Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,905 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 2,098,646
Pageviews Today: 3,060,423Threads Today: 708Posts Today: 15,865
10:17 PM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!

 
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
05/30/2010 03:55 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
When and if you see it . . . it will make a lasting impression on you. It hits you in the gut and you get angry.
 Quoting: George B


It is this kind of response which I keep in mind when hearing witnesses to any evil -- how fair it is that they are hurt and angry;

and we, by proxy, when we realize it, we WILL be hurt and angry (called "obsessed" even if not obsessed).

And we will realize it's part of OUR world too.

As MLK (Martin Luther King) said when it was suggested he should care a bit less, or was crazy for caring (I paraphrase again): Yes, I care. And I will continue to care!
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
05/30/2010 03:58 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
So, the "Zetas" are interfering (i.e., fixing appearances) but will not interfere (i.e., to save us from the PX disaster).



This premise is very close to the most ridiculous claim in all of ZetaTalk, which is saying quite a bit.

It's obvious to any rational person that has followed the saga from pre-2003 that this is all just a bizarre, completely illogical and impossible rationalization for events not happening as Nancy predicted.

No one but a handful of very deluded people will take you seriously about anything if you attempt to defend this nonsense.

I don't know if that's fair or not but it's the truth.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 969583


Hey.

I am not defending THAT it's happening. I put "Zetas" into quotation marks. I am clarifying what the claim is. And Menow was confusing the claim.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
05/30/2010 04:01 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Get real. Of course the assassination theories have been around, but kept as "theory as a notion" not theory tht would stand in a court of law and yes, let's take it there. No -- the mendia have talking points and always present it as "no credible evience" whenever they can. This keeps good people believing there is no conclusion possible.

[...]

The Zeta thing is not at the same level of testability. Not unless they present themselves physically for testing. Or PX presents itself -- but in that case, this debate is moot.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233


Hey, I noticed a cool typo I made: it became a spelling error in the other sense, of a meaning shift.

I wrote the "mendia" instead of the "media". And "mendacity" is of course "lying". So it works!

The Mendia. I like that!

5a
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
05/30/2010 04:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
It makes me think that you might be the shunned Luserboi trying to play nice, or maybe one of the other dumbfuck Canucks that do Nancy's bidding, like Agnes or Earth320 hiding behind a proxy.


No, she's who she says she is.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 969583

Thank you. This really is getting stupid.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 908953
Canada
05/30/2010 04:08 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Look, I have been mistreated here for days. I apologize if you think I insulted your intelligence. I did however point out to you a clear difference. And was mad at Menow for making the confusion of this term so often. It was HIS comment earlier to which I was referring in being pissed off.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

I'm not surprised you are being "mistreated". You are posting on a thread that exists to debunk Zetatalk. What did you expect? You use acrobatic "logic" to defend the indefensible. Maybe if you started your own thread you would attract woo woos with the same mentality to discuss nicely.

Menow HAS been one of the ones repeating this stuff about "interfering" not being "interfering".

So I added that in.

As to using the term "gobbledygook", you are using others' terms (Menow, I believe started that, too).


 Quoting: mclarek 986233

See? You did it again. You are suggesting that I need Menow to tell me the meaning of the word "interfering", when I can say with confidence that I have more education in writing and languages than you do. I am not using anyone's terms. Gobbledygook is a word. Look it up in the dictionary. Your ignorance and arrogance is showing!
And going again into the idea of my being someone else is RIDICULOUS.

 Quoting: mclarek 986233

It's a site where people engage in role playing. Read the disclaimer.
Who people are? By writing off their statements to start with, and not realizing how others interference can affect what you see in them, one can end up not understanding what they say. Then, the whole personality of the writer is missed, too.

My comments sometimes had stiltedness, but you guys would have seen very quickly who I was AND what I was getting at (even if in error) if there had been more positive questions and understanding salvos. Interference and mockery, interrupting the process of communication, did not help the situation.

However, do you now see the difference between interfering (to save us) and interfering (as Menow used it, to mean maintaining appearances)?

Hope I helped, is all. Cheers.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Again, this is GLP. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. And again you are insulting the intelligence of readers here, implying that we form opinions based on what other posters tell us to believe. (Holy shit, Menow, I bet you didn't know how important and influential you are ROFLMAO). Interfering is interfering. Look it up in a dictionary.
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
05/30/2010 04:18 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Look, I have been mistreated here for days. I apologize if you think I insulted your intelligence. I did however point out to you a clear difference. And was mad at Menow for making the confusion of this term so often. It was HIS comment earlier to which I was referring in being pissed off.

I'm not surprised you are being "mistreated". You are posting on a thread that exists to debunk Zetatalk. What did you expect? You use acrobatic "logic" to defend the indefensible. Maybe if you started your own thread you would attract woo woos with the same mentality to discuss nicely.



Menow HAS been one of the ones repeating this stuff about "interfering" not being "interfering".

So I added that in.

As to using the term "gobbledygook", you are using others' terms (Menow, I believe started that, too).



See? You did it again. You are suggesting that I need Menow to tell me the meaning of the word "interfering", when I can say with confidence that I have more education in writing and languages than you do. I am not using anyone's terms. Gobbledygook is a word. Look it up in the dictionary. Your ignorance and arrogance is showing!


And going again into the idea of my being someone else is RIDICULOUS.


It's a site where people engage in role playing. Read the disclaimer.


Who people are? By writing off their statements to start with, and not realizing how others interference can affect what you see in them, one can end up not understanding what they say. Then, the whole personality of the writer is missed, too.

My comments sometimes had stiltedness, but you guys would have seen very quickly who I was AND what I was getting at (even if in error) if there had been more positive questions and understanding salvos. Interference and mockery, interrupting the process of communication, did not help the situation.

However, do you now see the difference between interfering (to save us) and interfering (as Menow used it, to mean maintaining appearances)?

Hope I helped, is all. Cheers.

Again, this is GLP. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. And again you are insulting the intelligence of readers here, implying that we form opinions based on what other posters tell us to believe. (Holy shit, Menow, I bet you didn't know how important and influential you are ROFLMAO). Interfering is interfering. Look it up in a dictionary.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 908953

Clare is a bit naive with GLP and Zeta debunkers. She has not logged enough time on GLP to get all the head games and twists. I have been around almost a year and I am still learning the ropes. The thing that amazes me is she is still full of energy and has taken some of your best shots and keeps firing back. She is a trooper I have to give her that. Forgive them Clare for they KNOW (very well) what they DO!

Last Edited by George B on 05/30/2010 04:19 PM
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 969583
United States
05/30/2010 04:33 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
As to the Z-film it is debated but not "debatable" any longer. It was at issue before Costella's work on optics. Now, the case is done. It is only the after-party of debate teams which you are now listening to: where the losers keep sayng, "we didn't lose".

 Quoting: mclarek 986233


After your lengthy argument that the Moon isn't rotating, I don't trust that you have the knowledge of optics, or the technical or scientific objectivity to judge Costella's work.

There certainly appears to be continued debate and his premise seems implausible even if one believes in some sort of JFK conspiracy.

Also, Costella appears to support your associate Jack White's Moon hoax theories which is strike one, two and three for me regarding his reliability.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 986410
Germany
05/30/2010 04:38 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Nancy is having a live-radio show:

[link to www.blogtalkradio.com]

Nancy Leiden returns to discuss the poleshift!
 Quoting: radio


They got her name a bit wrong, rofl.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 986410
Germany
05/30/2010 04:42 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
ROFL ... she connected the oil spill with the Planet X caused wobble in the first sentence.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
05/30/2010 04:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
As to using the term "gobbledygook", you are using others' terms (Menow, I believe started that, too).


See? You did it again. You are suggesting that I need Menow to tell me the meaning of the word "interfering", when I can say with confidence that I have more education in writing and languages than you do. I am not using anyone's terms. Gobbledygook is a word. Look it up in the dictionary. Your ignorance and arrogance is showing!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 908953


No, I meant that he seeded the discussion of me with that word and others have been using it as an easy out, parrotting him. It is not the meaning of the word which I questioned, but the parrotting.

And going again into the idea of my being someone else is RIDICULOUS.


It's a site where people engage in role playing. Read the disclaimer.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 908953


I know that. I accused Menow of being a troll, himself. What I was saying as usual here was that my personality shows it's I, not another.

However, do you now see the difference between interfering (to save us) and interfering (as Menow used it, to mean maintaining appearances)?

Hope I helped, is all. Cheers.

Again, this is GLP. If you can't take the heat, stay out of the kitchen. And again you are insulting the intelligence of readers here, implying that we form opinions based on what other posters tell us to believe. (Holy shit, Menow, I bet you didn't know how important and influential you are ROFLMAO). Interfering is interfering. Look it up in a dictionary.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 908953

Testy, are we? (To quote you.)

I have taken heat, thank you.

If YOU are so worried that your intelligence is being questioned, maybe YOU should go.

And you cannot see, yet, that interfering as meddling action is interfering, but the "Zetas" were (supposedly) interfering ONLY to save appearances. Menow wasn't saying, "My God, they're interfering in ONE way, supposedly, so why not interfere in ANOTHER way and save us!"

No, he was claiming that if "Zetas" are interfering if they are saving appearances, that's the same thing as saving us from PX.

Obviously it's not the same thing, though they're both interference.

So, when "they say", "We are not allowed to interfere," the context is important: they are not allowed to interfere TO SAVE US FROM PX. That is the context of THAT statement. Finish the statement and you see what they mean.

They are allowed to interfere to confuse negative plotters (supposedly). So, they can interfere, just not indiscriminately or to save us from the PX arrival itself, which is considered a natural event.

Do you get that now? They interfere, but are "not allowed to interfere" in the key way. Most people speak in context and shorten sentences accordingly.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 986902
Finland
05/30/2010 04:47 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Forgive them Clare for they KNOW (very well) what they DO!
 Quoting: George B

No they don't.
George B

User ID: 976283
United States
05/30/2010 04:49 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Forgive them Clare for they KNOW (very well) what they DO!

No they don't.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 986902

Please explain?
Martin Luther King . . . Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter!

All truths are easy to understand once they are discovered; the point is to discover them.
Galileo Galilei, Italian astronomer & physicist (1564 - 1642)

The only thing guaranteed in life is deception. . . everything else is optional . . . George B
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
05/30/2010 04:50 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
As to the Z-film it is debated but not "debatable" any longer. It was at issue before Costella's work on optics. Now, the case is done. It is only the after-party of debate teams which you are now listening to: where the losers keep sayng, "we didn't lose".



After your lengthy argument that the Moon isn't rotating, I don't trust that you have the knowledge of optics, or the technical or scientific objectivity to judge Costella's work.

There certainly appears to be continued debate and his premise seems implausible even if one believes in some sort of JFK conspiracy.

Also, Costella appears to support your associate Jack White's Moon hoax theories which is strike one, two and three for me regarding his reliability.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 969583


I said all along the MOON IS ROTATING, but not RELATIVE TO ITS ORBIT OF EARTH, when the forward motion around the Sun is discounted.

Costella a) could be wrong about Jack White AND right about the optics, b) right about both, c) wrong about both (hypothetically only, for in fact his optics work on the Z film is conclusive).

There is conclusive work on some of the Moon photos. And remember, they can be fake as a guaranteed photo op but we could still have gone to the Moon. It is the Van Allen belt and lack of room in the LEM for 2 men, suited, with backpacks, which takes care of the latter question.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
05/30/2010 04:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Clare is a bit naive with GLP and Zeta debunkers. She has not logged enough time on GLP to get all the head games and twists. I have been around almost a year and I am still learning the ropes. The thing that amazes me is she is still full of energy and has taken some of your best shots and keeps firing back. She is a trooper I have to give her that. Forgive them Clare for they KNOW (very well) what they DO!
 Quoting: George B


You mean EVEN THOUGH they know what they do, lol. (Oh, and I am NOT insulting your intelligence, as one of the others thought I was, his.)

Yes, I know they know -- some anyway. Others simply have very insecure egos which assume everyone else is playing their game as they are, and so they get nasty and cock-sure.

So, George, I do know. But thank you. I just decided to re-posit the points, and handle the twists and turns ----- with some humour.

And yes, I know the Moon rotates. But it only does so in the superposition, or "layer of understanding" (which Menow says doesn't exist as a valid expression!), from the revlution around the Sun and bigger superpositions. The tidal lock, which creates a one-facedness to Earth, can also be expressed as a circular orbit of Moon around Earth, with the system otherwise still.

In this understanding, the Moon does not rotate, it only revolves.

But in the physically larger superpostion, it does not revolve around Earth; it rotates along a sine wave, relative to the Earth, in tidal lock, and the sine wave revolves around the Sun.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 908953
Canada
05/30/2010 04:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
As to using the term "gobbledygook", you are using others' terms (Menow, I believe started that, too).


See? You did it again. You are suggesting that I need Menow to tell me the meaning of the word "interfering", when I can say with confidence that I have more education in writing and languages than you do. I am not using anyone's terms. Gobbledygook is a word. Look it up in the dictionary. Your ignorance and arrogance is showing!

No, I meant that he seeded the discussion of me with that word and others have been using it as an easy out, parrotting him. It is not the meaning of the word which I questioned, but the parrotting.

 Quoting: mclarek 986233

How is that different? It still insults our intelligence and assumes that we all follow Menow around parroting him. News flash for you. The debunkers on this thread are very intelligent people from all kinds of professional and amateur backgrounds, with enough experience in their field to recognize bullshit when they read it.

If YOU are so worried that your intelligence is being questioned, maybe YOU should go.

 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Well since I am one of the original regular debunkers that started this thread, I think I will stick around. I was known as KeepingItReal, but I can't remember my password. You are like the new neighbour that moves in and expects the neighbourhood to change to suit them.

And you cannot see, yet, that interfering as meddling action is interfering, but the "Zetas" were (supposedly) interfering ONLY to save appearances. Menow wasn't saying, "My God, they're interfering in ONE way, supposedly, so why not interfere in ANOTHER way and save us!"

No, he was claiming that if "Zetas" are interfering if they are saving appearances, that's the same thing as saving us from PX.

Obviously it's not the same thing, though they're both interference.

So, when "they say", "We are not allowed to interfere," the context is important: they are not allowed to interfere TO SAVE US FROM PX. That is the context of THAT statement. Finish the statement and you see what they mean.

They are allowed to interfere to confuse negative plotters (supposedly). So, they can interfere, just not indiscriminately or to save us from the PX arrival itself, which is considered a natural event.

Do you get that now? They interfere, but are "not allowed to interfere" in the key way. Most people speak in context and shorten sentences accordingly.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Um, yeah, OK. Maybe in your logic challenged world. ROFLMAO.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/30/2010 05:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
But also the Van Allen belts and the little LEM make the thing preposterous.


 Quoting: mclarek 986233


How so? Please be specific, and be prepared to back up your claims with factual references. This has been beat to hell and back, so if you're wanting to get into it, be prepared.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 986902
Finland
05/30/2010 05:02 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Forgive them Clare for they KNOW (very well) what they DO!

No they don't.

Please explain?
 Quoting: George B

There's no need to give any credit to posters at GLP or in this thread. It's true that there are people here who know their stuff. Like for instance Astronut knows his stuff about gazing at galaxies and related. There are some really knowledgeable people here.

That doesn't mean they would know what they're doing, exactly, when replying or confronting Clare.

There are people here who are very knowledgeable about astronomy, electronics, physics and stuff like that. And the very same people can be totally ignorant regarding language for instance. Ignorant and blind.

That's why it's so easy for many people to truly assume/believe that it's Nancy hiding behind every other poster here.

Very many people have been accused (seriously!) of being in fact Nancy. I'm one of them.

So no, they don't know what they're doing.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
05/30/2010 05:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Forgive them Clare for they KNOW (very well) what they DO!

No they don't.

Please explain?
 Quoting: George B

Maybe our Finnish friend thinks they're all innocent.

And you know what? In some sense we all are, no matter how intentional we are being ... for it makes me think of the source of the statement, Jesus. (I should say, he's supposedly the source -- I mean, if the Gospel writers were quoting accurately).

Jesus knew the people wanted him gone ... but he was saying they really don't fully know what drives them, and how ignorant they are. And he's right.

It's true of all people -- but of some moreso true than others, and of some far less true (e.g., of Jesus, himself, possibly).
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/30/2010 05:03 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
It is the Van Allen belt and lack of room in the LEM for 2 men, suited, with backpacks, which takes care of the latter question.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233


There you go again. Please post your references. As for the Van allen belts, Dr. Van Allen himself has stated that thinking that the Apollo missions couldn't go through them is ridiculous. What do you know that he didn't?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 986161
United States
05/30/2010 05:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Zetatalk is nothing more than a badly written pseudoreligion...and a failed one at that.

That is all.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/30/2010 05:05 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
It is the Van Allen belt and lack of room in the LEM for 2 men, suited, with backpacks, which takes care of the latter question.


There you go again. Please post your references. As for the Van allen belts, Dr. Van Allen himself has stated that thinking that the Apollo missions couldn't go through them is ridiculous. What do you know that he didn't?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 795135


[link to www.clavius.org]

"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/30/2010 05:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Now that we've blown away your Van Allen bsts claim, Clare, where is your evidence for the lack of room in the LM?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/30/2010 05:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Typo: belts
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
05/30/2010 05:11 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
That guy totally rocks:
[link to zetasquawk.com]
wonder how long before the zetatards catch it???
(thats should set the cat amongst the pigeons for sure...)


Link doesn't show a site.
It is closed? Or being renovated?


Yea, something like that. There is a web site there that's
being worked on, but what can be read would drive the folks
on ning nuts. They think it's really a government run web
site.





K00KFIGHT!!!!!!

Nothing better than. Bob Officer and I have discussed the
idea of putting up a Kookology Facebook page. I told him
an AUK page would only be of interest to usenetters but a
Kookology page everyone could relate to.
 Quoting: DrPostman


Bob is good people! I bet we could have a lot of fun with clunk and Kazoo!
non sufficit Orbis

Being a zetatard means never having to make sense.

"Nancy pays me to post on Her threads"

Free Store admits to being a paid zetadrool shill

NO max/bridget EVER!!!!!
NO luser EVER!!!
NO clunker EVER!!!!!
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
05/30/2010 05:14 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
No, I meant that he seeded the discussion of me with that word and others have been using it as an easy out, parrotting him. It is not the meaning of the word which I questioned, but the parrotting.


How is that different? It still insults our intelligence and assumes that we all follow Menow around parroting him. News flash for you. The debunkers on this thread are very intelligent people from all kinds of professional and amateur backgrounds, with enough experience in their field to recognize bullshit when they read it.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 908953


This is loaded. No, people make mistakes. Even in "their field". Certain types of thinking lead to certain difficulties in communication with others naturally: in other words, certain types of learning lead to mis-construing other types of learning quite easily, if one is not very careful. It's typical. And it is not a matter of intelligence or not.

As for parrotting: the meanness in the thread increased and used Menow's word in approbation of it, towards me, after he used it again and again.

The thought that I made no sense may have been your own, but it is common that people parrot already-available "memes" including specific words.

So, you may very well think my actions were the equivalent of gobbledygook, but it is far less likely that you would have chosen that word -- unless it's a favourite for you as it is for Menow -- without his having INTRODUCED IT.

This is not a question of your intelligence.


If YOU are so worried that your intelligence is being questioned, maybe YOU should go.


Well since I am one of the original regular debunkers that started this thread, I think I will stick around. I was known as KeepingItReal, but I can't remember my password. You are like the new neighbour that moves in and expects the neighbourhood to change to suit them.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 908953


I was being sarcastic. Unlike some people here who are always so serious, or seriously mean in their sarcasm. I was being merely sarcastic.

They are allowed to interfere to confuse negative plotters (supposedly). So, they can interfere, just not indiscriminately or to save us from the PX arrival itself, which is considered a natural event.

Do you get that now? They interfere, but are "not allowed to interfere" in the key way. Most people speak in context and shorten sentences accordingly.

Um, yeah, OK. Maybe in your logic challenged world. ROFLMAO.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 908953


I can say, "I am not allowed to interfere" and mean something very specific in one context, really not having given the full context in the sentence, but covering it in other sentences or it was covered in the question which was asked. (The latter is the case on ZT: they are often asked, "Why aren't you going to STOP IT." They supposedly reply, "We are not allowed to interfere." The implication is not EVER, but rather TO STOP IT.)

I may be allowed to interfere in some other way, and say, "Oh of course I'm allowed to interfere, just not to INTERFERE [implying some specific important interference I'm not allowed to do]."

Get it?
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
05/30/2010 05:19 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
It is the Van Allen belt and lack of room in the LEM for 2 men, suited, with backpacks, which takes care of the latter question.


There you go again. Please post your references. As for the Van allen belts, Dr. Van Allen himself has stated that thinking that the Apollo missions couldn't go through them is ridiculous. What do you know that he didn't?


[link to www.clavius.org]

"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 795135


Yes, sure. Ever heard of the original suits? They were of LEAD. You know why? Radiation.

But it's possible it would have worked. I don't know as much about that one, as I said. But I know the photos were some of them provable fakes, and the conditions impossible.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 986410
Germany
05/30/2010 05:25 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Ever heard of the original suits? They were of LEAD.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Never heard of that before ... you have a credible source that they were made of lead ?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/30/2010 05:26 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
It is the Van Allen belt and lack of room in the LEM for 2 men, suited, with backpacks, which takes care of the latter question.


There you go again. Please post your references. As for the Van allen belts, Dr. Van Allen himself has stated that thinking that the Apollo missions couldn't go through them is ridiculous. What do you know that he didn't?


[link to www.clavius.org]

"The recent Fox TV show, which I saw, is an ingenious and entertaining assemblage of nonsense. The claim that radiation exposure during the Apollo missions would have been fatal to the astronauts is only one example of such nonsense." -- Dr. James Van Allen


Yes, sure. Ever heard of the original suits? They were of LEAD. You know why? Radiation.


 Quoting: mclarek 986233


No, the suits were NEVER made of lead, for crying out loud. If you think so, then where is your reference?
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 795135
United States
05/30/2010 05:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
But it's possible it would have worked. I don't know as much about that one, as I said. But I know the photos were some of them provable fakes, and the conditions impossible.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233



OK, let's see your evidence. In detail, please.

Let's see your "provable fakes".
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 908953
Canada
05/30/2010 05:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
No, I meant that he seeded the discussion of me with that word and others have been using it as an easy out, parrotting him. It is not the meaning of the word which I questioned, but the parrotting.


How is that different? It still insults our intelligence and assumes that we all follow Menow around parroting him. News flash for you. The debunkers on this thread are very intelligent people from all kinds of professional and amateur backgrounds, with enough experience in their field to recognize bullshit when they read it.

This is loaded. No, people make mistakes. Even in "their field". Certain types of thinking lead to certain difficulties in communication with others naturally: in other words, certain types of learning lead to mis-construing other types of learning quite easily, if one is not very careful. It's typical. And it is not a matter of intelligence or not.

 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Well how fortunate that we have you to correct our mistakes. Whatever would we do without you?

As for parrotting: the meanness in the thread increased and used Menow's word in approbation of it, towards me, after he used it again and again.

The thought that I made no sense may have been your own, but it is common that people parrot already-available "memes" including specific words.

So, you may very well think my actions were the equivalent of gobbledygook, but it is far less likely that you would have chosen that word -- unless it's a favourite for you as it is for Menow -- without his having INTRODUCED IT.


 Quoting: mclarek 986233

You are assuming that I have read all of the long and tedious exchanges between you and Menow. Maybe I called it gobbledygook because it is the best word I could think of to define what you write.

News