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 - JSS

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 38  Next >
1
Science & Alternative Science / Re: The June Eclipse
« on: June 10, 2021, 05:45:20 PM »
I also managed to take a photo of the shadow object from sunny London



Actually quite cloudy London and for a while I thought that had scuppered my attempt, but then it cleared a bit. I don't have a solar filter or anything so that's a reflection in a bucket of water I took into the garden, just took it on my Phone. Quite pleased with it though.

That's really good for being shot as a reflection in the water.  I've be very happy with that result.

2
Science & Alternative Science / The June Eclipse
« on: June 10, 2021, 12:22:30 PM »
Anyone else watch the eclipse today?  I wasn't in an area where I could see the full eclipse but did get some good pictures.

I'll post a boring, scientific one that are all sharp and clear.  I took this once the Sun had cleared the clouds, but it shows less of the Moon in front of it.



Any of you lucky enough to see the whole thing?

3
And if I remember correctly the PA GOP passed it about a year before the election.
Also, weirdly there were no legal challenges in States which had the exact same laws but which they won.
Funny, that!

The GOP being hypocrites?  Say it isn't so.

I'm still waiting to see all these 'illegal' laws and actions that totally turned a 10 million Trump lead into a massive catastrophic loss.

I mean, nobody would believe that if there wasn't actual evidence, right? They wouldn't just listen to Fox and blindly believe it... there has to be some court cases they won proving all this fraud? Somewhere?

4
Of course fraud occurs in every election. No election will ever be 100% perfect. But take PA for example. After an exhaustive search they found three fake votes (all for Trump) out of almost 7 million, which means that the election overall was not fraudulent.

Trump has lost almost 100 lawsuits so far, and in none of them did he show any evidence for wide scale fraud.

So calling the election illegitimate simply is not factually true. There just isn't any evidence to support that claim. Where are these ten million fake votes? Nowhere, they don't exist.

Trump lost, and people need to get over it. He's no God Emperor after all, just a mere mortal who lost an election. Move on.
If you read my post again, the election was illegitimate in that states, including PA, violated their own election laws without legislative action or authorization. I didn't mention widespread fraud.
[/quote]

Which laws were broken? Can you point to a single judge or jury who declared anything done in PA was against the law? 

Please be specific in exactly who broke the law, and where it was ruled to be illegal.

You are implying widespread fraud by claiming Trump won the popular vote and the electoral vote which could only happen if millions of votes were switched across the entire country, which is the definition of widespread fraud.

5
I'm waiting for the prosecution to present posts on this website as evidence that yes, people do take her seriously and in fact were cheering her on waiting for her 'kracken' lawsuit to put Trump back into office.

They probably still do think everything she said was true, even though now she's claiming it was just 'political talk' and not real.  Amazing mental gymnastics indeed.

Do you still believe her claims of voter fraud, Action? Or do you think shes lying now? Which is it?
I do believe fraud occurs in every election and I know the election was illegitimate in that most of the states in question violated their own election laws without legislative consent.

Of course fraud occurs in every election. No election will ever be 100% perfect. But take PA for example. After an exhaustive search they found three fake votes (all for Trump) out of almost 7 million, which means that the election overall was not fraudulent.

Trump has lost almost 100 lawsuits so far, and in none of them did he show any evidence for wide scale fraud.

So calling the election illegitimate simply is not factually true. There just isn't any evidence to support that claim. Where are these ten million fake votes? Nowhere, they don't exist.

Trump lost, and people need to get over it. He's no God Emperor after all, just a mere mortal who lost an election. Move on.

6
I'm waiting for the prosecution to present posts on this website as evidence that yes, people do take her seriously and in fact were cheering her on waiting for her 'kracken' lawsuit to put Trump back into office.

They probably still do think everything she said was true, even though now she's claiming it was just 'political talk' and not real.  Amazing mental gymnastics indeed.

Do you still believe her claims of voter fraud, Action? Or do you think shes lying now? Which is it?

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: March 24, 2021, 03:11:07 PM »
Like I wrote.

A proven liar supporting other proven liars.

"Tell a lie often enough and they will eventually believe it."

What lie is this? You still haven't given a reason why anyone would go to the trouble of faking a simple talk with reporters on a lawn.

Please fill us all in, what lie is that covering up?  So far your only reasoning is that it must be a lie because they are all liars, which is circular reasoning at best.

Why would they spend all the time and money and involve dozens of people in a conspiracy, instead of just having Biden talk to some reporters?  What is the point in your conspiracy here?

8
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: March 23, 2021, 12:32:56 PM »
So it's easier to hire reporters to give a Biden stand in, then film Biden responding to that interview, then compositing it, then releasing it and having the fake reporter say it all happened?  That is simpler than actually doing the interview? Perhaps the word "simpler" means something different to you than the rest of us.
Yes.

I have a firm grasp on its meaning, whereas you do not.

You can stop referring to yourself as "us," unless of course you have numerous alts, which wouldn't be surprising.

He is likely referring to "us" as the group of people here who think that it's not simple to film and photograph an interview from multiple angles and green-screen it all together with a separate group of fake reporters, and it is simple to just stand in front of real reporters and answer questions.

You may think involving dozens of people in a conspiracy to fake an interview for no good reason is simple, many of us do not.
The reporters were standing in front of him and their mics were in front of him also.

Having seen numerous examples of green screen effects and what happens when it goes wrong leads to the simple conclusion it was all a green screened TV production, aired a lot of the 5 o'clock news feeds.

No conspiracy necessary when they are all complicit.

I realize that doesn't sit too well with you.

Everyone knowingly involved in a conspiracy is complicit, that's what a conspiracy is, a group of people all being in on it. ::)

So let me get this straight, the entirety of your evidence that a press conference filmed from several angles with dozens of reporters and cameramen and witnesses is fake because... you know a green screen when you see it.  Clearly there can be no other simpler explanation because you, the expert on green screens have declared it so.

Sorry, the "rest of us" that don't see conspiracy theories everywhere disagree with you.

9
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why does the moon have impact craters?
« on: March 23, 2021, 12:15:21 PM »
Nothing magical about it, it's a natural, logical consequence of a large body like the moon rotating as it orbits.  Tidal forces and friction will eventually slow it's rotation until it is tidally locked as it is now. It's all very simple and easy to understand, actually.

Last I checked it was absolutely an anomaly, with no other observable or observed examples.  We can observe things that appear to have their own moons, but none are "locked" by magic.  Of course you can speculate that that is due to lack of liquid water, but this is a wild speculation (on top of centuries of them).

Why would I speculate that the lack of water is a reason?  I never said any such thing, please refrain from such obvious straw-man arguments.

As for there being no other examples, there are.  Mercury is tidally locked with the sun.

Pluto and Charon are tidally locked.

All the large moons of Jupiter are tidally locked.

In fact, it looks like tidally locked moons is quite common, not at all an anomaly. Please cite your sources if you are going to insist otherwise. Where exactly are you checking?

Quote
I'm not aware of any modern astronomers who have a problem with tidally locked bodies and how they become that way.  Which astronomers are you referring to?

It's not about the tidal locking, it's about the impact craters.  There would be expected to be far fewer (especially large ones) as the face (presumed to be riddled with them) is always towards the earth.  So the musing goes.  Astronomy is (largely, not entirely) pseudoscience, as you know.

I asked which modern astronomers are claiming this, do you have any names or sources?

As for the impact craters, are you aware of how far the moon is from the Earth?  At 250,000 miles away, the Earth would only block a tiny, tiny fraction of any asteroids coming at the near side.  This is only a problem if you don't understand the scale and angles involved. 

Again, please cite your source of modern astronomers claiming the near side of the moon should have less impact craters due to the Earth getting in the way. Where are you reading this?

10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: March 23, 2021, 11:36:08 AM »
So it's easier to hire reporters to give a Biden stand in, then film Biden responding to that interview, then compositing it, then releasing it and having the fake reporter say it all happened?  That is simpler than actually doing the interview? Perhaps the word "simpler" means something different to you than the rest of us.
Yes.

I have a firm grasp on its meaning, whereas you do not.

You can stop referring to yourself as "us," unless of course you have numerous alts, which wouldn't be surprising.

He is likely referring to "us" as the group of people here who think that it's not simple to film and photograph an interview from multiple angles and green-screen it all together with a separate group of fake reporters, and it is simple to just stand in front of real reporters and answer questions.

You may think involving dozens of people in a conspiracy to fake an interview for no good reason is simple, many of us do not.

11
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Why does the moon have impact craters?
« on: March 22, 2021, 11:32:27 PM »
It is presumed that the moon has impact craters, much the same as the craters we find on earth are presumed to be caused by impact events (there is almost no reason to suspect this).

As the moon is magically locked to the earth, and we only see the one "side" of it - this explanation doesn't hold water - which has been pointed out by many astronomers over time.

It is again PRESUMED that the moon wasn't always magically locked to the earth the way it is now, but we have no evidence to support these assertions.  They are mythological in origin, not scientific.

Nothing magical about it, it's a natural, logical consequence of a large body like the moon rotating as it orbits.  Tidal forces and friction will eventually slow it's rotation until it is tidally locked as it is now. It's all very simple and easy to understand, actually.

I'm not aware of any modern astronomers who have a problem with tidally locked bodies and how they become that way.  Which astronomers are you referring to?

12
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: March 22, 2021, 02:47:40 PM »
Of course it is the simplest explanation.

There is no conspiracy here.

Filming Biden in a green screen from multiple angles, hundreds of photographs, a dozen reporters and crew and using CGI to place in a background making it all mach is a much more reasonable assumption than... he just talked to some reporters.

You seriously think THAT is the most reasonable, simplest explanation to a video of someone standing outside talking to people. Why would they even bother?

The conspiracy you are claiming is that dozens of CGI experts, producers, reporters, government officials, travel agents, the secret service, bystanders, witnesses and whoever is paying for it all being in on it.

Just a simple little conspiracy, sure.  ::)

As for lying... you do know Fox News went to court, and won the right to outfight lie to their viewers and order their hosts to knowingly lie as well?

13
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: President Joe Biden
« on: March 22, 2021, 12:27:09 PM »
He literally recreates the angles in the press conference. The mic sock has many small hairs so of course it looks blurry. How do you know he wasn’t near the front of the mic socks? Can you post a picture from an angle that allows for better depth perception and shows he was not close to them? The lower angle shot in the video I posted seems to disagree with you. You talking about what you think is credible isn’t evidence and your xenophobia towards Canada doesn’t help either.
Xenophobia for a country that sees fit to lock up pastors and attack their citizenry in their own homes seems a good stance to take.

The mic sock looks blurry simply because the entire thing was shot in front of a green screen.

Simplest explanation, which you all like to chime so frequently.

So you think that the simplest explanation is that they shot multiple videos from several angles on a green screen sound stage along with dozens if not hundreds of photographs and audio recordings and then used large amounts of CGI to create Biden walking, talking and interviewing outside and somehow getting dozens of people to agree to lie about being there including the guy holding the mic and the secret service and everyone else involved and all the witnesses and got this all done in record time... instead of just... filming him standing and talking outside.

You really think THAT is the simplest explanation?

Makes me wonder what you imagine a complex conspiracy would involve if this one is so simple. ???

14
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes
« on: March 19, 2021, 01:13:06 PM »

15
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: March 18, 2021, 02:04:36 PM »
Trump said the following, which for Trump is a huge step in the right direction but it's still awful.

"I would recommend it, and I would recommend it to a lot of people that don't want to get it. And a lot of those people voted for me, frankly. But, you know, again, we have our freedoms and we have to live by that, and I agree with that also"

Lets rephrase that.

"If you see someone having a heart attack I would recommend calling 911 to save their life, and I would recommend it to a lot of people that don't want to call 911. And a lot of those people voted for me, frankly. But, you know, again, we have our freedoms and we have to live by that, and I agree with that also"

It's just so hard for him to tell his supporters to do the right thing if it will affect his popularity. He almost managed it, but hard failed in the end. As seen by the reaction of his supporters here, who still flat refuse to do it.

Just for the record, if you see a family member having a heart attack, you should call 911. But if you just let them die, that's ok too. Because we have our freedoms.

16
Suggestions & Concerns / Re: Post limit on DMs
« on: March 18, 2021, 01:38:37 PM »
I cant imagine that you need to DM anyone before having 10 posts. Spend more time engaging publicly, quote posts you want specific responses to and you will be at 10 posts in no time.

I've created accounts on forums simply to PM a user who I wanted to reply to in private about something, either giving them information or asking a question.

I think if I had to make 10 fake posts firsts I'd simply not bother and never visit again.

17
In fact, I'm certain I've come across threads where posts have been edited and I didn't get flagged as unread.

I was pretty sure of the opposite, but maybe I am confusing it with the delete-and-repost switcheroo.

This confused me as well, until Pete explained that if you edit a post within a short time of the initial submission it won't show it's been edited or send a new notification.

18
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Just Watched
« on: March 06, 2021, 12:09:22 PM »
And now WandaVision is all over. It was great for the most part. I do still think that much of the technobabble and expository dialogue was unnecessary, especially in the fourth episode, and in general that the show was at its weakest when it was most conventional and "MCU-like," so to speak. I wanted more quiet, poignant scenes between Wanda and Vision, less quipping and expository technobabble. More Kathryn Hahn, less Kat Dennings. More "Ship of Theseus" philosophical musings, less extravagant CGI battles.

I also really disliked the show's presumption that Hayward was a villain for wanting to kill Wanda - not just a jerk, but an actual villain who needed to be physically defeated and sent to jail - and that the other side characters were totally right to defend Wanda and stop him from killing her. It's such blatant protagonist-centered morality. We in the audience like Wanda and don't want her to be killed, but that doesn't mean anything in-universe, where the only thing the characters know is that Wanda is holding a town full of people prisoner via a powerful and dangerous magic spell. Why was it so morally wrong to try and kill Wanda? Why did the show portray that as such an inherently villainous act? In fact, why was Hayward even arrested at the end anyway? Did he ever actually break the law or do something that wasn't simply his job?

Pietro being played by Evan Peters was a bullshit fake-out on the show's part, and I'm not using spoiler tags for that because of how inconsequential the role proved to be. They knew what they were implying by casting him as Pietro, and if they weren't willing to follow through with it, they shouldn't have cast him.

Yeah, I was really disappointed he didn't turn out to be pulled from an alternate universe as a prelude to trying to reintegrate the sectioned off mess the various shows and movies are. But maybe as someone said it was to test audience reaction to the idea. People reacted VERY favorably so they might do so in the future.

I also felt the villain was underdeveloped and, well, not villainy enough to get the reaction from the other characters.

He was trying to take out a supervillain who took over an entire town and was literally altering their bodies and minds, and with Rambo providing evidence this alteration was harmful and permanent.

I guess the real evil plot was putting Vision back together as a weapon or something but it wasn't really clear what was so bad about that either.  I mean, half the Marvel universe is someone the government built/put back together.

But aside from that, it was really well done.  It was a great story when not distracted by a few flaws.

19
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: March 04, 2021, 07:18:37 PM »
Looking through all the news sources I can find, they are all saying the same thing.  The artist that created it has admitted it was made in China, and they made up a story of it coming from Mexico to hide where it came from during the show.  Being in the news doesn't make it true of course, but I see no mention of the artist denying the China origin story. He certainly would have no problems getting the word out if it wasn't true.

As it stands, all the available information points to it being made in China.

If someone can find a source where the artist says differently I'd like to see it.

20
Flat Earth Community / Re: A working map of the Flat Earth
« on: March 04, 2021, 12:17:23 PM »
JSS: "I drove all across the US multiple times, so I can verify the distances in miles for all surveying projects are correct"

No wonder people question your integrity.

You seem to have completely misunderstood what I said, you should read it again more carefully until you understand my point. You sound very confused.

If you would like to provide a counterexample of where you drove a route that should be 1,000 miles and it was off by hundreds of miles, please do so.  I'm sure we would all be very curious to hear where your direct, personal experience of how map distances are wrong from your travels, and we could then verify your claim.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 38  Next >