[Action80]

I have been perusing the forums here for evidence of revisionist history.

Here are two examples.

First Saddam tries to revise history by claiming Biden wanted Shokin fired because he was not investigating Burisma...

There's certainly no doubt that Hunter was hired by Burisma in an effort to help protect themselves, either by simply currying favor with Joe or by having access to directly influence him. The leadership of Burisma were clearly corrupt, and Shokin's refusal to properly investigate them was a big part of why the international community as a whole wanted him fired. (This is an important detail that conservatives keep trying to rewrite history on. Shokin wasn't fired for investigating Burisma; he was fired for protecting them. Biden wasn't protecting Burisma by demanding that Shokin be fired; it was in fact the reverse.) That criminals were talking like criminals amongst themselves isn't exactly a surprise. Also, Mykola Zlochevsky has something of a history of offering bribes, as seen by the fact that he's currently wanted by Ukraine's government for trying to bribe the prosecutors looking into Burisma, so the fact that he was supposedly considering offering bribes to Biden was almost certainly more of a Zlochevsky thing than a Biden thing, so to speak.

Had the sources actually existed in 2019(when all of this started to come to light) supporting Saddam's position, one can rest assured a reference most certainly would have been provided when news of Brandon's and Hunter's criminal enterprises became public.

Example two:

Additionally, only one engine in the missile.

Now, one must look at the entirety of the thread and simply notice the rabid and merciless replies from the fine RE-adherents here, such as DD, AATW, and the mourned, departed RS, never ceasing to jump on whatever they considered to be the slightest mistake or obvious misstatement  in any of my posts (indeed, that is their MO) within this thread.

Why didn't they catch this and jump all over me at the time?

Well, there was nothing to catch.

At the time, the NK ballistic missile was written to have only a single stage.

Because they knew the numbers wouldn't jive or fit the narrative, they had to add a second stage and revise Wikipedia.

Shameful.

[Lord Dave]

Do you have evidence Honk wrote something else prior?
That his claim isn't correct?


Also: lol.  FES revised Wikipedia.

[Action80]

Do you have evidence Honk wrote something else prior?
That his claim isn't correct?


Also: lol.  FES revised Wikipedia.

The evidence is Saddam did not even try to raise the false narrative that Biden sought to have Shokin fired for failing to investigate Burisma as Shokin was indeed investigating Burisma.

Also: Entities from FES can edit Wikipedia.

[Lord Dave]

Do you have evidence Honk wrote something else prior?
That his claim isn't correct?


Also: lol.  FES revised Wikipedia.

The evidence is Saddam did not even try to raise the false narrative that Biden sought to have Shokin fired for failing to investigate Burisma as Shokin was indeed investigating Burisma.

Thats not evidence.  Thats you assuming he's like you.

Also: Entities from FES can edit Wikipedia.

Really?  Who here has edit permission for the relevant page?

[Action80]

Do you have evidence Honk wrote something else prior?
That his claim isn't correct?


Also: lol.  FES revised Wikipedia.

The evidence is Saddam did not even try to raise the false narrative that Biden sought to have Shokin fired for failing to investigate Burisma as Shokin was indeed investigating Burisma.

Thats not evidence.  Thats you assuming he's like you.

LD- "Nuh uh..., the written record is not evidence."

Also: Entities from FES can edit Wikipedia.

Really?  Who here has edit permission for the relevant page?

Everyone.

[Lord Dave]

Do you have evidence Honk wrote something else prior?
That his claim isn't correct?


Also: lol.  FES revised Wikipedia.

The evidence is Saddam did not even try to raise the false narrative that Biden sought to have Shokin fired for failing to investigate Burisma as Shokin was indeed investigating Burisma.

Thats not evidence.  Thats you assuming he's like you.

LD- "Nuh uh..., the written record is not evidence."

"There is no written record which is proof that he's lying!" -Action

Also: Entities from FES can edit Wikipedia.

Really?  Who here has edit permission for the relevant page?

Everyone.
[/quote]
Prove it.  Because I just tried and couldn't edit the Flat Earth entry.

[Pete Svarrior]

Because I just tried and couldn't edit the Flat Earth entry.

I can, and I'm hardly special. The page is only semi-protected.

[Lord Dave]

Because I just tried and couldn't edit the Flat Earth entry.

I can, and I'm hardly special. The page is only semi-protected.

I see.  Good to know.  I was trying to edit it as a non-user, apparently.

So then we should be able to see any edits on the ICBM page that Action is referencing and the user who made that edit.

[Action80]

Do you have evidence Honk wrote something else prior?
That his claim isn't correct?


Also: lol.  FES revised Wikipedia.

The evidence is Saddam did not even try to raise the false narrative that Biden sought to have Shokin fired for failing to investigate Burisma as Shokin was indeed investigating Burisma.

Thats not evidence.  Thats you assuming he's like you.

LD- "Nuh uh..., the written record is not evidence."

"There is no written record which is proof that he's lying!" -Action

It is all here, despite your feeble protestation and/or willful blindness.

Prove it.  Because I just tried and couldn't edit the Flat Earth entry.

Well, that could mean you're part of the "no one," rather than the "everyone," because Wikipedia states "anyone" can edit Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Editing#:~:text=Wikipedia%20is%20a%20wiki%2C%20meaning,made%20Wikipedia%20better%20for%20all.
"Wikipedia is a wiki, meaning anyone can edit nearly any[1] page..."

[markjo]

Example two:

Additionally, only one engine in the missile.

Now, one must look at the entirety of the thread and simply notice the rabid and merciless replies from the fine RE-adherents here, such as DD, AATW, and the mourned, departed RS, never ceasing to jump on whatever they considered to be the slightest mistake or obvious misstatement  in any of my posts (indeed, that is their MO) within this thread.

Why didn't they catch this and jump all over me at the time?

Well, there was nothing to catch.

At the time, the NK ballistic missile was written to have only a single stage.

Because they knew the numbers wouldn't jive or fit the narrative, they had to add a second stage and revise Wikipedia.

Shameful.

Do you really want to reopen an 2 year old thread just to rehash some simple physics?  If so, then I'm in.  Just open a new thread in the appropriate board.  If not, then I'm not sure what the problem is.

[Action80]

Example two:

Additionally, only one engine in the missile.

Now, one must look at the entirety of the thread and simply notice the rabid and merciless replies from the fine RE-adherents here, such as DD, AATW, and the mourned, departed RS, never ceasing to jump on whatever they considered to be the slightest mistake or obvious misstatement  in any of my posts (indeed, that is their MO) within this thread.

Why didn't they catch this and jump all over me at the time?

Well, there was nothing to catch.

At the time, the NK ballistic missile was written to have only a single stage.

Because they knew the numbers wouldn't jive or fit the narrative, they had to add a second stage and revise Wikipedia.

Shameful.

Do you really want to reopen an 2 year old thread just to rehash some simple physics?  If so, then I'm in.  Just open a new thread in the appropriate board.  If not, then I'm not sure what the problem is.

I am sure if you read the title of the thread two or three more times, you may understand it is not reopening the subject of an old thread.  ETA: How could one possibly trust your ability to discuss physics (simple, as you define it) when you are unable to interpret the subject of a thread?

If you think it is reopening an old thread, report it to the mods rather than pretend to be a moderator.

Now, do you have something subject related or not?

[Pete Svarrior]

So then we should be able to see any edits on the ICBM page that Action is referencing and the user who made that edit.

Well, assuming the page in question is also semi-protected (most aren't), yes. There's nothing stopping someone from registering multiple accounts, so tracking down a person could be difficult, but showing that the edits exist at all would be a good start.

The only real reason the Flat Earth page is protected is to stop stupid schoolkids from blanking the entire page and replacing it with "NOOOOOOOO". It's just enough of a barrier to entry to stop the lowest-effort trolls, but not a measure to seriously protect the integrity of the page.