Printable View
Don't attack the lives of these people. Show facts to prove them wrong. Something in all your arguements that you have not done. You are trying to distract people from their own points. Who gives a damn that Isaac Newton was an alchemist? Does that prove him wrong?Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
You need to focus on the issue. Whether Newton (or anyone for that matter) was an occultist or not has NO bearing on the simple laws of physics. There is gravitational pull. If there is gravitational pull, then there also is a counter force made my a centrifugal action. without one we would see catastrophic results. I think that you need to end your rants by closing this thread, it is as ridiculous as the Dark Ages.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
:rant:
Whether Newton was a raving lunatic makes no difference to the fact that he was a raving lunatic. And the same is true of Abbe Ortes of Venice, of Charles Darwin, of Malthus and of countless other scam merchants of 'modern science'.
The Dark Ages are another invention.
Tell us plainly what happens to the Earth's atmosphere if the Earth is revolving at around 1,000 miles per hour. Just do this, can you ? And do give us your interpretation of the stellar images posted at the start of this thread. Which seem to have escaped your attention.
Thanks
Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
Oh god no.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
I can. :) The atmosphere of earth travels (and get this) at the same speed as the earth does, held by gravity. Amazing isn't it? And I believe that The Atheist explained those pictures very clearly, a post which YOU ignored and have not replyed to, the same as all of my replys. :) I see you are ignoring any answers that you cannot argue against. Very clever... actually not really. I am still waiting on replys to several of my questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
As a matter of interest, why are all these people engaged in this huge fraud? What's in it for them?
As you have not actually proved anyone really wrong yet, I have not yet found an answer to my phases which have to do with the movement of the planets and the earth.
I think you just don't know, no, you don't, I just know it. :rolleyes:
You just continuously go off on some rant instead of discussing. Just because the fact that you cannot explain yourself, and you know it. You cannot face it and cannot understand the facts.
'Truth will set you free', that is true... It is sad that so many people are still wrapped up in a lie.
But thank you for experiencing rampant ignorance. It enlightens me regarding my brother-in-law. I am learning to ask the right questions an detecting certain tactics. It is not going to work :hand:.
People have been showing facts to the Darwinist establishment since 1859, the year of the 'Origin of Species'. They don't want facts. They want their own dogmas. And to hell with the facts.
Who cares whether Newton was an alchemist and an occultist, supported by the alchemists and occultists of Venice ? That he stole virtually anything 'he' did from men like Leibnitz of Germany and claimed them as his own discoveries ? Really ? In such a case Neil Armstrong becomes a hero of the state. Is it not time to say that what is worthy of our belief is seen to be true and is seen to be subject to fair criticism ? If not, we are ignorant, and worse than ignorant. We are then willingly ignorant men.
Regards
Then show us your best evidence for the Earth revolving around the Sun. This thread has been running all of today and we are still waiting for the evidence. From 400 years of publications you surely have some evidence, don't you ?Quote:
Originally Posted by kevinthediltz
And you have still not told us your view of these stellar images which have been taken thousands of times from all over the world.
Which side is open to criticism ? And which side is producing evidence ? You have your answer. And, as long as this thread runs it will always be the same.
What's in it for them ? Well, it's a club. Academic studies tend to be. The conventions decree that careerists do not question the conventions. That they are never examined fairly and openly in the light of modern discoveries. Welcome to the Darwinian paradigm and that of the universe constructed around 400 years of mere assumption. The issue is this - are the conventions able to explain the discoveries of those who disagree with them ? That standard applies to almost everything we claim to be science. And, if it does not, we are sure to become deluded and are dogmatic fools. I do not want to be in that category. But I see academic dogmas all around me. So must you. That's why we can and must question these things. We can and must invite criticism. And welcome it. Because only with criticism can we claim what we study is worthy of our belief and is better than the views of our critics. Not to argue. But to share the facts, such as we have of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982
Regards
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
:hand:
tsh, We are still waiting for yours. I can't see it coming yet :rolleyes:.
You ignore most of our evidence anyway under the pretence you can't (don't want to) see it, so I'm asking for yours so that we can finally see how deep your mind is and the mind of people who put this into your mind. Obvisouly it is very shallow.
But, you see, I still haven't got an explanantion of phases. Still waiting, although I think I will have to wait a long time. You won't get out of it. :hand:
Is it gonna come or not? You can do it man (I hope :D).
Okay. What's in it for the club? When this club was first formed with intention of deliberately misleading the world about how the universe worked, what advantage did the founders see in that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Kiki,
You have 400 plus years of 'evidence' that the Earth revolves around the Sun. You have nearly 150 years of photography. You have every possible advantage. You have a head start (you claim) and you surely, surely have overwhelming evidence that the Earth revolves around the Sun, with the Sun as the centre of the Universe. Where is your evidence ? When, in fact, these stellar images, and these facts already presented clearly do not support your assumptions. Let's start there. But if that's too difficult, well, in that case, study what has been posted. Closely. And then we can agree to disagree.
Regards
Quote:
Originally Posted by kiki1982
:hand:
Still no explanation about phases.
I wonder whether you are not blind in one eye...
You can't explain, can you?
I'll tell you what, as you are so clever you have all possible advantage, why don't you explain the phases of the moon to me?
I'm really enjoying my time here. :hat:
Control !
Control of what is taught, believed, consumed, spoken of, admitted into textbooks, libraries, colleges, universities etc. Control of money, of governments, of banks, of culture and of 'science' (so-called). I think it's called 'control'.
Mark,Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
How about this idea. Set up a time lapsed camera session pointed at the stars. And then judge the results for yourself.
It won't convince many people. But it may well convince you. And if it does so you deserve the credit, having examined a view which, till now, you had not considered. That's the fruits of a fair conversation.
Regards
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
But they could just as easily exercise that control with your science couldn't they? Why does mendacious science give them control that real science doesn't?Quote:
Originally Posted by Musicology
Well, no.
Since, if you set up such an experiment yourself I would have no input into it. The results would be entirely your own. And, when you have such results, see how they will be treated by your colleagues.
'Mendacious science' is easily identified by its failure to allow major criticism of its underlying assumptions. And with that Darwinian/Copernican backdrop I think you have your answer.
At least, so I believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MarkBastable
As refusing to answer a simple question is an admittance of wrong :D