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 ... 464  Next >
1
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Comprehensive explanation for sunsets
« on: September 26, 2022, 08:46:49 PM »
So you read through the EA page and decided that it worked, but you thought that it "lacked empirical evidence" and discarded that possibility, proceeding to publish a video with the title page "The Sun Could Never Set on Flat Earth" which ignores EA and doesn't bring it up at all. This appears to be dishonest.

Why does EA "lack empirical evidence" to preclude it's inclusion in the video, but the FE Perspective Theory made the cut. Where is the empirical evidence for the FE Perspective Theory to show that it has more empirical evidence than EA? Also, where is the empirical evidence for the RE Theory observation of the sun setting behind the horizon to differentiate it from other explanations like EA? You appear to have singled out EA as not having empirical evidence, so I would expect you to show how the other two theories mentioned do have empirical evidence.

Furthermore, the EA page does list and link evidence: Moon Tilt Illusion, Milky Way arch, tails of comets, meteors, curved aurora borealis, curved ecliptic.


2
Girls?

So your argument is that the the one little black girl posted is a racist conservative snowflake then?

This shows that your view is terribly inaccurate. People disliking the changes to the Little Mermaid has nothing to do with conservatism or expressing inherent racism against black people.

3
Little black girls: Racist Conservative Snowflakes

4
Rama Set and honk must think this little girl is a racist.


5
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The Queen
« on: September 20, 2022, 05:58:40 PM »
As is usual in these tings, the very fornt rows were for closer relations.  Family, friends, royals, etc. of which there are many.

So Biden was in the back because he didn't have a good relationship with the Queen and he deserved to be in the back. That was the premise of the post you are trying to argue against.

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The Queen
« on: September 20, 2022, 04:10:57 AM »
It was a congregation of over 500 world leaders. Trump is obviously a former, and not a current, president.

This is embarassing for Joe Biden, though, to be made to sit towards the back in a room of world leaders. His being put in the back has nothing to do with Trump, only Joe Biden.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The Queen
« on: September 20, 2022, 03:56:05 AM »
oh man. How embarassing. At the social event of the season too. where was Trump sitting?

No former president was invited. This is also irrelevant to the fact that Joe Biden was made to sit near the back.

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The Queen
« on: September 20, 2022, 03:14:31 AM »
At the Queen's funeral Joe Biden was made to sit towards the back.


9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes
« on: September 18, 2022, 06:39:31 PM »

11
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 14, 2022, 01:24:02 PM »
The FBI recently seized the Pillow Guy's phone.


12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: The Queen
« on: September 13, 2022, 02:00:05 PM »
In solidarity of the Queen's passing the NHS has canceled thousands of surgeries and doctor's appointments that people have waited months to get.

https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/nhs-cancels-cancer-appointments-queen-elizabeth-funeral-bank-holiday/


13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Britain's Pedo Prince
« on: September 13, 2022, 05:45:33 AM »
Prince Andrew was allowed to attend the procession, although without his military uniform. He walked around with his medals pinned to his suit blazer, suffering heckling and public embarrassment.


14
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 11, 2022, 12:04:14 PM »
Let’s phrase this positively then: you really want a lawyer who is an expert in national security to represent you in cases pertaining to the espionage act.

Trump doesn’t have one of those and it’s pretty obvious to everyone who has reviewed his lawyer’s filings in this case. If it weren’t for a judge, who Trump appointed, making the arguments his lawyers should have, he wouldn’t have this special master ruling currently under appeal.  As it stands there is a good chance the 11th circuit is going to hold a legal zippo to the ruling.

You are simply wrong that the lawyers aren't being selected based on their specific experience. The new lawyers were added based on their experience:

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/trump-reportedly-adds-former-florida-solicitor-general-and-ron-desantis-ally-to-legal-team-in-aftermath-of-mar-a-lago-search/

    Boasting a long record in state and federal courts, Kise successfully argued four cases before the Supreme Court of the United States and dozens of others before the Supreme Court of Florida, according to his biography.

    ...

    Kise came with high recommendations from Brian Ballard, a top bundler for Trump and DeSantis once described by Politico as the “Most Powerful Lobbyist in Trump’s Washington.”

    “Chris is not only my friend, he is one of the finest lawyers I have ever met,” Ballard told NBC News. “His unique experience is perfectly suited to assist (former) President Trump.”

Did you actually go through the decades of litigation of these lawyers and determine that they did not have the experience, or are you just talking out of your rear end again?

15
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 10, 2022, 07:46:32 PM »
You don’t want an RV lawyer when you are defending against espionage claims being brought by the DOJ.

Actually it says that other lawyers in one of Trump's lawyer's law firm has knowledge of RV law and offers legal services in that area. This is a particularly poor criticism. Whoever that is likely has this as a subsection of automobile law they have knowledge of.

RVs are either luxury items for well off and wealthy or a vagrant home for the very poor and in no way indicates the quality of the law firm. Law firms tend not to cater to the very poor anyway and it is reasonable to believe that they are catering to the people who are more likely to pay their legal bills.

16
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 10, 2022, 06:40:03 PM »
Well at least he has this guy:

One of his attorneys works at a firm that lists one of its specialties as RV law.

Yes, because only poor people have RVs.


17
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 10, 2022, 05:06:28 PM »
Actually Rudy Guliani was a famous lawyer before he represented Trump. He was at least as known as Johnny Cochran. He was known for taking down the mob.

This lady says that he doesn't count because the media doesn't portray him in a good light anymore. The media liked Cochran defending OJ but not Guliani defending Trump. She thinks Trump should be represented by someone the liberal media portrays in a good light, which just shows her ignorance.

If Cochran was still alive and represented Trump, and was then subsequently demonized, I can only imagine she would be saying that "all he has is that has been Cochran who defended a killer and beat his wife, where are the great ones who took down the mob?"

"Doesn't count"?
She doesn't say that.  Just that he's not part if a high price, high skill law firm.

Also, nice deflection.  What about lawyers the conservative news things are great?

Trump has a bunch of conservative law firms and lawyers working for him. Politico identifies 19 of Trump's lawyers here -

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/09/07/donald-trump-has-at-least-19-different-attorneys-00055084

Here is one:

"Christopher Kise: Kise, a former Florida solicitor general who has won four cases before the Supreme Court, has been a longtime adviser to Florida Republicans including Gov. Ron DeSantis and former Govs. Rick Scott and Charlie Crist"

18
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 10, 2022, 03:19:30 PM »
Actually Rudy Guliani was a famous lawyer before he represented Trump. He was at least as known as Johnny Cochran. He was known for taking down the mob.

This lady says that he doesn't count because the media doesn't portray him in a good light anymore. The media liked Cochran defending OJ but not Guliani defending Trump. She thinks Trump should be represented by someone the liberal media portrays in a good light, which just shows her ignorance.

If Cochran was still alive and represented Trump, and was then subsequently demonized, I can only imagine she would be saying that "all he has is that has been Cochran who defended a killer and beat his wife, where are the great ones who took down the mob?"

19
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes
« on: September 10, 2022, 02:59:29 AM »

20
Flat Earth Investigations / The Blatant Lies of National Geographic
« on: September 08, 2022, 11:48:30 AM »
If you perform a search for "flat earth" on youtube one of the top videos that comes up is a piece from National Geographic, which claims to have tested the curvature of the earth and found it to be round. Specifically, they brought in the Independent Investigations Group who were promoted as a group of science professionals to "test" the matter. They determined that the earth was curved and this was heavily promoted and featured by National Geographic in the video.

This is the National Geographic video:



Specifically, they lied about how many lines were seen when the boat and the board went into the distance:

At 7:54 the CFI Investigations Group says:

"We've lost about one and a half stripes; so this can only
happen because of the curvature of the earth"


In the video preview on the YouTube search page there is also a teaser for the video featuing the Independent Investigation Group stating that this can only happen because of the curvature of the earth.

However, it is clearly not the case that one and a half stipes were missing. If you look at the striped board from other views before it went into the distance the red line was always at the bottom.

Close up; boat leaves and begins going into the distance:



In the distance:





There are no other shots of the boat in the distance. From this they concluded that one and a half stripes went missing. There is a little compression there, and it is possible that a very small portion of the bottom red line nearest the water might be missing for whatever reason, but it is clearly not the case that one and a half stripes went missing.

It is also apparent that the horizon is still behind the boat and the and the striped board, still intersecting it. If the boat and board were sinking into the horizon, then the bottom edge of the board is the waterline horizon and that is where the water would end. There should not be additional water seen behind the boat and the board cutting through behind it. If the bottom of the board and boat was the horizon then the surface of the water should curve away at that point.

If the boat is curving behind the horizon, you should not see a water horizon further in the distance. There is a diagram animated scene in the National Geographic video showing the boat receding from the observer, showing the surface of the Earth curving away into the red beneath the line of sight:



Embarassing.

It is possible that all of this is a simple mistake. But considering all of the National Geographic production effort put into this, the hiring and promotion of an independent "science" group, and the fact that this was played on television as an educational video; the inability to count the lines on the target, or look at their own diagrams and see that the water horizon is still behind the boat, can be interpreted as a lie via negligence. If it is a matter of severe negligence then it is still a lie because they claimed to the public that they at least performed basic due diligence on the matter and did not. The video eggregously promotes this as the science truth.

Especially if this is pointed out to them and they still do not remove the video; if YouTube and National Geographic keeps the video up and promoted then it is a heinous lie to the public. I would go as far as to advocate that tfes makes this one of its next front page posts, demanding an apology and retraction of the video content from National Geographic. If they do not remove it then it is clear evidence of a lie to the public by a high profile science and education organization.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 464  Next >