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 ... 347  Next >
1
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes
« on: September 26, 2020, 10:35:32 PM »









2
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 11:24:46 PM »
Trump is having three rallies today in three different states.



Joe Biden is having three naps today.

Quote
Yes, they refused to give private information to the federal government including info that is not relevant.  Like convictions, military history, social security numbers, date of birth, etc...  All of which they have anyway in other federal agencies.  So why ask for it?

Federal agencies don't have PII for voting records. To detect fraud you need to know information about who voted. There is no way to check anonymous data.

Quote
Simple question: if Obama wanted that info, would you want your state to provide your info to him?

I wouldn't care if the Obama whitehouse wanted the last four digits of social security numbers for CA voting records, like Trump's white house asked for, to detect possible voting fraud. Any actionable items from them would need to be verifiably real with the state records, obviously. I would prefer that the federal government regularly checks for voting fraud in a transparent manner, rigorous enough for a court of law. I can see why the democrats would care about hiding the possible voter fraud of their constituents, however.

3
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Joe Biden is winning by a landslide
« on: September 25, 2020, 05:46:44 PM »

4
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 06:22:14 AM »
It just sounds to me that you can't really explain to me why a politician should accept voter fraud.

And some smarmy answer for the other question. The federal investigation Trump initiated proves that he did care about voter fraud. The states refused to participate and it was closed. End of.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/trump-dismantles-voter-fraud-commission-heres-what-the-controversial-group-did

States refused to cooperate, which is different than not finding anything. Just more media dishonesty.

5
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 05:53:52 AM »
Why not quote what he said?

Quote
Chris Wallace: Can you give a direct answer you will accept the election?

President Donald Trump: I have to see. Look, you — I have to see. No, I'm not going to just say yes. I'm not going to say no, and I didn't last time either.

We want to make sure that the election is honest. And I'm not sure that it can be. I don't know that it can be with this whole situation, unsolicited ballots

Looks like you were being dishonest. I don't see anything about mail-in ballots being invalid as a rule. He has his doubts on the practice of sending out millions of unsolicited ballots.

Trump said that he has to see how it plays out and there might be voter fraud. If there is voter fraud he's not going to accept it. And why should he? You just implicitly admitted that a politician shouldn't accept voter fraud.

I think your information is not quite up to date.  This is the most recent incident that I'm referring to.



Here he is stating, without any evidence, that the democrats are committing a massive amount of voter fraud.

Sounds like he said the same thing. He can't commit because there might be voter fraud. He has to see.

You clearly agreed that if there is voter fraud then a politician should not accept the results of the election, and that this was the proper course of action.

This has nothing to do with whether accusations of potential fraud are accurate or not. If there is voter fraud a politician should not accept those results. You agreed with that implicitly, and that's what Trump said he would do.

Trying to turn this into anything else is just dishonesty. Deflecting is dishonest. If there is fraud then those results should not be accepted. Simple.

6
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 05:49:59 AM »
I did not claim that there was voter fraud in any particular election. I asked you guys simple questions which you are unable to answer and can only deflect on.

If there is voter fraud, why should a politician accept it?

Can you list out which politicians would accept voter fraud?

Please answer directly.
Donald J. Trump.
He would accept it if it means he won.
In fact, many politicians would accept it if they won and got away with it.  Why do you think they fight so hard against such accusations?  Trump stated, as a fact, that the 2016 election had fraud yet the investigation found nothing and closed without much of a peep.

So either
A) Trump lied.
B) He found some but he and republicans accepted it.

If you aren't going to answer my questions then I can only assume that you are accepting my position. No politician is going to accept voter fraud, so faulting Trump with that is just silly and dishonest.

Why can't you guys just be honest and make good arguments that you can double down on successfullly? If you don't have a good argument in your pocket then you should just keep your mouths shut.

7
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 05:40:07 AM »
Why not quote what he said?

Quote
Chris Wallace: Can you give a direct answer you will accept the election?

President Donald Trump: I have to see. Look, you — I have to see. No, I'm not going to just say yes. I'm not going to say no, and I didn't last time either.

We want to make sure that the election is honest. And I'm not sure that it can be. I don't know that it can be with this whole situation, unsolicited ballots

Looks like you were being dishonest. I don't see anything about mail-in ballots being invalid as a rule. He has his doubts on the practice of sending out millions of unsolicited ballots.

Trump said that he has to see how it plays out first to say whether he will accept it and there might be voter fraud. If there is voter fraud he's not going to accept it. And why should he? You just implicitly admitted that a politician shouldn't accept voter fraud.


8
I read the article, it doesn't explain how the light sets into the Flat Earth it just says it does. That's what I would like to know.

There are links to the current theories in the article.

9
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 05:24:45 AM »
I did not claim that there was voter fraud in any particular election. I asked you guys simple questions which you are unable to answer and can only deflect on.

If there is voter fraud, why should a politician accept it?

Can you list out which politicians would accept voter fraud?

Please answer directly.

10
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 05:05:25 AM »
Sounds like you deflected as predicted. The question was if there is voter fraud, why should Trump accept it?

Dem states refused to participate with the federal voter fraud inquery, so don't ramble and deflect about something which does not directly address the matter. There could be many reasons for why this or why that. All deflection. Again, it's a simple question, and has nothing to do with evidence or what might or might not of happened in the past.

If there is voter fraud, why should a politician accept it?

Are you going to dishonestly deflect again or will you admit that no politician is going to accept voter fraud?

11
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 04:35:57 AM »
Disingenuous Reporters: Will you accept the results of the election?

Trump: We'll see. There might be voter fraud.

Disingenuous Reporters: REEEEE! Trump refuses to accept results of election REEEEE!!

You: REEEEE!! Trump refuses to accept. REEEEE!!

Funny puppet. Please provide a list of politicians willing to accept massive voter fraud.

You will deflect, claiming that the risk of voter fraud is low or some dishonest thing like that which does not directly address the matter. But this is not what was surmised. If there is voter fraud Trump won't accept it. So again, please list out the politicians who will accept voter fraud. 

Obviously no one is going to willingly accept voter fraud. So your arguments just end up looking weak and stupid, originating from the disingenuous reporters you are parroting. Don't argue for something that you can't double down on.

14
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: September 25, 2020, 12:09:24 AM »
Uhhh... How do you know how Trump will behave when/if he loses?  He hasn't given any indication whatsoever that he is committed to the peaceful transition of power and has given indications that he is opposed to it.  Your position isn't supported by reality.

At the end of the day Trump would step down because all things considered he is a weak, reactive leader who has neither the cleverness, the influence nor the dedication to pull off a regime change. His mumbling rhetoric about sticking around past an election loss is not worth serious consideration and it certainly isn't worth writing entire articles about.

I hope you are right, but that’s just a hypothesis. He is the first president not to be committed to democracy in his statements and that should be alarming to his supporters.

Considering that Trump's main opponent is voter fraud, I don't see why Trump should accept the results of the election if fraud is apparent.

15
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes
« on: September 23, 2020, 06:48:59 PM »







16
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lake Minnewanka
« on: September 22, 2020, 08:23:00 PM »
https://thebanffblog.com/lake-minnewanka/

Quote
You have a wide range of options for boating on Lake Minnewanka that include canoes, motorboats, kayaks or even stand up paddleboards. If you’re seeking more of a challenge or to experience canoeing on open water head to Lake Minnewanka. The large lake is well known for its “swells” that occur when the wind gust picks up. More advanced paddlers with their own canoes can plan multi-day camping trips along the lake.

So we have lake known for swells, at a time when the waters are a bit choppy (windy). And the camera is 10 cm from the water. 

It surely must be the curvature of the earth hiding things in the distance when placing the camera close to the water surface ::)

17
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lake Minnewanka
« on: September 22, 2020, 05:02:48 PM »
10 centimeters is 3.93 inches. The image of the setup is different than the experiment.

All of the sinking takes place when the camera is down near the water surface.

8:51:

8:52:

8:53:

8:54:

8:55:

8:56:

8:57:


Compared to the high position:


18
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lake Minnewanka
« on: September 22, 2020, 03:59:53 PM »
The example shots does not reflect the actual measurements. The example set-up has a boulders and rocks in the way:







This image looks like the camera is practically in the water. He says 10 centimeters, so it's at 10 centimeters. His folly of trying to get as close as possible to the water surface discredits his observations of the sinking effect seen as due to the curvature of the earth.

19
Flat Earth Theory / Re: Lake Minnewanka
« on: September 22, 2020, 03:39:56 PM »
This video is a ridiculous gull. He puts the camera down to 10 centimeters above the water level. Waves and swells exist, and they don't need to be as large as whatever they are blocking in the background to block those objects, just as one can hold out a dime to obscure an elephant.

20
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Terrible Political Memes
« on: September 21, 2020, 10:00:47 PM »







Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 347  Next >