25 May 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHIn other words, you play the game according to YOUR rules and nobody else gets an answer even though we HAVE answered them, you just pronounce them non-answers and then I am not going to answer your questions till you answer mine, meaning: Till you agree with me you can go piss in a bucket.
You are correct.
Address the OP and we can move forward.
25 May 17
Originally posted by sonhouseStart your own thread, bub.
In other words, you play the game according to YOUR rules and nobody else gets an answer even though we HAVE answered them, you just pronounce them non-answers and then I am not going to answer your questions till you answer mine, meaning: Till you agree with me you can go piss in a bucket.
This thread is for what is in the OP.
Address it or move on.
Originally posted by FreakyKBHLike I said, you prove our point. We don't agree with you, ANY answer we give is BS to you and your puppet masters. That's the bottom line. I already told you what would be a more rigorous analysis with big placards but that is ignored, a non answer.
Start your own thread, bub.
This thread is for what is in the OP.
Address it or move on.
25 May 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHBTW the OP says SONHOUSE I WAS WRONG. So that is what we will go with. You actually admit you were wrong. A step in the right direction.
Start your own thread, bub.
This thread is for what is in the OP.
Address it or move on.
OOOH, wait, you mean that was sarcasm? Wow, didn't see that part.
25 May 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHGee, I don't remember the comeback to this one, wherein my wild-eyed conspiracy theories became so out of control, I was actually claiming things which could not be supported with evidence, because, well, you know: nut job.
[youtube]yjrsHZt5AQc[/youtube]
[b]PUBLIC SERVICE ANNOUNCEMENT (PSA 17.452.a): There are many things you believe that are categorically flat-out wrong.
This will not stop you from emphatically declaring them to be true, even viciously insulting and unkindly denigrating those who point out your errors, but you've been informed, nonetheless.[/b]
What was it that you were saying, Suzianne, about not finding me believable?
26 May 17
Originally posted by FreakyKBHApparently, you're the only one on here who doesn't "know what the hell is going on".
Maybe one of the few women on here will have more balls than you and actually research what it in the hell is going on.
That would make you the only one who needs to research it.
Too bad that you choose crappy sources to learn from.
26 May 17
3 edits
Originally posted by FreakyKBHOk, great, so even smart people sometimes say stupid things, fine.
Gee, I don't remember the comeback to this one, wherein my wild-eyed conspiracy theories became so out of control, I was actually claiming things which could not be supported with evidence, because, well, you know: nut job.
What was it that you were saying, Suzianne, about not finding me believable?
He's also an atheist, so....
But to his defense, he does say the earth is oblate, which is correct. He also says the southern hemisphere is slightly wider around than the northern hemisphere which is also correct. This doesn't equate to being "pear-shaped". Not in the slightest. If a pear was shaped exactly like the earth, you would never notice the "wider on the bottom" bit, the difference is minuscule. In this case, I'd say that "pear-shaped" is hyperbole. It's actually nothing like a pear. He introduces the "pear-shaped" analogy to illustrate the "wider on the bottom" concept, but I'm sure even he knows that "pear-shaped" is really, really stretching his point. Frankly, calling it "pear-shaped" is ridiculous and irresponsible. But having stepped into Carl Sagan's shoes, his job is apparently to distill science into chunks that the hoi polloi can understand. "Pear-shaped" fits that bill, but it is in no way scientifically accurate.