''This means that the US Department of Health and Human Services and all vaccine makers have been lying to the American people for over 30 years about the effectiveness and safety of vaccines'' That's what his shitty ass article says, it's simply not true, it doesn't mean they were lying and it doesn't matter that it was required by law, shit happens, don't you think? It wasn't proved that it was systematically breaking the law, it wasn't proved that they hid or destroyed the reports.
This also doesn't mean they were lying for 30 years because we have thousands of other safety reports.
I didn't defend the article, I defended the facts. If any of the statements I made were not factual, please do enlighten me. Then don't quote me when we are talking about the article that badecker posted because thats the debate, mate, maybe you should learn how to read. His point was that because they did not file some reports they have been lying for 30 years which is simply not true as shown above. He keeps saying there are no safety reports/tests which is again simply not true. https://www.skepticalraptor.com/skepticalraptorblog.php/del-bigtree-vaccine-safety-complaints-hhs-responds/I don't know what your point is. Yes they did NOT file the required reports of the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986 but they have done all the required work to make sure vaccines are safe. |
|
|
|
Get yourself new reading glasses. Your link agrees with the things said in the case won against government. What are those things? Basically three of them: 1. No test reports shown; 2. Under reporting as required by law; 3. A bunch of blabber to cover up this fact. The point isn't really the winning of the law suit. Rather, it is the safety. So far, we are still in the dark regarding actual safety reports... the reports including the tests being done, and how they confirmed safety. On top of that, there are warnings on the "bottle" about how unsafe vaccines and other medicine can be, and these reports are even listed on government websites. Simply Google "government site showing side effects of medicine" to see thousands of them (some not government). When you Google "government site showing medicine safety" do any of the sites show safe test reports?... not just some blabber that suggests that the tests were done and showed safety... but the actual test reports that show how the test was done and the various actual results from the test? For something as important as this, we aren't finding any actual test reports that show safety.  1. No specific tests of some specific reports. However you can see and check all the other thousands of safety reports, linked in the same website I posted. 2. The case was settled by law, in no way it means vaccines aren't tested  not even close lmao. 3. A bunch of bullshit by anti-vaxxers to push their agenda because the US settled a vaccine case once, ignoring the hundreds of thousands of other safety reports. You are once again drifting from facts you know to be true. This wasn't "a vaccine case once", this was the government not following its own reporting requirements, as required by law. This is not an injury suit, this is an issue of systematic breaking of the law regarding safety reporting. Keep your arguments intellectually honest or I will again return to whup your ass with facts, and I am a way better at debating than these guys. ''This means that the US Department of Health and Human Services and all vaccine makers have been lying to the American people for over 30 years about the effectiveness and safety of vaccines'' That's what his shitty ass article says, it's simply not true, it doesn't mean they were lying and it doesn't matter that it was required by law, shit happens, don't you think? It wasn't proved that it was systematically breaking the law, it wasn't proved that they hid or destroyed the reports. This also doesn't mean they were lying for 30 years because we have thousands of other safety reports. |
|
|
|
Get yourself new reading glasses. Your link agrees with the things said in the case won against government. What are those things? Basically three of them: 1. No test reports shown; 2. Under reporting as required by law; 3. A bunch of blabber to cover up this fact. The point isn't really the winning of the law suit. Rather, it is the safety. So far, we are still in the dark regarding actual safety reports... the reports including the tests being done, and how they confirmed safety. On top of that, there are warnings on the "bottle" about how unsafe vaccines and other medicine can be, and these reports are even listed on government websites. Simply Google "government site showing side effects of medicine" to see thousands of them (some not government). When you Google "government site showing medicine safety" do any of the sites show safe test reports?... not just some blabber that suggests that the tests were done and showed safety... but the actual test reports that show how the test was done and the various actual results from the test? For something as important as this, we aren't finding any actual test reports that show safety. 1. No specific tests of some specific reports. However you can see and check all the other thousands of safety reports, linked in the same website I posted. 2. The case was settled by law, in no way it means vaccines aren't tested not even close lmao. 3. A bunch of bullshit by anti-vaxxers to push their agenda because the US settled a vaccine case once, ignoring the hundreds of thousands of other safety reports. |
|
|
|
The point is this. Nobody presents a product to the public without testing it, and showing the tests when asked. For example. Imagine you are a gunsmith. And you are building a new kind of gun. Don't you do thousands of tests on the metal alloy, and the metallurgy of the metal alloy, and powder kinds and amounts, and anything else you can think of, so that you won't hurt yourself when you use your new gun, or anybody else? And don't you make the test reports available to anybody who wants to see the ways that you tested? So, why can't the government come up with even one safety test in court for vaccines? - https://phibetaiota.net/2018/09/rebecca-campbell-us-government-loses-vaccine-lawsuit-has-lied-to-the-public-for-decades-vaccines-not-tested-autism-will-drop-if-parents-use-this-case-to-legally-challenge-mandated-vaccinatio/. Especially when other people are reporting that it is the vaccinated people who are spreading the diseases? - https://www.naturalnews.com/2018-11-14-proof-vaccinated-people-are-spreading-communicable-disease.html. Doesn't anybody find it a bit odd that we can't seem to find the formal test reports on the actual testing that was done to prove safety? Government can't even seem to find the batch safety tests that are required for the various batches of vaccine serum that were made. Does somebody get a piece of PVC plumbing pipe, and use it to make a shotgun barrel and firing mechanism? Of course not. It isn't safe. In fact, it is downright dangerous. So, why are we so happy to get injected with a bunch of stuff that doesn't have a bunch of independent testing laboratory test reports behind it?, and doesn't have even one report when demanded in court? How in the world stupid and foolish can we get? But that is what the medical has seemed to have converted us into when we simply accept them because a doctor said so. Again with the same shit? Do you have alzheimers, the US never lost that lawsuit, I already told you that once... are you ok? https://vaxopedia.org/2018/07/22/did-the-us-government-lose-a-landmark-vaccine-lawsuit/Please, go to a doctor and get your memory checked. |
|
|
|
^^^ No it's not meaningless, Vod is claiming I'm a liar and given me a negative trust rating as a member of the default trust list for stating a provable fact. Fucking sack of shit hides behind the cop-out to authority.
Yeah but you didn't answer though. Have you performed the experiments yourself or are you just trusting random internet websites? Why is it that everytime an article/website is against your belief it is a hoax but if it supports your belief it has to be 100% true? Stop being a dishonest person. |
|
|
|
@Astargath, you're screaming in pain as you strike out at me "LIAR!". Airy failed to detect the motion of the Earth, re-branding the experiment as a failure to prove the existence of the aether is a Jewish tactic and a lie; Airy set out to prove the motion of the Earth. Saying the experiment as an aberration in the heliocentric theory is Jewish word salad for "our bullshit theory is proven wrong so we'll give it fancy label and carry on". AF is a simple experiment that almost anybody who's technically inclined can perform to prove there's a aether and, that the Earth is motionless. The results of AF are confirmed by the Michelson & Morley Experiment (also dishonestly re-branded as a failure to detect the aether) and, all arguments against both experiments involving Special Relativity are debunked by the Prunier & Dufour replication of the Sagnac Experiment. The P&D Sagnac replication takes SR into account and proves the theory is not consistent with experimental results.
I've got even more proof of a motionless Earth: "The Trouton–Noble experiment was an attempt to detect motion of the Earth through the luminiferous aether, and was conducted in 1901–1903 by Frederick Thomas Trouton (who also developed the Trouton's ratio) and H. R. Noble. It was based on a suggestion by George FitzGerald that a charged parallel-plate capacitor moving through the aether should orient itself perpendicular to the motion. Like the earlier Michelson–Morley experiment, Trouton and Noble obtained a null result: no motion relative to the aether could be detected.[1][2] This null result was reproduced, with increasing sensitivity, by Rudolf Tomaschek (1925, 1926), Chase (1926, 1927) and Hayden in 1994. ..." -- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trouton–Noble_experimentHow am I liar, how does this make a liar? I'm quoting a wikipedia article (with sources) that I believe is factual (quoted text), how am I fucking lying?
6-Hour Gyroscope Test Debunks Spinning Earth - Flat Earth -- https://youtu.be/IGPSjgv9t3EShills claiming ring LASER and MEMs gyroscopes can measure a rotation are full of shit BTW, they're measuring the weak Coriolis effect caused by aether drift (measured by the M&M Experiment). If Earth was spinning at it would effect the gyroscope in the video.
The Earth is motionless and this is an observable, repeatable, testable, documented, empirical fact: Aiy's Failure Experiment. -- Empirical proof the Earth is motionless. The Michelson & Morley Experiment. -- Empirical proof the Earth is motionless. The Trouton–Noble experiment. -- Empirical proof the Earth is motionless. The Sagnac Experiment. -- Empirical proof of the aether. Prunier & Dufour's replication of The Sagnac Experiment. -- Empirical proof the theory of Special Relativity is not consistent with experiment. Do it then, show us a video of you re creating the experiment, why would you trust them? Why would you think anyone ever did that experiment? Why don't you use the same criteria for your beliefs? Dishonest liar, as always. ''I'm quoting a wikipedia article (with sources) that I believe is factual (quoted text)'' What you believe is meaningless if you haven't done the experiments yourself. |
|
|
|
...
Can you give me a practical experiment that I can do at home so that I can confirm the Aether for myself?
...
Airy's experiment that failed to detect the rotation of the Earth (Airy's Failure) is simple enough most people could perform it, his experiment only requires two telescopes (one filled with water to slow lights speed). It provides scientific evidence for a stationary Luminiferous aether and that the stars are in motion. Save any arguments that involve special relativity, it's a debunkable theory. ROFL Proving aether with just 2 telescopes in 1871? What a bunch of trash. Pd: you always say that about the Cavendish experiment. Now I can say it about yours. Problem is that yours doesn't even prove what its supposed to. How is the experiment "trash"? The nature of electrostatic forces makes the Cavendish experiment inconclusive and a completely useless setup. You just calling AF trash because it failed to support the bullshit globe model is just an immature response from a butthurt loser who can't prove the official narrative. SaltySpoon wanted an experiment he could perform himself and AF was the simplest one I could think of. Proof of the aether is available in the form of the Sagnac Experiment, however the setup is more complex. The Dufour & Prunier replication also debunks special relativity. ...
Reality is one of two choices:
1) You are lying.
2) Millions of people are lying.
...
Yes Vod, the masses are full of truth and I'm the bastard... I'm declaring Flat Earth theory officially debunked.
No one can explain to me why I can't tune into Russia over shortwave radio from here in Texas.
I should have no trouble doing this on a Flat Earth.
Pff, he would just deny it like everything else. He will say that shortwave radio signals aren't real and move on. Or radio signals disappear into vanishing point. Because railroad. The shortwave radio signals bounce between the ionosphere and the ground (a waveguide) and can reach any point on Earth.This works on both the globe model and in reality. If you're having trouble tuning into your assinged shortwave number station from within the US, it's probably because of atmosphereic conditions or, changes made by HAARP to block your espionage related actives. You are a dishonest liar, again. ''Airy was trying to repeat an observation made by a German astronomer a few years before. Airy’s Failure is an 1871 experiment that George Airy undertook which attempted to measure the drag on light that would change the stellar aberration of light from a suitable star that was almost overhead (hence almost zero refraction), by using a telescope filled with water rather than air. (See his original paper here: http://rspl.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/20/130-138/35.full.pdf+html) The Aether theory indicated that the different refractive medium should produce a different effect compared to a telescope filled with air. The experiment was repeated a number of times on different nights, at times six months apart. The result of the experiment was that there was no evidence to support the existence of the Aether. The common name for this, ‘Airy’s Failure,’ concerns the failure of the experiment to demonstrate the existence of the Aether. However, if you believe in the Aether (against all evidence), then you would conclude the Earth was stationary, even though the regular stellar aberration observations indicate that it is not stationary. The notion of a stationary Earth is not proved or denied by this experiment. It helped to remove the Luminiferous Aether theory'' Why do you keep lying? |
|
|
|
This is Craig Wright, pretending to be Satoshi again. Apparently, he managed to sign a message with Hal Finney's private key, somehow. (Edit: or he might've pulled up an old Hal Finney signature) The scuttlebutt is that he signed it in a non-standard way, kind of like when he "signed" a message as Satoshi to convince Gavin that he's Satoshi. Seems like Craig did PhD in handling multiple Twitter accounts, not in Computer Science.  Also what about the fact that satoshi himself said something like BCH would be a bad idea? https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=195.msg1611#msg1611 |
|
|
|
I'm declaring Flat Earth theory officially debunked.
No one can explain to me why I can't tune into Russia over shortwave radio from here in Texas.
I should have no trouble doing this on a Flat Earth.
Pff, he would just deny it like everything else. He will say that shortwave radio signals aren't real and move on. |
|
|
|
...
Can you give me a practical experiment that I can do at home so that I can confirm the Aether for myself?
...
Airy's experiment that failed to detect the rotation of the Earth (Airy's Failure) is simple enough most people could perform it, his experiment only requires two telescopes (one filled with water to slow lights speed). It provides scientific evidence for a stationary Luminiferous aether and that the stars are in motion. Save any arguments that involve special relativity, it's a debunkable theory. ROFL Proving aether with just 2 telescopes in 1871? What a bunch of trash. Pd: you always say that about the Cavendish experiment. Now I can say it about yours. Problem is that yours doesn't even prove what its supposed to. |
|
|
|
Hopefully this leads to new rules about media conduct that will result in avoiding this type of disruption and disrespect to the office in the future.
Thats the thing most people don;t understand about how flimsy this suit was. The White House is not an official government entity. It is literally The President's home. He has no requirement to admit anyone there, that is why the 1st amendment argument was ruled invalid. They did however say he had a 5th amendment protection for due process. I am looking forward to him in court trying to weasel out of explaining how he legally committed an act of assault. The problem was that he was disruptive, not that he was asking hard or mean questions. He was literally yelling stupid shit when there weren't even questions during the Kim jong un meeting and more. |
|
|
|
I'm not going to get involved in this debate, because anti-vaxxers are as insane as the flat earthers. There is literally no point arguing - they won't accept the evidence because they don't understand what is and is not evidence. Facebook moms "doing their research" are somehow equivalent to hundreds of years of global scientific advancement in their eyes. I only wanted to comment on this, because this is a whole new level of stupid: ...
Kinda like back in 1977 or thereabouts, when the doctors in Orange County, CA, went on strike for a month, and there were 50% fewer deaths in Orange County that month.
Lol! Why am I not surprised? Doesn't seem to be an isolated incident either: https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2016/02/09/hoskins/QhjVuBHqnrjrT0wSeWRJII/story.htmlFrom: http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/MEDICAL_ETHICS_TEXT/Chapter_3_Moral_Climate_of_Health_Care/Reading-Death-Rate-Doctor-Strike.htmDOCTORS ON STRIKE
Whenever medical doctors go on strike, a most interesting phenomenon occurs - death rates go down! In 1976 in Bogota, Columbia medical doctors went on strike for 52 days, with only emergency care available. The death rate dropped by 35%. In 1976 in Los Angeles County a similar doctors' strike resulted in an 18% drop in mortality. As soon as the strike was over, the death rate went back to normal. A 50% decrease in mortality occurred in Israel in 1973 when there was a one month doctor's strike!
I'm sensing that Doctors are commonly admitted 'into the club' and are given certain protections as long as they are acting in the interest of the 'club owners.' The minority who take an active interest in understanding the end goals and show zeal in the game-play are given seats on various boards (e.g., the boards who decide what to inject into the kiddies.) The same is even more true of 'scientists'. A significant proportion of deaths are as a result of complications of surgery. Every surgery, no matter how minor, carries a risk of death with it. If doctors strike, all non-emergency operations are cancelled, and that risk of death disappears. Failure to understand this completely basic fact is just more proof that you have literally zero idea how healthcare works. Also, I am a doctor, and I confirm I am "in the club". I only get the real vaccines made from unicorn tears. Risk of death is not the same as death. The reports that tvbcof shows don't have anything to do with risk of death. They have to do with death. Also, now that we know where you get your vaccines from, no wonder there is death from doctors. FACEPALM........ Let me use some easy examples that even a kid would understand.... People die, even from simple surgeries, when doctors are working they are performing surgeries, let's say the perform 100.000 simple surgeries and 50 people die on those, when they are NOT performing these simple surgeries, 50 people DO NOT die, so basically by going on strike they are ''saving'' 50 people, this wont work forever though, as more time passes the death rates will start to climb fast. Punch yourself please. |
|
|
|
The sextant is a simple tool like a ruler, it measures the angle between two objects using two mirrors and the eye.
Correct. You cannot measure distance with it. Wrong (you). Angular size is a measure of the distance an object physically spans (its diameter) and it's measured directly with two measurements, no trigonometry required. Angular diameter is NOT the real diameter of the object. |
|
|
|
...
What is a horizon line exactly? And how do you calculate it to use it with the sextant?
The horizon line is a visual object that's observed not calculated; the image of a line is formed (emerges) due to optical convergence (and perspective) on a plane. The vanishing point is a point on the horizon line where, an object (or area) is no longer visible due to its visual (apparent) size being too small to resolve with the eye; all the points on the plane form a line. The sextant is a simple tool like a ruler, it measures the angle between two objects using two mirrors and the eye. One of the two objects is almost always the horizon line, but it doesn't have to be. Once you've measured your angles then you can use them with your calculations; your action could be a simple as measuring the time of day with the Sun or a complex navigational calculation with the stars. You can also measure size and calculate distances with trigonometry; one minute is equal to one mile. So you measure the sun to be ~ 30 arcmin, how do you now calculate the distance to the sun exactly? |
|
|
|
You may want to head next door to the religion discussion if you want to talk about beliefs. I don't give a fuck what you believe in. I give a fuck about what you can practically demonstrate.
If you cannot practically demonstrate what you're claiming to me then your simply talking your religion.
What kind of practical demonstration do you need for gravity? Have you tried stepping off a roof of a tall building? That usually settles the issue. Can you prove to me that me falling off the building was a consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass and not something else? You don't need to go that far. You don't even need to call it "gravity" if you have some religious objection to the word. Are you at least willing to admit that there is a force that makes things move towards Earth? Let's call it "Joe falling off a tall building experiment force", or j-force for short. Now if hypothetically speaking the Earth was ball-shaped, or penis-shaped, or whatever - what would the j-force do to large bodies of water? Things more dense than the air fall and things less dense than the air rise. That's what I observe. That's the how things fall. I think we all get that one. The big question is why do things fall? Saying that it is a curvature of spacetime causing things to fall (gravity) it is where I have the issue and would like to see proof. Why does the curvature of spacetime not effect the helium balloon? How were you able to witness and experiment with curvature in spacetime? Did you do an experiment where you were able to harness spacetime and prove this to yourself or did you believe what you were told? No dummy, density cannot exist without gravity, please go study. ''You don't think water finds it's level?'' YOU DID NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, STOP BEING A DISHONEST LIAR. What does level mean? Which level does it find and how does it do it if it's not gravity. Triggered? If you don't know what level is you're a dumb fuck. Not sure what else to say. www.google.com may help you. Also notice that you have no fucking clue how to prove it is gravity causing these actions we see on earth. You can rant and rave all you want about gravity causing it but you cannot show a practical demonstration of gravity actually causing these actions to take place. All you can do is shout in all caps. Sit back down my little bitch and keep believing what other men tell you. ''a practical demonstration of gravity'' Rockets in space but then again you don't believe in space or rockets so it is kind of hard to provide a practical demonstration for you. Can you prove it's density? Because gravity has been accepted for many years now, you are the one challenging the fact that gravity exists. ''If you don't know what level is'' You clearly lack scientific knowledge and the only thing you can do is be a parrot or rather an NPC parroting the same thing over and over again, WATER FINDS ITS LEVEL HEHEHE. ''not effect the helium balloon'' It's affect btw, and it's fairly simple, I mean do you actually not know why or are you trolling? I'm simply asking you to prove it's gravity causing these actions we see on earth. You're making the claim that we are dumb if we do not know these things so I assume you have done the experiments yourself and have seen this first hand. What was your experiment? How did you measure it? How did you know it was gravity and nothing else causing these actions we see on earth? How were you able to eliminate all other possible causes? It seems like an amazing feat you have accomplished to be able to actually prove gravity via experimentation. I for one would love to see it. ''How were you able to eliminate all other possible causes'' Because of outer space and the same phenomena observed out there, rockets still experience gravity when they are out there, we can calculate the gravity of the different planets based on a formula that works, that's how we know gravity is more than just ''DENSITY HURR DURR'' |
|
|
|
^^^ There's no vanishing point on a globe, the horizon is curvature. In reality the horizon is the result of convergence to a point on a plane. The sextant measures angular size from the vanishing point, this is impossible on a globe. We're not on a globe the Earth is flat, it's measurably flat.
''There's no vanishing point on a globe'' Why not? ''The sextant measures angular size from the vanishing point'' Who told you this? https://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-SextantThere's no vanishing point on a globe because it's hidden behind curvature. Who told me how to measure angular size? Well certainly not the Jews at wikipedia, those wikihow instructions are just the basics and don't cover angular size. Measuring angular size is covered up, it's a conspiracy (Jews control all information with few exceptions) and there's no readily available source that will discuss measurement because it's impossible to measure on a globe. I've explained how angular size measurement works, you should kill yourself instead of insisting it's impossible.  Do you know what the vanishing point is? Can you define it for me please since I can't trust the jews at wikipedia? What I understand the vanishing point is not something physical. It's not a real point in space, 2 parallel lines never touch, just like in your example, the rails never touch, do they? So how are you measuring anything from the ''vanishing point'' if the vanishing point doesn't exist? The explanation for this is complex, short answer it's an emergent visual object. The Jews will tell you all about perspective on a plane and the vanishing point, but only within an artistic context, and only in an advanced art class. If you don't want to pay the Jew school there's some resources online, look up perspective and drawing and you'll find some information that can also be applied physically. Hitler spoke about the Jews and art in his famous book, you could also look that up too. So what is it? You didn't answer at all, how do you calculate where the vanishing point is and how do you use that to measure angular diameter with a sextant? You lying? The vanishing point isn't calculated, it's observed; the horizon line goes in one of two mirrors when making angular size measurements. You asked for information and when I explained where to find a more detailed explanation than just "an emergent visual object" you imply I'm a liar? Go off yourself. "...density cannot exist without gravity..."
So a dense mass causes gravity and gravity causes a dense mass? Globe logic at its finest, nothing works quite like using an unproven theory in conjunction with circular logic to prove your point. What is a horizon line exactly? And how do you calculate it to use it with the sextant? |
|
|
|
You may want to head next door to the religion discussion if you want to talk about beliefs. I don't give a fuck what you believe in. I give a fuck about what you can practically demonstrate.
If you cannot practically demonstrate what you're claiming to me then your simply talking your religion.
What kind of practical demonstration do you need for gravity? Have you tried stepping off a roof of a tall building? That usually settles the issue. Can you prove to me that me falling off the building was a consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass and not something else? You don't need to go that far. You don't even need to call it "gravity" if you have some religious objection to the word. Are you at least willing to admit that there is a force that makes things move towards Earth? Let's call it "Joe falling off a tall building experiment force", or j-force for short. Now if hypothetically speaking the Earth was ball-shaped, or penis-shaped, or whatever - what would the j-force do to large bodies of water? Things more dense than the air fall and things less dense than the air rise. That's what I observe. That's the how things fall. I think we all get that one. The big question is why do things fall? Saying that it is a curvature of spacetime causing things to fall (gravity) it is where I have the issue and would like to see proof. Why does the curvature of spacetime not effect the helium balloon? How were you able to witness and experiment with curvature in spacetime? Did you do an experiment where you were able to harness spacetime and prove this to yourself or did you believe what you were told? No dummy, density cannot exist without gravity, please go study. ''You don't think water finds it's level?'' YOU DID NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, STOP BEING A DISHONEST LIAR. What does level mean? Which level does it find and how does it do it if it's not gravity. Triggered? If you don't know what level is you're a dumb fuck. Not sure what else to say. www.google.com may help you. Also notice that you have no fucking clue how to prove it is gravity causing these actions we see on earth. You can rant and rave all you want about gravity causing it but you cannot show a practical demonstration of gravity actually causing these actions to take place. All you can do is shout in all caps. Sit back down my little bitch and keep believing what other men tell you. ''a practical demonstration of gravity'' Rockets in space but then again you don't believe in space or rockets so it is kind of hard to provide a practical demonstration for you. Can you prove it's density? Because gravity has been accepted for many years now, you are the one challenging the fact that gravity exists. ''If you don't know what level is'' You clearly lack scientific knowledge and the only thing you can do is be a parrot or rather an NPC parroting the same thing over and over again, WATER FINDS ITS LEVEL HEHEHE. ''not effect the helium balloon'' It's affect btw, and it's fairly simple, I mean do you actually not know why or are you trolling? |
|
|
|
^^^ There's no vanishing point on a globe, the horizon is curvature. In reality the horizon is the result of convergence to a point on a plane. The sextant measures angular size from the vanishing point, this is impossible on a globe. We're not on a globe the Earth is flat, it's measurably flat.
''There's no vanishing point on a globe'' Why not? ''The sextant measures angular size from the vanishing point'' Who told you this? https://www.wikihow.com/Use-a-SextantThere's no vanishing point on a globe because it's hidden behind curvature. Who told me how to measure angular size? Well certainly not the Jews at wikipedia, those wikihow instructions are just the basics and don't cover angular size. Measuring angular size is covered up, it's a conspiracy (Jews control all information with few exceptions) and there's no readily available source that will discuss measurement because it's impossible to measure on a globe. I've explained how angular size measurement works, you should kill yourself instead of insisting it's impossible. Do you know what the vanishing point is? Can you define it for me please since I can't trust the jews at wikipedia? What I understand the vanishing point is not something physical. It's not a real point in space, 2 parallel lines never touch, just like in your example, the rails never touch, do they? So how are you measuring anything from the ''vanishing point'' if the vanishing point doesn't exist? The explanation for this is complex, short answer it's an emergent visual object. The Jews will tell you all about perspective on a plane and the vanishing point, but only within an artistic context, and only in an advanced art class. If you don't want to pay the Jew school there's some resources online, look up perspective and drawing and you'll find some information that can also be applied physically. Hitler spoke about the Jews and art in his famous book, you could also look that up too. So what is it? You didn't answer at all, how do you calculate where the vanishing point is and how do you use that to measure angular diameter with a sextant? You lying? |
|
|
|
You may want to head next door to the religion discussion if you want to talk about beliefs. I don't give a fuck what you believe in. I give a fuck about what you can practically demonstrate.
If you cannot practically demonstrate what you're claiming to me then your simply talking your religion.
What kind of practical demonstration do you need for gravity? Have you tried stepping off a roof of a tall building? That usually settles the issue. Can you prove to me that me falling off the building was a consequence of the curvature of spacetime caused by the uneven distribution of mass and not something else? You don't need to go that far. You don't even need to call it "gravity" if you have some religious objection to the word. Are you at least willing to admit that there is a force that makes things move towards Earth? Let's call it "Joe falling off a tall building experiment force", or j-force for short. Now if hypothetically speaking the Earth was ball-shaped, or penis-shaped, or whatever - what would the j-force do to large bodies of water? Things more dense than the air fall and things less dense than the air rise. That's what I observe. That's the how things fall. I think we all get that one. The big question is why do things fall? Saying that it is a curvature of spacetime causing things to fall (gravity) it is where I have the issue and would like to see proof. Why does the curvature of spacetime not effect the helium balloon? How were you able to witness and experiment with curvature in spacetime? Did you do an experiment where you were able to harness spacetime and prove this to yourself or did you believe what you were told? No dummy, density cannot exist without gravity, please go study. ''You don't think water finds it's level?'' YOU DID NOT ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, STOP BEING A DISHONEST LIAR. What does level mean? Which level does it find and how does it do it if it's not gravity. |
|
|
|
I'm not going to get involved in this debate, because anti-vaxxers are as insane as the flat earthers. There is literally no point arguing - they won't accept the evidence because they don't understand what is and is not evidence. Facebook moms "doing their research" are somehow equivalent to hundreds of years of global scientific advancement in their eyes. I only wanted to comment on this, because this is a whole new level of stupid: ...
Kinda like back in 1977 or thereabouts, when the doctors in Orange County, CA, went on strike for a month, and there were 50% fewer deaths in Orange County that month.
Lol! Why am I not surprised? Doesn't seem to be an isolated incident either: https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2016/02/09/hoskins/QhjVuBHqnrjrT0wSeWRJII/story.htmlFrom: http://www.qcc.cuny.edu/SocialSciences/ppecorino/MEDICAL_ETHICS_TEXT/Chapter_3_Moral_Climate_of_Health_Care/Reading-Death-Rate-Doctor-Strike.htmDOCTORS ON STRIKE
Whenever medical doctors go on strike, a most interesting phenomenon occurs - death rates go down! In 1976 in Bogota, Columbia medical doctors went on strike for 52 days, with only emergency care available. The death rate dropped by 35%. In 1976 in Los Angeles County a similar doctors' strike resulted in an 18% drop in mortality. As soon as the strike was over, the death rate went back to normal. A 50% decrease in mortality occurred in Israel in 1973 when there was a one month doctor's strike!
I'm sensing that Doctors are commonly admitted 'into the club' and are given certain protections as long as they are acting in the interest of the 'club owners.' The minority who take an active interest in understanding the end goals and show zeal in the game-play are given seats on various boards (e.g., the boards who decide what to inject into the kiddies.) The same is even more true of 'scientists'. A significant proportion of deaths are as a result of complications of surgery. Every surgery, no matter how minor, carries a risk of death with it. If doctors strike, all non-emergency operations are cancelled, and that risk of death disappears. Failure to understand this completely basic fact is just more proof that you have literally zero idea how healthcare works. Also, I am a doctor, and I confirm I am "in the club". I only get the real vaccines made from unicorn tears. You are clearly paid by the jews. Hahahaha I didn't even see that. This guy is no different than flat earthers, you are right. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
