a few changes to the CSS to tweak it to our brand; and then it stayed like that for years. I suspect we'll want to do that again, rather than try and fix the current ancient hodgepodge.

Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Wiki Spam
« on: March 24, 2024, 11:19:32 AM »
your and Pete's accounts
Are you certain about that? I manually reverted the vandalism, but I saw no evidence of my account making any malicious edits.

Also, it's worth keeping in mind that just reverting the database is likely not to be very effective on MediaWiki. It's at least plausible that some of the vandalism persisted in its cache, and that making an edit restored it.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: February 19, 2024, 08:29:03 PM »
Biden just isn’t well enough to be president. He’s not well enough physically or mentally.
Hmm. I dunno about this. To me, one of them (Trump, to avoid ambiguity) has bad intentions, while the other one is "just" in bad health*. We definitely agree that neither is ideal. But, to me, it seems like our options are a comparably healthy person who's actively malicious, and one person who might end up handing power over to another milquetoast Democrat if things get bad enough.

* - if we even accept that narrative to begin with. I honestly don't know if he's any worse than Trump on that front. Recall the hysteria around Trump's health when he was president - and the counter-argument in which his health was declared to be Truly Presidential™ by his doctor.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: February 17, 2024, 10:43:03 PM »
I was talking to a mate about this yesterday and we both agreed we’d both probably vote for Trump if we were in the US. I can’t stand him, but he is at least compus mentus.
This really surprises me. I'm no fan of Jo Biden, but to say that Trump is compos mentis1 seems off. Many of the things he's said, especially during his presidency when his publicity was at its highest, strongly suggested that his grasp on reality was tenuous at best. Are you sure that you're comparing the two fairly, rather than falling for the trap of hearing Biden say silly things more recently?

1 - yeah, yeah, I'm just correcting your spelling here. Gimme a break.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: February 04, 2024, 07:02:35 PM »
I was under the impression you lived in Europe enjoying the peace and stability that Russia's defense of the continent brings.
That surprises me, and suggests that you might be stuck in a spiral of irrational hatred. You seem to act as if I was obliged to hold every view you find distasteful. Let's try and set you straight:

I'm an openly bisexual man with fairly strong liberal leanings. I don't think Russia and I have much in common, and I don't know why you'd think otherwise. Hell, I'm pretty sure I've referred to the Russian military as "orcs" on multiple occasions here, and I didn't mean it as a term of endearment.

But truthfully, there's nothing that would ever change the perceptions of a flat earther. They dismiss any form of evidence that doesn't agree with their beliefs.
There's that apparent hatred again. This conversation really boils down to:
-I read a thing
-Oh? Name a part you liked
-[A multi-paragraph diatribe on how naming one thing wouldn't change anything, because no one would believe you anyway (and it's everyone else's fault ofc).]

Surely you can see how that would affect anyone's willingness to believe you. Especially when you're claiming something as mundane as reading a PDF.
Nice. I still don't understand why you couldn't have recalled any details from a document you've supposedly read, or why you were so extremely defensive about it, but perhaps it has something to do with your visceral hatred of FE'ers, and your conviction that proving your points is unnecessary when talking to The Inferiors.

Coincidentally, I'm not sure you were around when this was put in place, but visits to this website from Russia are still redirected to Obviously that's trivial to circumvent, it's just an IP check, but I thought you might enjoy it nonetheless.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: February 03, 2024, 11:53:25 PM »
It shows personal growth that you admit you haven't read the document and admit your total ignorance on the subject.
Why are you so obsessed with what I do or don't know? I made no statement either way - I'm merely asking that you back up your own claims. But, for some extremely unclear reason, you keep trying to make it about what I know, not what you know.

It just boggles the mind. Why would someone so knowledgeable about a subject be so desperate to avoid recalling any of his knowledge?

My files are in large subjects generally chronological.  Since the invasion of Ukraine, Trump (and the Republicans) sucking Putin's dick just happens to be on the top of the stack right now.
So, no screenshot then?

As someone in the biz, do you sincerely agree with what Trump said about Russian attacks in 2016,
“I mean, it could be Russia, but it could also be China. It could also be lots of other people. It also could be somebody sitting on their bed that weighs 400 pounds, OK? You don’t know who broke in to DNC,” he said."
What are you talking about? There is overwhelming evidence that Russia attempted to, and succeeded to some extent, to influence the outcome of the election. What does any of that have to do with your claims of having read a document?

As someone who lives in Europe

I'm guessing you are comforted by [shit that has nothing to do with electoral systems]
Please elaborate - what does your comment on the most common electoral system in modern republics have to do with [checks notes] Putin something something evil gays?

Surely you see that doubling down on this lie doesn't do you any good.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: February 03, 2024, 07:57:29 PM »
So here you are, preaching to me about the report and you've never read it.
Preaching? Where did you get that idea? I haven't made grandiose claims about having read it, nor did I say anything about not having read it. You're the one who suggested that you've thoroughly scrutinised it, and how you believe every American should subject themselves to the very same ritual... and yet you're being awfully defensive about mentioning even a single detail you recall. Y'know, by now you could have opened the PDF that's totally on your desktop, picked a fun fact, and posted it here.

Also, I'm amused that you've backpedalled from your "joke's on you I was merely pretending" line. You should have committed, it would have been much cuter.

Yes, I have years of files (almost a decade) about cyberattacks, breeches, malware and disinformation campaigns. Russia has a special folder all its own.
Are all of these in folders on your desktop, or is it just the Trump-Russia case that earns this special spot?

If you can't recall any detail from this extensive research (wow!), perhaps you could post a screenshot of your desktop, with all these neatly-arranged folders?

Trump tried to federalize the election system his first year in office (like Russia,)
I wonder - is there a document on your desktop listing all countries with a single nationwide electoral system, or is it just a PNG file with the word "Russia" poorly handdrawn on a laptop touchpad? Because, y'know, them's a few countries that should be on that list.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: February 03, 2024, 02:39:28 PM »
That was years ago
And you kept it on your desktop for years? Gosh!

and every American should have read it
Mhm, mhm. So, you consider it a foundational piece that all of your countrymen should have read, but you can't recall a single substantial detail?

I appreciate your attempts to set up a "joke's on you I was only pretending" conclusion, though. I'll dig out the jpeg.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: February 03, 2024, 10:41:32 AM »
I have read it. It's a pdf in a folder on my desktop. 400 pages. I study that shit.
Then you'll easily be able to provide us with more meaningful detail than that you store your files on the desktop like a savage, or an approximate page count.

Read your reply and throw in a few "believe me"s and" "it's true... it's true"s. That's how believable your story of Studying That Shit is, because you forgot to offer anything of substance.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 349  Next >