1

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 24, 2023, 10:10:55 PM »

this shit doesn't move the needle for me at all. i couldn't give less of a fuck about trump paying daniels and then technically not recording it properly or whatever. who cares.

the motherfucker is literally on tape begging governors to fix the 2020 general. and then separately inciting a mob to try to overthrow the federal government and install himself as a fucking dictator. how about we try him for actual crimes that matter at all.

LOL!!!

No human being believes any of what you write.

And once again, you're proven wrong.
Does it ever tire you?

Being correct never tires me, thanks anyway.

2

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 24, 2023, 07:16:11 PM »

this shit doesn't move the needle for me at all. i couldn't give less of a fuck about trump paying daniels and then technically not recording it properly or whatever. who cares.

the motherfucker is literally on tape begging governors to fix the 2020 general. and then separately inciting a mob to try to overthrow the federal government and install himself as a fucking dictator. how about we try him for actual crimes that matter at all.

LOL!!!

No human being believes any of what you write.

3

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 24, 2023, 09:43:53 AM »

Has anyone bothered to check whether a county DA can prosecute a federal crime?

4

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 24, 2023, 08:28:40 AM »

...he's a shill and it's easier to shill to the GOP base.

All democrats are shills, of course.

It's possible that there is a conspiracy there, but it brings your first hand witness count from 1 to 0.

The payments to Stormy Daniels are not in dispute.  They happened whether there was an affair or not.  The NY investigation (imagine having to specify which criminal investigation is being referred to lol) is in to whether or not the payment violated campaign finance law.

Of course, you know this and are trolling.

Democrats do not get indicted for paying off women to keep silent.

A' la Trump's good buddy, Clinton...

Of course, you know this and are trolling.

5

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 06:22:27 PM »

It took awhile for Lackey to realize Trump is a liar, but hey, we got there.

Although, it may be the case that Trump's announcement caused plans to indict him to change, or that Trump was simply mistaken.

Trump is a lifelong democrat.

Lifelong pals of the Clintons.

Dogs and ponies.

6

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 03:52:12 PM »

I removed two of my replies to the offending parties here, who happen to believe everything they see on social media and in the news.

7

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 01:05:49 PM »

Did the "ARREST," happen?

Answer - NO

Does anyone know whether he posted the material?

Answer - NO

Just more "keep busy posting BS," tripe eaten up and repeated by the mindless.

8

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 11:51:04 AM »

https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1637938226437537792

Summary;
Trump didn't get arrested and more reporters than protestors showed up.

Guess Trump isn't popular enough to take off work to protest for anymore.

Summary: More fake news.

I didn't realize Trump was in the news profession. He was the one whining that he was gonna be arrested Tuesday.

And you were there in person hearing him say that?

And, even if he did say such a thing, you would believe him?

He literally posted it on Truth.
I think he even sent out emails.


So yes.  I believe he said such a thing.  And so did others.

Demonstrating a lot of people believe fake news is not really helping anything.

9

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 11:38:25 AM »

https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1637938226437537792

Summary;
Trump didn't get arrested and more reporters than protestors showed up.

Guess Trump isn't popular enough to take off work to protest for anymore.

Summary: More fake news.

I didn't realize Trump was in the news profession. He was the one whining that he was gonna be arrested Tuesday.

And you were there in person hearing him say that?

And, even if he did say such a thing, you would believe him?

10

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump

« on: March 23, 2023, 11:25:54 AM »

https://twitter.com/oneunderscore__/status/1637938226437537792

Summary;
Trump didn't get arrested and more reporters than protestors showed up.

Guess Trump isn't popular enough to take off work to protest for anymore.

Summary: More fake news.

11

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 20, 2023, 06:14:22 PM »

And on a clear day, with little swell or chop, lo and behold it’s still a clear line.

I really don’t understand how people can say it’s not.

You can keep making this false statement until the end of time (if you choose), but I have already pointed out why it is false.

Can you explain what you mean? Because I don’t think you have.

On a clear day with good visibility, the delineation between sea and sky is very easy to discern.

Have you lived on the coast? How often do you look out to sea on the average day?

Although I don't currently live on a shoreline of a major body of water, I have spent ample time there.

Fact of the matter is this: the traits of both mediums, such as color and reflectivity, are such that no one person can claim with certainty what it is they are looking at from such a distant point away.

Fact of the matter is?

Sorry, no, that’s your opinion.

No, it is fact.

Every seafarer and navigator would disagree.

Every seafarer and navigator know the traits of both mediums are identical in most instances when it comes to coloration.

Yes, at time, in poor visibility, one cannot distinguish the horizon. But on many other occasions it is very clear.

Are you saying that even when it is clear, you believe that the water continues on, effectively appearing above the horizon, but that it looks to us exactly the same as the sky?

I am saying no one knows what it is they are looking at from that distance.

12

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 18, 2023, 10:08:26 PM »

Yes, stack...

I can unequivocally state you have nothing to offer relevant to the op.

Wrong as usual.

13

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 18, 2023, 12:04:13 PM »

You cannot see curvature of the earth in that photo either.

That is according to RET dimensions as presented.

Again, just stop with the equivocation (and in this case), with the outright falsehoods.

I guess you and I are seeing two different things. It happens.

What RET dimensions are you referring to? I only ask because you seem to have a tendency to state something as unequivocal without providing anything to back it up. You know, just words, no substance.

And does crispness or fuzziness of the horizon line account for the observed dip of said line at altitude?

You are the RE expert, remember?

You come here spouting how the globe must exist because of math, yet ask me for the dimensions of the globe?

Anyway, the math dictates that even from the altitude of the Concorde, you were not able to see curvature.

Not high enough given the dimensions of the earth as stipulated by RE.

You are a smart guy, figure it out.

14

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 18, 2023, 08:14:08 AM »

You cannot see curvature of the earth in that photo either.

That is according to RET dimensions as presented.

Again, just stop with the equivocation (and in this case), with the outright falsehoods.

15

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 17, 2023, 11:28:55 PM »

There are multiple accounts of most RE adherents that curvature can be detected even at ground level

Do you have any relevant quotes from people to back this up?

An oldie but a goodie claim by AATW that no RE-er has ever claimed that curvature can be detected at ground level by the human eye...

yet...

Unsurprisingly, here he is (along with his choir) in this very thread, doing just that.

It seems that you are taking this out of context. You folks were talking about the curvature observed of the horizon behind the Concorde at a cruising altitude some 70k' feet above the earth.



AATW's comment was in regard to whether one can see the horizon line curve at ground level as you claimed REr's say they can see curvature at ground level. Even the OP opened up this thread with, "Okay I agree that curvature of the horizon from left to right is not visible from the surface of the earth."

Curvature is curvature.

Just stop with the equivocation.

There is no curvature.

16

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 17, 2023, 06:17:15 PM »

There are multiple accounts of most RE adherents that curvature can be detected even at ground level

Do you have any relevant quotes from people to back this up?

An oldie but a goodie claim by AATW that no RE-er has ever claimed that curvature can be detected at ground level by the human eye...

yet...

Unsurprisingly, here he is (along with his choir) in this very thread, doing just that.

17

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 16, 2023, 04:46:07 PM »

And on a clear day, with little swell or chop, lo and behold it’s still a clear line.

I really don’t understand how people can say it’s not.

You can keep making this false statement until the end of time (if you choose), but I have already pointed out why it is false.

Can you explain what you mean? Because I don’t think you have.

On a clear day with good visibility, the delineation between sea and sky is very easy to discern.

Have you lived on the coast? How often do you look out to sea on the average day?

Although I don't currently live on a shoreline of a major body of water, I have spent ample time there.

Fact of the matter is this: the traits of both mediums, such as color and reflectivity, are such that no one person can claim with certainty what it is they are looking at from such a distant point away.

18

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 11, 2023, 05:58:22 PM »

You are sadly wrong if you think the photo you present depicts a clear distinction, but it doesn't. Go ahead and point it out.

Ummm....  The dark blue area in the bottom half of the picture is the sea and the light blue area in the top half is the sky.  To my eyes, there is a pretty clear and distinct change from dark blue to light blue in the middle.

Ummm...the light blue under the clouds...what is that...water or sky...how do you know for sure...

19

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 11, 2023, 04:54:53 PM »

There is no clear distinction between the water and the sky.

You can never be sure of which is which from three miles away.

I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand or believe.

It's hard to understand or believe because it's obviously wrong.  If you can't see where the water ends and the sky begins in this photo, then I'm not sure how much more clear the distinction needs to be to satisfy you.

You are sadly wrong if you think the photo you present depicts a clear distinction, but it doesn't. Go ahead and point it out.

I'm also not quite sure why you're hung up on three miles.  Depending on your elevation, the horizon is often far more than three miles away.

I didn't introduce three miles into the discussion. RE adherents did.

Not hung up on it at all,  as I have no way of telling how far I can see out over open water if my eyes are just over 6 feet above the level where water meets the shore.

20

Flat Earth Theory / Re: Curvature of the Horizon

« on: March 11, 2023, 07:12:45 AM »

And yet there are other times where there is no gradient of color between the water and sky or reflectivity in either medium where the distinction is quite obvious.  Don't those situations count?

You have no way of knowing what situations are present at the moment of observation, given you are three miles away.

As for knowing the conditions three miles out to sea...  Well, it's a fairly trivial thing to have someone go three miles out on a boat and report those conditions back to you via phone or radio.

They are at their point, and you are at yours. They are looking at what things look like up close, not from three miles away. Things look different.

The conditions across the three or more miles (depending on your elevation) across the sea determines what kind of view of the horizon you will get.  If you can see a nice, crisp distinction between the water and the sky (horizon), then there is a pretty good chance that the conditions across those three or more miles are pretty favorable for such observations.  However, if you have any questions about the conditions between the your position and the three or more miles in question, then you should have a trusted associate get in a boat and go out three or more miles and report the conditions along the way.  Again, if the conditions are favorable along the way, then there's a pretty good chance that the view from the boat will be pretty much the same as the view from the shore.  I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand or believe.

There is no clear distinction between the water and the sky.

You can never be sure of which is which from three miles away.

I'm not sure why that's so hard to understand or believe.

Please stop making such obviously false statements.