OOAK Table Tennis Forum

Surely this age of technology would allow upgrades from tinfoil hats....but then again anything with technology in it would probably have conspiratory thought control implants I guess

_________________
I'm always in the dark, but the Dark sheds lights upon everything!! Beauty is only pimple deep! Beauty is in the eye of the pipholder!
S/U 1: Blade: Bty Gergely . FH Black Andro Rasant 2.1 . BH Red Tibhar Grass Dtecs
S/U 2: Blade: Bty Gergely . FH Black Hexer+ 2.1 . BH Red GD Talon
S/U 3: Blade: Bty Gergely . No rubbers...thinking of adding Red Dtecs and Black Rasant
Aussie Table Tennis Shop / Aussie Table Tennis Facebook Page / Equipment Review Index / Read my Reb Report Blog: click here.

Ooh, this is interesting! Nothing from mac33 for weeks, and then an immediate response accusing someone of stealing his "work"!

What do we take from this?

1. Posting a youtube video constitutes his "work". So much for independent thought.
2. Anyone who disagrees with mac's viewpoint is a "sheep". So much for respectful dialogue.
3. mac33 is closely following what happens in this thread, but... refuses to respond to anything unless it suits his agenda.

I guess it's the last one which annoys me most. He's watching us take this seriously, posting counterarguments to his "work", but simply will not answer simple questions he's asked. His rudeness is quite breathtaking.

Here's another question for you to ignore, mac: Why can't you respond like a normal, decent human being?

I've posed many questions myself that have went unanswered - like why are we able to see the Chicago skyline from the beach across the bay,distance approx 60 miles.

I've yet to receive a suitable answer.

I've read so far that it is a mirage caused by refraction or some other whacko belief.

Certainly does not look like a mirage to see,more like the real thing.

https://flatearthinsanity.blogspot.com/ ... om-mi.html

If you insist that you have not received a suitable answer, then I will agree that you haven't. You have, however, received a correct answer. We can't do anything with the fact that the correct answer does not suit you.

The page linked above discusses that answer in more detail than what I believe has been done previously in this thread. You will dismiss that answer again, by classifying refraction as "whacko belief" (which says a lot).

Just a little disingenuous, mac. The answer has been given lots of times, but you refuse to accept the science. Nothing we can do about that.

FACT: It is possible to see objects >60 miles away, given the curvature of the earth removes from sight the lowest portion of an object before the highest. Pictures have been posted here which clearly show that the visible part is only the upper parts of the skyline. Do you need us to post those pictures again?

FACT: Refraction ≠ a mirage. I've already posted a picture illustrating that. Light bends = scientific fact. The result of that is seen every single day in all sorts of ways. Just go and get a glass, fill it with water, put a straight skewer in it, then look at it. You know the skewer is not bent, even though it appears to be. In the same way light bends through the atmosphere.

FACT: (I know I'm at risk of confusing you here by now talking about mirages, but they are a subset of refraction.) In a mirage, what is seen is "the real thing", even though the atmosphere causes the light to bend. From our good friends over at Wikipedia: "In contrast to a hallucination, a mirage is a real optical phenomenon that can be captured on camera, since light rays are actually refracted to form the false image at the observer's location. What the image appears to represent, however, is determined by the interpretive faculties of the human mind." Notice, mac33, the last sentence - "the interpretive faculties of the human mind". If someone interprets a refracted sky as water and refuses to accept that it's not water, that's a problem with the person, not the image.

FACT: You've been asked to prove your straight edge is straight and have never attempted to answer the question.

Oh?? I posted an answer right here:

viewtopic.php?f=7&t=29637&start=345#p353961

I even took screen shots from that video you posted. You can clearly see the bottom parts of the buildings were not visible at full distance because they were hidden behind the horizon, but became visible as you get closer. And believe me, the calculation you use to "prove" that the skyline should not be visible is based on bad geometry - just because it's been passed from person to person on YouTube doesn't make it right.

You posted that video, not me. Flat Earthers shot that video, not me.



Actually it's worse... apparently WATCHING YouTube videos constitutes his "work"..

Iskandar

Actually, Flat Earthers, as conspiracists, are probably relatively harmless. THIS, however, worries the heck out of me:

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/06/opin ... heory.html

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/01/us/p ... qanon.html

Unfortunately, flat earthers would be the type of people who'd probably lap this up. They already think there's some sort of all-powerful cabal controlling the world.

Iskandar

Speaking of more "research" (er, YouTube videos)... I wasn't aware of Iridium Flares. Now I should try to catch one.



Flat Earthers probably think they're due to someone shooting off fireworks or something..

Iskandar

I don't know if you've noticed or not, but someone's been very quiet for a very long time. Abduction?

At around the 44 minute mark it gets in to the lie of cosmology.

This is one of the best documentaries ive ever watched.

Scientism - an excessive belief in their stories.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z-ldcmMw3fM

Came across this today. Had quite a bit of a laugh at it.





Ha. It's yet another creationist rant video. At around 44 minutes some guy invents this term "scientism". Big deal.

Iskandar

First up, mac it's good to see you again. I thought we'd scared you away with our attacks on your beliefs.

Secondly, may I point out that your linked video begins with a lie. How am I supposed to believe the rest of the video when it begins with a deceptive and untruthful introduction?

At just 10 seconds into the video, we're shown this supposedly important message: "O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoid profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called." - 1 Tim. 6:20

2 questions: Why is this quoted? And why is it a lie?

Let's start with the second. The text is quoted from the bible without any context or understanding. It's also in a translation which is completely inaccurate. It's an error. The original Greek - from the earliest documents available - is this: Ὦ Τιμόθεε τὴν παρακαταθήκην φύλαξον ἐκτρεπόμενος τὰς βεβήλους κενοφωνίας καὶ ἀντιθέσεις τῆς ψευδωνύμου γνώσεως". Which, I'm guessing you can't read. Note the final word, which is butchered as "science" in the video. The English transliteration of this word is "gnoseos". This word occurs lots and lots of times in the New Testament and is never, ever translated as science. It's always "knowledge" particularly understood as a reference to a cult known as gnostics - you might note the spelling of gnostics and the original word gnoseos. Gnostics were not scientists. They were in fact a cult who believed themselves to have been given divine insights, special knowledge that no one else had. In fact, they were the first century equivalents of modern conspiracy theorists. The warning is against conspiracy theorists, not science!

So why is this (incorrectly) quoted? Because it's from the bible, and this whole hocum is a front for young earth creationists. It's religion, mac. Got nothing to do with what's real or not real. Just an excuse for the worst kind of religious propoganda.

So, mac, are you a young earth creationist? Is your flat earth agenda nothing more than an exercise in religious conversion?

So did you get around to watching it?

Dismissing something as not worthy of watching by labelling it a conspiracy theory or like is weak.

Really difficult to continue debate short of gritting your teeth and confronting the other side.

Believing in the gospel of their 'Science' - is that also not a religious belief too?

Impossible to have an informed opinion on this matter if you're only willing to confront their side of the story. And what a 'story' their heliocentric / evolution model is!

Their evolution theory would be impossible to push without first indoctrinating us to buy their spinning ball theory - no?

How this can even be a discussion.... And for 37 pages... Yeez.

_________________
Read about my adventures to perfect my style and the ever-present battle against the evil EJ virus!

Again and again and again you refuse to deal with specifics raised with you. I'm pointing out one very, very specific issue, identified in the first ten seconds of the video. Why not respond to my criticism? Why not give me a reason for watching more than 10 seconds? If it begins with a lie, why should I waste my time and energy on it?

For once, deal with something specific. Why does the video begin with a lie?