Godlike Productions - Conspiracy Forum
Users Online Now: 2,401 (Who's On?)Visitors Today: 43,654
Pageviews Today: 72,216Threads Today: 20Posts Today: 415
12:32 AM


Rate this Thread

Absolute BS Crap Reasonable Nice Amazing
 

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

 
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 03:52 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
TEST IT ASTRONUT or anyone with cojones.

Do it -- I dare you to prove me wrong here.

Lemme know.

:)
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 996418
United Kingdom
06/08/2010 03:54 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
feedtroll
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 04:01 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
You've made excellent points, well documented and explained.
 Quoting:

The points are excellent on the surface.

But you guys couldn't grasp that the Colaio entries are NOW saying back to 2001 and weren't as of last year. You guys got confused because when I said there were none "from 2003-2009" (though I explained the point they have added back-posts now), you still thought that meant the current posts are only from 2009-2010 dated.

I was saying they were PUT UP in this past year.

Also, the percentage of change in the bridge (from central tracking point) is not okay.

AND foreground buildings don't shift.

AND we have morph names.

AND we have same-orientation faces or flip-flops in different colouration. Which repeat and repeat. So all evidence of newspaper articles and (in some lucky "victims'" cases) families is not sufficient to say in a GIVEN case that the person is real. In the case of any duplicate photo or near-duplicate, or never-updated page (as of last year, when the simulation was written up), we must ask IF the person is real and if they are, why the lack of photos, memorials, or why the fake photo in addition to (maybe) a real one?

AND we have no engine air pressure, it seems, for no-one handled that one to show we do.

Etc.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 908953
Canada
06/08/2010 04:03 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
TEST IT ASTRONUT or anyone with cojones.

Do it -- I dare you to prove me wrong here.

Lemme know.

:)
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

I dare you to fuck off and start your own thread repinche hija de puta. You won't, tho, because you are trying to derail this thread so nobody talks bad about Nancy. You need to be ignored.
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
06/08/2010 04:13 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Chew toy troll.

I know, I know, I am being pedantic....;-)

No, Commentator: at least you're dethroned on your self-imposed dungeon chair of insisting the building behind shouldn't move if the background moves ...

or that you need equations to know it!

LOL!

.................

You don't seem to know what pedantic means, by your use of it here: it means knowing fine points and lording it over others; it does not mean being supercilious (condescending) and brutish, which you imply.

I can see where you'd get that impression, though, because pedants do lord it over others, but the word refers to their picayune (picky) sophistry as well as their lording it over others -- at the same time.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233



Why don't you show the ray tracings to prove your claim, clunker?

Oh, right, you don't know what a ray tracing is, the math to perform it, or the brains to know what it meant.

Face it, clunker you are only good for a huge lolatu now and again with your mindless spam.

How do you like being a laughing stock and a loosa? Was your mental problem caused by a gotbop or was it a nasty case of bonghit?
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!!!!!
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/08/2010 04:18 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I made a mistake in saying the percentage is OF THE TOWER as 100%.

Simon Shack made the same error technically.

The percentage is from the centre point of the putative TRACKING.

So, percentage of bridge movement relative to centre point.

 Quoting: mclarek 986233

Performing that measurement on a couple frames of my video yielded a much larger "percentage movement" for the fridge than the vase. 268% farther from the center of the tracking for a point on the fridge, only 118% for the vase point. There's no difference between the effect my video showed and the effect the WTC video showed.
astrobanner2
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/08/2010 04:19 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
TEST IT ASTRONUT or anyone with cojones.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

I've tested it and found your whole point to be irrelevant since it applies equally to my video. This is the last I will engage you on the matter unless you admit you were wrong.
astrobanner2
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 04:20 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Performing that measurement on a couple frames of my video yielded a much larger "percentage movement" for the fridge than the vase. 268% farther from the center of the tracking for a point on the fridge, only 118% for the vase point. There's no difference between the effect my video showed and the effect the WTC video showed.
 Quoting: Astronut

Your fridge and a vase?

Do you know how far away the bridge was from the towers!

And Astronut, the floor tiles around the fridge in your view also shifted, didn't they!

The buildings in the foreground would have to shift.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 04:26 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
See any shift OTHER buildings? No.

:)
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 04:31 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
You can really see how ridiculous it is from 3:13 to 3:42.

Ignore the black building shape coming up on the left in the full frame. The mid-ground should show movement.

I know you're focussed on tracking. But there would be movement in buildings around the centre point, in mid ground. You will see none.

AND no perpective shifts on objects relative to themselves.

All tracking involves perspective relative angle shifts, too.
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/08/2010 04:32 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Performing that measurement on a couple frames of my video yielded a much larger "percentage movement" for the fridge than the vase. 268% farther from the center of the tracking for a point on the fridge, only 118% for the vase point. There's no difference between the effect my video showed and the effect the WTC video showed.

Your fridge and a vase?

Do you know how far away the bridge was from the towers!

And Astronut, the floor tiles around the fridge in your view also shifted, didn't they!

The buildings in the foreground would have to shift.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233

So you have chosen not to admit you were wrong. You are attempting to shift goalposts again to more bullshit such as equating background floor tiles you can't even distinguish to foreground buildings that do indeed shift, but I will not continue to feed your trolling when you blatantly refuse to admit you were wrong. You were just proven wrong by your own suggested analysis. The videos show proper parallax, you are a bitch for defaming the families of the dead. Now begone troll, for I shall feed you no more.
astrobanner2
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 922113
United States
06/08/2010 04:42 AM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
[link to i319.photobucket.com]
If you can get over the ghosting effect caused by the changing dust cloud it forms quite the nice stereogram of downtown in the middle of the first tower's collapse, showing the 3d shape of the buildings...
astrobanner2
The Commentator

User ID: 587619
United States
06/08/2010 04:45 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Performing that measurement on a couple frames of my video yielded a much larger "percentage movement" for the fridge than the vase. 268% farther from the center of the tracking for a point on the fridge, only 118% for the vase point. There's no difference between the effect my video showed and the effect the WTC video showed.

Your fridge and a vase?

Do you know how far away the bridge was from the towers!

And Astronut, the floor tiles around the fridge in your view also shifted, didn't they!

The buildings in the foreground would have to shift.

So you have chosen not to admit you were wrong. You are attempting to shift goalposts again to more bullshit such as equating background floor tiles you can't even distinguish to foreground buildings that do indeed shift, but I will not continue to feed your trolling when you blatantly refuse to admit you were wrong. You were just proven wrong by your own suggested analysis. The videos show proper parallax, you are a bitch for defaming the families of the dead. Now begone troll, for I shall feed you no more.
 Quoting: Astronut



Didn't you know? clunker is NEVER wrong, she is just differently right.....
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!!!!!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 969583
United States
06/08/2010 07:57 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!



That'a total bullshit.

I've produced overwhelming information on Liz Wainio and the Colaios that could be confirmed beyond any doubt without subpoenas.

The same is no doubt true of any of the victims.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 218281
United States
06/08/2010 09:30 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
I vote troll. And I think I've seen this style before.



Chew toy troll.

I know, I know, I am being pedantic....;-)


The more she is ignored, the more shrill she gets. If we can all ignore it it will spin up to a crescendo of bullshit emission, then explode nova-like in yet another Troll melt-down.
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 996418


PLEASE just ignore the idiot troll Clare. She's shown everyone that she hasn't a clue.

Wrestling with a pig only gets you muddy and the pig likes it.
Setheory
User ID: 869850
United States
06/08/2010 11:24 AM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
So, Astronut. You've been fooled by a slightly blurred still frame (the evidence of the blurring adjustments are even left -- sloppy work! -- at the bottom of the frame in your link).


Look you fucking moron, the "blurring adjustment" in the bottom of my image is ME ROTATING THE GODDAMN IMAGE TO BE ROUGHLY THE SAME ANGLE FOR BOTH THE LEFT AND RIGHT EYE IMAGE; the result is that the layer beneath is exposed showing the original background layer for the image. It's got nothing to do with the video being fake you lunatic.

Oh you did it?

Okay. I retract that. Blurrier image.

Still, the foreground buildings do not move. Now DO THEY?

 Quoting: mclarek 986233


putin

I'm not sure catching-up with this thread is even worth it.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 74444
United States
06/08/2010 01:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
So, Astronut. You've been fooled by a slightly blurred still frame (the evidence of the blurring adjustments are even left -- sloppy work! -- at the bottom of the frame in your link).


Look you fucking moron, the "blurring adjustment" in the bottom of my image is ME ROTATING THE GODDAMN IMAGE TO BE ROUGHLY THE SAME ANGLE FOR BOTH THE LEFT AND RIGHT EYE IMAGE; the result is that the layer beneath is exposed showing the original background layer for the image. It's got nothing to do with the video being fake you lunatic.

Oh you did it?

Okay. I retract that. Blurrier image.

Still, the foreground buildings do not move. Now DO THEY?



putin

I'm not sure catching-up with this thread is even worth it.
 Quoting: Setheory 869850


I will continue to peruse this thread, nonetheless. However, I have been quite curious why Clare won't start her own thread about these subjects, rather than keep posting in the Zetatalk Debunker thread. It seems disingenous, at best, on her part.

Since Clare already admitted that Nancy's astronomical claims are hokum, I had nothing further to engage her upon. So I wish her well, but would gently suggest that her ideas are, repeatedly, derailing this thread from its intended subject.

Thus, Clare, will you please start your own threads about your 9/11 and other ideas, please? I am sure interested parties will participate.

That said, I find the Ning ridiculously impossible to navigate, so I look forward to others crossposting here, and documenting Nancy's continued missteps on her new playground.
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 908953
Canada
06/08/2010 01:39 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
The ning is a mess! Looks like Nancy has some new comedy videos on youtube:





Lots of laughs!
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 03:07 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Hi, Astronut.

did you ever notice that the "live shots" were of only one viewing direction roughly speaking: from the SOUTH. How weird, eh? No fly-arounds?

The only exception was a few very close-ups of the north.

......................

You didn't prove "movement" in the stereo.
It was with blur AND it was not a controlled distance-height relationship. The proportions must be the same.

Your vase has to be a certain height (proportion to the bridge, in relation to fridge), and the distance it is from the fridge must be also proportional.

THEN you must try tracking a viewpoint while making a circular motion, and pure lateral motion, both.

By the way, I don't recommend doing it with your fridge as the arbiter. The distance to test this would be very large. A field or two?


And no, your right side of the building in the stereo is not different at all, or negligible, allowing for overall blur change in the frame.

I suggest a little tower (salt shaker?) and a very little proportional object, so you can get the experiment inside the house.

You will see more movement in the faraway objects than in the tracked objects and near ones. But for the tracking you will see LESS movement in the faraway ones THAN in lateral motion.

(You know why, when tracking, you will get LESS movement in faraway objects than when pure lateral motion is involved? It's because for every distance forward on a circle, you are not getting as far lateral to your original position as if you'd gone purely lateral. The circle movement is forward AND to the left; whereas just going left in a lateral action, from your original point. And this is not different if you turn your head to focus on an object in EITHER case, of true tracking -- circular motion with viewpoint shift as well -- or lateral movement with a viewpoint re-adjustment.)
.......................

The fakery is ALL OVER THE CASE. It just piles up...

Like so many portraits (not to mention the weird Colaio brothers with no memorial -- 'til now -- AND BACK DATED)!

The portraits: Welcome to Fletcher and Glascoe.
And the rest. IMPROBABLE to the point of RIDICULOUS.

Try to figure it out in ODDS. How many anomalies for the victims, anomalies of high improbability each -- what are the odds? Astronomical. Hm. Astronomical.

......................

And the rest.
Like, that we had only one viewing direction roughly speaking: from the SOUTH. How weird, eh? No fly-arounds?

The only exception was a few close-ups of the north.

Oh and a day later, "amateur video" cam out of the sides.

But all those news stations and only from the south? Absurd. The whole thing is absurd.

When you've changed your hypothetical viewpoint accordingly, let me know.
Have a good day.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 03:15 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
The ning is a mess! Looks like Nancy has some new comedy videos on youtube:

[second sun youtube]

Lots of laughs!
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 908953


Second Suns: I do wonder at the Padua one -- only.

Other than that, the rest could be cloud effects.

As to the moon swirls: What about that SOHO bunch of moon-like things? And that Feb 3 2010 one??? Is that real? Those sure look like Moons.

I don't think the China pic of moon swirls is undoctored. It and the one from 2004 look doctored to me.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 03:24 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!

[Youtube on Dark Twin]


Hey, what of that photo of the Dark Twin. Have you analyzed that? I went to the guy's site. He took a great photo, and didn't realize it had anything in that dark sky until he bumped it and inverted it to see.


Have you analyzed that? What the heck is it?
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 03:27 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
To 908953 or anyone else:

That Texas image in the Dark Twin video is weird: it has its own Telephone poles in the object -- but a lens flare would not, I think. It is claimed here it's Planet X.

ANY CLUE?
AstronutModerator
Forum Moderator

User ID: 634208
United States
06/08/2010 03:33 PM

Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Do I hear something? I could have sworn I heard a troll spammer returning to the thread. Funny, I didn't hear anything that refuted anything I said or proved already, and I know for a fact I proved them wrong by their own criteria. I bet they're trying to move the goalposts again. How sad. It's a shame they've already been proven wrong, I wonder if they'll ever accept that reality. Probably not, you can't get fed as a troll if you start accepting reality.

Last Edited by Dr. Astro on 06/08/2010 03:34 PM
astrobanner2
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 986902
Finland
06/08/2010 03:37 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
One must also question whether or not a Formosa action would not be appropriate for the clunker.
 Quoting: The Commentator


Does this mean that maybe we should send some warships on her way? Very good! Why don't we give her the same treatment that she's given to Liz Wainio? What else can we do to rid this thread of such terroristic dumbness?

She's obviously too dumb to realize she believes in hoaxes - even though many people have told her that. Nothing goes through to her, nothing. There's like a brick wall, made of blind belief. Very annoying.

I would have thought that anyone would see immediately what kind of a site that Septemberclues is. But no, there are people gullible enough to believe in every hoax. A researcher by the name of Hoi Polloi is something she believes in while complaining about people's normal names. Ha ha! And other members are called Simonshack and D. Duck, yea right. And she just believes everything these hoaxers write there.. She doesn't see anything wrong with this deliberate hoax. For her fake is real and real is fake. Such a nice example of true believer syndrome indeed.

She certainly seems to have more problems than she can handle.
 Quoting: The Commentator


Meaning that we should have mercy on her? Why? Because she's human? According to her logic we can't know that for certain. According to her logic she might be not a living person but 1) dead 2) shilling for hoaxers 3) CIA, FBI or whatever government agent testing how people react to her absolute bs. And according to her logic if she might be then she probably is - no, she HAS TO be, yah, the fact is that she is. That's some radical logic without a clue of what radical actually means. But to me it seems she's either a "true believer" or a cruel evil hoaxer.

Also I've been wondering about her word magic with names like Wainio, Vatican, Israel etc that she seems to be unable to write correctly. Why would she always write certain names incorrectly, as if she's afraid of those names?
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 03:40 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
What do you think of the missing Saturn, the bounced Venus, and the drifting-tail and multiple PX possibilities?

What of the totality of links betwee these phenomena being weird on the images?

Those aren't pixel flares. We've been over that. What is going on ...?

Then ...
That evidence from the "1999" site claiming the image probs were there all along when no-one could find any examples before and now we have ONE from a German debunker site but there are several of them per year now?

This is not good sounding. I didn't know about that event. What a laugh: not anything like them on Menow's database links, or in images regularly until now -- and now "one" showing up from 1999?

I also don't like the sound of the claim -- I don't know if it is true -- that when there's a possible PX image there's often equipment down for days, sometimes longer.




I do agree, though, these moons as "artifacts" near the Sun -- some of them maybe planted, to confuse the real ones -- do would not likely be "compression artifacts" because THEY DIDN'T HAPPEN BEFORE either.



What on earth is going on here -- in each case or overall? Thank you.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 03:46 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Do I hear something? I could have sworn I heard a troll spammer returning to the thread. Funny, I didn't hear anything that refuted anything I said or proved already, and I know for a fact I proved them wrong by their own criteria. I bet they're trying to move the goalposts again. How sad. It's a shame they've already been proven wrong, I wonder if they'll ever accept that reality. Probably not, you can't get fed as a troll if you start accepting reality.
 Quoting: Astronut

I am refining the discussion. PHYSICS is the goalpost -- if I or YOU discover another aspect which was not tested to bedrock it is fair game to bring it up. If you think with blur and tiny movements in the buildings you have found SOME movement in the buildings, a) did you pick clear frames (or are your measurements of blur totals and thus invalid?), b) is the movement in all buildings?

But most important ... IS IT PROPER MOVEMENT IN THE BRIDGE to the buildings ... and for that you did a "test".

And you did your test with THE WRONG PROPORTIONS.

You did not do a CONCLUSIVE test.

You must test PROPERLY.

I can't test your dog's tissue sample for cancer and claim it's your OWN cancer!


As to signing off late last night; I was tired. I am back to set this straight.

NOT DEBUNKED.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 03:53 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
Also I've been wondering about her word magic with names like Wainio, Vatican, Israel etc that she seems to be unable to write correctly. Why would she always write certain names incorrectly, as if she's afraid of those names?
 Quoting: Anonymous Coward 986902

Wainio I spell correctly -- unless there's a typo I made somewhere.

V- and Isr- and Jsuet- I do not finish or I mess up the spellings because I know those key words are searched -- especially in combination ------ a concept some of you don't understand: combining evidence to show what might have seemed possible before is impossible in that COMBINATION of occurring.

Anyway, those words are "heavy" in combination in a post, for word search processors -- most of which run in I-rle, by the way. I "promise" you (the name of the software is that word without an e at the end), they are searching for this sort of discussion. It shows familiarity with the totality of the groups, not with only one line of thinking.
Setheory
User ID: 869850
United States
06/08/2010 03:56 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
What do you think of the missing Saturn, the bounced Venus, and the drifting-tail and multiple PX possibilities?

What of the totality of links betwee these phenomena being weird on the images?

Those aren't pixel flares. We've been over that. What is going on ...?

Then ...
That evidence from the "1999" site claiming the image probs were there all along when no-one could find any examples before and now we have ONE from a German debunker site but there are several of them per year now?

This is not good sounding. I didn't know about that event. What a laugh: not anything like them on Menow's database links, or in images regularly until now -- and now "one" showing up from 1999?

I also don't like the sound of the claim -- I don't know if it is true -- that when there's a possible PX image there's often equipment down for days, sometimes longer.




I do agree, though, these moons as "artifacts" near the Sun -- some of them maybe planted, to confuse the real ones -- do would not likely be "compression artifacts" because THEY DIDN'T HAPPEN BEFORE either.



What on earth is going on here -- in each case or overall? Thank you.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233


Translation: I want things to be weird!!!!!
Anonymous Coward
User ID: 218281
United States
06/08/2010 03:57 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
NOT DEBUNKED.
 Quoting: mclarek 986233


Only in your own mind, Clare. You have been shown to be nothing but a clueless troll. Please go else where to have yout trolling fun. You've been completely debunked here.
mclarek
User ID: 986233
Canada
06/08/2010 04:00 PM
Report Abusive Post
Report Copyright Violation
Re: Debunker Talk LIVE Chat 24/7 - A debunker's paradise!!
So you have chosen not to admit you were wrong.
 Quoting: Astronut

I am not wrong, scientifically.

You posted INADEQUATE tests.

So, try again.

IN PROPORTION, dear.

You are not an optical scientist if you don't know that distinction: proportional tests.

Go on. Try it.
I don't mean this as a "shift of goalposts". It is a refinement of what we're testing.

Hey: I test the car for arsenic. Oops! Discovered this weird bottle in the person's house: let's test IT ... oh it has cyanide. Now let's test for cyanide.

KEEP GOING. Your test was invalid to start with. (The one with the fridge and vase. But also the one with the stereo because you picked a blurry frame for the "larger total" -- which was SO slight.)

So ONLY THEN, with accounting for blur in the frame, and a proper camera movement around your test (I assume you don't want to use a fridge, as I said, for the test will require a very large field, to test with), will we know IF and HOW MUCH there was movement in any foreground building enough, or too much in the bridge.

There wasn't. Or rather, there was TOO MUCH in the bridge.

News