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 - timterroo

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22  Next >
"...millions of people who had seen nine agonizing minutes of murder were told by an autopsy report that they hadn’t."

When you watch wrestling do you scream "Stop, you're hurting him!!!" too?

It certainly is possible that the police are appropriately trained to apprehend and detain subjects, like those wrestlers are trained to wrestle each other.

If one wrestler begins choking and obviously can't breathe, do you think the match would continue as the wrestler goes limp and passes out?

There is also a stark difference between two trained wrestlers who have an agreed upon contract for what is going to happen, and a police officer pinning someone with dire health conditions against their will.

An interesting find, Floyd had tested positive for the novel coronavirus.

Are we going to blame cause of death on COVID too?

The following article seems to be a bit bias, but it also counters the point Tom is trying to make, which (biases aside) is still evidence that there are multiple sides to this story. It doesn't seem all that impossible that an organization (or even a mortuary) would lean toward a specific narrative in order to avoid backlash from public pressures. It happens all the time in politics - and this is a VERY political topic.

"...millions of people who had seen nine agonizing minutes of murder were told by an autopsy report that they hadn’t."

It is clear that Floyd is on drugs. He acts very erratic and complains of breasting distress while standing up in the open air. Autopsy report shows that he overdosed on fentanyl.

<video from above>

Again, so right. He's on drugs, let's put em out of his misery. Why should his life matter?

Let's go full commie and kill everyone who does the illegal drugs! Cuz drugs are bad 'mkay

I don't see a police killing. Floyd is saying that he is not able to breathe long before he is pinned to the ground.

<video above>

I can see the officers are clearly frustrated with the situation. George says he wants to comply, but resists all the way saying he's claustrophobic and can't breathe. Who wouldn't want to knock him over the head with a baton right then and there?

That is their job, however, is it not? To deal with this kind of behavior, however irrational, and to do it while PROTECTING the lives of the people they encounter - that is their obligation when they took their oath. To do any less is shameful and should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. If you can't take it, get the fuck out. We give police officers more power than we give ordinary citizens. This is why we do it - to PROTECT! Knowing that they will be put in situations that challenges their morality, character; their very essence. We expect that in these situations they will uphold the very thing we as a country bled and died for - sovereignty and independence. Police officers and any law enforcement - military included - are expected to be held to a higher standard. Actions like those officers who dealt with George Floyd is a disgrace to this country.

Click for bigger.

<image from above>

OK - you're right. Murdering George Floyd was completely justified. While we're at it, why don't we go ahead and eliminate all the scum in the world. Fuck everyone who doesn't walk your straight line and bow down to the man.

Trump will declare it a sham election if he loses and can blame corona, to which everyone will go 'But you said mail in voting was full of fraud.'

I'm sure if Trump loses, there will be people on the left saying the same thing. It's a no-win situation.

I hope everyone can and does vote.

I do not believe the Earth is flat as I have seen it curve during flight. I also have evidence of round earth due to HF having increased range as compared to UHV or VHF. I don't mean to be offensive, but am wondering why you guys believe what you do.  :)

May I ask you, how high have you flown? Typical airliners fly up to roughly 40k feet, correct?

I am a RE er and I can say that at that height, you cannot see the earth curve. You can see a round horizon, but that is really just a perspective effect, not a spherical arc.

Good news. Trump to send more federal law enforcement into cities.

Pardon me if I am incorrectly assuming, but it was my impression that you are in favor of less government/federal intervention in the lives of American's, not more???

How is this a good thing?

This whole discussion about panoramas is a diversion. The moon tilt illusion observably happens. Surely what is relevant is why it happens and whether its explanation is a point for (or against) FET or RET.

My take: it’s an optical illusion - the string experiment proves that. Yes, it looks like the string perpendicular to the terminator will shoot off into space but if you keep following the line you’ll see it doesn't. Like all optical illusions it’s an interesting insight into the way our brains process visual information, nothing more.

This isn’t a point for or against either model, in both models the moon is illuminated by the sun (ignoring some models where the moon is self illuminated which are, in my view, just silly).

The only potential point against FE with this illusion, once you understand that it’s an optical illusion, is that in FET would you actually expect the line perpendicular to the moon’s terminator to reach the sun? Wouldn’t EA mean the light should bend? Not sure about this. The Wiki claims that the illusion is a prediction of EA but I don’t understand this as when the illusion happens the light appears to bend the opposite way to the way EA predicts. Although, as discussed, it’s an optical illusion. The light isn’t really bending at all.

My only point about the picture being panoramic was simply to discredit it as evidence, and that (as Pete agreed), it is not a good example of what is happening in reality.

So, getting past the distorted picture, and back to the point:

If the best argument against the string experiment is that "There are several ways to hold the string up to the Moon, to connect to points in the sky", then at least Tom is admitting that it is possible to connect the string from the moon to the sun. We need no further evidence to assert that it is POSSIBLE that the moon is being illuminated by the sun AND that no bending of light is necessary.

According to the wiki, the person making the claim (the father), never actually observed the phenomenon himself. He only saw the photograph.

Keep reading:

"I'm very surprised that some of you have never noticed it before hence the suggestion asking me to post a video. This is a very common occurrence and I have seen it many many times as I go for my morning walk at about 8.00am every morning. I have never thought of actually tabulating my observations"

"The anomaly is acknowledged to exist with or without photos."

He's referring to a different observation altogether, not at all the same one as in the photograph. We have established that the moon tilt illusion does exist. So the man can possibly also see this illusion, but not to the extent as in the photograph.

The photo does not allow the observer to account for a 3 dimensional perspective. It is a false premise.

The 3 dimensional perspective is what allows the string experiment to work.

The angle in that photo is quite different than it is in reality. The sun and moon do not appear that close together in reality. In reality, during that particular moon-phase, you wouldn't be able to look at the moon and sun at the same time, but because of photographic technology that skews the photo, you can see them at the same time. Therefore, presenting this photo as evidence is disingenuous.

There might be some curving in that photos. The evidence is the text, however, that people regularly see this themselves.

The evidence is that they assert that they saw it themselves with or without photos. I would suggest actually reading the content.

You keep mentioning the evidence is the text. The evidence is that they "saw it for themselves".

According to the wiki, the person making the claim (the father), never actually observed the phenomenon himself. He only saw the photograph.

Below is a photo that my son took in Scotland showing the sun and moon at the same time. I immediately noticed this anomaly that the light illuminating the moon could not possibly come from the sun.

Therefore, the fact that the photograph is skewed from reality is a MAJOR conflict and discrediting factor. It probably explains why nobody but a single librarian responded to his inquiries.

The evidence is that they assert that they saw it themselves with or without photos. I would suggest actually reading the content.

First off, please don't make assumptions about what I have and have not read - I read the content.

Secondly, since when do you take someone's word as evidence of anything other than words? Many have told you they demonstrated the string experiment and found that the sun does in fact point to the moon - yet you have routinely dismissed this as evidence, why do you now believe (or expect someone else to believe) someone's word in this case?

Panoramics don't generally turn straight lines into curves, by the way, otherwise the horizon, powerlines, and all elements would show this warping.

Have you ever taken a panoramic photo? They absolutely DO change straight lines into curves, that's how it can grab 180 degrees and shrink it into 50.

Look closely at that picture, you will see that the fence and (more prevalently), the power lines do curve. Just hold a ruler or any straight edge up to the photograph. Seriously, give it a try on the power line. There is no easier way to argue this - and you won't convince anybody that it is straight.


Furthermore, you admit that it is a panoramic photo, but still somehow you want to use it as evidence? You might as well use "that everest photo" as evidence to support the claim made by the climber who asserts they see a curve on the horizon.

OK, here's an image I found in the wiki (

This is an attempt to prove that the sun can't possibly be pointing at the moon.

My first thought when looking at this picture, was very similar to the wiki's quoted text saying

I immediately noticed this anomaly that the light illuminating the moon could not possibly come from the sun.

There is something that doesn't appear right in this photo...........


It's a panoramic photo!

You can't make any determination one way or the other with it. It isn't representative of reality, whatsoever.


TBH, I would suggest removing it from the wiki because it undermines the point you are trying to make because the photo is skewed since it is panoramic - and it is probably obvious to most who view it that it is in fact a panoramic photo.

Flat Earth Investigations / How does FET explain comets?
« on: July 20, 2020, 05:21:13 PM »
Last week, the comet "Neowise" was visible from my location. I could see it each night in the western sky.

One observation I made was that its position relative to mine changed with the passing of time - it appeared to drop on the horizon, as would be expected, as the earth rotated away from it toward the east.

Each night as the sun set, it would then become visible once again in the same portion of the sky.

So, let's suppose the sun and moon rotate in a circular motion over the earth as it does according to FET, and let's assume the earth is not rotating as it does in RET.

How then, is it possible for the comet's location to appear to drop on the horizon as if it were "setting" and then appear back in its original location the next day? If the earth isn't rotating away from the comet and the comet is just moving away from us, it's almost like the comet is teleporting back to it's original location in the sky each night, yet it is clear that it fades each night, as though it is moving away from us, yet it's location gets reset?

If you assume FET, then it is apparent that this comet is not behaving in a way that makes any sense whatsoever. If you assume RET, the comet is moving in a way that is consistent.

So, how does FET explain the inconsistent behavior of the comet observed in this case?


The phase of the ball will change with small movements around the scene. If the camera is somewhere behind his hand looking up at the moon the ping pong ball is going to be a darker phase. If the camera is angled from lower, looking up, the phase of the ping pong ball is going to be pointing more upwards.

Take a small half-colored ball and see how easy it is to change phase in relation to a point in the distance with small movements.

This is another case of: "I used a highly variable close range perspective effect and got something to match. Proofz!!!"

It may not be definitive proof, but it IS proof that it is POSSIBLE that the sun is pointing at the moon just as RET says it should.

You seem to be arguing that it is possible to hold the laser pointer in such a way that it is parallel to the ground and seems to match the upward angle of the ascending lamps. You are making a perspective effect with the laser pointer by holding it in a special way and position from your eye so that the laser pointer's body seems to point upwards. But there are multiple ways to hold that laser pointer.

If you are standing in line with a row of lamp posts, for example, the line of lamps points straight upwards:

There are multiple way to angle the laser pointer to match that:

In the bottom position we have your method of specifically trying to make a perspective effect with the laser pointer body.

This is the problem we saw before, there is no way to know which angle is correct. Both positions can seem to match the scene. Only by using outside and pre-determined knowledge of the lamp configuration (or by using perspective clues), do we know which position matches the scene.

Since you can admit and believe that the laser pointer can be positioned parallel AND match the upward angle of the lamps, why is it so hard to believe this same effect is happening with the moon?

Since the Sun is on the horizon behind you, the only way to get a laser pointer to shine at it is if the laser pointer was being held parallel to the horizon and Earth surface.

Are you suggesting that if you hold a pencil out up against the Moon during the Moon Tilt Illusion when the Sun is on the horizon that it would always be aligned along the Earth surface and horizon?

I am suggesting that it is possible to position the laser pointer so that it will point toward the sun and be lined up perpendicular to the moons tilted shadow.

Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: July 11, 2020, 04:52:16 PM »
They gon' take our guns away!

Calm down Tom, you'll still be able to buy your AKs without any fuss at a gun show.
Brits mostly cannot believe the attitude of most Americans to guns. Of course you shouldn’t be able to buy stuff like this online.
I remember Obama lamenting the fact that you can’t even have a debate about this sort of thing. The merest hint that just maybe there should be some control over guns and the response is a hysterical THEY’RE GOING TO TAKE AWAY YOUR GUNS!!!1!!1!

I mean, personally I think they probably should take away your guns. So many incidents show you can’t be trusted with them. But that’s never going to fly. But surely some level of sensible debate on the issue without the hysterical response above.

I wholehearted believe in my right to bear arms. However, I am embarrassed by some Americans who tout their guns around and clearly do not know how to wield one.

Like this couple:

This is an example of someone who should not be allowed to own or possess a gun.

I also agree that any police officer should respond to all calls and find out what the issue and then act on it appropriately.

Firstly, the calls should be getting filtered so that officers are not being sent on spurious calls.

I think that idea could be a slippery slope. Who’s going to make that determination and what if they get it wrong?

Police should respond if they are called.

However if someone has made a spurious call, like some we’ve seen in the news lately, there should be strict penalties for it.

Also, I think we are mostly in agreement in this thread that police need to be better trained all around. This requires more funds, and/or redistribution of funds (not defunding) - supporting programs meant for education on different cultures, bias awareness, and deescalation tactics.

Say you hold out a laser pointer up against the moon like your short piece of string and get the laser pointer to point upwards. Assuming no atmosphere absorbency, if you could turn it on would its photons broadcast out into to space away from the earth or would they curve around on the celestial sphere and hit the sun on the horizon behind you?

That would depend.

You, the Moon and the Sun form three points of a triangle. A triangle is a planar figure.

If you look at the Moon, or the Sun, you are looking along this plane of the triangle. You're not looking above or below it.

If, while looking at the Moon, you hold string, rod, or laser point up such that it is perpendicular to the Moon terminator, then any of those will be in alignment with the side of the triangle, as viewed from your position behind the string, rod or laser line.

In order for your laser to point at the Sun, you need to hold it broadly parallel to the line of the triangle connecting Moon and Sun in order for it to point at the Sun. You could align it to miss the Sun, and it would still look as though it were perpendicular to the terminator from your viewpoint.

This is a good explanation of what I am trying (and miserably failing) to say.

Tom, the laser pointer has inspired me as well, so let me attempt to explain it this way:

If you hold the laser pointer out in front of you from a standing position, basically vertical to the ground and parallel to your body, you can line it up perpendicularly to the moons shadow and the laser beam will shoot up into the void of space.

If you angle the laser pointer towards yourself (on the plane of the triangle Tumeni mentioned), and point it up over your head (you might have to lay on the ground and hold the pointer parallel to the ground), you can still line it up to be perpendicular to the moons shadow and it will now point toward the horizon and sun.

This was also demonstrated by your cone example in which you can change the angle on one plane, and still be perpendicular on another plane.

Furthermore, if you can imagine a scenario where this is possible, you can imagine it is POSSIBLE that the sun's light is pointing along that path towards the moon.

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 22  Next >