''ince there are a lot more cops, and since cops are treacherous at times, cops are way worse than ISIS, who honestly does what they were designed to do.'' Just because a group is designed to do something doesn't mean they are morally good, assassins are designed to kill people, hitmen are designed to kill people, no one thinks they are good, no one. We know they are morally wrong, we know killing people is bad, you should know that too because you believe in the bible, cops are there to protect and serve, the few bad cops that don't are bad, the rest are good, the overwhelming majority of cops are good people, end of story.
So you are actually serious? No troll? How can someone with more than 60 IQ say those things? It's so retarded it's insane. The simple fact that close to 100% of the cops will back up the police union, no matter what it says or does, no matter what the truth is, no matter what is good or bad, right or wrong, shows that cops are way worse than ISIS.  What is the police union? There are lots of those as far as I know. You would have to prove that close to 100% of cops actually back up the police union and then prove that the police union is corrupt, your argument is going off the rails because you know you are wrong. I debunked your shit with facts, now you are crying. Most cops are good people. |
|
|
|
How well does any average person understand E=mc 2? Who understands the math of Big Bang Theory? Many scientific theories, including the two listed, are gobbledygook to average people. But people can see intelligent design in everything - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dsHkfWr5TEo - even if they don't want to recognize the Designer. To suggest that God doesn't have scientific proof, is to suggest that one had found out just about everything about everything. oh jeezus ...seriously dude? intelligent design? a youtube link to some clown interview... very convincing ... SMFH ... "it's not so much about hunches... its about growing up, running around in the woods...blah blah miraculous blah blah".. oh ffs ...I had to shut off the nonsense after that. hey your fellow nutter notbatshitcrazyman posts youtube links on a 500+ page btctalk thread too..so they must be true. (Yeah ok, so you're not quite at 500 pages ....I rounded up) Just because you can't understand the machinery applications in the cells of living creatures, doesn't mean it isn't there. Wake up and understand that all of our machines come from watching the machines in nature operate, or from using them. Machines have designers and makers. Why would you think that it is different with the machines of nature? You really need to start studying science before you make a fool out of yourself with silly words like you posted, above. ''Machines have designers and makers'' prove it. |
|
|
|
...
4. @Astargath no you didn't explain it, you posted memes and are unable to articulate your argument. You're asking the reader to believe the Earth is a globe based on unspecified equations and can't produce them for analysis. That's some nice fucking strategy to keep me from debunking the claims you copy&pasted. I can prove mathematically that adding more wells (or sticks) to Eratosthenes (was he even a real person?) experiment doesn't change the results, I can add any number of wells and the results are the same for a globe or a plane.
But all formulas and even a method that you or anyone can do are found here: https://takethisskepticalblog.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/how-to-disprove-the-flat-earth/:^) welcome to reality. That blog post debunks a strawman flat Earth model; Eratosthenes works for both a globe and a plane, it proves neither.  What exactly is wrong about that flat earth model? Are you changing definitions and other stuff again to fit your twisted view of reality? |
|
|
|
Please you don't need to post your signature posts, I will be checking them manually, thanks. |
|
|
|
Funny how this guy doesn't know what the ancient greeks knew over 2,000 years ago. Hey buddy, was 9/11 an inside job and Sandy Hook a hoax too? Just testing out my own theory.... Either he's a terrific troll with a devastating amount of free time on his hands or... well there is no "or."  I explained to him how you can prove the earth is not flat with a few shadows, he ignored it lol. 1. The ancient Greeks knew the Earth was flat (it's in the Bible which is Greek and written in Greek), they also knew Pythagoras' theory of the globe was a crackpot idea. 2. 9/11 and Sandy Hook were both the Jews. 3. The Flat Earth Society is controlled opposition to the globe.  Leo "I'm a plant" Ferrari - Founder, The Flat Earth Society4. @Astargath no you didn't explain it, you posted memes and are unable to articulate your argument. You're asking the reader to believe the Earth is a globe based on unspecified equations and can't produce them for analysis. That's some nice fucking strategy to keep me from debunking the claims you copy&pasted. I can prove mathematically that adding more wells (or sticks) to Eratosthenes (was he even a real person?) experiment doesn't change the results, I can add any number of wells and the results are the same for a globe or a plane. But all formulas and even a method that you or anyone can do are found here: https://takethisskepticalblog.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/how-to-disprove-the-flat-earth/:^) welcome to reality. |
|
|
|
So I am finally shaking the foundations of your evolution religion! Good. You just might come to reality and realize evolution is a hoax. Where is your example of beneficial mutation? Just because a bunch of people think that a mutation might be beneficial, do we take a vote to see who is right? How do we know that a critter thinks that the change is beneficial? If a fish grew legs via evolution, where did the legs start? They started as nubs, or even less. No benefit in nubs. Do you think the fish foresaw that one of its descendants thousands or hundreds of thousands of years later would benefit from legs? Where are your DNA samples for any of the fossils that are considered missing links? Without them, there is no way to tell that all the so-called missing links were not their own animal brought about by some non-evolution method that we don't understand yet. What about the fact that there are multitudes of fossil creatures that just appeared, fully developed, without something to have developed from? Where is your proof of even one pure random happening, so that we can see that there is a possibility that things were not programmed to exist as they are? After all, physics doesn't deviate in producing results. If it did, nobody could expect to ever get the same result from the same scientific experiment. Where is natural selection? After all, nature has made multitudes of fantastic forms of life. Scientists and engineers can't make even one. And nature has fantastic reproduction in all its life forms. Scientists don't even entirely understand how it works. Why is nature so smart beyond all scientists and engineers? When you look at the answers evolution people give to these and many other questions, you don't even realize that the answers skirt the questions, rather than answering them. But that is all right for you. You need to keep your evolution religion intact, right? Evolution isn't just a hoax. It's a complete fabrication. You have points in your questions, and even if answers skirt the questions, as you say, how come you so easily accept another solution to the questions, one which has absolutely zero proof? Why don’t you apply the same suspicion and scrutiny to this solution? 500 years ago, we did not even know electricity existed. Might have experienced it via static electricity, but did not really know what it was. Just because we don’t know – yet – does not mean it is not true. 2-4000 years ago, people believed in a multitude of gods, as an absolutely undisputed fact. They would think you were crazy if you told them there was only one. How were they less correct vs. your beliefs now? I think you would say they are, because it’s obvious and maybe even downright insane to you – but prove it to me! Just because scientists and engineers can’t make life yet, has zero to do with if any given thing is true or not. That's exactly the problem with these people. They are extremely skeptical about evolution, for example and yet accept other ridiculous claims so easily. He said numerous times that he knows the bible is real because ''eye witnesses'' rofl. |
|
|
|
Funny how this guy doesn't know what the ancient greeks knew over 2,000 years ago. Hey buddy, was 9/11 an inside job and Sandy Hook a hoax too? Just testing out my own theory.... Either he's a terrific troll with a devastating amount of free time on his hands or... well there is no "or." I explained to him how you can prove the earth is not flat with a few shadows, he ignored it lol. |
|
|
|
Some of these creeps consider it to be a 'humanitarian' action. Kinda like getting a pet neutered or spayed so that 'future generations' will not have to 'struggle' with overpopulation issues. The academics who design and analyze these programs, and the middle level operatives who implement them are prone to this line of thought. The people at the top know it is about power, money, and control. They are psychopaths who take pleasure in their 'successes' in these kinds of things.
...
How can you believe in these idiotic myths? Overpopulation is not even close to be a problem, probably never will, do you know China? So many people live inside China and they are perfectly fine, even if the population doubled or tripled in size we would still be fine and by that time we will probably live on Mars. I can believe that the psychopaths with huge influence believe this stuff because I pay attention to what they write and say. I can believe they act on their desires because there is a huge amount of evidence for it. I know of China and India and have in fact traveled to both. I believe that both probably are more highly populated than is desirable by any standard, but that is their problem to work out. As long as they don't work it out by sending their excess people to take over my country I don't think it is any of my business to tell them what to do. I would also mention that often times when a person travels they see mostly or exclusively the densely populated urban areas and get a distorted view of reality. Indeed, even urban residents of a nation itself sometimes 'don't get out of town much.' This make them prone to be intellectually victimized by the Eco-fraud crowd (who are usually bank-rolled by control freak psychopaths who have their own agenda.) So on one side you believe some unknown group of people control us so much that they are literally creating harmful vaccines to slowly kill us with time but you also believe they are stupid enough to think overpopulation is a problem? LUL |
|
|
|
I think a sicker could not be about having a vaccine or without being vaccinated. The chemicals mixed to the vaccine and to our foods causes the man to be in a poor health. Also the lifestyle is one of the reason why man become sick. However, in our country, the Philippines, some childs died because of a vaccinne.
The policy of the U.S. is to have fewer people in the Philippines. This will help our corporations obtain mineral resources at a lower cost. That is known from documents rather than inferred from activities. Now four decades later corporations are much more 'multi-national' than they were. ... Limiting the people in the Philippines by using this whatsoever is unhuman. Ya think? Some of these creeps consider it to be a 'humanitarian' action. Kinda like getting a pet neutered or spayed so that 'future generations' will not have to 'struggle' with overpopulation issues. The academics who design and analyze these programs, and the middle level operatives who implement them are prone to this line of thought. The people at the top know it is about power, money, and control. They are psychopaths who take pleasure in their 'successes' in these kinds of things. Most of our people does not entrust vaccines immediately wether it is local or foriegn.
Glad to hear. The Philippines has been sort of a 'ground zero' for testing out population control ideas on the little brownies. Ever since the hCG-laced 'tetanus' vaccine designed to sterilize women. The DAR supervise the natural fruits, foods and resources to enhances the growth of healthy production. Also, our experts do study the strategies of other countries in managing health problems.
Looks to me as though the problem of political corruption is what is biting the Filipino people in the ass over and over again. Right up until the Sanofi related denguvaxia scandal just recently. Glad to see the Duterte seems to be at least a little bit active in at least acknowledging the issue and trying to get to the bottom of it. No wonder he is so hated by the Western media. How can you believe in these idiotic myths? Overpopulation is not even close to be a problem, probably never will, do you know China? So many people live inside China and they are perfectly fine, even if the population doubled or tripled in size we would still be fine and by that time we will probably live on Mars. |
|
|
|
I see you don't have any examples listed, that prove evolution.
There are literally hundreds of examples listed for you in this thread do you really think its necessary for me to repeat it to you for the hundredth time? It's like my old grand pappy used to say "you can lead a retard to the truth but you can't make him understand it!" It's nothing personal I just think you're a moron, oh wait is that personal? Those are not examples of evolution. One of the things that would have to be shown to be proof for evolution is, somebody would have to show an evolution mutation that benefited a creature, and the next beneficial mutation change to one of its descendants that carried the first beneficial mutation change, and the next beneficial mutation to one of its descendants that carried the first two beneficial mutation changes... and more would be better, because it is difficult determining from a selection of only 3, if the changes are, indeed, beneficial changes, since mutation changes can be exceedingly tiny. Nobody has found this, and nobody will ever be able to find it, at least not until we develop a time machine to actually go back and examine countless creatures in the past. Why not? Because according to ETE, these changes are too far apart in history for us to live long enough to detect such changes, even in punctuated evolution. So, evolution will never be proven... at least not for a long time. Of course, we need to start, now, recording all the natural mutation changes that we can get our hands on, just in case one of them turns out to be beneficial. This way we can watch all the descendants of all these creatures in the hopes that one of them will have a second beneficial mutation change. And remember. It has to be in an undisturbed natural nature so that scientists cannot be accused of manipulation. Are you beginning to see how difficult it will be proving evolution, and why the evolution stuff that some people call proof, isn't really proof at all? Why do you even keep replying? Is it to convince yourself that you are asking for proof and no one is giving it to you so you can tell yourself, yeah these guys don't have any evidence, evolution is truly a hoax. I can give you plenty of examples of beneficial mutations that are passed on through generations but then you will say the same things that you have been saying all the time, evolution fits better adaption (which is retarded) and mutations aren't random therefore evolution can't exist (which is not proven) |
|
|
|
...
Modern science places the earth’s radius at 3,959 miles, ...
Can you be more specific, "modern science" is a little bit vague? You're literally pulling a number out of your ass and calling it science. Forget about that part if it bothers you, read below the image to understand how ridiculous your model is. |
|
|
|
^^^ Just kill yourself now:  Mathematical proof that modifying the experiment by adding a 3rd well (or stick) at Luxor doesn't change anything. Modern science places the earth’s radius at 3,959 miles, which gives a pole to pole circumference of about 24,875 miles. Dividing by 360, we find that one degree of arc should be about 69.1 miles on the earth’s surface. That is why lines of latitude are about 69.1 apart. So on a globe for every 69.1 miles or one degree of latitude you move north or south of the point the sun is directly overhead, the angle of the shadow in that location would increase by one degree. If Eratosthenes was correct, the angle of his shadow must have been equal to Alexandria’s latitude north of Syene, because that would be the angle that Alexandria is leaning away from Syene due to the curvature of the earth. If three other astronomers had performed the experiment on the same day at 20 degrees, 40 degrees, and 60 degrees north of the Tropic of Cancer, they would each respectively measure a shadow angle of 20 degrees, 40 degrees, and 60 degrees, and all would arrive at a circumference of 24,875 miles. The beauty of Eratosthenes’ experiment is that you can repeat it anywhere on earth, on any day of the year, and arrive at the same circumference. This is where the flat earth model runs into problems.  In the flat earth model, as a consequence of geometry, as your distance from the point the sun is directly overhead increases, the distance between each successive degree of shadow will also increase exponentially. For example, assume the sun is giving off a 45 degree shadow at 45 degrees north, as depicted in this flat earther meme. If the earth were flat, that would mean that the sun is, more precisely, 3,110 miles high. In that case, it would be 1,132 miles to the 20 degree shadow, 1,478 miles between the 20 and 40 degree shadows, and a whopping 2,777 miles between the 40 and 60 degree shadows. Someone performing Eratosthenes’ experiment at 20 degrees north of the Tropic of Cancer would arrive at a circumference of 20,376 miles, someone at 40 degrees north would get 23,486 miles, and someone at 60 degrees north would get 32,320 miles. Flat earthers use the Azimuthal Equidistant Projection map, which shows all points at an undistorted distance and direction from the center. Lines of latitude on the flat earth map have flat earth mapthe same spacing as those on the globe: 69.1 miles per degree. It is for this reason that the angle of the shadow can only be equal to the degrees of latitude between you and the point the sun is directly overhead in one location. Everywhere south of that point the shadow angle would be greater than the latitude and everywhere north of that point the shadow angle would be less than the latitude. If the sun were 3,110 miles above the flat earth, the 20 degree shadow would be 16.4 degrees north, the 40 degree shadow 37.8 degrees north, and the 60 degree shadow 78 degrees north. Only at 45 degrees north would the latitude and the angle of the shadow actually match as they would everywhere on the globe and only there would someone arrive at a circumference of 24,875 miles. You can change the height of the sun all you like, the latitude and angle will only be the same in one location. Even then, it is only a coincidence due to the random height of the sun, not a direct function of latitude as it is on the globe. To be sure, if each of our astronomers were to measure a shadow angle corresponding to their latitude, as is to be expected on the globe, and you were still assuming a flat earth model, that would require that from 20 degrees north the sun be 3,797 miles high above the flat earth, at 40 degrees north 3,294 miles high, and at 60 degrees north 2,393 miles high. An impossibility. The only possible solution would be to distort the flat earth map beyond recognition by staggering the lines of latitude, but even then it would only be correct for a single day, as the sun moves to a different latitude each day and the model would again become increasingly wrong. |
|
|
|
^^^ LOL, triangulation involves using two points to calculate a third. A few relevant points: - If you use a sextant and measure the distance to the Sun it's about 3,000 miles high and 32 miles wide. - There's no proof Eratosthenes was a real person and his experiment relies on making multiple assumptions. He's most likely a fictional character created by the ((Jesuits)) as a tool to spread globalist propaganda. His experiment assumes the Sun is millions of miles away, assumes that the Sun's rays strike the Earth in parallel, and assumes the story of the light down the well at noon in an adjacent city is true. This is not even science. - Adding a third point to the experiment doesn't change anything other than increasing its resolution; a small close Sun over a flat plain still works the same.   https://flatearth.ws/eratosthenesStop believing non sense. Also: https://takethisskepticalblog.wordpress.com/2015/10/21/how-to-disprove-the-flat-earth/ |
|
|
|
I wouldn't say all cops are bad, but there is good evidence to believe such things.
I have watched dozens of videos of cops doing illegal things over the years. Everything from planting drugs to shooting people in the back. Not once have I seen a cop administer first-aid. Not once have I seen a cop question or detain another cop after they clearly shot someone illegally. Not once have I seen a cop place another cop under arrest after witnessing them do something illegal.
In fact, the only good cop I can think of (a cop who actually reported the illegal activities of another cop), is one who recorded his commanding officer telling him to arrest more blacks and hispanics in Florida.
As far as I can see, 99% of them are accomplices to the evils of their fellow cops. Even if they did not do it themselves, they watched another cop do it and said nothing.
This makes them equally guilty under the law they presume to uphold
So you watched a few videos of cops doing bad things therefore 99% of cops are bad? Oh well :^) |
|
|
|
So you are actually serious? No troll? How can someone with more than 60 IQ say those things? It's so retarded it's insane.
''ince there are a lot more cops, and since cops are treacherous at times, cops are way worse than ISIS, who honestly does what they were designed to do.'' Just because a group is designed to do something doesn't mean they are morally good, assassins are designed to kill people, hitmen are designed to kill people, no one thinks they are good, no one. We know they are morally wrong, we know killing people is bad, you should know that too because you believe in the bible, cops are there to protect and serve, the few bad cops that don't are bad, the rest are good, the overwhelming majority of cops are good people, end of story.
Wrong! The thing you say makes all cops except for a very few, to be bad cops. Why? Because all except a very few support the Police Union, even when they know that the Union is fighting for something wrong. Cops are way worse than ISIS. They are simply deceptive in looking good most of the time, when they are really bad down into their core. ''The thing you say makes all cops except for a very few, to be bad cops.'' It's not what I say, it's what I show, statistics clearly show that only a few cops are bad, it's a fact. ''even when they know that the Union is fighting for something wrong.'' Prove it. |
|
|
|
|
Remember ''Do not quote your previous report, this only slows us down.'' If you do, you will get 0 stakes for that week.
|
|
|
|
^^^ LOL, triangulation involves using two points to calculate a third. A few relevant points: - If you use a sextant and measure the distance to the Sun it's about 3,000 miles high and 32 miles wide. - There's no proof Eratosthenes was a real person and his experiment relies on making multiple assumptions. He's most likely a fictional character created by the ((Jesuits)) as a tool to spread globalist propaganda. His experiment assumes the Sun is millions of miles away, assumes that the Sun's rays strike the Earth in parallel, and assumes the story of the light down the well at noon in an adjacent city is true. This is not even science. - Adding a third point to the experiment doesn't change anything other than increasing its resolution; a small close Sun over a flat plain still works the same. Doesn't matter whether you beloeve eratosthenes or not, with 3 wells, not sticks, your flat earth model simply doesn't work, ever, it's fairly easy to understand lol |
|
|
|
Please include your telegram profile. |
|
|
|
Tell me, does the report take a new report every time or edit the old report?
Report every week please and do not quote your older reports. |
|
|
|
|
erastothenes calculated it 2k years ago using the bottom of 2 wells, however 2 wells are not enough. The reason the 2 shadow solution can give varying results (and work for both round and flat models) is because the angle of the light can be explained by a closer source depending on the shape of the surface.
The best way to picture it is to imagine shadow-1 is on the equator during the equinox. shadow-2 is some distance north of shadow-1. At Shadow-1 the light is coming down at 90° to the ground, so there's no shadow, no calculations needed, the line goes right from the shadow to the sun. nice n easy. Shadow-2 you get a right angle triangle. The hypotenuse of that triangle is the direction of the sunlight.
So if Earth is flat, that hypotenuse line from shadow-2 will cross with the verticle line from shadow-1. If the sun is far away, the hypotenuse from 2 and line from 1 will essentially be parallel... which is how the greeks did the calculation.
It's like triangulating. If you only have 2 detectors you will get a line of possible locations of the source. When you had the 3rd detector you can pinpoint where on that line the source is, triangulating it. It's not the same math, but the same idea works for calculating the curve of the Earth. You get a line of possible sun locations depending on how concave/flat/convex the Earth's surface is, adding a 3rd shadow to the experiment allows you to triangulate where on that line the sun really is... and it's not close, it's far.
Rip flat earth, again.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
