Rahul Gandhi's hard work, 82 rallies performed in a few weeks
Read more news in Punjabi Language. Visit Rozana Spokesman.
Punjabi Newspaper Online
Punjabi News Epaper
hey, quick question: what the fuck??Hey not batman. Do an experiment that lends evidence to your hypothesis or shut the fuck up already. I already cursed myself the moment I first commented in this dumpster fire of a thread. If you can't perform an experiment that lends credence to your theory then for the sake of all that is decent, lock this fucking thread. If you're not going to do an experiment with your sextant that can be replicated by others and uses the well-established laws of physics and geometry, you should just shove it up your ass, where you pulled this whole notion from in the first place. You're saying the sun is 32 miles away? Hell son, it should be easy to rent some sort of transportation to get there and prove it. So just do it already. Don't say peep until you come back. The dipshit gimp is back! How about an experiment that we can observe, measure, and repeat that proves we are on a ball. Will your answer be the same as last time where you copped out like the gimp you are? Well aside from livestreams of earth from space and the millions of pictures, also observing stars at night or eclipses. Yes there are some other experiments you can perform yourself. Eratosthenes did one with 2 holes and their shadows but retards don't accept it because it assumes the sun is far away, however 3 holes far away apart will prove the earth is not flat very easily by measuring the angles of the shadows. You can google more experiments. Trust video's as scientific proof - logic fail - do you believe all the movies you watch? "livestreams of earth from space" Trust pictures as scientific proof - logic fail - are pictures of unicorns real? "millions of pictures" Looking at the ceiling to determine the floor - logic fail - selenelion eclipse "observing stars at night or eclipses" Neil Tyson Degrass debunks your 3 holes theroy - See youtube interview with Tyson How did you measure the suns distance? Can you please provide us with your experiment and measuring device. Remember you have been calling for mathematical proof (even though math proves nothing) so throw a little substance in next time. ''Trust video's as scientific proof - logic fail - do you believe all the movies you watch?'' Do you believe Trump exists even if you have never seen him in person? ''Neil Tyson Degrass debunks your 3 holes theroy - See youtube interview with Tyson'' You mean this one, where he explains it?? https://youtu.be/hLPPE3_DVCw?t=248Don't forget about this joe, you shill liar. |
|
|
|
'' Why any god at all? Why not super intelligent aliens, etc etc.
I think Astargath, if we are to say this world was created by super intelligent aliens, it begs the question, "where do these super intelligent aliens come from?" the word "God" is given as a term to mean "the First Cause/Creator" who is eternal and has always existed Yes the word ''god'' has that definition, which is an invented definition, just like an unicorn. God begs the question just as much as super intelligent aliens. Where does he come from? Then religious people invent some more and say, oh he was always there, as if they knew that, of course they don't. |
|
|
|
Badecker, I read your discourse on man's free will to choose evil over good. It was well-written, thanks!
Some people choose evil over good, this is a fact of life. How can we blame God for evil existing? Either we are created as robots who can do no harm and live in an evil-free world (what would be the point), or we are created as human beings with free will but the price we pay is evil existing among us for we can choose evil whenever we want to.
To be fair, the concept of God is extremely difficult to imagine. How can a being exist forever with no beginning? Infinity is so hard to grasp, it is much easier for me to believe in something that has a beginning and an end.
We do all kinds of things with microbes. They react in a Petri dish. But they never know what in the world is really going on. We make robots and AI. But aren't we really complex robots? Why would one think that a Being that is so great that It can make a universe easier than we can build a house, is impossible? Nature suggests such a being, way more than it suggests any spontaneous happening.  Nothing is impossible for God. What I was saying is that the difference between us and robots is that we can make free choices to do evil or do good. Robots that are programmed to always choose good can not do evil. Well, scientifically it's not clear whether we actually have ''free choice''. Everything could be deterministic. Badecker himself said so. PD: You still didn't answer badecker. |
|
|
|
4) (UNTAGGED) (last update: 14th of May) This user not only translates in German, Dutch, Romanian, French and Croatian, but is also a ban evader: Reference. Not sure whether this is enough go kick him off this forum, but I hope it is. I didn't check other accounts, but this one translated threads using automated tool(s). Original: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4481485.0TMN is a cryptocurrency developed especially for fast and safe transactions, provided
by a new system of tiered masternodes, Translation: https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4481717.msg40261914#msg40261914TMN je kriptoturna razvijena posebno za brze i sigurne transakcije, pod uvjetom
po novom sustavu višeslojnih maslina, Maslina == olive  provided by a new system of tiered olives
Original https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4426988.0- Blockchain launch ✔ Translation https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4629960.msg41839550#msg41839550- puštanje blok-lanca ✔ Blok lanac == blockchain 
Are all these accounts banned? I don't want to waste time if they are. I can confirm that all the Romanian translations were bad. |
|
|
|
Rahul Gandhi's hard work, 82 rallies performed in a few weeks
Read more news in Punjabi Language. Visit Rozana Spokesman.
Punjabi Newspaper Online
Punjabi News Epaper
hey, quick question: what the fuck??Hey not batman. Do an experiment that lends evidence to your hypothesis or shut the fuck up already. I already cursed myself the moment I first commented in this dumpster fire of a thread. If you can't perform an experiment that lends credence to your theory then for the sake of all that is decent, lock this fucking thread. If you're not going to do an experiment with your sextant that can be replicated by others and uses the well-established laws of physics and geometry, you should just shove it up your ass, where you pulled this whole notion from in the first place. You're saying the sun is 32 miles away? Hell son, it should be easy to rent some sort of transportation to get there and prove it. So just do it already. Don't say peep until you come back. The dipshit gimp is back! How about an experiment that we can observe, measure, and repeat that proves we are on a ball. Will your answer be the same as last time where you copped out like the gimp you are? Well aside from livestreams of earth from space and the millions of pictures, also observing stars at night or eclipses. Yes there are some other experiments you can perform yourself. Eratosthenes did one with 2 holes and their shadows but retards don't accept it because it assumes the sun is far away, however 3 holes far away apart will prove the earth is not flat very easily by measuring the angles of the shadows. You can google more experiments. Trust video's as scientific proof - logic fail - do you believe all the movies you watch? "livestreams of earth from space" Trust pictures as scientific proof - logic fail - are pictures of unicorns real? "millions of pictures" Looking at the ceiling to determine the floor - logic fail - selenelion eclipse "observing stars at night or eclipses" Neil Tyson Degrass debunks your 3 holes theroy - See youtube interview with Tyson How did you measure the suns distance? Can you please provide us with your experiment and measuring device. Remember you have been calling for mathematical proof (even though math proves nothing) so throw a little substance in next time. ''Trust video's as scientific proof - logic fail - do you believe all the movies you watch?'' Do you believe Trump exists even if you have never seen him in person? ''Neil Tyson Degrass debunks your 3 holes theroy - See youtube interview with Tyson'' You mean this one, where he explains it?? https://youtu.be/hLPPE3_DVCw?t=248 |
|
|
|
Who proved the multi dimensional spaghetti god doesn't exist?
No one, unless there were spaghetti angels that would tell you. You have a since of humor btw But if we are going to analyze it. Spaghetti were made out of something(milled wheat and water). By that said somebody or there is a being who created the spaghetti. Now if we can relate it to the issue of god's existence and the issue of life's essence is it just a common sense to think that there is a being who created everything makes sense? If you were talking about the flying spaghetti monster gospel that i cannot answer tho '' Now if we can relate it to the issue of god's existence and the issue of life's essence is it just a common sense to think that there is a being who created everything makes sense?'' Not necessarily common sense but it's definitely not crazy to think some being could have created us. I personally never rejected that possibility, however, why does it have to be your particular god and not the others? Why any god at all? Why not super intelligent aliens, etc etc. |
|
|
|
Badecker, I read your discourse on man's free will to choose evil over good. It was well-written, thanks!
Some people choose evil over good, this is a fact of life. How can we blame God for evil existing? Either we are created as robots who can do no harm and live in an evil-free world (what would be the point), or we are created as human beings with free will but the price we pay is evil existing among us for we can choose evil whenever we want to.
To be fair, the concept of God is extremely difficult to imagine. How can a being exist forever with no beginning? Infinity is so hard to grasp, it is much easier for me to believe in something that has a beginning and an end.
We do all kinds of things with microbes. They react in a Petri dish. But they never know what in the world is really going on. We make robots and AI. But aren't we really complex robots? Why would one think that a Being that is so great that It can make a universe easier than we can build a house, is impossible? Nature suggests such a being, way more than it suggests any spontaneous happening. ''Why would one think that a Being that is so great that It can make a universe easier than we can build a house, is impossible?'' I don't but why would you think it has to be one being and not multiple? |
|
|
|
Rahul Gandhi's hard work, 82 rallies performed in a few weeks
Read more news in Punjabi Language. Visit Rozana Spokesman.
Punjabi Newspaper Online
Punjabi News Epaper
hey, quick question: what the fuck??Hey not batman. Do an experiment that lends evidence to your hypothesis or shut the fuck up already. I already cursed myself the moment I first commented in this dumpster fire of a thread. If you can't perform an experiment that lends credence to your theory then for the sake of all that is decent, lock this fucking thread. If you're not going to do an experiment with your sextant that can be replicated by others and uses the well-established laws of physics and geometry, you should just shove it up your ass, where you pulled this whole notion from in the first place. You're saying the sun is 32 miles away? Hell son, it should be easy to rent some sort of transportation to get there and prove it. So just do it already. Don't say peep until you come back. The dipshit gimp is back! How about an experiment that we can observe, measure, and repeat that proves we are on a ball. Will your answer be the same as last time where you copped out like the gimp you are? Well aside from livestreams of earth from space and the millions of pictures, also observing stars at night or eclipses. Yes there are some other experiments you can perform yourself. Eratosthenes did one with 2 holes and their shadows but retards don't accept it because it assumes the sun is far away, however 3 holes far away apart will prove the earth is not flat very easily by measuring the angles of the shadows. You can google more experiments. |
|
|
|
Proven by whom? when? where? What makes you the leading authority in the matter? Why do you expect people to take you seriously? All questions sadly even your benevolent god can't answer (because there isn't such a thing).
If your god exists, let him prove by killing me in the INSTANT I post this message.
-edit-
The experiment proved to be a success, god doesn't exist. I'm still alive.
I personally don't what badacker is trying to point out and i somehow don't want to cause i could still not understand it. But i would like to also point out some of your points. I would also like to ask that question back, Who proved that there is no God?, where and when? If you were going to tell me that science is the answer then ill just to argue with you that it isn't the answer. Even Einstein said that it is to difficult for us humans to tell if god really existed or not. (I'm not talking about the god of any religions) Who proved the multi dimensional spaghetti god doesn't exist? |
|
|
|
^^^ A football field is 328 feet long, it's also flat. Your double digit IQ is also showing. I'm describing an experiment not making any claims, this is the opposite of assumption. I think you're a Satanic twat well aware of the Satanic law of reversal and inversion when applying your pipul however.
Reducing the length by 2/3 useing a basketball court then making claims based on the new much shorter length would be dishonest when attempting replication of events photographed on a football field.
Simple fact is you're all dishonest liars and gullible retards who will never agree to the truth, you should all be stuffed in gas chambers.
This (perspective) is the same exact shit as the fisheye lens just a different pile, all of you need to answer for your deceit.
But where is the math showing how much is hidden due to perspective? You are a liar. No math = liar. |
|
|
|
You said, there is only ''1 thing outside the universe'' which you claim it's god. If god created the universe, where did he get the ''materials'' to do so? Was it not spontaneously generated?
If I understand this correctly, BADecker is claiming that the universe was spontaneously generated by GodHe does not believe that something can be spontaneously generated by itselfAm I correct BADecker? His argument goes like this: The universe had a beginning and anything that causes something else, has to be more complex (whatever that means). Therefore god created the universe. Problem is, how do we know it wasn't gods, or something else that created the universe? |
|
|
|
Where the FUCK did you get this from? I cannot believe what I am reading.
People don't believe in your God (or ANY OTHER GODS) because there is not a shred of evidence of your God's existence.
You not only make shit up in your own delusion, but you don't even understand why others see you as delusional and don't believe what you believe.
In the end, there will always be intellectually strong people and an intellectually weak who will need this extra supernatural help to get them through their day.
It actually has nothing to do with evidence, science, logic or any of that sort. It is a psychological defect that leads people into this delusion.
Be at peace af-newbie I am not accusing you of making those particular arguments. They are just the typical arguments I have often seen in some form or another. Your argument is that the evidence for God's existence is not sufficient to compel you to believe in God so you don't. I understand your position. I also understand why you keep calling me delusional. I simply think you are mistaken. You are correct that question ultimately has very little to do with evidence. It goes deeper then that and is related to how the available evidence is interpreted in the context of an individuals existing knowledge including the assumed axioms he or she applies when interpreting incoming evidence. If you truly believe that God does not exist you will find confirmation for your disbelief everywhere. There is not sufficient data to compel you to abandon disbelief. Similarly if you truly believe in God you will find evidence supporting the glory of his existence every day. The question is like a Bayesian inference that diverges to completely different conclusions when fed the same data set. This is because data itself is not ultimately separate from consciousness. Our knowledge is shaped by new data but new data is also shaped by our existing knowledge. Given this reality no one will ever be able to prove God to you. However, that inability does not mean God does not exist. Thus instead of approaching the question from the perspective of looking for proof to reject disbelief I recommend instead trying to look at the world holistically from the perspective that God does exist examine how that changes your perspective on things. Then compare that worldview to your current one in its entirety. Bruce Charlton who is a more eloquent writer then I expressed this in the following way. The Big Decision about Life...http://charltonteaching.blogspot.com/2017/10/the-big-decision-about-life.html?m=1The Big Decision about Life is a metaphysical one - not a matter of 'evidence'. And that insight (metaphysics not evidence) is the first step.
The situation is that Life is a mixed-picture: the decision is whether Life is validated by its best moments or times; or destroyed by its worst.
As I said, evidence does not help - the question is not quantitative. This is a matter of primary assumption.
And the question is not answerable in isolation - Life can only be validated if Life has 'meaning'; and the nature of validation depends on the nature of that meaning.
On the other hand, if you have already accepted that life has no meaning - is merely determined, or random - then you have already made your Big Decision. (Whether implicitly or explicitly) your basic assumptions ensure that for you Life is defined by its worst aspects - indeed the single, most extreme worst-of-Life is the truth-of-Life (both for individuals, and en masse).
Nothing can be done for you - because any possible Good will be negated by One Bad Thing - even when that Bad is merely the evanescence of Good.
On the other hand; if you understand, and live-by, the conviction that the best of Life is the truth of life (despite that this cannot be continuous) - then you have indomitable strength, assurance, and hope.
We only truly believe your god doesn't exist. The one from the bible. In general some sort of god could be possible. |
|
|
|
^^^
Maybe the antenna is bent? Nothing else that the antenna passes over shows the effect. You can usually see the deception of a fish eye during movement. I don't see any of that. The antenna is constant throughout the shot and does not effect anything that it crosses over such as the clouds.
You can have your ball not trying to convince you of anything, Just pointing out your obvious attempt to deceive with the Mig video.
Very telling you trust the Russian government footage which uses a fish eye lens and is shot through a canopy more than an average mans doing an experiment.
Again, there are 24/7 livestreams of earth from space. You can google them. Also full pictures of earth from space. What's the point of arguing here? Your only option is to ignore all of it and call it fake, that's it. |
|
|
|
^^^ That's right keep denying perspective is real to support your lies. Everybody can see the guy on the football field is obsured by perspective and know that you're a liar. 
If a boat disappears due to going out of sight from convergence as is the case when viewing a ship with the naked eye standing on the beach, then yes a zoom lens will bring it back into view.
Shut up you liar. You have no idea what will happen because you have never tried it. You just have no idea period, you're an NPC with a double digit IQ. You should off yourself just for that if not for being a complete tool of this Satanic agenda. How do we know the football field was totally flat? We don't. You either show the math or you remain as a liar. Which you are. Big shill and liar. You always have the math for everything, don't you? Where is the math, notbatman, where? |
|
|
|
...
Right.. So that guy walked like 30-40 meters on your picture and half of him is hidden. So basically every 50 meters, you get 1 meter hidden. 1 km away would hide 20 meters. However in your youtube video you can still see the top of the traffic lights even though it's further than 1 km. How does it work? Where is the math? Paid shill still lying.
The camera on the football field is on the ground and the PhD curve test is elevated a bit. I've got an idea why don't you hop on YouTube and tell the PhD who did the curve test he's a retard and fool yourself? The only reason I joined this forum is because of fraud against me, then to be called a shill by the shitstains at Black Arrow when I asked where the miner I ordered was at was fucking enraging. Now I've got you pulling the same bullshit, I don't make a fucking dime from telling the truth. You're clearly a Satanic fag who needs to be stuffed in a gas chamber. Then show the math you fucking shill. What's the math to calculate how much an object will be hidden due to ''perspective'' on the flat earth. You are a fucking shill. I tried it myself in my house with a bottle of water and a camera on the ground and the bottom of the bottle was never hidden, even 15+ meters away from the camera. Show the math or shut up forever. |
|
|
|
^^^ The math involved in describing and calculating the optics is actually complex and the sources due to being flat earth conspiracy related are few. The only place currently available is from art books.
This is just more gaslighting, he knows the math describing the optics is complex.
What a bunch of shit to say I don't know. Let me remind you of something. ''if you zoom in you will bring back the boat in full view'' You said that, now you are claiming that even on a flat earth, more than 80% of a traffic light is hidden by ''perspective''. Do you think you would bring back the whole thing with a powerful zoom? You are a paid shill and proven wrong again. Paid shill? Go fuck yourself you lying cunt. If a boat disappears due to going out of sight from convergence as is the case when viewing a ship with the naked eye standing on the beach, then yes a zoom lens will bring it back into view. If you cherrypick a situation where the viewers perspective is less than a foot off the ground like in the PhD curve test video or, the picture of man walking away on the football field taken by a camera on the ground then no, the object being viewed is physically obscured and no amount of zoom will bring it back into view. Suck off a shotgun you intellectually dishonest twat. Right.. So that guy walked like 30-40 meters on your picture and half of him is hidden. So basically every 50 meters, you get 1 meter hidden. 1 km away would hide 20 meters. However in your youtube video you can still see the top of the traffic lights even though it's further than 1 km. How does it work? Where is the math? Paid shill still lying. |
|
|
|
Dictatorial regimes don't follow moral codes. Are you new here on Earth? Your Bible did not save Christians or Jews who were killed in Auschwitz, nor it prevented Christians from killing other Christians or Jews.
Every society follows some kind of moral code. Sometimes that code can be as simple as the strongest rule and the weak are slaves. Usually it's more complex. Democratic rule does not prevent tyranny it is not exempt from injustice and immorally. Review the history of Athens if you want to understand this better. Tyranny of the majority was one of the greatest concerns of the US founding fathers. It the reasons they took such great effort to limit the power of direct democracy. Everything from the selection of Senators by state representatives, the selection of the president via the Electoral College, and the limits of voting to land owners were all attempts to lower the risk of a tyrannical mob rule. Your stated standard is "you are automatically a good person if you are following the moral code that your society accepts." This is a very problematic code that highlights the profound detachment from reality your philosophy and atheism leads into. I noticed you did not really refute my examples above. Via your standard any horror if accepted by a society becomes "good" and the perpetrators of said horror are "good people". With this standard you are lost in a morass of relativism a natural consequence of rejecting the divine.
You think the Bible will save you from a dictatorship? You are confusing your delusional religious beliefs with political systems.
...
Judeo-Christian ideology is no different than other inhumane ideologies. Nazism and Communism included.
You lack an understanding of the pivotal role of the Judeo-Christian tradition in facilitating coordination and driving progress over time. I discussed this topic in some depth here: Religion and Progress I did not reject God. There is nothing to reject. Why can't you get this through your head is beyond me?
You were raised religious and brought up to accept and worship God. You and later rejected both that tradition and God. We have real issues of dispute we should not waste our time on word games. I came from a highly religious family, went through Catholic school system, both primary and secondary, I was an altar boy
...
What I saw, was corruption, abuse on pretty much every level imaginable.
God rejected him, in any case. If god wanted us to know about his existence, he would know exactly what to do to show us. And no, this wouldn't take away my free will, he wouldn't need to force me, just show me enough proof. Logically god makes no sense in any way you can think about it. |
|
|
|
^^^ The math involved in describing and calculating the optics is actually complex and the sources due to being flat earth conspiracy related are few. The only place currently available is from art books.
This is just more gaslighting, he knows the math describing the optics is complex.
What a bunch of shit to say I don't know. Let me remind you of something. ''if you zoom in you will bring back the boat in full view'' You said that, now you are claiming that even on a flat earth, more than 80% of a traffic light is hidden by ''perspective''. Do you think you would bring back the whole thing with a powerful zoom? You are a paid shill and proven wrong again. |
|
|
|
^^^ He ignores the posted image of perspective obscuring the man on the football field and continues to shill/gaslight!
Show me how to calculate it then if it happens all the time, it shouldn't be too difficult, right? |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
