RainbowSingularity
Valued Senior Member
Australian local government banning rain water collection tanks in suburban houses is next level crazy
but very real
they need to ban city council salarys
give your opinion... government lying about technology
- Thread starter truthseekerofthegods
- Start date
Australian local government banning rain water collection tanks in suburban houses is next level crazy
but very real
they need to ban city council salarys
Space debris. Only extremely foolish people think these are bubbles.
https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/msl/multimedia/pia16052-color.html
Pareidolia. Have you got normal intelligence?
The horizon is 3 miles away at least given the guesstimated elevation. How wide is this "road" of yours!?
The scientific method? Sheesh. You said it looks like a road therefore it is one.
NASA have not faked anything they have no need. But of course that doesn't stop internet troofahs from observing things they don't understand.
Space debris. Ice, pieces of paint, tiny fragments of things expelled from the hatch. Usually ice though.
How is this crap "scientific"? The footage is massively wrong speed - using frame capture rather than video. His suit was not built for long duration EVA. Objects released are under a number of effects - the sun being one of them, the force from release, shape memory and finally once set in motion the metallic sheeting flexes and reflexes without any restriction.
Nothing unusual whatsoever. The problem is the failure of the author to have a valid education on the matter. This also applies to those gullible enough to believe this unscientific crap.
Crap from another forum - you're not really allowed to do that. Bring your spam here if it hasn't been addressed.
sculptor
Valued Senior Member
same same Colorado
The rain that falls on your roof doesn't belong to you, it belongs to the state.
...................oops----I misspoked -----that changed--(I'm 7 years out of date)--now citizens of Colorado can collect up to 110 gallons of rainwater---in a prescribed manner
in 2 rain-barrels
Space Station Hoax -Air Bubbles Rise- Space Walks Simulated in A Massive Water Pool
There's nothing foolish about hypothesizing that it's bubble. It looks like a bubble and it behaves exactly like a bubble would behave. If it's not a bubble, what is the force that made it move upward?
There's other footage with alleged bubbles.
Russian 'Space' Walk In 2013 Proves The ISS Is Fake
Watch this from the 19:35 time mark to the 20:25 time mark
ISS Hoax - The International Fake Station
There seems to be something up there orbiting the earth.
Jarrah White's response to Flat Earthers and Space Travel Deniers
There's definitely something up there. Yet, there are anomalies in the footage they show us. Something's fishy.
At the 25:13 time mark of this video a wire is being held against the wall by an astronaut's feet. When he removes his feet, the wire falls the way it would in gravity.
NASA ISS FAKE - 1
At the 6:28 time mark of this video the astronaut seems to loose her footing and slips.
Fred Astaire and the ISS
https://www.brighteon.com/e641f208-b2d5-4e13-b6c2-e4e7b7cbe2da
There's a theory that the real inside of the ISS (International Space Station) is very different than what we're being shown and that they're doing a lot of military-related stuff there so they have to show us a fake scenario of what is going on there so that part is being faked.
We might be cooperating with the Russians more than they're telling us.
https://www.aulis.com/apollo-soyuz.htm
https://www.aulis.com/apollo-soyuz_contents.htm
https://www.aulis.com/apollo-soyuz1.htm
A logging road would have to be pretty wide.
Here's something I didn't put in this post on the allegedly faked Mars missions thread.
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/th...ere-probably-faked.163437/page-7#post-3664986
http://nemox71.fr/img/mars_lemming.jpg
That's a pretty clear picture of a lemming. I don't see how anyone can dismiss this as a case of Pareidolia.
Would it now! A logging road on a treeless mountain. Your brain truly regurgitates such gibberish.
It's a rock with an indentation. Pareidolia. Which to a conspiracy theorist is like a red rag to a bull.
"What, WHAT! I'm not seeing things, everything I see is real because I say it is".
I'm not saying you are an example of these pics below, because it's pareidolia, but you really are a .....
https://i.pinimg.com/originals/30/95/cc/3095cc12499dd8b64c2dba4ef36d8141.jpg
http://cf.broadsheet.ie/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/funny-mushrooms1.jpg
Oh and fyi, that wall of spam just above has been reported for ridiculous off topic bullshit.
The lunacy of this Fatfreddy/Cosmored/Scott guy. Virtually a cut and paste duplicate about the ISS from the political forum.
Anyone who thinks the Chinese spacewalk was in water is a moron. Anyone who thinks the ISS is faked is an imbecile.
You ignore every single answer from people way more informed than you, you really are the worst troll on the web.
Anyone who thinks the Chinese spacewalk was in water is a moron. Anyone who thinks the ISS is faked is an imbecile.
You ignore every single answer from people way more informed than you, you really are the worst troll on the web.
Is that something bad?
The viewers can decide for themselves.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...on-in-the-international-space-station.585456/
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/nasa-is-faking-the-mars-missions.585399/
I think Betamax made a fool of himself here.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-chinese-spacewalk-was-faked.578673/
Look at his response to this post.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index...e-spacewalk-was-faked.578673/#post-1072491826
Well when you ignore all responses and do it for 20 years - yes. It's a bit more than bad though, some sort of medical issue would be more appropriate.
Nobody will bother following your spam - it takes such colossal ignorance to think either of those two are faked.
Your opinion is very low down on the credibility listing. You cannot reason with somebody of your obvious limitations.
I looked. He said the ice was moving towards the camera. Works perfectly. Nothing works for that obvious piece of ice being a "bubble".
What's wrong with you? How the hell can you not see the problems with fabric in water and pieces of ice rotating and getting 4 times bigger!? It would be laughable if you didn't spam this garbage all over the internet!
It is very telling that you can't explain anything yourself - you just post links of other people explaining things and links to Youtube videos. It's easy to mislead people like you, people who don't think for themselves and instead rely on other people to do their thinking for them.
You're missing the point. Betamax said it wasn't ice but a piece of debris. A piece of debris would not get four times bigger. Tell us what would get four times bigger besides a bubble moving upwards?
The Mars missions and the International Space Station are two sensitive issues right now.
The moderator closed this thread with a lame excuse.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/sh...-that-the-International-Space-Station-is-fake
I later started this thread...
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?114105-Are-the-unmanned-Mars-missions-being-faked
...and he closed it and banned me. I suppose he bent to pressure from above.
The moderator closed this thread with a lame excuse.
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/sh...-that-the-International-Space-Station-is-fake
I later started this thread...
https://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?114105-Are-the-unmanned-Mars-missions-being-faked
...and he closed it and banned me. I suppose he bent to pressure from above.
You are either deliberately playing dumb and doing a good job of it or don't know things that all people with eyes know.
Firstly a bubble size is related to the pressure. The increase in pressure relates directly to the size of the bubble, if pressure gets halved, the bubble size doubles. If I recall correctly you actually denied the increase in size!
For a bubble underwater to gain 400% size it must experience a 400% pressure drop. In what appears to be barely a few feet of change the pressure change would be negligible:
CalcTool: Pressure at depth calculator
Putting in 5metres gives 1.496 atm.
Putting in 4 metres gives 1.396 atm.
Your stupid lie about a bubble is busted just on that alone. But visually it gets even more absurd - all through the spacewalk bits of material are expelled in every direction BUT vertically and that includes the diagonally travelling piece of ice you lie about.
As for "what gets 4 times bigger" - it is coming diagonally towards the camera - so obvious.
From your nemesis:
"7. THERE is your real credibility test.
That looks NOTHING like a bubble and EVERYTHING like a flat jagged piece of rotating ice. A bubble in areas where people are breathing is almost impossible to be a singular item. It rises vertically and doesn't change size by 400% in a short span of ascent. It isn't jagged, doesn't rotate and isn't white and flat!
Here is a further credibility test.
Only 3 seconds before the idiotic "fluttering" video which is being moved by his hand ridiculously fast in water, we see the flag being PUSHED edge first. In water, it is absolutely absurd to suggest that is possible in a viscous medium with drag!"
Last edited:
Betamax is the one who talked about the increase in size. I just pointed out Betamax's blunder. First he said that the object was a piece of debris. Then, he said that the object increased in size and the increase was too much for it to be a bubble. He had forgotten that a piece of debris wouldn't increase in size at all. He then attributed the increase in size to its coming close to the camera. The same thing would happen with the bubble.
Betamax made a big blunder and then he tried to control the damage. It's pretty clear that he was trying to obfuscate some clear proof.
http://www.politicalforum.com/index.php?threads/the-chinese-spacewalk-was-faked.578673/
Well it DOES increase in size and this cannot be explained by depth change.
Nah, you have not the slightest clue what you are talking about.
It is a piece of debris in terms of it being the remains of something. It is probably a piece of ice but could also be something else.
Are you really that dumb that you think these two statements are mutually exclusive? It is a piece of debris/ice coming towards the camera it is on a diagonal path.
It would if it was coming towards a wide angled lens - are you actually being serious here?
This was always his position - he even quoted where he made that statement. You shouldn't leave links to these threads - he really does kick your sorry butt.
Oh really. How does that work then? Bubbles go UP!
No blunder was made - I think you must be a few sandwiches short of a picnic.
So to summarise, you claim the flat, clearly rotating, clearly jagged, diagonal trajectory bubble coming towards the camera and not vertical is a bubble, because of reasons that you have failed to provide, meanwhile all the other objects firing out of the hatch at a whole myriad of angles don't actually help you understand how colossally dumb your claim is. Is that about right?
And you have the audacity to question people's credibility when you have absolutely none whatsoever. You are clearly a troll trying to play idiot games on as many forums as possible.
You avoided this:
______________________
Only 3 seconds before the idiotic "fluttering" video which is being moved by his hand ridiculously fast in water, we see the flag being PUSHED edge first. In water, it is absolutely absurd to suggest that is possible in a viscous medium with drag!"
________________________
To add to your unbelievably dumb claim about the obvious NOT bubble we now have the 100% impossible fabric being pushed edge first in water.
You said this "The bubble hugs the astronaut`s visor and then goes straight up which is consistent with what a bubble would do. A piece of debris would go straight along it's original trajectory. It also looks like a bubble."
Cornered. Check mate. You lose. The debris/ice DOES go on its original trajectory, towards the camera. Haha, listen to you, it looks NOTHING like a bubble. Not even remotely like it.
If the increase in size is just because it's getting closer to the camera, the same thing would happen to a bubble. Then, the argument that it can't be a bubble because the size increase is too big doesn't make any sense. He was trying to obfuscate this anomaly and he didn't think it through. This is a big blunder by a sophist.
You seem to be a little bit confused here. The camera is sideways on. You said the "bubble" went straight up, clearly it isn't a bubble and clearly it comes towards the camera. Bubbles don't look like that and don't fly off sideways diagonally. Again you said..."and then goes straight up" !!
You're a joke - not just in the endless garbage you post, the repeat spam, or the fact you ignore so much of what gets written. No. You have appalling comprehension - obvious things just whoosh right over your head.