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 - AATW

Pages: < Back  1 ... 136 137 [138] 139 140 ... 236  Next >
2741
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 08, 2020, 12:59:30 PM »
Yes, they did vote for that administration but my point is Trump was more than just the poster boy and "lead singer".
The personality and views of the president are absolutely a part of the polices that are made while they're in power.

While we're here, I don't know whether to laugh or cry at this:


2742
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
« on: January 07, 2020, 11:36:03 AM »
The public is never ever ever wrong. It is infallible. That's the starting point of democracy. The instant you stray from that, you're fucked. You can't say "the public are stupid and can't be trusted to decide on Brexit" and also "the public are smart and chose me as a representative to tell you how stupid they are".
Disagree.
The starting point for democracy is "One man, one vote" (or woman these days - political correctness gone mad, I tells ya).
So the premise is that everyone has a right to an opinion (true) and that everyone's opinion is equally valid (false - obviously false).
I shouldn't need to labour this point but if you're the sort of person who, say, thinks that were the earth a ball then the oceans would go flying off into space like water off a rapidly spinning tennis ball then your opinion about the shape of the earth is not as valid as someone who has a degree in physics and understands a bit about angular velocity.
People have different experience and knowledge. Of course everyone's opinion doesn't (or shouldn't) carry equal weight.

When it comes to a General Election then I'd suggest there's no "right" answer. Would I have preferred Corbyn to Johnson or Hillary Clinton to Trump? Probably, but in neither case was it clear that either of them were particularly good options. Increasingly it feels like we're choosing the "least bad" option.

When it comes to individual issues though...FFS don't ask "the people". We shouldn't decide to leave the EU because of a vague feeling that we are "British". I'd suggest we can be British and be in the EU anyway, the French certainly don't seem to have an identity crisis in terms of being French and they're in the EU. Nor do younger people in the UK. And, for balance, we shouldn't stay in the EU because some people think the sky will fall in.

The decision about this should be made based on careful analysis of the benefits and drawbacks of being in or out of the EU, not because John in Scunthorpe doesn't like the "bloody Frogs". You're right, it's not the electorate's fault they were asked, Cameron's at fault for that. He gambled on the Scottish Referendum, won that and went double or quits on this one. The dick.

I see you brought up sovereignty. To be honest, that was an argument that briefly swayed me. But then I realised something - we are sovereign. Any power we have ceded to the EU we have chosen to do so and we can take back if we choose to. How did we start the process of leaving the EU? Who did we have to go to war with? No-one, we just had to write a letter. The process of leaving is complicated but we didn't have to go to war because we are sovereign, being in the EU wasn't imposed on us. We chose to join, we can choose to leave. And we have. Is it the right decision? Time will tell. But if it is then it wasn't made for the right reasons and it wasn't made by the right people. People who know what they're talking about should be making these decisions. They might still bugger it up of course just like a doctor can misdiagnose people, but they've got a better chance of getting it right than hair-dressers.

2743
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
« on: January 06, 2020, 08:46:31 PM »
Thork:
I want to pick you up on this, because everyone's vote is equally valid and so are their opinions.

Also Thork, in the same post
Quote
You don't go to a politician for a haircut. Why would you go to the nations hairdressers and ask them what trade policy we should follow?

Dude, you literally just explained my point while disagreeing with it.
Slow handclap for you.

2744
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
« on: January 06, 2020, 02:04:42 PM »
Been meaning to reply to this for a while.
I pretty much agree, it was a feeling. The UK has always had a feeling that we are separate - even superior - to most other nations.
The British people did answer that but it's notable that it was close and you know what, in polls a few years before the Referendum this was not a subject which preoccupied people. It was only when certain high profile politicians and the media started whipping people up it suddenly became something people decided was important.
It's also notable that younger people generally do feel European, they've grown up in a multi-cultural society and they seem to mostly like it. Younger people overwhelmingly wanted to Remain.
It's not about thinking I'm "better" than anyone but it's obviously bollocks to pretend that everyone's opinion about things is equally valid.
If my car breaks I call a mechanic. If I'm ill I go to a doctor.
I don't start a FB poll and take whatever action wins, because most people don't have the expertise to know what's wrong and tell me what to do to fix it.

Anyway, it's done now. I doubt the sky will fall in. But I don't think it'll make us much positive difference as people like Johnson and Farge were pretending.

2745
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 06, 2020, 01:41:52 PM »
Trump is America's spokesperson. Like Tony the Tiger or the Michelin man. A face for the nation. That's it.

Bullshit.
And proof it's bullshit is that Trump has spent the last few years either undoing or trying to undo a lot of what Obama did.
Was Obama simply America's spokesperson?
If so then why is the whole machine underneath Trump now doing completely the opposite of what it did under Obama?
I'm simplifying somewhat but withdrawing from the Paris agreement, the billions set aside to "build a wall", repealing "Obamacare", these things all come from Trump. Of course he has a whole civil service under him but the president absolutely sets the tone and direction.
Were that not so why would it be so different under Obama and Trump?

And it's not envy, it's just a fact that Trump thinks he is the expert on every subject when the reality is he knows very little.
Most of what he says is demonstrably not true.
And he's in charge of the most powerful country in the world.
Will it affect you and me? Probably not. But it does affect a lot of people. Just because you're not one of them, doesn't make it OK.

2746
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: Trump
« on: January 06, 2020, 11:07:57 AM »
And that the world will keep on turning and it won't effect most people's lives one jot.

I think what you mean is it won't affect you. And, you know what, it hasn't really affected me either.
But that doesn't mean it won't affect a lot of people and is, in general, a bad thing.
He's the poster boy for Dunning-Kruger, he thinks he understands things a lot better than he actually does and that is potentially dangerous when he has the power to make policies which affect people.

2747
Flat Earth Media / Re: ISS Lens correction
« on: January 06, 2020, 09:54:12 AM »
I'm not sure what your point is in that video but at points the horizon is actually concave so there's clearly some lens distortion going on.

2748
Flat Earth Community / Re: More fake moon landing proof.
« on: January 03, 2020, 07:42:47 AM »
*sigh*

Yes, they did have some cameras on tripods for taking wide pictures of the scene and for film of the lander taking off from the moon’s surface. For taking pictures of each other, like in the example from the original post, they used chest mounted ones.

2749
Flat Earth Community / Re: More fake moon landing proof.
« on: January 02, 2020, 10:57:12 PM »
I didn't "make it" grainier, that's literally a screenshot from your own article.
And they didn't use tripods, they used chest-mounted cameras, if you don't even know that then it shows how little research you've actually done into this before declaring it all fake without basis.

2750
Arts & Entertainment / Re: Star Wars Episode IX: The Rise of Skywalker
« on: January 02, 2020, 01:36:02 PM »
I liked it. None of it makes much sense of course or stands up to scrutiny.
"Oh, he just crashed his spaceship at high speed, he's definitely dead...oh, no, he's fine. Oh, now he's been thrown off a cliff, that's the end of...oh, no, he's fine again". And of course they just happen to land at the exact right spot on an entire sodding planet to meet the people they need to.
ScreenRant points out all these things in a very amusing way (contains spoilers, obviously):



But you could probably do that for any of the films in the series. If you don't think about it too hard it's enjoyable enough, has lots of references for the fans and wraps up the main series of films nicely.

2751
Flat Earth Community / Re: More fake moon landing proof.
« on: January 01, 2020, 11:00:25 AM »
Seriously? That’s it?

This fuzzy image is “proof”, is it?



I guess you’ll see whatever suits your agenda, but spoiler: it’s the other astronaut.

Google the “face on Mars” pictures where a fuzzy picture which looked like a face was thought to be evidence of civilisations on Mars, newer better resolution pictures of the same place on Mars show it’s just a rock formation.

This is ludicrous confirmation bias, it’s a fuzzy spec on an image. To say it’s “clearly” a stagehand or someone not in a spacesuit, given the resolution and lack of clarity is nonsense.

2752
Philosophy, Religion & Society / Re: A question to our resident Brexiteer
« on: December 18, 2019, 11:35:04 PM »
Ha. He lost me at "wisdom of crowds".
Just because a lot of stupid people think the same way, that doesn't make it wise.
And yes, yes, not everyone who voted to Brexit is an idiot just like not everyone who voted to Remain is a clever clogs.
But look at the things which are popular. That video is from The Sun, one of the most popular papers in the UK.
Look at the TV Shows which are popular (Mrs Brown's Boys, anyone?!).
That doesn't shout to me that we have a well educated population who make careful decisions about how they vote on things based on extensive research into the matter at hand.

2753
it is simply the MASS of the propellant being ejected out of the rear of the rocket that is causing the rocket to move in the opposite direction. Please note, it is not necessary for the MASS of the propellant to be on FIRE...
But it is necessary for the mass of the propellant to be ejected at very high speed if you're going to move a sodding great rocket, as opposed to a small balloon. What's one way of eject stuff at very high speed? How about if you ignite some fuel in a chamber and leave a hole in one end? What happens? Effectively you get an explosion in the chamber which creates a lot of heat and pressure, you get a very high speed jet coming out of the hole so the chamber moves quickly in the other direction.
I'm simplifying but that's basically how rockets work.

Quote
Well, no...First, anything introduced to a vacuum? Like gas from these these rockets?
Right...results in no vacuum.

A little bit of gas will go into the chamber, yes. But look at the pressure gauge after the rocket has gone off. The needle barely moves.
The chamber is big compared to the amount of gas the rocket will produce, it's still effectively a vacuum.

Quote
No, you didn't explain why he was tapping it.

I posted a link explaining why people do that. I also posted stills from the video after her turned the pump on which clearly show the gauge is working and shows the pressure lowering when he turns the pump on.
You can watch the video yourself. And I look forward to the results of your experiment.

2754
Finally, tech is available to military and government FAR IN ADVANCE of general populace (i.e. DARPA).
This bit is probably true, but the whole logistics of faking 9/11 with holographic airplanes is stupid.

Look, the point here is this. Let's say the technology does exist. So how we determine the nature of reality then? How do we know anything is true?
If you're determined to believe that everything NASA and SpaceX does is a lie and you're going to call all the evidence which shows that they really are launching rockets into space as lies/hoax/fake/holograms or whatever then it's not a very productive discussion.

We are both entrenched in our views, the difference is I am entrenched because of the evidence, you are entrenched despite it.

2755
Now, it's controlled explosions...
LMMFAO!

Yes...
What do you think happens in your car?
https://www.explainthatstuff.com/carengines.html

Quote
The spark ignites the fuel-air mixture causing a mini explosion. The fuel burns immediately, giving off hot gas that pushes the piston back down. The energy released by the fuel is now powering the crankshaft.

The other things you mention no, those are not controlled explosions. Stop straw manning.

Quote
Actually, no...multiple videos have been posted showing rockets work in the atmosphere...

Well no, they've been shown working in vacuum chambers. That demonstrates the principle that they can work in a vacuum, rockets aren't pushing against an atmosphere, they don't need to push against anything, that's not how they work.

Quote
You haven't even addressed your bogus video with the sticky gauge...

Again, I don't know what there is to address. I've explained why he was tapping it but you can clearly see in the video the gauge is working and records the lowering pressure when he turns the pump on





2756
Where was this for Mariah Carey?
You can literally see the screen behind "her". And it's at night, on a stage.
In broad daylight projecting a hologram above a city in such a way that it can be seen properly from all angles and the sound matches up with the location of the image? Not a chance.


And that's before you get into the issues of the fact that these flights had flight numbers, were reported as having stopped contacting air traffic control and had passengers on board who are listed as victims of the attack. The logistics of faking all that make my head spin.

2757
Not one of you want to address the silly gauge video offered up...what is the scientifically established protocol in tapping a gauge, in terms of both number of taps administered, frequency of taps, force of taps, etc...

I genuinely don't know what you think there is to address here. On a manual gauge the needle can get stuck, tapping it can help check it's reading correctly. This was pretty much the first thing I found when I Googled it. What is your issue here?

https://www.reddit.com/r/todayilearned/comments/9v9nwx/til_when_you_tap_on_a_gauge_or_meter_to_see_if_it/

Quote
According to you rocket surgeons, the reason why a rocket works in a vacuum is that mass is being expelled and the rocket travels in the opposite direction of the expulsion.
Why does the mass need to be on fire for it to work?

It's about generating a force in one direction which causes an equal and opposite force in the other. Newton's third law.
Controlled explosions are a pretty efficient way of generating that force. It's basically how cars work too - the mixture of fuel and air is ignited, that explosion creates the force that ultimately makes the car move. If you can invent a way of generating significant amounts of force in a different way then you'll be a bazillionaire.

Quote
Rockets don't work in a vacuum.

Multiple videos have been posted showing quite clearly that they do. If you still refute this and want to do your own tests to demonstrate your position then I look forward to seeing the results.

2758
Why would I want to go watch holographic images?
And that, right there, sums up a lot of mentality I see from conspiracy theorists.
You believe something without providing any evidence but when you are shown evidence for being incorrect you just without basis dismiss it as fake.
It's a pretty dishonest way of debating.
But OK, as you said it - what is your evidence that rocket launches are holographic images which are good enough to fool people from multiple viewpoints and angles. Does that technology even exist?
Of course it exists.

https://www.fastcompany.com/90365452/hologram-concert-revolution-like-it-or-not-meet-company-touring-whitney-houston-buddy-holly

Did you even read that article?

Quote
Pepper’s Ghost was popularized by British scientist John Henry Pepper, who debuted his version in an 1862 stage production of Charles Dickens’s The Haunted Man and the Ghost’s Bargain. The basic mechanics involve a reflected image giving the illusion of someone or something in its physical form. For Tupac at Coachella, a live actor was made to look like Tupac using CGI. That performance was then projected downward on a reflective surface, which bounced the moving image onto a tightly pulled transparent foil screen.
It’s an effective illusion but not efficient for a touring schedule.
“There’s a lot of tension on the screen, like 1,200-pounds-per-inch kind of tension,” Tudor says. “So you have to set up an enormous structure around that to be able to deal with the tension on the screen. To do a full stage-size screen is doable. It’s just a big undertaking.”
The seminal development that has allowed Tudor to go beyond the legacy tech is when he found a company in the U.K. that develops a proprietary mesh screen that makes setting up and breaking down a set much faster. What’s also elevating Base’s productions is an Epson projector capable of producing 25,000 lumens of light (a standard 60-watt bulb produces about 800 lumens). Instead of the Pepper’s Ghost technique, Base projects directly onto the screen.
Base’s technology does have its limitations: There’s currently no way to project a volumetric image (which would represent a character in three dimensions), certain venue seats can’t be sold because of angle issues, projections can walk across the stage but can’t go up and down stairs, and so forth.

My emphasis.

The headline is that sure, some impressive technology exists which in a theatre setting where they can set up special screens and very powerful projectors can produce some convincing effects within certain limitations. But a holographic plane flying across a city with full sound effects which is convincing from any angle? No, that technology does not exist.

This is like me saying people can't fly and you saying "Have you seen David Copperfield?!". Sure, in the theatre he can do it. Next time you see him in the street ask if he can fly around a bit for you, see how that goes.

2759
What in the world is the big fascination with rocket launches? They go up, tilt over, get out of site and kerplunk in a vast ocean.
Please provide some evidence for this.

2760
https://archive.org/details/youtube-ek-Q0T9wK2g

Holograms in use .

9-11er  Huge surprise

Gotta say, this is an angle I'd not heard before. The idea that it wasn't real planes which went into the Towers despite the number of witnesses who saw and heard them fly over, the fact that another plane went into the Pentagon and another crash landed and all 4 planes have flight numbers and passenger lists.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Airlines_Flight_175

Leaving aside the ridiculous notion that the technology exists to produce a hologram which works from all angles and also makes a sound like a plane going over, the scale of conspiracy required to fake all the plane data makes my head spin.

And, again, this is the problem with the conspiracy theory mindset. You can prove anything to yourself if you ignore all the evidence showing you to be wrong or just dismiss it as fake. You can literally go and see a rocket launch. I have. But if you're crazy enough to call the launches and the videos of them as fake and then say that if you did go there then you'd only be watching a hologram then there's not much point in further discussion.

Pages: < Back  1 ... 136 137 [138] 139 140 ... 236  Next >